Mike Lake

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have asked this question of Bloc members a couple of times today, and I want to get this member’s take on it.

As we know, in the new coalition 100% of confidence measures would need support from the Bloc. That includes the Speech from the Throne, which is a vision for Canada. One would expect that the Speech from the Throne would include a strongly articulated support for a united Canada, including Quebec.

When such a strong statement for a united Canada, including Quebec, comes out, what will the member’s position be on it?

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows, 100% of confidence measures under the new proposed coalition will need the support of the Bloc. We also know that the Speech from the Throne is a confidence measure and that it lays out the vision the government has for this country.

If there were a Speech from the Throne under the new coalition government that strongly articulated support for a united Canada, including Quebec, would the hon. member support that Speech from the Throne?

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, speaking on the G8 in July, an article in the London Telegraph lamented the lack of leadership in the world in this global situation. One thing it did single out was our Prime Minister, saying that if the rest of the world had comported itself with similar modesty and prudence, we might not be in this mess.

How can the party of the hon. member, along with the other two parties, justify bringing down the government?

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, earlier today I had a chance to ask a question of one of the Bloc members regarding the alliance. We know that 100% of the confidence measures proposed by the coalition government would need the support of the Bloc.

I asked if there were a throne speech that used strongly articulated support for a united Canada, which would include Quebec, would the Bloc support that. The answer was that it did not have to worry about it. As part of the agreement, the Leader of the Opposition would have to consult with the Bloc, so obviously there would not be any articulation of a united Canada in any kind of throne speech or government communication.

What are the member's thoughts on not being able to articulate the use of, or the censorship of, united Canada type language in any kind of government communication?

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday during the three amigos' press conference, this question was asked:

My question is for [the leader of the NDP] and [the leader of the Liberal Party]. Today the National Bureau of Economic Research in the United States said that the recession there began in December 2007, a year ago. StatsCan figures have come out today showing the Canadian economy still growing, showing we have not had a net job loss and our banks are still solvent. How do the three of you justify the moral authority to take down a government based on its economic record?

That was the question asked of the three amigos. I would note that the member's leader basically said to the leader of the New Democratic Party, if I remember correctly, “You take this”, because he did not have an answer himself.

I am curious. Maybe the new member might want to answer that question on behalf of his leader.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked about the coalition. Under that coalition, with the way the numbers work out, 100% of confidence measures passed in the House would need the support of the Bloc.

My question for the member is a straightforward yes or no question. If there were a Speech from the Throne, which is a confidence measure, that strongly articulated support for a united Canada, including Quebec, would the hon. member support that?

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the previous Liberal member's question, I would point out that the Liberal Party did not receive the support of about 75% of the Canadian population and now it is proposing to lead a coalition. He talked about the campaign document that we had during the campaign. I would point out that the centrepiece of the Liberal campaign was a massive new carbon tax. The centrepiece of the New Democratic Party campaign was a massive increase in corporate taxes. The centrepiece of the Bloc and the entire reason the Bloc exists is to destroy the country.

I would ask the hon. member to comment on the impact that three part strategy of the new coalition would have on the economics of this country.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, of course the opposition parties are colluding right now to put together a coalition in response to the economic statement that would include, I guess, their three point plan for the economy: a massive carbon tax, a massive increase in corporate taxes, and of course, breaking up the country. I think any discussion of these points is completely relevant in the context of the debate that we are having today.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would argue that the views of the member for Markham—Unionville on the economic and financial incompetence of the New Democratic Party is fully relevant to this debate.

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

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his election to the House and on making his first speech. Earlier this week, I quoted from an article in the London Telegraph published during the July G-8 meetings. It lamented the leadership in the G-8, but made a special exception for our Prime Minister. It stated:

Of all the leaders, only [the Prime Minister]...is able to point to a popular and successful record in office. Some will regard it as alarming that, in current times, world leadership should rest with Canada. But the Canadian Tories are a model of how to behave during a downturn. They have kept spending in check and reduced taxes.

If the rest of the world had comported itself with similar modesty and prudence, we might not be in this mess.

The hon. member referred to the 2% GST cut. Would the member acknowledge that the injection of $14 billion into the economy, through the 2% GST cut, may be part of the reason the Canadian economy is now the envy of most of the industrialized world?