Jim Maloway

[First Nations Financial Transparency Act, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for introducing Bill C-575.

I would be interested in knowing, in her development of the bill, the groups and people she consulted with and which of those groups actually supported the development of the bill.

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the Bloc for its choice of a subject matter for today's motion.

Canada has now spent $18 billion and counting and yet there is no one out there saying that we are actually winning this war. It is pushing a decade now that we have been in there. The United States recently has been flooding the country with a surge of troops because what it was doing before was not achieving results.

The real mystery in this whole debate is not so much what the government is doing, because we expect inconsistencies from it, but it is the Liberals. The Liberals have three apparent leaders. Just yesterday, the member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, the former leader of the Liberal Party, said that the Afghans do not need training, that they defeated the Soviet Union in the 1980s, that they know quite well how to fight wars and that they do not need military training. The member for Toronto Centre got together with the government to negotiate some secret deal here to prolong this training without even telling the Liberal caucus about it.

I wonder whether the government will eventually come clean and let us know what is happening and what is going on with the Liberals and their secret agreement with the government to prolong this action.

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how much evidence the government needs that the Government of Afghanistan is corrupt. Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index indicates that Afghanistan is tied for 176 out of 178 in terms of corruption.

Back in January or February of this year, I recall that a doctor, one of the candidates who ran against Karzai for president, testified at a Senate committee hearing. She indicated that at least two people that she was aware of in Afghanistan working for the Afghanistan government had purchased half a million dollar homes, one in Vancouver and I believe one in Toronto.

When are we going to wake up and smell the coffee here, and realize that we are doing all this work and spending $18 billion to help a government that is essentially corrupt?

[Business of Supply, November 25th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, on Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index, Afghanistan ties for 176th place out of 178 countries. Just yesterday somebody called my office asking that very question, why we would be supporting a government that rates so high in corruption.

We have spent $18 billion already on this effort that has produced very questionable results. So I would like to ask the member if he would expand upon that whole issue, on whether or not we should be looking at what we are really doing there, supporting a corrupt government. There are two American military officials, just in the last few days, evidently questioning the same point.

Why would we possibly be supporting putting money into developing an army for a government that rates so high on the corruption index?

[Petitions, November 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by dozens of Canadians to end Canada's military involvement in Afghanistan.

In May 2008, Parliament passed a resolution to withdraw Canadian Forces by July 2011. The Prime Minister, with agreement from the Liberal Party, broke his oft repeated promise to honour the parliamentary motion and, furthermore, refuses to put it to a parliamentary vote in the House.

Committing 1,000 soldiers to a training mission still presents a danger to our troops and an unnecessary expense when our country is faced with a $56 billion deficit. The military mission has cost Canadians more than $18 billion so far, money that could have been used to improve health care and seniors' pensions right here in Canada.

Polls show that a clear majority do not want Canada's military presence to continue after the scheduled removal date of July 2011. Therefore, the petitioners call upon the Prime Minister to honour the will of Parliament and bring the troops home now.

[National Tree Day, November 24th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak today to Motion No. 575 sponsored by the member for Ottawa—Orléans. It is a very worthwhile effort on his part.

Over my lifetime, I have seen times when trees and forests were taken for granted. Up until the 1970s and probably beyond, we had clear-cutting practices and all sorts of forest harvesting methods that today we would not approve of. I do recall knowledgeable people in those days talking about how Europe was so far advanced. Sweden, for example, had a program where if a tree was harvested then another tree was planted.

It is good to hear that people, like the member for Ottawa—Orléans, have been concerned with this issue for a long time and have been promoting the conservation of our forests.

We debated a bill that was before this House not along ago, which is still not through the final processes, but it would require governments to use wood in the construction of government buildings. The Province of British Columbia and, I think, the Province of Quebec have passed similar legislation.

While there is some push-back from the concrete industry on this whole issue, there are a lot of good reasons for us to use wood in some of our construction projects. I remember seeing some coverage of the earthquake in China where, in the aftermath of the earthquake, the Chinese were attempting to rebuild using Canadian lumber. They knew that structures constructed of wood survive in an earthquake a lot better than structures constructed of concrete or bricks.

I do not know what the government has or has not done with regard to the Haiti earthquake situation, but if the Chinese are excited to be committed to rebuilding their whole devastated area with Canadian wood, I would think the government should be looking into what can be done in the Haiti situation, rather than simply rebuilding buildings that would be susceptible to earthquake damage in a future earthquake, which will surely happen at some point. We should be looking into building these buildings out of wood so that they can withstand earthquakes and would also lead to less loss of life if and when another earthquake were to happen.

I asked the member a question during question period regarding the boreal forest, which, as the member knows, is a very important part of Manitoba. We have been attempting to have it designated a world heritage site under UNESCO. It is a huge forest that goes down the east side of Lake Winnipeg and into Ontario.

However, we are having a big debate right now in Manitoba over the Bipole III project on whether to run the bipole down the east side of Lake Winnipeg, which would cut through a corridor of the boreal forest, or whether to skirt around it, which would be a much longer process. The current government is supporting the longer and more expensive route but the Conservative opposition is raising quite an issue on this because it wants to take the cheaper route and cut down through the middle of the forest.

I do not know if Dorothy Dobbie, who was a member of Parliament and now has a gardening show in Winnipeg, has interceded on behalf of those who want to see the forest survive in its present state. I would ask the member, who I believe knows Dorothy very well, to talk to her about this whole issue. This is certainly something that—

[National Tree Day, November 24th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, Manitoba has a broad expanse of boreal forest on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. The government is trying to protect that area and turn it into a UNESCO world heritage site, but his provincial cousins, the Manitoba Conservative leader and his party, are wishing to build a hydro corridor down the east side.

I just wondered whether he was aware of that issue and whether he would endeavour to follow the 10,000 people who have intervened in this issue and add his support to those who want to turn the area into a heritage site and stop the power line from coming down the east side in the boreal forest.

[Protecting Children from Online Sexual Exploitation Act, November 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that the government is spending $42 million to play cat and mouse with people who are running these sites, when we have the examples of Germany and Sweden simply blocking the sites and the problem is solved.

I want to ask the member whether the government has looked into best practices in other countries. There are other countries beyond those, which I could name, that actually do not have a problem with this issue simply, once again, because they block the sites. Is that not a reasonable solution to this problem?

[Petitions, November 24th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by dozens of Canadians to end Canada's involvement in Afghanistan.

In May 2008, Parliament passed a resolution to withdraw Canadian Forces by July 2011. The Prime Minister, with agreement from the Liberal Party, broke his often-repeated promise to honour the parliamentary motion.

Committing 1,000 soldiers to a training mission still presents danger to the troops and an unnecessary expense when our country is faced with a $56 billion deficit. The military mission has cost Canadians more than $18 billion so far, money that could have been used to improve health care and seniors' pensions in Canada.

Polls show that a clear majority of Canadians do not want Canada's military presence to continue after the scheduled removal date of July 2011.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon the Prime Minister to honour the will of Parliament and bring the troops home now.

[Pensions, November 23rd, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I am a bit disappointed in the government for not moving quickly enough to establish an insurance scheme to insure pension funds.

Property and casualty insurance companies across Canada could form a fund back in 1986 or 1987 to take care of any bankruptcies in the property and casualty insurance business. If houses burn down and a company goes bankrupt, the rest of the companies in the country get together to resolve the situation, pay the claims and bail the company out. That same situation happens with life insurance companies. It is about time the government looked at that as an option.

I would like to ask the member if she would agree with that analysis and whether we could collectively encourage the government to look into that as an option.