Ralph Goodale

[Business of Supply, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Chair, I am very interested in and very concerned about the NATO flying training in Canada program at 15 Wing near Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. There are worries that participating countries may be dropping out of the program and new countries are not being recruited to replace them or to expand upon them. I have several questions tonight for the minister.

First, which NATO countries are currently represented at the NFTC program at Moose Jaw?

Second, what is the duration of each of their contracts?

Third, have any of these contracts or will any of these contracts be terminated prematurely?

Fourth, what new prospects are being recruited to fill the vacancies?

Fifth, what would be the effect of a weakened NATO flight training in Canada program on the Canadian Snowbirds? Could the Snowbirds be sustained and remain in Moose Jaw without the NFTC?

Sixth, does the NATO flying training in Canada program continue to this day and going forward to be marketed professionally and aggressively by the Government of Canada, the Department of National Defence, the Canadian Forces and the Bombardier private sector consortium?

[Ways and Means, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, for the sake of clarity, we have had issues in the House recently and on several occasions the turmoil distracted from the exact proceedings of the House. Would you simply advise once again, because I could not hear you at all, what your disposition was with respect to the ways and means motion?

[Points of Order, November 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, given the discussion that took place across the floor during question period about the fundamental importance of a dialogue on Kyoto with the European Union, I wonder if there would be unanimous consent now for the following motion: That while the Prime Minister is travelling to, attending and returning from the Canada-EU summit in Helsinki, the chief government whip or his representative may request the deferral of any division, whereupon the Speaker shall defer the said division to an appropriate time after the Prime Minister has returned from Helsinki.

[Breast Cancer, November 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it was an honour to participate in this year's Run for the Cure in Regina, sponsored by the CIBC and the Breast Cancer Foundation.

Another participant, Verna Karalynn Tushkewich, asked me to read into the record an excerpt from the Canadian Breast Cancer Patient Charter. I am pleased to do so. It states:

The Canadian Breast Cancer Patient Charter was created to serve as a personal roadmap for the more than 22,000 Canadians who will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year.

This Canadian Breast Cancer Charter is intended to give patients the knowledge and courage needed to get the best possible care and support, and a better understanding of what to expect and what to ask for throughout the breast cancer experience. It echoes the spirit of the Canada Health Act: the best possible care must be universal across Canada, and not be denied for financial, economic, social or geographic reasons.

We salute those who work to find a cure for this cruel disease and to care for its victims. We praise the courage of all cancer patients and we fondly remember those who have not survived.

[Business of the House, November 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, what the government House leader has just put on the table in terms of this proposed motion reflects the discussions among House leaders over the course of the last number of days and represents progress on the proposal that the official opposition had made for expediting the justice plan.

With respect to Bill C-9, however, I wonder if the government House leader could provide just a bit more information to the House. We have no problem with the motion the way it is proposed and for which the House leader is seeking unanimous consent, but in the discussion about Bill C-9 and about this motion, there was a certain understanding among House leaders about the type of amendment that the government would bring to the floor of the House during the report stage proceedings.

It is our understanding, according to the order paper, that the nature of that motion has changed to a certain extent, and because the agreement that is embodied in this motion was predicated on a certain understanding of the proposed amendment, I wonder if the government House leader or perhaps, failing that, the Minister of Justice, could simply put on the record the nature of the change that the government has in mind between what was discussed originally and what is now embodied in the motion on the order paper.

[Norman Spector, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a short question for the Prime Minister. Could the Prime Minister simply give Canadians the absolute assurance that Mr. Norman Spector, a former Conservative government operative, will never again speak in any capacity for the Government of Canada?

[Canadian Wheat Board, October 31st, 2006]

--minority Conservative government bullying farmers and trampling on their rights?

[Canadian Wheat Board, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, either we have a single desk marketing system or we do not. The minister cannot suck and blow at the same time. Look at the government's ham-fisted, underhanded, bloody-minded behaviour: private meetings from which the majority of farmers are barred; a task force that is biased and stacked from the outset; a phoney letter writing campaign; a gag order to muzzle the board; directors under personal threat to shut them up; and the voters list suddenly slashed by 16,000.

Why is the majority--

[Canadian Wheat Board, October 31st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, there can be no doubt that the plot from the minister's one-sided task force to kill the Canadian Wheat Board would trigger the producer plebiscite laid out in subsection 47(1) of the Canadian Wheat Board Act.

Farmers have the legal right to a fair and democratic vote on any change to the Wheat Board's marketing mandate. That right is enshrined in the law now.

Why will the minister not give all farmers his absolute guarantee that their legal rights will be fully respected? Why is he so afraid to let farmers vote?

[Business of the House, October 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in light of what the government House leader said just a few moments ago, I wonder if you could see if there is unanimous consent in the House at this moment for the following motion: That Bill C-9 be deemed to have been concurred in at report stage, read a third time and passed; that Bills C-18, C-19 and C-23 be deemed to have been reported from committee, without amendments, concurred in at the report stage, read a third time and passed; and that Bills,C-22 and C-26 be deemed to have been read a second time, referred to and reported from committee without amendments, concurred in at report stage, read a third time and passed.