Joe Volpe

[Foreign Affairs, October 6th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians want the Prime Minister to be concerned about Canadians.

Access to information documents tell us that the Prime Minister knew on July 1, not August 18, about Suaad's problems.

The communications director for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, at 8:57 in the morning, in an email marked urgent, said:

“I need lines for the PM right away.”

Seventeen minutes later she repeated, “Lines for the Prime Minister, please”.

Is the Prime Minister telling us today that he did not receive this briefing, that he was not paying attention or that he just did not care about Canadians' safety?

[Foreign Affairs, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister refuses to answer.

When it comes to protecting the rights of Canadians abroad, the cabinet seems to be speechless, if not indifferent. In July, the Minister of Foreign Affairs ceded final responsibility for the Suaad Hagi case to the Minister of Public Safety. This minister promised to make public the results of an inquiry into the abandonment of a citizen for several weeks.

Two months later, still nothing. Why the delay? Is the minister also involved?

[Foreign Affairs, October 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on October 2 the House leader for the official opposition asked the Prime Minister about his government's abandonment of Canadian citizens abroad. He asked which ministers were involved in the Suaad Hagi case, what the role of the Prime Minister was and when he first became aware of the plight of Suaad Hagi. What date exactly did the Prime Minister learn about the case of Suaad Hagi?

Now that he has had the weekend to research his files, will the Prime Minister tell this House truthfully when he knew and what he did with that information?

[Business of Supply, October 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am excited by the opportunity to engage in the rhetoric that is emanating from the government side. The minister is talking about two things: first of all, cooperation in the House. That is not something that belongs to the premiers or the mayors or other municipal leaders, but it does belong to members of Parliament in this place.

I dare say that notwithstanding the protestations of the government side, the government has had and has enjoyed the support of members of Parliament from all three parties on the opposition at one time or another. It is important to understand that there has been cooperation here, because the most important question that Canadians have asked as a result of the cooperation of members of Parliament over the course of the last four years is what the government has done with that cooperation.

Here is the answer I would like the minister to address. Over the course of the last 10 months, we have seen an erosion of the finances and the economy of this country under the watch of people who have had the support of members of Parliament who put aside partisanship. We have seen the finances go from a surplus to a deficit situation. That translates into a $2,000 loan, theft, from the pockets of every single Canadian: every man, woman and child. That is $2,000. How will the Conservatives recover that in an environment where they are engaging in getting us to go to an election?

[Iran, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, how low Canadian foreign policy has dropped. In a week when world leaders turned their attention to the Iranian threat to world peace, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs opted for a local show as opposed to making a substantive contribution to world stability. Yet every day Iran is getting closer to backing up its vicious vitriol with nuclear weaponry. Responsible western nations need to stop Iran's steady march toward its goal and consequent regional destabilization.

Iran's military politics are a global threat, a threat that extends beyond the Middle East and should be treated as such. We need to act now. We need to back up talk with action.

My colleague from Mount Royal has introduced Bill C-412, An Act to combat incitement to genocide, domestic repression and nuclear armament in Iran, a bill which I proudly seconded.

If the government is serious about the Iranian threat, it should adopt the bill, make it law and prove that it can walk the talk.

[Employment Insurance Act, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party has attempted to work with all members of Parliament in order to put objectives on the table and to see if we could work with government. We have actually done that.

The NDP has pointed out that all of the collaborative efforts have been for naught. Those members have finally realized that the government cannot produce anything, and it has not. Now the Conservatives are swallowing themselves whole and saying this is a great project. Where is the $1 billion?

[Employment Insurance Act, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully and I noted that the member opposite was really talking about a plan that has nothing to do with Bill C-50. She talked about issues that were resident in the Canadian action plan, the same plan that has produced 500,000 unemployed and a deficit that is now at $56 billion. However, that was only last week. It is probably higher today.

She talked about it serving employees and workers. Some of these projects were ongoing projects and they have their own merit. She did not talk about what this bill does in terms of the jobs it is going to create, where it is going to create them and in which industries they are going to be created.

I noted as well that she very deliberately left out the references in the bill to all the exemptions that displaced workers are going to face if they want to access EI. Those exemptions are all included under this rubric: Anyone who has used the EI system any time in the last five years will be out of luck. Anybody who has already been unemployed as a result of the government's mismanagement—

[Employment Insurance Act, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my colleague. He is an interested person and member. I am wondering whether he would explain the ramification of an issue that was brought to the table by my colleague from Mississauga South, and that is the whole question of accountability and trust.

Here we have a member of the government who glories in the achievements of his government, but not one of them has given an indication of what has happened in the last 10 months, where we went from a surplus to a $56 billion deficit. That is $60 billion of deficit.

We ask ourselves what that means. It is either an investment or a shortfall. If it is an investment, I would like the member to tell the House what the Canadian public has received for that $60 billion, because it should have added up to at least 500,000 jobs instead of 500,000 unemployed. Alternatively, it could demonstrate that there is a shortfall of government revenues. Since the Government of Canada takes about 20% of the GDP in taxes, it would mean there has been a shortfall of $300 billion in economic activity.

Under those circumstances, what would possibly possess Canadians to think they ought to renew confidence in a government that is that incompetent and untrustworthy?

[Employment Insurance Act, September 28th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused by what my hon. colleague from Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel just said. I do know whether he plans to support the government or not. Yet that is the most important question. It is because of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP that the government can continue to claim that the bill it introduced will help Canadian workers.

I think my colleague from Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel is actually speaking on the government side. Perhaps he will answer this question.

He has read the bill. He knows that the bill will not create one single job. He knows as well that the bill is intended to help long-tenured workers.

Just think about that language, long-tenured workers who have contributed for a minimum of x number of years and have not drawn out more than x number of weeks of pay. That means it helps nobody in the auto industry because the auto industry has been using the employment insurance system in order to retool, upgrade and do all kinds of other things.

It means that none of those employees can profit. Why would the member support the government in a smoke-and-mirrors exercise?

[Rosh Hashanah, September 18th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this evening, blasts of the shofar will ring in the new year, 5770, for Jewish communities everywhere. Around the world, and here in Canada, our fellow citizens of the Jewish faith will celebrate Rosh Hashanah. This is a period of great celebration and as importantly of honest self-reflection.

Over the weekend, families and friends will gather across Canada to share in this most special of holy days, celebrating the passing year and ushering in the new. I know that all members of the House will join me in wishing our Jewish friends, colleagues and neighbours a Shanah tovah u’metukah. May their year and ours be blessed with peace, joy and good health.

I would like to offer a very special good Yom Tov to the Jewish community in my home riding of Eglinton—Lawrence.