Pierre Poilievre

[Government Contracts, June 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates adopted a motion forcing the government to impose fines in connection with the rental scandal. The Liberals broke the law by paying millions of dollars in rent for an empty building.

Is the Prime Minister going to force his Liberal buddy to pay up or is he going to sweep one more Liberal scandal under the rug?

[Canada Health Act, June 20th, 2005]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-414, An Act to prevent the Government of Canada from charging rent to non-profit hospitals.

Mr. Speaker, this private member's bill would institute the principle in law that the federal government should not charge rent to our community hospitals.

It would also have a practical benefit. There is a community hospital near my riding serving a catchment area of 400,000 people, many of them seniors, who need access to quality care but may be denied because of the government's attempt to raise rent on the land on which that hospital sits.

I join with my colleague from Carleton—Mississippi Mills, whose riding is also served by this important hospital, to forbid the federal government from doing that.

I might note that it is unfortunate the Liberal cabinet does not take this matter into its own hands and move through order in council to give that hospital its land.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Eastern Ontario, June 20th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party must really have it in for us folks here in eastern Ontario.

First, the Prime Minister shortchanged Ottawa and other Ontario municipalities to pay for an enhanced deal for Toronto. Ottawa, including its suburban and rural communities, should get the same number of infrastructure dollars per capita as Toronto.

Second, the Liberal cabinet refused to give our community hospital control over its own land. The Queensway-Carleton Hospital says that Liberal rent on the land will thwart plans for improved patient care and more family doctors. In fact, it could cost as many as 40 nurses at that hospital. Maybe the government needs the money from the hospital to pay the rent on that empty building owned by a Liberal friend over in Gatineau.

Or maybe we in eastern Ontario have had enough of Liberals taking us for granted. Maybe it is time for a Conservative government.

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, June 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member spoke rather eloquently about Liberal theft, Liberal corruption, Liberal bribery and Liberal fraud, all of which have been a great cost to Canadian taxpayers. He is right.

I would like to ask him about what I believe will prove to be one of the most spectacular acts of government waste the government will ever engage in, and that is saying something. I refer to of course the $10 billion to $13 billion it plans to spend on its day care scheme. That will mean higher taxes for parents and fewer choices for families. This $12 billion day care scheme will go only to the small group of parents who chose to put their children in mediocre, government-run day care centres to be set up by the government.

In this party we understand that child care is not federal jurisdiction. It is not provincial jurisdiction either. It is parental jurisdiction and that is why we will take child care dollars and put it directly in the pockets of parents, letting them decide how to raise their own children.

The other side, the Liberal-NDP coalition, which is a coalition of socialism and corruption, believe that they should take other people's money and spend it on raising other people's children. We here believe in just giving those dollars directly to the millions and millions of child care experts who already exist. Their names are mom and dad.

Would the hon. member elaborate on that quintessential difference between our party and theirs: us trusting parents, trusting young mothers, trusting young families and them putting control in the hands of bureaucrats and people who have no understanding of the needs of the folks whom we represent?

[An Act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make certain payments, June 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the member repeatedly directed his comments straight over to the member over here without going through the Chair. We would urge all members to follow the Standing Orders and direct their comments through the Chair.

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, June 16th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I must really be on a roll if they are trying to interrupt me constantly.

I am going to get right to the heart of the matter. This is a quarter billion dollar interest free loan to a nearly bankrupt American airline company, Delta. The Liberals gave a quarter billion dollar loan to Delta Airlines in exchange for a promise that it would purchase Bombardier jets. That is what they consider sound economic management.

On this side of the House we would take those dollars and use them to reduce taxes for the employers of the country. We would allow small businesses, the hard-working people like those who own the Kelly's Landing pub on Manotick's Main Street. That is a darn good place and they earn their money in the pub at Kelly's Landing. We would give it to The Swan which is another fine establishment in the heart of my constituency, on River Road. We would allow those dollars--

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, June 16th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I will draw my line in the sand. In fact, I will make a deal with this group of Liberals. I will stop calling them thieves when they stop stealing. That party has a record of corruption--

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, June 16th, 2005]

It's worse.

This time they gave, this is the anti-American Liberal Party, a quarter of a billion dollar loan to a nearly bankrupt American airline company. They gave nearly a quarter of a billion dollar loan to--

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to make Certain Payments, June 16th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, we speak regularly on this side of the House, and quite rightly, about Liberal corruption, Liberal theft, Liberal fraud. We have to repeat ourselves often because that is often the only discussion item generated from that side of the House.

This evening I am going to venture into some different territory. I am going to talk about the fundamental difference in philosophy that divides this side of the House from that side, that separates Conservatives, who believe in freedom, from the NDP-Liberal coalition, a coalition of corruption and socialism. I am going to give a few examples to illustrate this point. By the time I am through members will be convinced beyond any shadow of a doubt that our party represents a vision of freedom that all citizens of the country can embrace.

I am going to start by talking about economic policy. Across the way there is a party that takes dollars out of the pockets of assembly line workers and reallocates them into the pockets of high priced CEOs and blue chip billionaires. That is the social justice they talk about over there.

What did they do recently? It did not get widely reported. They sort of went under the radar screen. They took a quarter of a billion dollars, $250 million. That number rings a bell. Everyone thinks I am about to talk about the quarter of a billion dollars of Liberal theft in the sponsorship program.

[Supply, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, no, I do not. I believe that all families regardless of income should have some support for child care in those crucial early years. I believe that those dollars should go directly into the pockets of parents. Instead of sending the dollars to bureaucrats and public sector unions, we would give the dollars directly to parents.

It is interesting that the member asked a question about dollars allocated. The member did not mention anything about this, but I wonder what he thinks about the fact that in Quebec where the day care system is up and running, workers are going on strike. They are putting parents in a position of peril. Their position is being jeopardized. Those parents have come to rely on the system to take care of their children every day. They are paying for it through their taxes. Now it will not even be provided because the day care workers are going on strike.

Can we expect these kinds of strikes to occur nation wide? Can we expect nationwide day care strikes where parents have committed their children to attend a day care throughout the day? The parents rely on that service being there. A strike could suddenly be called and the parents would be left with no option, even though they had been forced to pay for the service through their taxes.

Those are the kinds of massive hurdles that will present themselves in this bureaucratic scheme.

I note also that the government member did not explain where the $13 billion will come from for the government day care scheme. Will it come from higher taxes? Will it require cuts to health care? Will it require cuts to old age security at a time when the baby boomers are moving into a higher age group? Where will this $13 billion come from?

Why is it that even though he has been questioned almost 10 times in the House of Commons, the minister continues to refuse to answer how much his day care scheme will really cost? He wants to keep it secret. He wants us to pursue a program that he admitted this weekend might never be able to work.