Gary Goodyear

[Business of Supply, May 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by saying that I have a great amount of respect for the member opposite. We have had many discussions.

I have to try to correct some things and then perhaps he would comment on them. The last thing he mentioned was putting the $1,200 into an RESP and that it had better not be the gross amount. The member should know that once it goes into an RESP, it is completely tax free. I guess that is part of that rhetoric.

The member alluded to the synapses in this developmental process and he is absolutely correct, that does happen. Indeed, that first year is such a crucial time for children. The EI program allows folks to be off work for a year.

This is my concern and also my question for the member. I am absolutely sure he does not share the views of the majority of his colleagues on the Liberal side of the House when he suggests that we need to get these kids at that early stage and put them into an early childhood educational program especially since parents can do a much better job given all the love that everyone knows they can give.

I am concerned that the message I am getting from the opposite side of the House is that heaven forbid if parents choose to rear their children, in some way they are being offensive and maybe should be charged with child abuse. Clearly the member does not mean that. I know that is the impression we are getting from other members in his party. Surely that is not the impression the member wants us to believe.

[Business of Supply, May 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member's speech. In fact, I thought that he had a lot of good things to say. Unfortunately he lost all credibility when he mentioned that the budget does not help any Canadians. I think that is the rhetoric he was referring to just a moment ago.

My first question is on the issue of child care. He certainly does not want us to refer to it as child care, but indeed we are helping parents who ultimately provide child care. I wonder if he would correct his terminology. What the Liberals are now claiming is essential but failed to do leads me to ask the question, if this was so important, why did they not just do it? But on the issue of the terminology of child care and abandoning this rhetoric, would he not admit that what they are providing is a limited day care program, not child care?

[The Budget, May 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with a lot of what the hon. member said. Although I respect her passion for Canadian families, I disagree that all families should put their children into a day care program or they are not doing the right thing for their kids. I agree that the Liberals were sort of kicked out by the Canadian public, but I have some good news for the member. It is not really a question but just a comment.

I have some good news. In the budget, had the member read it, the Conservatives are putting $250 million toward day care spaces and 125,000 spaces will be created. Hopefully, she feels much better now.

[Committees of the House, April 28th, 2006]

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.

[Committees of the House, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two reports. The first report is the third report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, in both official languages, regarding the membership of committees of the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, as well I have the honour to present the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, in both official languages, regarding the membership of the legislative committee on Bill C-2, an act providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight and accountability.

[Committees of the House, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I would move that the second 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, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the second report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the guidelines for access to committee meetings by the electronic media.

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

[Committees of the House, April 26th, 2006]

(Motion agreed to)

[Committees of the House, April 26th, 2006]

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

[Committees of the House, April 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to present the first report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning membership and associate membership of standing committees. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the first report later this day.