Peter MacKay

[National Defence, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is involved in a very important effort in Afghanistan. The troops being there gives us the ability to help build democracy, to help build the capacity of the Afghan people themselves to eventually enjoy the same type of freedom that we enjoy in Canada.

This is the type of effort that Canada is involved in. This is what members opposite and members of the NDP should be supporting, not backing down, not suggesting we cut and run, as they did in the vote last week.

[National Defence, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I was having difficulty hearing the member as well. Maybe she could raise her voice in her next question.

What we know, obviously, is that Canada, as I said, is part of a very important effort to try to eradicate--

[National Defence, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, what we do know is that Canada is part of a global effort to eradicate terrorism. We are making a significant effort in Afghanistan, along with our international partners, to free and liberate the people of Afghanistan from the oppression that was in place under the Taliban.

We do know for certain that this hon. member and members of the NDP do not support Canada's effort in Afghanistan or the troops that are there making us proud every day.

[International Aid, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, unlike previous governments, this government acted immediately with its pledge of support. We immediately sent personnel into the region and they will be arriving today. As well, I spoke with the foreign minister from Indonesia to assure him of Canada's ongoing commitment and support. As for the specific spending, that will be done in conjunction, obviously, with the Indonesian government, our international partners and other groups that are there, including the Red Cross which is doing exemplary work.

I thank the hon. member for the question because it is important for Canadians to know that Canada has been very active, proactive and out in front on this issue leading all countries.

[Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, May 29th, 2006]

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is wrong. He made inaccurate allegations in the first instance and stood up in the House and misstated the facts about a position at ACOA having a change in the requirement of the hiring practice. It has not changed. I indicated clearly then, as I do now, that I will look at all applications as the department goes through the process. We will always take into consideration the criteria used previously.

The member opposite should refrain from getting up, simply misstating the facts and misleading Canadians about a department that is working very well for Atlantic Canada, sullying the name of ACOA representatives.

[Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, what is truly unfortunate is that members opposite get up and make completely unfounded and biased comments about a department that is there to benefit our region of Atlantic Canada. They make unfair suggestions that the hiring practice has changed. In fact, what has happened is that ACOA now uses an open, transparent and inclusive hiring process that is on the website. That is why the member opposite and members of his party do not recognize it.

[Human Rights, May 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has been very strong in asserting human rights values, both at the United Nations and around the world. We will always continue an abiding interest in ensuring that our human rights are on par with other countries. The United Nations is the best forum in which this debate is to take place. There is significant reform activity going on at the United Nations in which Canada has shown a long and abiding interest.

This type of activity is going to elevate and Canada is going to continue to play the leading role, which it has always played, on issues pertaining to human rights.

[Foreign Affairs, May 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, if in fact this allegation and this legislation are verified, then certainly we will respond appropriately. Certainly we will take all measures through the United Nations and through other diplomatic means to express Canada's dismay, along with our international partners.

It would be nothing short of irresponsible to act precipitously, to do as the hon. member is suggesting, to condemn in the strongest possible terms, to follow all diplomatic means, based on one single solitary factor and that is to verify that it is true. The member knows that has to be the case.

[Foreign Affairs, May 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intent of the question, but to pre-emptively call in somebody and express dismay over an allegation would be nothing short of irresponsible. The Islamic fashion legislation has not become law and we are unaware of the specific content of the draft legislation.

Surely, as has been expressed by the parliamentary secretary, we would condemn in the strongest possible terms if in fact this were to happen, but we will be following this issue very closely and responding appropriately in a measured way.

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the member for Halifax, the former leader of the New Democratic Party.

I was with her in Afghanistan. I know that she met with members of the Canadian Forces. I know that she spoke with representatives of CIDA who are doing important work. I know that she takes very seriously her role as a member of Parliament and someone who represents a constituency and community in Nova Scotia that has many proud representatives of the Canadian military.

I agree with much of her commentary about the need to do more on the capacity building and the development side. She knows, as I do, that education is the bridge, that the humanitarian efforts have to continue. Yet all of that happens because of defence and boots on the ground. I heard comments about misinformation and somehow disinformation coming from the government.

We are having an open debate here. The Prime Minister made his intentions very clear, unlike the government in the previous administration who had no debate and no vote on the subject, and deployed troops for two years in that capacity.

Amidst the rhetoric and the commentary tonight, I will read a quote from the hon. member, and it states, “It is not a question of should we be in Afghanistan. Yes we should. We need to be. We need to be in for the long haul”. The member for Halifax said that three days ago, so what I would like to know, was the truth of that statement a victim of war or was it a victim of the usual NDP hypocrisy on deployment of troops?