Ralph Goodale

[Judicial Appointments, February 13th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative scheme to invent social engineering in the selection of judges is not only stacking the courts, but also slowing the filling of vacancies. The Chief Justice, the Canadian Bar Association, the judicial council, universities and many others have expressed deep concern.

A year ago the Prime Minister acknowledged being driven by an ideology that many Canadians would find distasteful, and that is still true today. However, he said not to worry, that the courts, more in tune with Canadian values, would hold him in check. Why has he now removed that assurance?

[Judicial Appointments, February 13th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the issue is the government's obsessive ideological determination to enforce its right wing social engineering. That worries Canadians, and stacking the courts is only part of it.

Conservatives openly insult the Chief Justice. They demean the Supreme Court. They belittle the Charter of Rights and restrict access, so the rich can go to court but the poor cannot.

Why will the minister not restore a sense of fairness in the rating of judicial candidates by eliminating the ideological blood test that he is now imposing?

[Points of Order, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, apropos the subject of tabling documents, during question period reference was made to certain quotations from the former vice-president of the United States, Mr. Al Gore. Mr. Gore was in fact misquoted by the government and the evidence clearly shows that.

I would be curious to know what quote exactly the environment minister was referring to when he made reference to Mr. Gore earlier this week. I would ask him to table that quote in the House, because in fact even Mr. Gore's staff cannot find it.

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the recent Munk Centre report on G-8 countries meeting their climate change commitments said, “Canada received the lowest score because of [the Conservative] government's change in policy and attitude towards the Kyoto protocol”. The Munk Centre said that it is directly attributable to the Conservative government.

Will the government move past denial and spin and produce an investment plan to use responsible climate change action as a driver of Canadian economic growth and productivity?

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, clearly he cannot answer the question. The environment minister increased Ontario's dependence on coal. He was in the government that brought Ontario the Walkerton tragedy. At Treasury Board he slashed over $5.6 billion from climate change action plans.

Here is what Al Gore told CTV News not long ago:

--I just refuse to believe that the Canadian people will go along with what the minority government here seems to want to do.

Instead of misrepresenting Mr. Gore, will the government simply embrace his real advice?

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the environment minister falsely pretended that former U.S. vice-president Al Gore endorsed Conservative climate change policies. Several on this side actually know the former vice-president and let me say, the environment minister is no Al Gore.

Far from commending Conservatives, Mr. Gore told them to get with the program, get with Kyoto, not to mimic George Bush, and to catch on to the green agenda to drive prosperity and growth. That is what Al Gore really said.

Why did the environment minister mislead the House?

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Nonsense. You have just re-announced what was already there.

[Business of the House, February 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in the usual manner, I wonder if the leader of the government in the House could provide the House with a briefing on the work that he plans to call before the House for the rest of this week and through next week.

While he is doing that, I wonder if he could specifically indicate his view with respect to the request that has been made today by a number of members of the official opposition that the government provide some time in the form of a take note debate at some point next week when all members of the House might discuss the topic of the safety of Canadians travelling in Mexico.

[Ministerial Motor Vehicles, February 6th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, when attending official duties at the nearby Chateau Laurier hotel, previous prime ministers would typically walk. Today for his speech at noon, the Prime Minister drove to the Chateau. Then while he droned on and on, the Prime Minister's massive SUV sat idling outside spewing greenhouse gases.

The Prime Minister says he is clamping down on his ministers' chauffeurs. Will he show some leadership and clamp down on himself?

[Points of Order, February 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary's intervention at this point really does underscore the government's great fear with respect to climate change and the Kyoto protocol.

Even today in Paris the Minister of the Environment said that he was, as of today, surprised to learn that climate change occurs as a result of human activity. Maybe that surprise is the reason why, as President of the Treasury Board, he spent the last year cutting $5.6 billion in climate change programs, which goes directly to the issue of fiscal flexibility available to the government and the very point the parliamentary secretary made.

One of the ministers, in answer to a question today in question period, made the point that the government now has, as of the last two months, $2 billion in new money on the table with respect to climate change.

All of this reinforces the point just made by the member of my party who spoke before me, which is that indeed the flexibility exists.

There is nothing that has changed that would materially affect your previous ruling, Mr. Speaker, and the government in fact does have the resources available, and this bill does not call upon the government or require it to spend anything new. It is indeed a matter of reallocation, as you yourself found in your previous ruling.