John Baird

[Government Programs, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day we think it is important to have laws that are constitutional. Instead of giving grants out to Liberal Party lawyers, we think politicians should accept their responsibility and deal with any issues that are before Parliament to ensure they are constitutional.

We have to say that things like health care, education and ensuring our seniors feel safe in their communities are also priorities and they did not receive enough attention from the former Liberal government.

[Government Programs, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is important that every taxpayer dollar is spent effectively, responsibly and accountably. We believe it is inappropriate that government pass legislation that is unconstitutional, which is why we are making the choice not to do that.

[Government Programs, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I think all of us would agree that the Government of Canada and all parliamentarians support the good work that volunteers do in our communities, but it is important that we look at the priorities of Canadian families, the priorities of health care, the priorities of ensuring that our communities are safe, the priorities of ensuring that there is really meaningful tax relief for senior citizens and working families throughout this country.

The previous prime minister, the member for LaSalle—Émard said, “Do I think it is possible to make cuts in spending? Yes. Do I intend to make cuts in spending? Yes. Do I believe that we can hold spending as a percentage of GDP? Yes”. Did the Liberals do that? No.

[Government Programs, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, we believe as a government that we have a very important responsibility to ensure that every taxpayer dollar is spent effectively, is spent responsibly and is spent accountably.

The real concern is that the priorities of the previous Liberal government, the previous defeated Liberal minority government, were not being addressed. That is why this government in our budget has chosen to make new investments into health care, new investments into making communities safer, and new investments to ensure that we provide tax relief to seniors on pensions.

[Estimates, Part III, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, on behalf of my colleagues, part III of the estimates, consisting of 90 departmental and organizational expenditure plans and priorities.

These documents will be distributed to the members of the standing committees to assist in their consideration of the spending authorities sought in part II of the estimates.

[Points of Order, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the long-standing parliamentary tradition has been for members on all sides of the House to recognize the contribution made by those men and women who work in our public service and who put their lives on the line every day. The very sad reality is that not one Liberal member, including the member for Ottawa South, is speaking up against this disgrace. It is an absolute disgrace.

[Government Programs, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it was the former prime minister, the member for LaSalle—Émard, who said, “looking over spending should occur annually”. We agree. We will be announcing some changes shortcoming.

[Political Financing, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I always find it interesting when members of the Liberal Party bring up the name of Brian Mulroney. The last time the Liberals were in government, they were forced not only to apologize to Brian Mulroney, but to give back more than $1 million in a defamation suit involving Mr. Mulroney for the lies that were spread.

What we are seeing opposite is character assassination of the worst kind. What we need the members of the Liberal Party to do is to speak up against the raising of the dead by the member for Eglinton—Lawrence, to speak up against the crazy campaign tactics and to speak up against the shakedown of young school children for their milk money.

[Political Financing, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. Another political party was also given the same advice and counsel as this party was with respect to financial donations to political parties. Another political party was told that the costs for convention fees were not required to be counted as donations because the cost of the convention was $600 and that was the cost that was paid.

What the Liberal Party wants taxpayers to do, hard-working middle class families in Ajax and Pickering, is to dig into their pockets and to subsidize their own convention by $1.6 million in subsidies, something that those of us on this side--

[Political Financing, September 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly do not accept the premise of the question. Let us be very clear what the member is looking to happen.

What the Liberal Party says is that the big fat cheque it gets annually from taxpayers is not enough, that the big refund to candidates at the local riding level is not enough. The Liberals are asking the taxpayers to subsidize the Liberal leadership convention with full tax credited receipts. The cost to taxpayers would be more than $1.67 million.

That is so much money, it is even more than the million dollars the Liberals stole from the taxpayers when they were in government and were forced to return to taxpayers by the Gomery report. Shame.