Gary Goodyear

[Committees of the House, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the third report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.

(Motion agreed to)

[Committees of the House, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 and 114, I have the honour to present the third report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning membership of committees of the House.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the third report later this day.

[Committees of the House, November 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 and 114, I have the honour to present the second report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning committee memberships of the House, and I should like to move concurrence at this time.

(Motion agreed to)

[Committees of the House, October 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I had the privilege of tabling the first report of the procedure and House affairs committee. Discussions have taken place among all parties and I believe that there is consent for the following motion. I move:

That the first report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning committee membership, tabled yesterday, Tuesday, October 30, 2007, be now concurred in.

(Motion agreed to)

[Committees of the House, October 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 and 114, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of committees of the House.

[RADARSAT-2, October 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Industry visited the Canadian Space Agency's David Florida Laboratory, where he viewed and spoke about RADARSAT-2, Canada's newest and most advanced earth observation space satellite.

This new satellite represents powerful state of the art technology that will enhance our ability to protect Canada's sovereignty in the far north, in keeping with our Arctic strategy outlined in the Speech from the Throne.

RADARSAT-2 will also provide improved surveillance and monitoring capabilities for management of our natural resources and monitoring of the environment. In cases of disaster, RADARSAT-2 will be an indispensable tool to provide rescue and humanitarian aid for those most in need.

RADARSAT-2 will be launched in December of this year and is proof of Canada's commitment to leading edge research. We can all be proud of its contribution to the global scientific community.

[Canada Evidence Act, October 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise in what time is left to speak to Bill C-426.

I know the hon. member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin is a respected criminal law lawyer who has had a long-standing interest in protecting journalistic activity. I expect that one of the purposes of the bill is to codify or cement current conditions and current common law protection to ensure they are not eroded either through legislation before us or perhaps by subsequent case law.

I agree with the hon. member that there is a very important public interest in ensuring that journalists are free to pursue truth, to expose wrongdoings, to look into avenues and to keep public officials accountable. There is also an extremely important public interest in pursuing truth in another arena, and that is in the context of legal proceedings, especially criminal trials where the innocence and liberties of a person are at stake.

There is thus the potential for the pursuit of truth by the journalistic context to clash with the pursuit of truth at trial. The courts have tried to address this tension. They have done so by applying a sophisticated balancing test between protection of freedom of the press and the state's interest in the investigation and prosecution of criminal activity.

The issue before us is not the importance of journalistic activity in their pursuit of truth. Rather the issue is whether the provisions of Bill C-426 bring greater clarity to the law without unduly compromising the pursuit of truth in civil and criminal proceedings. Therein lies my concern with Bill C-426. I do not feel it does address the serious operational and policy problems.

For example, the reality is that search warrant provisions, which are already contained in the Criminal Code, are an extremely important tool in the investigation of crime. By attempting to shift these provisions into the Canada Evidence Act instead, a serious flaw would be created by the bill not clarifying the current law.

Clearly it is beyond the scope of Bill C-426 to consider amendments to the Criminal Code to modify search warrant—

[Petitions, October 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a petition containing 1,159 signatures. These petitioners from across Canada, but specifically my riding of Cambridge, North Dumfries and the riding of Oxford, have raised serious concerns about Canadian Pacific Railway and its lack of civic, social and corporate responsibility as well as its refusal to cooperate and respect the communities it steamrolls through.

CP Rail is planning on constructing a bargain basement rail yard which, in the opinion of all levels of government, fails to adequately protect the environment and threatens the current living conditions of many Canadians. CP is flaunting the fact that federal laws have little jurisdiction over them. We will not be railroaded by the railroad, say the petitioners.

The petitioners ask that the Minister of Transport, the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Minister of Public Safety, as well as the Minister of Health, use their collective influence to immediately require Canadian Pacific Railway to appropriately protect the environment, show some respect for these Canadians and start acting like good neighbours should.

[Seniors, October 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are so preoccupied with getting back into power they just do not know, or perhaps they just do not care, what is happening in the real world.

The member for Mississauga South introduced a motion on Wednesday calling for the creation of a secretary of state for seniors. Well the Prime Minister already did that last January.

In addition, the Conservative government delivered over $1 billion in tax relief to seniors, doubled their pension income credits, invested $10 million in the new horizons for seniors program, improved old age security, created a national seniors council, improved compassionate care benefit, and we will introduce identity theft legislation to protect Canadians, especially seniors, from scam artists.

In the throne speech, the Prime Minister made very clear our intentions to tackle elder abuse. Perhaps members of the Liberal Party should stop worrying about themselves just long enough to appreciate all the good this Conservative government has done and will continue to do for seniors.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, October 18th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member and, as in the past, it appeared that the member did not do her research very well. I would like to point out to her that the throne speech specifically mentions a phenomenal infrastructure program with an historic amount of money for our cities.

Now that the member knows that the throne speech does address that, is she willing to phone her riding and the city of Toronto and explain why she intends to vote against the program she is criticizing?

I have heard the hon. member criticize the government before on affordable housing for aboriginal communities, for the homeless and those who are in need. I want her to agree to phone her constituents and admit to this House that she intends to vote against these positive initiatives so that we can remind her of that when she criticizes the government the next time.