Mario Silva

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, November 27th, 2008]

Madam Speaker, I will begin by congratulating you on your new position and my hon. colleague for his new role as parliamentary secretary.

Given the fact that it is the first day that we are back in the House since the terrorist attack that took place yesterday in Mumbai, India, I would like to express our profound horror, shock and dismay and to tell the people of India and the victims that our solidarity and our prayers are with them.

Would my hon. colleague share his comments on this issue and would he be willing to speak to his House leader to see if there is a possibility of having a moment of silence today?

We have found out that Canadians may also have been taken and are unaccounted for. This is a terrible tragedy around the world and we must show our solidarity.

I would invite my hon. colleague to make comments and to speak to the House leader about a moment of silence today.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, November 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as this is the first time I have spoken in the current session, I would like to start by thanking the voters of Davenport for having put their confidence in me and re-electing me.

I know that the Bloc Québécois member represents a magnificent region of our country, and I would also like to congratulate him on his election. I would also like to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, on your appointment to the chair of this House.

I know that the Speech from the Throne is vague, that it is missing a great deal and that it has left some things unclear. I know and am aware, after having spoken with many people, that this speech does not talk about a number of issues that are important to Canadians. These issues include problems in our city, poverty issues in our country, issues related to seniors, etc. However, in good conscience—and I know that my colleague is aware of the situation and that he wants to be responsible in this House—we all have a responsibility and we all must be responsible.

The first vote of confidence will be on the Speech from the Throne. In good conscience, is this the moment to force an election and waste $300 million—

[Foreign Affairs, June 20th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, we know that Julie Couillard had relationships with the Departments of Foreign Affairs, Transport, Human Resources, Public Works and Public Safety, not to mention the mafia and Hells Angels. So, yes, Canadians are interested in these relationships, as are the RCMP.

The problem is that the government is hiding and has been since this scandal broke. How long will it be before it realizes that its cover-up has failed and it must call a public inquiry?

[Foreign Affairs, June 20th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it appears as though the member for Beauce will finally speak about the scandal he is involved in. Will he appear before the parliamentary committee or address the House of Commons to answer questions? No, instead, the member is organizing a press conference where he will not take any questions from journalists.

Does the government understand that a press conference does not demonstrate transparency if the member will not answer questions?

[Municipalities, June 20th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, when the previous Liberal government implemented its new deal for cities, municipal governments across Canada found a seat at the national table. Cities like Toronto, home to millions of Canadians, finally found a partner in their federal government.

In contrast, the Conservative government policy can be summed up in one statement, no deals for cities, leaving Toronto and other cities to fend for themselves.

The facts are alarming: $123 billion is needed for infrastructure work; soaring demands are being placed on municipal public transit systems; and the economic prosperity of our urban centres is being threatened.

The government must start responding to the needs of Canadian cities. Cities like Toronto deserve to be treated with respect.

[June 19th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Dublin convention is a profoundly important step toward a better world as was the 1999 Ottawa convention. In the latter, Canada took the lead in demonstrating to the world our profound commitment to building a better world where horrific weapons of destruction are relegated to the pages of history where they belong.

In the case of this convention banning cluster munitions, we must take note of the fact that the role of Canada in 2008 was so vastly different than that of 1999. In 1999, Canada's position was consistent with the values of our country and what the world had come to expect from us. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the government's representation of our country in 2008.

Irrespective of these realities, we must all work to promote the ban on cluster munitions as we have done with landmines and in so doing continue to work diligently toward a better world where such weapons have no place.

[June 19th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, historically, Canada has always been proud to be a world leader in advancing peace around the world. This fact was clear on March 1, 1999, when the eyes of the world were on Canada as the Liberal foreign affairs minister, Lloyd Axworthy, hosted and championed the signing of the Ottawa convention banning the manufacture and use of landmines.

However, as we all know, this convention did not include a ban on so-called cluster munitions.

All weapons of war, from the most rudimentary to the most highly sophisticated instruments of destruction, are contrary to any fundamental concept of human dignity. However, the intensely insidious nature of cluster munitions even manages to set them apart from other weapons.

These are horrible weapons that do not differentiate between civilians and military targets. They are used primarily from aircraft and descend in a spiral of destruction that often blanket vast tracks of land indiscriminately. These cluster munitions not only fail to differentiate between civilian and military targets, they often maim and kill civilians long after they have been deployed since many remain unexploded.

Beginning in Oslo, Norway in February 2007 and moving through to Wellington, New Zealand one year later in 2008, the process of developing a cluster munitions convention has often been challenging.

While many across the world looked to Canada to take the lead in promoting this convention, it is with dismay that we instead witnessed Canada, along with several other states, pushing for the inclusion of article 21. This article is viewed by many as a loophole that, while still preventing Canada from producing, stockpiling or directly using cluster munitions, does not prevent this country from conducting military operations with a third party state that has not signed the convention and that may indeed elect to use cluster munitions in the course of a joint combat operation.

In the words of Mr. Paul Hannon of Mines Action Canada, he stated:

In our view, there is only one small stain on the fabric of this fine treaty text, which is the additional article added related to participating in joint operations.

When the history of the process leading to this convention is written, it unfortunately will include reference to the fact that instead of leading the world toward a conclusive and non-negotiable treaty banning cluster munitions, the Government of Canada was attempting to water down its objectives.

While we all celebrate the results of the Dublin meeting and the participation of so many states in the process of banning cluster munitions, our joy is tempered by the fact that instead of leading the way, the Canadian government was, in the eyes of many observers, simply representing the concerns of nations that chose not to sign the convention.

The government must represent the views of the Canadian people and the fundamental values of this nation. While Canada may have signed the convention, we most certainly take little comfort in the role of the government in the process leading up to and including the Dublin meetings.

[Foreign Affairs, June 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the member understood the question, so I will try it in French.

The government cannot continue making excuses to avoid the situation. The courts have concluded a number of times that Omar Khadr was not receiving the fair treatment that every Canadian citizen should be entitled to expect. Worse still, the government has abandoned young Omar Khadr.

Why does the government refuse to grant the same consideration to Omar Khadr that every other western democracy grants its citizens?

[Foreign Affairs, June 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the United States Supreme Court ruled that Omar Khadr and other detainees at Guantanamo Bay had been denied the basic right to challenge the legality of their detention. I will remind the minister that Omar Khadr remains the only citizen of a western country still being held at Guantanamo because the Conservative government has ignored his case.

How many more rulings will it take before the Conservative government intervenes and brings Omar Khadr back to Canada to face justice in a fair court of law?

[Portuguese Canadians, June 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, today, June 10, is Portugal Day, a day we celebrate the great poet, Luis Vaz de Camoes, and also when we honour the contributions made by Portuguese Canadians in Canada and a relationship that dates back centuries.

Among the notables in this history are Gasper Corte Real, who in the 15th century discovered Conception Bay, or Pedro da Silva, who in 1705 was commissioned as the “first courier” in New France.

We also honour those on Canada's west coast like Portuguese pioneer, Jose Silva, also known as Joe Silvey, who braved enormous challenges in the late 1800s to become the first British Canadian citizen of Portuguese origin, and the first known European to marry an aboriginal. He also introduced net fishing along the west coast and opened Vancouver's first bistro known as “The Hole in the Wall”.

In 2003 Portuguese Canadians celebrated the 50th anniversary of official immigration to Canada when vibrant neighbourhoods developed in places like Portugal Village in Toronto.

Today, we recognize people like Bill Moniz, who works tirelessly to document Portuguese history in Canada or groups like ACAPO, who organize Portugal Day parades in Toronto each year that draw over 300,000 people.

As the first Portuguese Canadian member of Parliament, it is my honour to ask that all members of the House join with me in honouring Luis Vaz de Camoes and in celebrating Portugal Day.