Gary Goodyear

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues for staying high level on this debate. There are some unspeakable things that ISIL is doing, such as beheading children and forcing parents to bury their children alive. While my colleagues will not mention that because it is unspeakable, I want the opposition members to understand what they are voting against.

No god, including Allah, condones this behaviour. No religion, including Islam, supports this behaviour. This is an affront to humanity.

Could the member comment on what the government proposes in terms of the limited military action against this evil?

[Military Contribution Against ISIL, October 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think anyone in the House wants to put our own in harm's way. I firmly believe that none of us want to do that, any more than any of us want terminal cancer.

However, these are not just kidnappers or murderers. They are beheading children and forcing parents to bury their children alive. If the folks who are now offering to do this to Canadians are not our enemies, then who is? Whoever was an enemy of Canada? The Taliban? Hitler?

These are difficult decisions. The Liberals sent our troops to fight the Taliban. This is the time to do the same.

The NDP are obfuscating and want more time. Time is of the essence. People are dying right now.

I know the leader of the Liberal opposition has an obsession with phallic symbols. That is immature and inappropriate.

Could the minister tell us what would happen if we were to wait longer, since people are dying today?

[Respect for Communities Act, June 17th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, it is a very long title. I tried to get it shortened to FedDev, but they do not do that here.

I appreciate the member's contribution to the debate this evening. On a side note, if the member wants to talk about what politicking is all about, I can assure him it is not about using taxpayers' money, illegally, to send out mailings.

In terms of creating scare tactics for Canadians, it was not the government that made this statement: “Medicalized heroin maintenance has been used very successfully in places like Europe”. In fact, it was the member's own colleague from Vancouver East who made that statement.

My question is this. Where do we go from here, besides randomly allowing injection sites to happen in any community, which is what the NDP wants, without the consultation of parents and communities, which is what we are asking for?

What the NDP wants is unfettered access to injection sites in any community, without participation of the community. Is the next step that the NDP will ask the federal government, through taxpayers' dollars, to provide medicalized heroin as well?

As we all know, the heroin people take to these clinics is from pushers. It is not safe. Is that next on the agenda?

[Respect for Communities Act, June 17th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I respect the hon. member opposite, but she is mistaken on the points of the bill.

The bill would bring more safety by allowing parents in a community where an injection site is thinking of setting up to enter the decision-making process. It would allow those folks who want to do that to provide scientific evidence around the actual need for that injection site, which would be hard to do in my riding of Cambridge-North Dumfries. The NDP wants to set up an injection site there, but I doubt the people in Cambridge would want that.

The fact is that the bill would allow science to enter the decision-making process. It would also allow parents to enter the decision-making process. What exactly is wrong with allowing Canadians who live in the community to decide what their needs are?

[Respect For Communities Act, June 17th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for proving a point that we have been trying to make in this House; that is that the members opposite want more time to debate. They have already had 18 hours on this particular subject. More than 97 members have stood in this House to speak to this issue. One of the complaints I have heard from my colleagues is that the NDP members continue to stand up and read virtually the same speech and raise the same issues.

The member asked a pertinent question, whether heroin is safe. Heroin is made by bad guys. It is not a controlled substance. It is not produced in a government lab. Is that the next issue? That is a very pertinent question. Is the NDP saying that the Government of Canada, if run by the NDP, would use taxpayer dollars to make the heroin so that it is safe to be injected at safe injection sites? Is that where the NDP is going with this?

[Respect For Communities Act, June 17th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I have sat here and listened to this conversation about limiting debate, when there has, in fact, been no limit to the debate, I am getting more and more concerned.

Obviously, I am here to represent my community of Cambridge-North Dumfries. Maybe in my hon. colleagues' ridings, it is okay to have injection sites beside a school without criminal record checks and without actual proper drug treatment programs. However, I can assure the members of the House that no one in Cambridge is willing to have drug injection sites for drug addicts beside a school. This is common sense.

This is Canada. We need this legislation passed. The best place for it right now is at committee, after 97 members have spoken during 18 hours of debate. It is time for the committee to hear from Canadians so those folks will know what Canadians think.

[Respect For Communities Act, June 17th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask my hon. colleague a question regarding injection sites and what is laid out in this bill about them.

I know there have been considerable community consultations. I know that there has been considerable debate in the House, as the minister himself has mentioned. Some 97 members of Parliament have stood to voice their opinions on this. I also have to agree with him that, as we sit through debates and listen to members on the opposite side, we hear that the speeches are almost all the same. It does not matter how many hours we sit here. Even if it is one hour, we end up hearing the same speech three or four times. As much as I like listening to my friends across the way, there is an obligation to Canadians that we actually enact what is going to improve the safety of their communities and these injection sites where, in fact, illegal drugs are offered to people.

I wonder if the minister could comment on community consultations and how this act would benefit my community in Cambridge and North Dumfries, for example. I know the NDP wants to put an injection site in Cambridge. I do not think the folks in Cambridge would be at all happy with that, and I wonder if the member could comment on that.

[Main Estimates, 2014-15, June 10th, 2014]

moved:

That Vote 1, in the amount of $57,532,359, under THE SENATE—The Senate—Program expenditures, in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2015, be concurred in.

[Business of Supply, June 10th, 2014]

Like the GST cut?

[Business of Supply, June 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I find the rationale behind the member's speech quite disturbing, frankly. By her logic, she feels that we should not give child tax benefits, because some Canadians do not have children, and we should not give tax reductions to seniors, because not all Canadians are seniors.

We gave tax credits and tax benefits to families with children and families without children. We gave tax benefits to single people, to married people, to students, to farmers, to fishermen, and to firemen.

Of the 180-plus tax reductions for Canadians in every sector, of every age, of every type of family, with kids, with no kids, seniors with kids, which one did that member vote for? Would she name me one?