Dave MacKenzie

[Public Safety, May 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my friend opposite would prefer to have all criminals on the street but that is not the position of this party. The protection of Canadians must come first. Part of keeping our communities safe is keeping dangerous criminals behind bars, not releasing them on to the streets early. That is why the provinces and police support our efforts to end credit for time served, efforts the Liberals tried to block.

We disagree with the Liberals' view that dangerous criminals should be released on to our streets early just to save a buck.

[Public Safety, May 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Liberals, our priority is public safety. The Liberals have shown they have a fundamentally different view on what it means to be tough on crime. They believe that it is citizens who should be locked up in their own houses while dangerous criminals are on the street.

That is not the position of our party. We stand with victims and we stand for the rights of Canadians, even if the member opposite does not.

[National Security, May 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite is aware, the matter is before the courts. As such, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the specific case. There are, however, some points I am sure will be of interest to the House.

First, CSIS is an arm's-length agency, and the case in question predates its creation. In addition, all access to information requests are processed by officials of the public service. Finally, this matter has been reviewed by the Information Commissioner, who supported the redactions on national security grounds.

[Firearms Registry, May 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Brant for that question.

While we support the licensing of gun owners and registration of prohibited and restricted weapons, we do not support the wasteful long gun registry.

At committee yesterday, the member for Ajax—Pickering and the Liberals challenged their own motion so that the sponsor of the bill could speak for only 10 minutes. Instead of allowing the committee to hear the facts, the Liberals continued to play political games.

We hope all Liberal MPs put the calls of their constituents above the order of the Liberal leader and vote to finally end this wasteful long gun registry.

[Firearms Registry, May 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, all our members are in favour of gun control. What we are not in favour of is a registry that does not work. It does not cut down on crime like the Liberals promised it would.

It is time to get rid of that wasteful tool which was implemented. If my colleague across the floor would like to come to the committee, he will hear a variety of views, not all of which fit his agenda.

[Firearms Registry, May 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the registry is not cracking down on crime like the Liberals promised it would. It unfairly targets hard-working farmers and hunters, not criminals. It is time to put an end to this billion dollar Liberal boondoggle once and for all. There are all kinds of people who have opposed it. The leader of the Liberal Party said:

No sensible Canadian thinks the problem is the shotgun on the barn door. No sensible Canadian thinks the problem is the target shooter or the legitimate licensed gun owner. The problem is those handguns.

That was on CTV March 22, 2009.

[Firearms Registry, April 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Portage—Lisgar for her private member's bill, Bill C-391.

The Liberal leader has whipped his members to support the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry. Now the Liberals are attempting to hijack the public safety committee by desperately trying to force a pro-long gun registry list of witnesses.

Why are the Liberals scared to hear what others have to say? Why do the Liberals not want to hear from witnesses such as Police Chief Hanson from Calgary, who has called the long gun registry a placebo and has said that it creates a false sense of security and does nothing to stop gun violence between Calgary gangs?

It is time to put an end to the wasteful long gun registry and the Liberal-led coalition—

[Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, April 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. The NDP has been opposed to every free trade agreement that I know of that has come before the House. This is just one more step in that long list of complaints that it has about free trade.

[Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, April 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague has actually hit the nail on the head where those parties that are opposed do not seem to grasp. With the opportunity for Colombia to move ahead by leaps and bounds to the standards that we have in this country, some of these issues will be far better for Colombia and Colombians in that we will have that opportunity.

With the economic boost to them, to their labour, and to their social opportunities, this is tremendous. It is also good for Canadians. It gives us opportunities to trade with Colombia in a free trade agreement. As I said previously, we currently trade with Colombia. There is no reason why we cannot enhance that trade. As we do it, it will be of benefit to both countries.

[Canada-Columbia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, April 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago I heard my colleague across the aisle talk about the NDP being locked in the 1950s and 1960s with its ideology and it certainly comes out again in this comment.

I do not know what the NDP thinks. Is it that we will build some sort of wall around Colombia that will all of a sudden change things? We already have companies trading with Colombia. We already have investment in Colombia. This is an agreement that will insist on Colombia moving forward with respect to its labour and social obligations. This is good for Canada but it is also good for Colombians, and I wish the NDP would at least get into this century.

Like I said, my colleague across the floor was absolutely right. The NDP is locked in the 1950s and 1960s.