Keith Martin

[Budget Implementation Act, 2008, May 30th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my NDP colleague in regard to getting back to the economics of our country. This is so central to the ability of Canadians to have the life they want in order to provide for their families and to us as a Parliament and a government to have the assets to serve our citizens.

Does the hon. member think the Conservative government has made serious errors in what it has done to eviscerate the financial capabilities of the federal government by putting the finances of the Canadian government on the brink of a deficit situation?

Does he think the dropping of two percentage points on the GST was an abysmal mistake? Would it have been preferable to put moneys directly, through a non-refundable tax credit, to the poor and the middle class? Would that have been a much more preferable way of getting money into the hands of those of modest means in our country, those who need it most?

That would be much more preferable than the blanket drop in the GST, which actually preferentially helps those who are most affluent, because the more we spend, the more we can benefit from a drop in the GST. As well, we know that those who are least fortunate in our country are spending money on rent and food. In other words, they are spending their money on items that are GST exempt.

Does he agree that the government has taken quite an immoral position and has been quite cavalier and damaging to our country by affecting the finances of our nation in such a negative way?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2008, May 30th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, does my colleague believe that the government's significant mismanagement of the economy by eviscerating the financial and economic capabilities of Ottawa is somehow in keeping with its ideology? The Conservative government believes that its ideology is good for Canada. Some of us believe it is significantly damaging to Canada. The fact is the government leadership believes that we are simply the sum of our parts, whereas many of us believe that we are greater than the sum of our parts.

Does the member believe that a strong Ottawa working with strong provincial leaderships would enable our Canada to achieve its potential?

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, we cannot have a foreign policy unless our diplomats are working abroad. DAC assessments show that we are at the bottom of the barrel of the G-8 countries in terms of the percentage of our diplomats working abroad.

Is there a management plan to reverse this trend and ensure that our diplomats are going to be abroad in the field where they can do their job representing our country? Does he have a specific management plan with targets?

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

Am I taking time out of my colleague's time?

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

I assume though, Mr. Chair, that that time was not taken out of the initial time.

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, our troops are doing an extraordinary job in Kandahar. I have a simple question for the Minister of International Cooperation. Can she tell us how many schools and how many clinics CIDA has actually built and made operative in the last year in Kandahar?

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

I will assume that is a yes, Mr. Chair.

The United Nations Department of Security and Safety has said that the area of control by the Taliban in Afghanistan is actually increasing rather than decreasing. Would the minister agree with that assessment?

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, I will be sharing my time with the very fine members of Parliament for Winnipeg South Centre and Etobicoke—Lakeshore.

My first question concerns the fact that the United States has been blocking efforts to negotiate an international ban on cluster munitions. I would simply like to ask the minister whether or not his government supports an international ban on the production and use of cluster munitions, yes or no?

[Nuclear Liability Compensation Act, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has been a leader on this issue, not only for his constituents but here in the House. I thank him for mentioning one area that I was remiss in not mentioning and that is the issue of solar power.

The member is absolutely right. We did a lot of things to enable people to acquire other alternative options in terms of energy. He is absolutely right in terms of the use of solar. A very large chunk of Japan's energy source comes from solar. It is interesting to note that in Germany and in Japan they are constructing buildings that use 70% less energy than the equivalent buildings that we build in North America.

There are a lot of options and ideas out there. We just need to get on with it and employ those ideas for our country and our citizens.

[Nuclear Liability Compensation Act, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not tell the public that the member's private member's bill on poverty reduction just received royal assent. That was a cooperative effort on both sides of the House, but the member was the lead because it is his bill and he deserves a lot of credit for completing that extraordinary effort.

One of the things I find really sad is how science and fact do not guide public policy very often. Canada has world-class scientists with extraordinary minds and I believe we need to tap into their ideas and solutions. I believe our role as members of Parliament is to tap into those great minds and study their ideas for the benefit of the public we serve. Extraordinary people living in our country have amazing ideas that should be brought to life, if even on a pilot project, that could benefit Canadians in many ways. I would implore the government to do a better job of utilizing our scientists.

It was a sad thing when the government closed the office of the science advisor and let Dr. Carty go. Why on earth would the government close the office of the science advisor to the Prime Minister, one of the stellar scientists in our country? It is unfathomable to me but the Prime Minister chose in his wisdom to do that.

Nuclear power can be a very potent tool. It is one of an array of non-greenhouse gas emitting tools that allows us to meet our energy needs, reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, improve our environment and reduce our smog factor. It also affects the price of carbon. If we are going to be using carbon credits, the utilization of nuclear power, as with hydro, tidal and wind power, would enable us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, acquire a lot of carbon credits and keep the price of carbon down.