Marc Garneau

[National Defence, March 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the $400 million cost that the member is talking about reminds me of the Mirage air base fiasco for which the government was responsible.

It is shameful to see how wasteful this government is being with Canadians' money. Let us put this into perspective. The Parliamentary Budget Officer and the Pentagon can confirm these figures: a thousand times more money for fighter jets than for our children's education and a thousand times more money for prisons than for crime prevention. It does not make any sense.

How can they look at themselves in the mirror?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 21st, 2011]

With regard to ecoENERGY Fund projects in Saskatchewan: (a) in which federal riding is each project located; (b) what is the description of each project; (c) what is the expected cost of each project; and (d) what is the expected completion date of each project?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, March 21st, 2011]

With regard to ecoENERGY Fund projects in British Columbia: (a) in which federal riding is each project located; (b) what is the description of each project; (c) what is the expected cost of each project; and (d) what is the expected completion date of each project?

[Access to Information, March 21st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, there are serious allegations of political interference by the government over access to information. The Information Commissioner had to investigate these allegations and now the RCMP is involved yet again.

Whether it is Canadians asking for information or the opposition requesting costs for megaprisons or $30 billion stealth fighters, the Conservative regime just will not come clean and give Canadians the straight goods.

Why do the Conservatives not respect the public's right to know?

[Access to Information, March 21st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have rights with respect to access to information, and we will ensure that these rights are respected. The Information Commissioner has joined a long list of public officials who are investigating the Conservatives' schemes. The Conservatives always want to hide everything, which was evident when we tried to uncover the exorbitant costs of the F-35s and the megaprisons. Furthermore, a ministerial aide flouted the Access to Information Act and no one is taking responsibility.

Why do the Conservatives systematically refuse to come clean with Canadians?

[National Defence, March 9th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, when Canadians buy a car, they look at several models and choose the best model for their needs. Then they go to more than one dealership to see which one will give them the best price. That is how they get the best deal.

Apparently wiser than the minister, most Canadians also know that it is worth bargaining before buying the car. If the car dealer knows the purchaser has several options, he will try harder to win his or her business with the best deal possible.

It is the same thing with jets. What does the government not understand about the value of holding a competition before making the most expensive purchase in Canadian history?

[National Defence, March 9th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives refuse to come clean with Canadian taxpayers.

They are basically telling us that they are going to purchase aircraft but that they are not going to tell us how much those aircraft cost. They are refusing to hold a competitive bidding process to ensure that the Canadian Forces get the best aircraft for the best price. They are also carrying out a costly propaganda campaign with ministers and generals to try to justify their bad decision. We all know that the actual cost has doubled since the program began.

Why are they hiding the truth from us?

[Points of Order, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, you will recall from my questions during question period that I was making reference to the fact that the Prime Minister had decided to re-brand the Government of Canada to the “H” government. I made it quite clear that I felt this was outrageous as an act and also that it went against strict rules. Civil servants have been instructed to make those necessary changes.

My question today has to do with Parliament. Parliament is the designation that has now been pushed on the civil service by the Prime Minister. Is it considered parliamentary? Because we will be often referring to the Government of Canada in this chamber and in the Senate, I would like to have a ruling from you, Mr. Speaker, as to whether the new designation replacing “Government of Canada” is considered to be parliamentary.

[Government Communications, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are immensely proud of their country and rightly so, but the Conservatives do not seem to share in that pride. It is no longer the “Government of Canada”, but the government of the Prime Minister's last name. It is a government of only one, for only one and by only one.

Is this what the Prime Minister meant when he said that by the time he was finished we would no longer recognize Canada? Why does the Prime Minister think he is more important than Canada?

[Government Communications, March 7th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, from coast to coast to the Canadarm in space, the identity of the Government of Canada is subject to strict, non-partisan rules. It is that identity, which belongs to all Canadians, that the Prime Minister is attacking. Once again, he is disregarding existing rules. He is acting as though he were above the law.

In fact, is that not the problem, that the Prime Minister thinks that he is the government?