Mike Lake

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, May 16th, 2008]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by thanking my colleagues from all parties who have supported my private member's bill up to this point. Because of prorogation and some things around scheduling, we have actually had two opportunities to talk about this. I have had about 15 minutes twice to discuss this and we have heard from members of all parties on this important bill.

In a few minutes, my colleague from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo will move a motion to send this bill back to committee and I support that motion.

The bill was sent back to the House from the committee without being reviewed by the justice committee for reasons that we all understand. However, I will not get into a debate on those reasons right now. I know the minister would like this bill to get a proper review before committee. I personally would like to see my bill scrutinized before committee so I could have the opportunity to answer any questions from members of other parties or my own party regarding the bill and hear what experts have to say about it.

When a private member's bill comes before committee, I am consistently asking questions about the amount of research that has gone into it. I want to ensure we are dealing with well thought out and well researched legislation. I want to ensure my own bill follows those same rules. I want people to understand what it is I am trying to accomplish and I want them to have confidence that I researched it properly and nothing was missed. For me, the idea of the justice committee having the opportunity to review this bill is important and I look forward to the opportunity to do that.

I have had discussions with members from the other parties and I understand that there is general support for going in this direction. I thank the members who I have talked to for that. I look forward to the opportunity to be before the committee and thank all members for their support for this important bill.

[Health, May 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, since taking office the government has taken a new approach to the issues surrounding drug abuse. Under the previous Liberal government, Canadians were given mixed messages about the legality of drugs and some of the Liberal campaigns stopped just short of actually encouraging children to experiment with drugs.

Last October the Prime Minister announced Canada's new national anti-drug strategy and since then we have made great strides in clamping down on those who traffic illegal drugs while providing meaningful treatment for those in need of help.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary for Health please update the House on any recent developments in this area?

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying something that I often say in the human resources committee when we are talking about these important issues. We all want the same end result. I think all of us in the House want to see decreased levels of poverty in Canada. It is just that from one party to another we differ in our views on how to get there, quite significantly sometimes.

We have taken some measures, as I said earlier, to cut the GST, to introduce the working income tax benefit and to introduce the universal child care benefit. We have increased the basic exemption and lowered the lowest tax bracket. These are all measures that the NDP has voted against. I would like to ask NDP members why they voted against them, but I am not going to do that. Actually, I am just happy that they voted.

I have a question for the member. She has been in the House for much of today and has heard members of the Liberal Party in debate. I would like to ask her, based on what she has heard today, whether she feels her Liberal colleagues are going to vote on this confidence motion and, if so, which way they might go.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's party often talks about its commitment to working families. I would like to point out some of the things that the government has actually done for working families, important steps like cutting the GST, introducing the working income tax benefit, introducing the universal child care benefit, increasing the basic exemption, and lowering the lowest tax bracket. We have taken all of these important steps.

The NDP voted against these important steps but has introduced several private members' bills, one of which was Bill C-265 that was dealt with in the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Bill C-265 would have basically cost the average worker in Canada a little more than $100 per year.

My question to the hon. member is this. How can she justify to working families her opposition to the important steps that we have taken to put more money in their pockets and, as well, how can she justify to those same working families the NDP's proposal to add a little more than $100 to the EI bill that they pay through their hard work that comes off of their cheques?

[Sport, April 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, participation in sports is part of a healthy lifestyle and contributes to a healthy society. Sport is also a very important contributor to Canada's image worldwide.

Canadian athletes have demonstrated time and time again their ability to bring home the gold. Hosting sporting events builds significant legacies for the Canadian sport system and brings substantial economic, cultural and social benefits to our cities.

Could the Secretary of State for Sport please update the House on how the government plans to raise Canada's profile with regard to sport on the international stage?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2008, April 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the comments of the hon. member and of the member who spoke before her, the hon. member for Victoria. I was particularly interested to hear the long list of big programs that they would like to see funded by the federal government.

What I would like to know is when we can expect to see a costing of all of those promises to the dollar, and maybe a list of the tax increases that would be required to pay for those promises.

[UN World Autism Awareness Day, April 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago yesterday, my wife and I received word from doctors that our two and a half year old son, Jaden, had autism.

Today we mark the first ever UN World Autism Awareness Day. It is a day not only to discuss the many challenges that accompany this mysterious disorder, but to share and celebrate the truly unique and authentic individuals who have autism.

Jaden may not be a star hockey player or a straight A student, but he and other individuals with autism are remarkable in ways that we tend to undervalue in our goal oriented society.

Jaden does not know how to hate. He can be aggressive, but is never intentionally mean, and he does not know when other kids are being mean to him. He never gossips or holds a grudge.

He is 100% genuine and honest with his feelings, something that is particularly difficult when he is sad, because usually he is unable to communicate the reason for his tears.

Almost every single person in Jaden's life would say that they get more from him than he takes from them. We should all hope to one day achieve that kind of impact through our own lives.

[Liberal Party of Canada, March 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the previous Liberal government showed a complete lack of accountability and stewardship of Canadian taxpayer dollars. Therefore, it is refreshing that in just two years our Conservative government has delivered three straight responsible and balanced budgets, paid down the federal debt by $37 billion and set the course toward the lowest federal tax burden in half a century.

Contrast that with the Liberal Party, which has now promised more than $66 billion in scattered new spending priorities over the next four years, spending which will have to be financed by either raising taxes or driving the country back into deficit. Its most recent brainwave involves an ad hoc private member's bill which, according to TD Bank chief economist Don Drummond, would cost about $2 billion a year and favour the wealthy.

The Liberal leader is about to stand up. I hope he will use his time to explain to Canadians that his newly minted catchphrase “tax shift” is really just code for another Liberal taxpayer shaft.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that I quote often, “Those who stand for nothing fall for anything”. On this issue, the NDP does not stand for anything when it comes to Afghanistan but expects that Canadians will fall for the idea that we can somehow do all of the humanitarian things and all the good work in terms of helping to raise up a government without--

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, there is a total contradiction in the NDP approach here in Canada versus what it is advocating for in Afghanistan. It is a complete contradiction.

We know that the Taliban has been known to pull women out of school and shoot them in public for the crime of teaching. There are even stories of the Taliban killing girls as they came out of school. I would point out that if one were to talk to people who have been there, whether it is the military or people from that area, they will almost unanimously say that the notion of negotiating with the Taliban leadership is absolutely ridiculous.

I note that the leader of the NDP Party at one point talked about sending people with shovels instead of guns. I would ask the question: If we send people with shovels instead of guns, who will protect the people with the shovels?