Paul Martin

[Pope John Paul II, April 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Pope John Paul II not only embodied and served a religious ideal, he transcended it. He broke barriers. He built bridges. He reached out to all who walk on this earth. He stood up for people regardless of age, of race or faith. He was a beacon of spiritual guidance and a champion of human freedom. During the course of his 26 years as head of the Roman Catholic Church, he was a tireless and influential apostle of peace.

His wide-ranging travels, despite ill health, were an expression of his determination to use every opportunity to promote international reconciliation and respect for democratic values and human rights.

History will also record that John Paul II made a vital contribution to the democratic transformation of central and eastern Europe, and to the end of the cold war.

The Pope's global vision included Canada. His empathy with the aspirations of aboriginal Canadians, symbolized by his special trip to the north in 1987 to meet aboriginal communities, was particularly noteworthy and indelible.

Unforgettable were his visits throughout our country as well as his participation in World Youth Day in Toronto in July 2002 during which he inspired hundreds of thousands of young people with the strength and the clarity of his moral vision.

For Catholics and indeed for all the people of the world, it was truly moving to bear witness to the grace, the courage and the dignity that the Pope displayed during his life of service and during his final days among us.

Today, in churches and in coffee shops, around the dinner table and around the world, we mourn the death of John Paul II. We celebrate his achievements. We marvel at a single human life that touched so many of us, guided so many of us, and inspired and comforted so many of us.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, this is a serious debate. It is one that ought to be carried on by serious people about the future of our economy and the role we are going to play in the world. I would ask the leader of the NDP to approach it in that way instead of simply pursuing straw men. I would ask that he sit down in the House or in committee or anywhere and debate the real issues. The future of Canadian generations to come will depend on just how competitive our economy is and on the kinds of programs we build in to build this country.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, three sovereign nations came together a decade ago to sign NAFTA and it has been of enormous benefit to Canada. Given the evolution of the world's economy, the rise of China and India, it is perfectly understandable that those same three sovereign nations would want to make North America stronger and more competitive, providing better jobs and a higher quality of life to their citizens.

It is beyond me why the leader of the NDP, instead of engaging in a serious debate on this matter, continues to go over the top.

[Sponsorship Program, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, first, the leader of the Bloc Québécois must know that the Liberal government set up the Gomery commission. We did so because we wanted answers and we are going to get them.

Second, we have said from the beginning that any inappropriately received money would be paid back. That is that.

[The Senate, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to say that those who have been appointed to the Senate are outstanding Canadians. They are outstanding Canadians who, in the Senate, will represent both the government and the opposition parties. I think that is incumbent upon us in that way.

In terms of Senate reform, I have stated time and again that I believe in Senate reform but I do not believe that it should be done in a piecemeal way. It should be done in a comprehensive way, dealing not only with the method of choosing senators, but also dealing with the equality provisions that are required.

[Air-India, March 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the Deputy Prime Minister has not only offered to meet with the families but she has asked to do so in order to identify with the families, those who are most concerned, what the fundamental questions are that they, as well as the government, feel ought to be addressed. She wants to do this. What we really should do is determine what the questions are and then we should go about answering them.

[Meeting of North American Leaders, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, if we take a look at the record that Canada has had, we are the only G-7 country that is currently in a surplus. We have had an incredible increase in the standard of living of Canadians.

The hon. member talks about jobs. The fact is that we have had some of the highest job creation Canada has ever had in any decade, and certainly greater than most other G-7 countries, all as a result of the policies of this government.

What I would suggest the hon. member ought to do is to stop reading just the headlines and he might start reading the articles.

[Meeting of North American Leaders, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure what Alice in Wonderland book the leader of the NDP has been reading, but I will tell members what we will be pursuing. We will be pursuing an agenda that would provide greater security for Canadians and for Americans and indeed for Mexicans. We will be proceeding on an agenda for greater economic prosperity for our three countries. We will be proceeding on an agenda for greater quality of life, for better environmental control.

If the leader of the NDP finds that security, prosperity and a higher quality of life is an agenda that he cannot accept, we have known that for a long time.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the government has been extremely clear since the start. If some money came from inappropriate sources or if some tainted money was received, it will be repaid.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed worrisome when the leader of Her Majesty's opposition has so little understanding of the nature of the trading difficulties and the trading relationship between our two countries. He ought to know that on the one hand there has certainly been no capitulation. The fact is that Canada has won consistently before every panel that has to decide.

What he also ought to understand is that it is not the Canadian government that is going to be able to overturn the decision of an individual judge in Montana. We are two different countries, but what we have done is work very closely with the administration, which is supporting the Canadian position.