David Christopherson

[Supply, November 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the remarks of the member for Vancouver East. As usual, she has brought her passion for her constituents and all Canadians to the fore in making her comments.

I want to focus on the issue of choice. From the time I have been in the House this morning, it seems to me that those who are sympathetic but not quite there are thinking that maybe labelling is where we ought to go. The support for that is it would provide choice. It would leave the impression that choice is the be all and end all.

We recognize the world leadership role of the World Health Organization, and I think of SARS in particular. In light of that, we ought to be taking what the World Health Organization has said about this issue very seriously. I would ask the member to comment on and underscore the issue of choice and why labelling under the guise of choice is really not the answer, given the scientific evidence that is before us now.

[Ellen Fairclough, November 15th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians were saddened to learn of the passing of the Right Hon. Ellen Fairclough on Saturday, November 13. On behalf of the NDP caucus, all parliamentarians and all Hamiltonians, we wish to express our condolences to her family and friends.

Today Hamiltonians mourn their loss but are bursting with pride at her earned place in history. Mrs. Fairclough, Canada's first woman to hold a federal cabinet post, was an important political figure in the city of Hamilton as well. Before she was elected to the House of Commons, she was elected as a city councillor in 1946 and served as a Hamilton controller and deputy mayor for the year prior to her 1950 byelection win as the Conservative MP for Hamilton West.

Born in Hamilton in 1905, Ellen Fairclough was a leader, paving the way for a succession of notable politicians from Hamilton West, in particular Canada's first black member of Parliament, the Hon. Lincoln Alexander, and for the important women who have served and continue to serve as cabinet ministers in the Government of Canada.

[Sponsorship Program, November 4th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, could the minister inform the House how many other contracting decisions are being reversed by Liberal staffers, since that seems to be standard government practice?

[Sponsorship Program, November 4th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister would start providing some legitimate answers to the House, we would not have to listen to the minister misconstrue statements and put accusations where they do not belong.

This is about the minister, his Prime Minister and the party that he represents. You owe Canadians an explanation as to what is going on--

[Sponsorship Program, November 4th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we now know there are documents which prove the Prime Minister's former executive assistant knew that part of a $600,000 contract that had been awarded fairly to one contractor was overridden by someone in the finance department to direct it to the Prime Minister's friends at Earnscliffe.

The minister today says that this is just a legitimate difference of opinion. What does the minister say to Canadians who think those are just code words for more Liberal political chicanery?

[Sponsorship Program, November 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize.

Chuck Guité was given a raise to facilitate the plundering of the public purse. He testified today that no contracts were tendered, there were no rules and no guidelines. Does this sound like a person who deserves a raise?

[Sponsorship Program, November 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are tired of hearing this broken mantra everyday, that they cannot answer. You have answers to give to the people of Canada. We are going to continue pursuing you until you give them.

Chuck Guité--

[Sponsorship Program, November 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the former top bureaucrat in charge of the sponsorship scandal testified today about the extent of his political influence in the Liberal government. Chuck Guité said he had a direct relationship all the way to Gagliano's office and the PMO. He was able to order up a raise, a promotion, and when he wanted to leave, these same people convinced him to stay.

Does the minister concede that Mr. Guité should have been fired, not given a raise?

[Bankruptcies, October 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of labour.

Will the minister acknowledge that he is aware of the lobbying efforts on behalf of the United Steelworkers of America who are here fighting for their members' pension rights in the cases of bankruptcy? The minister would also know that his House leader made serious commitments with regard to making these changes during the election campaign.

My colleague from Winnipeg Centre will be introducing legislation supported by the Bloc that would make the changes that would help protect workers' pensions.

Will you commit to send at least--

[Supply, October 28th, 2004]

When the member's government cuts $25 billion from health care and cuts the last affordable housing program that we had in the country, that affects provinces because they have to make up for that or their citizens go without housing and without health care. That goes down through to the municipal governments.

As well, the member talked about smart government. I would like to know what is so smart about cutting health care, cutting affordable housing programs and still deciding tax cuts are a bigger priority than health care and housing. How does that create smart government?