Paul Martin

[Foreign Affairs, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the quality of research on the Alliance Conservative side. The fact is that the suggestion for the secretariat came from the Liberal caucus about a year ago.

Subsequently, I talked about it in speeches during the leadership race and then it was in the Speech from the Throne. It has been actively debated.

I can understand that the hon. member might not have known what the Liberal caucus suggested. I can understand that he might not have followed all my speeches during the leadership race. However, I saw him; he was here for the Speech from the Throne. Surely to heaven he listened to something.

[Government Contracts, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know to what formal policy announcements the hon. member is referring.

The fact is that Mr. Herle is a very active member of the Liberal Party. There is no doubt about it. He is a knowledgeable political analyst.

However, I do not know to what great announcements the hon. member is referring.

[Human Rights, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the interim leader of the NDP that I intend to discuss a whole series of spiritual issues. The Dalai Lama himself declared that he was coming as a monk. These are subjects he wants to talk about.

That having been said—absolutely, the question of human rights must be brought up when one meets with any international leader, especially one with such broad influence as the Dalai Lama.

[Human Rights, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the comments in the preamble by the interim leader of the NDP are very much to the point.

I absolutely believe that human rights are a spiritual issue as well as others. I certainly have no difficulty raising the issue of human rights with anybody, anywhere, at any time.

[Sponsorship Program, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I may have been a little confused as to the political party to which the Leader of the Opposition belongs or once belonged. He has belonged to so many political parties over his political career, but there is one thing on which he is actually right. He has never been a progressive Conservative.

[Foreign Affairs, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would simply point out that I will be the first Canadian Prime Minister to meet with the Dalai Lama. I would ask the hon. member, who is a member of the Conservative Party, what advice he gave previous Tory prime ministers, Mr. Clark and Mr. Mulroney? Did he suggest to them that they meet with the Dalai Lama? Because if he did, they did not take his advice.

[Foreign Affairs, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister of Canada, I will decide whom I will meet with and whom I will not meet with. I will decide where I will meet with them, and I will also decide the subjects that I want to address with them.

[Foreign Affairs, April 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the difference between the two is very clear. What the Leader of the Opposition wanted to do was send our troops to Iraq during the war. That is exactly what he said on the Fox network in the United States.

What our government wants to do, what our Minister of National Defence wants to do, is send our troops to Haiti to secure and maintain peace. He wants to send our troops to Afghanistan to secure peace. Our Minister of National Defence wants Canada to help these countries build their institutions. There is a fundamental difference between—

[Lobbyists, April 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has just said, government policy is determined in cabinet and by cabinet.

There are outside consultants who may well advise on matters of communication and that kind of thing. There has been no lobbying by any firm of me as far as I am concerned.

I will say to the hon. member that there are outsiders who have certainly given us advice in terms of health care, to begin with, the hon. Roy Romanow.

[Government Contracts, April 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in terms of a finance minister, myself at that time, who had some problem with numbers, let us go through some numbers.

We inherited a $42 billion deficit from that party and a debt to GDP ratio that was going through the roof. What is the net result? Today we are the only G-8 country not in deficit. We are the only one in surplus. I understand those numbers.