Ralph Goodale

[Business of the House, April 1st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, with the House about to adjourn for the Easter weekend and with next week being scheduled as a constituency week for members of Parliament, I wonder if the government House leader could indicate how he intends to occupy the rest of this day and the week following the constituency week with the government's agenda.

[Employment Insurance, March 30th, 2010]

Tell Sheila Fraser that.

[National Aboriginal Achievement Awards, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, last weekend the 17th National Aboriginal Achievement Awards were held in Regina. Every year these awards celebrate the outstanding accomplishments of Canada's first nations, Inuit and Métis people.

The 14 recipients this year are: 96-year-old William Commanda for lifetime achievement; Skawenniio Barnes, an outstanding youth; Kananginak Pootoogook; Ellen Melcosky; Tom Crane Bear; Raoul McKay; Danny Beaton; Madeleine Dion Stout; Donald Worme; Kenneth Atsenhaienton Deer; Eric Robinson; Edith Cloutier; Monica Pinette; and Doug Henry.

From the Parliament of Canada to each one of these achievers, we say congratulations. To Roberta Jamieson and her colleagues at the National Aboriginal Achievement Foundation, we say thanks and well done.

Canadians can watch the whole awards show on Global TV and APTN on May 1, hosted by the fantastic Andrea Menard.

[Afghanistan, March 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the government continued its cover-up with respect to torture in Afghanistan. The papers it dumped on the table were three months late, incoherent, incomplete and calculated to mislead.

It was a gimmick to get thousands of rabbits running to a thousand different dead ends, anywhere but the truth. The whole scam is an insult to the government's new lawyer, Mr. Iacobucci.

When will the Conservatives realize that this issue goes to Canada's global reputation for integrity, and a cover-up will not work?

[Business of the House, March 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the government House leader would outline his program for House business for the period between now and Easter.

In answering the question, I wonder if he could bring some order into this issue around documents that were tabled in the House of Commons today. They were tabled in a rather disorderly way, without any reference to the outstanding process that has been started by Mr. Iacobucci. I wonder if the government House leader could indicate when further documents will be forthcoming to the House. Since they come in such large volumes, it would be of assistance to have greater order in the presentation of those documents, including sufficient copies made available in advance so that all members could have access to them at the same time and, therefore, better understand exactly what they mean.

[Points of Order, March 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, to seek some further clarity from the parliamentary secretary with respect to the documents that were put on the table today in a form that was clearly imperfect, could he indicate to us if Mr. Iacobucci has seen the documents tabled today? Has Mr. Iacobucci cleared those documents that were tabled today, or are we now facing a situation where there are two categories of documents? There are certain documents that Mr. Iacobucci will see and will be asked to clear and certain other documents that pertain to the same situation which will not be drawn to the attention of Mr. Iacobucci.

There seems to be a double standard here in the way documents are treated and I think we need to have absolute clarity with respect to what kind of documents these are.

[Points of Order, March 25th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this is of course a very serious topic. This is not the first time this issue pertaining to the documents related to Afghanistan has been raised in the House. It has been raised seriously and conscientiously by a members of a number of different political parties. It is extremely important that the Chair treat this matter with the gravity it deserves, and we are confident that will be the case. However, it is also very important that the government treat it seriously as well.

The government's behaviour today in bringing these documents, whatever they may be, to the House in the condition that it has is really a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. The government wants to appear to be doing something to leave the impression that it is being transparent with respect to the Afghan documents when in fact transparency is the least description one could use to characterize what has gone on here.

When the House opened at 10 o'clock, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader was in his place and put before the House two large cardboard boxes. He said that those boxes contained documents pertaining to the motion passed by the House last December, related to Afghanistan. He indicated that they were not translated and accordingly he had to seek unanimous consent for those documents to be put forward. The House gave unanimous consent, as a courtesy, because there is importance attached to any documentation related to Afghanistan. However, here we have 2,500 documents, we are told, one copy of each, we are told, not translated and still apparently in redacted form. That is, and Mr. Speaker I think you will have to agree, highly unusual. It may in fact be unprecedented in parliamentary experience.

The government has known about Parliament's requirement for documentation since at least December 10. Indeed, an argument could be made that the requirement for those documents was known even before the date upon which Parliament passed the resolution. However, the government has known that Parliament requires these documents. Now, more than three and a half months later, it comes to the House with one copy, untranslated, of 2,500 pieces of paper.

One might ask, in this massive exercise of recalibration that apparently went on in the government after prorogation, did it disconnect all the photocopying machines in the Government of Canada? What has it been doing, with respect to this documentation issue, for the last three and a half months, that it comes to the House in such an unprepared way?

For now, tabling, under the rules of the House, has not actually been effective. The government will try to make the argument that it has had a little exercise in transparency here today by bringing in these documents and dumping them on the table, in two cardboard boxes, but that is not effective tabling under the rules. Substantively, tabling has not been perfected. What we have had is a show, a charade, but it is not legitimate.

I would call upon the Chair to note for the record that while the tabling of these documents may have begun in this chaotic and ad hoc way today, it is not yet complete and these documents should be deemed not yet to have been tabled, unless and until all the documents, whatever they may be, are available to all parties, in both official languages, as required under the rules.

The attempt at tabling that was undertaken today has obviously been far from perfect. It does not meet any of the transparency or information requirements of members of Parliament. The government needs, PDQ, to get on with the job of producing those documents, as Parliament has requested, in a very legitimate way. The obfuscation on the part of the government simply only serves to raise greater suspicions in the minds of members of Parliament and the Canadian public.

[Supplementary Estimates (C), March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, just to be clear, in the list of business given by the government House leader, he made mention of the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement implementation legislation. Could he say again which day he intends to call that legislation?

[Business of the House, March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this is the Thursday question, seeking information from the government about what it plans to have on the order paper for the rest of this week and next week.

I would remind the government that the House was subject to prorogation for a very long time so that the government could engage in recalibration, but so far, in looking at the agenda, only four or five recycled bills have been put on the order paper and it seems what we have now is procrastination.

I wonder if the government could beef up the agenda a bit so we could get on with the business the government considers to be important.

[Aboriginal Affairs, March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the administrative deficiencies that the Prime Minister speaks of have been corrected and it is time now to aim for the future.

For several hundred young aboriginal students every year, if there is no First Nations University, there will be no higher education. It is not right to visit upon these innocent young people the past sins of others.

The total amount needed by First Nations University is about one-third of what this Parliament has been spending annually to print and distribute those wasteful ten percenters. Would it not be more appropriate to give that money to First Nations University?