Merv Tweed

[Royal Manitoba Winter Fair, February 28th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring attention to a milestone event in my riding of Brandon--Souris. The 100th Royal Manitoba Winter Fair will take place in Brandon on March 26 through 31.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II honoured the fair with her attendance in 1970 and officially declared it a royal event. The Royal Manitoba Winter Fair is one of just three fairs in the entire world to have the royal designation and is renowned as one of Canada's largest agricultural events.

Activities at the fair include equestrian events, heavy horse competition, livestock displays and sales, awareness programs, entertainment, and over 300 commercial and agricultural exhibits.

This year's event will highlight our region's rich heritage and history as the Royal Manitoba Winter Fair celebrates a century of agricultural excellence in the western Manitoba region.

Mr. Speaker, I want to invite you and all Canadians to visit the 100th Royal Manitoba Winter Fair in Brandon, Manitoba, from March 26 to 31. Everyone should plan to be there.

[Canadian Wheat Board, February 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, for years western Canadian grain farmers have been asking for greater openness at the Canadian Wheat Board. Because of the current monopoly, producers have no choice but to sell their grain to the board, accept whatever returns the board gives, hope this money is spent wisely and returns are maximized.

Could the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell the House when access to information for the Canadian Wheat Board will come into force and what will it mean to western farmers?

[Delegated Legislation, February 21st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That notwithstanding Standing Order 126(1)(c), any division or divisions demanded in relation to this motion shall be deferred to the end of government orders.

[Criminal Code, February 6th, 2007]

The voice of experience.

[Committees of the House, December 13th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

In accordance with its order of reference of Thursday, September 21, 2006, your committee considered and held hearings on the subject matter of Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, and agreed on Tuesday, December 12, 2006, to report it with amendments.

[Government Policies, December 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as Canadians prepare for the holiday season, this is a time for reflection, a time when Canadians can celebrate all the wonderful things of the past year. With this in mind, I would like to remind Canadians of the great things that have happened under Canada's new government.

Canadians are now experiencing a lower GST, as this government reduced it from 7% to 6%. The government has delivered tax credits to all families. We have delivered on our universal child care benefit. We continue to deliver on our get tough on crime bills. We have signed the softwood deal that lingered among Canadians for many years. Today we will finally pass the accountability act, which will say to all Canadians that this Parliament will now become accountable and responsible to the people of Canada.

Canadians have much to be happy about, but particularly about a government that does what it says. On behalf Canada's--

[Federal Accountability Act, December 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this weekend Liberals returned to the scene of the crime. The names may have changed but absolutely nothing is different.

The most important event that did not happen this weekend was a simple apology to Canadians for violating their trust and stealing their money. Was that too much to ask?

It is clear Liberals do not care for political reform as they could not even get quorum during their party's reform debate.

The unelected Liberal Senate continues to stall the accountability act. It has been through this House six times. When will the member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville tell his unelected Senate to move forward with the accountability act? More important, one wonders if the Liberal Party and its new leader have any plans to ever be accountable to the people of Canada.

For Liberals, as the old saying goes, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Federal Accountability Act, November 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, exactly one year ago this House voted non-confidence, condemning Liberal corruption and Liberal scandal.

In response to Liberal corruption, Canada's new government brought forward the toughest anti-corruption law in Canadian history, the federal accountability act.

The only obstacle left is the Liberal Senate, which has blocked the accountability act from becoming law for almost six months.

Would the President of the Treasury Board tell this House what he thinks of Liberal Party tactics to prevent the accountability act from becoming law.

[Criminal Code, November 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the member has talked about Manitoba and the ability of moving forward with its consumer protection act.

What we really have is a payday lending institution that is just completely unregulated. We have certainly heard from members here today about the difficulties this can create. I certainly agree with my hon. colleague on some of the issues that we face, not only in the major centres but in smaller communities too, where the lack of access to banking and banking facilities becomes a bit difficult.

Has the member thought at all about what happens if provinces or territories choose not to regulate? Does the member have any ideas of how that would pan out with one province moving forward with regulations and, for example, the neighbouring province not?

[Criminal Code, November 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the comments of the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre. I have a lot of respect for the member and his comment.

I guess I am having trouble, along with many people understanding, his new position with regard to Bill C-9.

On August 18, the member stated, “I think it's a social experiment that has failed catastrophically. If the idea was to save money by having less people in jail the trade-off hasn't been worth it”. Does the member not understand that by gutting Bill C-9, he is putting the very same car thieves, arsonists and break and enter people back on to the street to commit these crimes in the very community that he claims to protect?