Preston Manning

[Government Grants, June 1st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the office of Prime Minister is more important than the person who occupies it and the integrity of that office is more important still. Serious allegations have come to light surrounding this Prime Minister's use of public funds particularly in his own riding: grants announced before they were awarded; a personal aide under investigation for influence peddling; contracts awarded to political contributors.

Does the member for Saint-Maurice believe that these actions enhance the integrity of the office of Prime Minister?

[Kosovo, May 31st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this has gone far beyond the necessity of briefing.

The United States is threatening to send 90,000 troops to the former Yugoslavia in a matter of weeks if no peace settlement is reached. Britain is talking about increasing its commitment to 50,000 troops. It is increasingly likely that NATO will send in ground troops in advance of any peace settlement and Canada is expected to be part of that contingent.

Given that an invasion force could be put together within a few weeks, why is the government not bringing forward a plan and a motion to parliament on that issue now?

[Kosovo, May 31st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, to date the government has done little or nothing to involve the House in developing Canada's commitments in Yugoslavia.

Most members of the House get more information from television and newspapers than they do from the government on this subject. The government has yet to bring any votable motion at all before the House on this issue.

What more does the government intend to do to involve parliament in a substantive way during the summer recess with respect to this issue?

[Kosovo, May 31st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, as we all know the tensions in Kosovo are growing every week. Our allies are stepping up their commitments and diplomatic initiatives are at a critical stage. At the same time, the House will be recessing for the summer in a matter of days.

What specific provisions will the Prime Minister make to ensure that parliament is involved in any ongoing discussions or changes to Canada's commitments in the former Yugoslavia?

[Taxation, May 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister runs a tax system which not only gouges workers but particularly gouges low income workers with almost $4 billion per year in incomes taxes from Canadians who make $20,000 a year or less and over $2 billion per year in payroll taxes from workers who make $20,000 or less.

The tax policies of the government have become one of the chief contributors to poverty in Canada. How can this tax rich government, which is sitting on a $7 billion to $15 billion surplus, justify ripping $6 billion a year out of the pockets of the working poor?

[Taxation, May 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister gave that answer to that auto plant worker, the worker would laugh in disbelief.

While the government is promising $16.5 billion in tax relief by the year 2002, like it promised to get rid of the GST, in fact what it has done is collect over $42 billion in tax increases since it took office. That is why that worker is paying half of his overtime pay in tax deductions.

The Prime Minister could give every worker in the country a pay increase this year simply by reducing the federal tax rip-off from paycheques. Why does he not do so?

[Taxation, May 12th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, six weeks ago I met an auto plant worker in southern Ontario who had just received a paycheque for overtime work.

He was madder than a boiled owl because the amount the government had ripped out of his paycheque was equal to the amount that was left for him and his family. He said he thought he was working for Chrysler but it turns out he is working half time for the federal government.

When will the Prime Minister provide substantive broad based tax relief for the overtaxed workers of Canada?

[Supreme Court Of Canada, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister fails to consult this House on the most important judicial and administrative appointments. He signs treaties, even commits Canada to involvement in a war with neither a vote nor a mandate from this House. He does nothing to prevent appointed judges from short circuiting this elected assembly through rewriting the law rather than just interpreting it.

Why does the government not seize this opportunity to show some real confidence in the House and insist that the Prime Minister consult the House prior to any judicial appointment?

[Supreme Court Of Canada, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately the public does not share the view of the Deputy Prime Minister. In a recent national survey, nine out of ten Canadians said they were opposed to the Prime Minister appointing the next supreme court justice. Eighty-four per cent preferred a greater role in appointments by the legislative arm of government, that is, parliament and the legislatures.

Why does this government not respect the will of the vast majority of Canadians and stop defending an appointment process that they neither support nor respect?

[Supreme Court Of Canada, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in June Mr. Justice Cory will be retiring from the Supreme Court of Canada after 10 years of distinguished service. The Prime Minister will be filling this position on the advice of the Minister of Justice.

Since the supreme court is becoming increasingly active in rewriting the law as well as interpreting it, many Canadians feel that elected legislators should have a role in questioning and approving supreme court nominees before they are appointed.

Is the government prepared to consult parliament on this appointment and to give a parliamentary committee an opportunity to discuss and question the nominees?