Harold Albrecht

[Elections Canada, April 30th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, at the time of the last election, the most recent guidelines to candidates issued by Elections Canada specifically provided that advertising costs incurred by a local candidate that promoted either the candidate or the party was an allowable expense of the candidate. Now it appears that Elections Canada has changed the rules after the fact.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board please inform the House of the discrepancies between the 2005 and 2007 election manuals provided to official agents?

[Sponsorship Program, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, today the RCMP arrested Benoît Corbeil, the former director-general of the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada. He will face charges including fraud, exercise of influence, and conspiracy to defraud as a result of the investigation into the Liberal sponsorship scandal.

Canadians rejected this kind of corruption by voting in the Conservative Party in the last election. Can the government tell us what it has done to clean up this kind of corruption?

[Criminal Code, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me the speaker is raising unnecessary concerns that these provisions will somehow be abused. In fact, there are many safeguards with respect to the recognizance conditions.

First, I should point out that the consent of the Attorney General of Canada or the attorney general or solicitor general for the province has to be obtained.

Second, it is only if the person refuses to enter into the recognizance that her or she can be incarcerated, and that is an important point. Also, the person who enters that recognizance has the right to apply to change or to vary the conditions under the recognizance order.

It seems to me that many of the concerns he has raised are unnecessarily raising fear among Canadians that this will somehow be abuse.

Would he respond to those comments?

[Liberal Party of Canada, April 15th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are finding it increasingly difficult to understand and trust the Liberal Party's divergent positions on almost every issue. Despite claims it is united, all evidence points to a number of different factions within it, all with extremely varying positions.

What is more remarkable is that the Liberal Party's own leader changes his position on issues from day to day and week to week. Who can believe anything he says when one week he is against the budget and the next week he supports it, one week he does not agree with our immigration reforms, and the next week he is supporting the government?

The Liberals voted in favour of Bill C-10, the same measure announced by the previous Liberal government in 2003, but have now changed their minds.

It is the Liberal Party that has trouble sorting out its policy. Riddled with division and frustration, the Liberals have become the party of no policy, no leadership and no credible plan for Canada.

[The Economy, April 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, last fall, in anticipation of global economic turmoil, Canada took pre-emptive action to bolster our economy with $60 billion in broad based tax cuts, including business tax reductions and keeping our promise to reduce the GST to 5%.

While the Liberals would run massive deficits, the NDP would send personal and business taxes soaring, and while the Bloc cannot do anything but complain, this Conservative government is taking prudent and responsible action to ensure Canada's economic fundamentals remain solid.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance please update the House on our government's record on job creation?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2008, April 3rd, 2008]

Create jobs.

[Afghanistan, March 31st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief issued a report last week that outlined some of the concerns it has regarding delivery of aid in Afghanistan. This report noted concerns over the commitment of donor countries to reconstruction efforts. While the agency's report stated that a great deal of progress has been made, it was critical of the level of funding actually received in the country.

Can the Minister of International Cooperation tell the House how Canada is doing in terms of its commitment to Afghanistan?

[Tackling Violent Crime Act, March 14th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as we prepare to rise, after an extremely productive winter session, I would like to take a moment to reflect on one of the very significant things we have accomplished for Canadians.

As my colleague has stated, Canadian families are now safer due to the passage of the Tackling Violent Crime Act. This Conservative act will impose mandatory minimum sentences on gun criminals, keep repeat violent and sexual offenders behind bars, and protect children by raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16 years old, is now law.

Kitchener--Conestoga residents asked me to represent them on these very issues and it is gratifying to see that results were delivered on their behalf, with the help of the Liberals and the Senate who helped pass this Conservative act.

The Conservative government wants to wish all Canadians a safe and happy Easter break.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I was really interested in hearing my colleague's remarks, especially as they relate to being in uniform.

I had the privilege not too long ago of having in my office a reservist who just returned from serving in Afghanistan. He was pleased to share with me some of the success stories that he had been involved in there.

I wonder if my colleague could comment on some of the stories he may have heard from people in his riding or people he has met while in Afghanistan or back here in Canada.

[Afghanistan, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I too listened with interest to the member's speech as it related to the combat mission and other aspects of the mission which he maintains we should strengthen, and certainly I do not think he has any disagreement on this.

For the record, in terms of security, as he pointed out, there is demining activity. The Government of Canada contributed $8.8 million for demining activities in February 2007. In December 2007 we announced a further $80 million for those kinds of initiatives. As it relates to governance and rule of law, we announced $20 million for the law and order trust fund to help Afghans take control of their security situation. As it relates to community development, there is $50 million for the national solidarity program for community development councils.

We could go on. On infrastructure, we have built 1,200 wells and 80 reservoirs so far. As it relates to women, we have contributed $14.5 million toward girls' primary education, and so on. I could go on and talk about microfinance projects, which we have financed.

Does the member not feel that this kind of initiative is a good, solid base on which to build further development and reconstruction initiatives?