Peter MacKay

[Employment Insurance, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the member has a point. Clearly, Canada is not immune to the global fluctuations that are occurring, especially with what we see happening in Europe. Of course, the European markets and what has happened in the United States definitely impact us.

I will say what the government will not do. It will not do what the member's party did when it had a surplus in the EI fund, which was to expropriate and actually steal that money to use it for another purpose.

I assure the House our government will not follow that example.

[Employment Insurance, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, we have taken a number of steps to address the issues regarding the economy, particularly those with respect to employment insurance.

Our government's top priority remains getting Canadians back to work. That is exactly what we are doing. We are working to promote economic growth.

I do not know whether the hon. member heard or not, but we have actually made announcements very much specifically dedicated to that effort. We are committed to providing timely service to all Canadians who do need that service.

That is what our minister has been doing. That is what our government's policy puts forward for the country.

[International Trade, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear. Each time, our country has protected the interests of Canadians. Our Conservative government is concentrating on job creation for Canadians and on economic growth. That is our government's priority.

[International Trade, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we have been clear: Canada's approach will not be different in these negotiations from its approach in the European Union negotiations. I repeat: we have officially expressed our willingness to work with the trans-Pacific partnership, but all countries approach these negotiations with a view to protecting their interests.

[International Trade, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, we have formally expressed an interest in our willingness to work with the trans-Pacific partnership.

Having said that, all countries approach these negotiations with a view to protecting their interests, as Canada certainly will. Therefore, Canada's approach to the TPP will not be different with respect to the European Union free trade negotiations. Of course, this includes our interest in defending and promoting our specific interests in the economy, including supply management.

[National Defence, November 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer is that is the number the air force asked for. It has clearly indicated that is the right balance. It has clearly indicated that this will allow our pilots in the air force to carry out the important work that we ask of them.

Why is the NDP against giving the best equipment to the best pilots to the best air force? It would improve our aerospace and would bring jobs and prosperity to our economy in his province and across the country. The NDP's position on this is backward thinking.

[National Defence, November 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, once again that is absolutely false.

The Royal Canadian Air Force has clearly stated the number of aircraft it needs, which meets the right balance for its capabilities, as well as the balance in terms of the budget.

We have seen time and time again that every time we have brought forward improvements for military personnel, whether it be improvements for the children of deceased veterans, whether it be improvements for their salaries, for their equipment, whether it is anything from the graveyard to the schoolyard, the NDP opposes it if it would improve things for the Canadian Forces.

[National Defence, November 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, all the information provided by the member is false, absolutely false.

What I continually cannot understand about the NDP is why it opposes getting the best equipment for our military, why it opposes the incredible benefits these purchases would bring to the entire country, including Quebec. I am completely baffled by the position taken by the NDP, which runs contrary to the wishes of the military and the aerospace industry.

[Afghanistan, October 31st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, that is false. The Prime Minister provided accurate and correct information. It is true that this mission involves significant risks.

This is the reason we continue to support our men and women in uniform with appropriate equipment to protect them, to support them in every way we can. We have nothing but the highest regard, admiration, and respect for the men and women in uniform, and their families, for what they do for our country at home and abroad.

[Afghanistan, October 31st, 2011]

Let us be frank, Mr. Speaker. The reality is that this training mission is in a different configuration. It does not involve combat. It does not involve searching and engaging the enemy. It involves training in a static base form in and around Kabul.

There is no way to eliminate all risk, given the reality of that country. Given the security climate there, we can never mitigate that risk to zero, as I just said, but we certainly want to support our men and women in uniform with equipment. We want to support them morally, and that is what this government--