Ralph Goodale

[Softwood Lumber, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, industry people say that this softwood deal could have been had yesterday or two weeks ago or six months ago. All it took was a Canadian government that was prepared to roll over.

The Americans violated NAFTA, they capped the market access, they swiped $1.5 billion, and on the very day that this deal was done, the U.S. filed another extraordinary challenge against Canadian softwood lumber.

Why was this deal unacceptable to the Minister of International Trade last November but, in even less favourable form, it is okay today?

[Softwood Lumber, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in the softwood lumber dispute up until now, Canada has always demanded the Americans show respect for the trade agreements they signed. We also insisted that duties collected illegally from Canadian firms not be scooped into the pockets of American lumber barons.

With yesterday's deal, Canada lost both ways. It was a political deal, a deal at any price, and the Americans got a signing bonus of up to $1.5 billion swiped directly from Canadians.

Why did the government give in, on bended knee, to Uncle Sam?

[Points of Order, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to that website, apart from the very serious issue in relation to the repatriation of our fallen soldiers, that website includes very detailed speculation about what may or may not be in the budget next Tuesday. I wonder if the hon. gentleman could inform us if that reflects government policy or is that just to dissent.

[Privilege, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the issues having to do with the control of the parliamentary precinct are very important issues and they do have a bearing in relation to the privileges of members of Parliament. There is a very intricate interrelationship between the functioning of Parliament and the functioning of various government departments.

Physically, of course, the flag is raised and lowered on a daily basis by the officials who work for the Department of Public Works and Government Services. That is part of their function.

I think there is an important legal question about the issue of control here. Perhaps it would be helpful, at least for members of the House generally, if we could ask the Table to seek the appropriate legal advice as to the issues of control. Part of this is a matter of parliamentary privilege but part of it is also a legal interpretation of where the authority of government departments begins and ends vis-à-vis Parliament. I think it would be useful for us, for this purpose and perhaps for some other purposes, to precisely identify that line.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have a question for the government House leader with respect to the debate on Darfur, which I am sure the House welcomes. Would he confirm that not only is the holding of this debate important in its own right, but it also helps to satisfy the suggestions from a number of organizations, including the Canadian Jewish Congress, that it would be appropriate for the House to have such a debate, at least in part in acknowledgement of the Holocaust, and that those sorts of incidents should not occur elsewhere?

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

Mr. Speaker, could the Government House Leader inform the House about his plans for government business at least through to the end of next week? Also, could he tell us after the budget next Tuesday, how quickly the House will see specific legislation to cut personal income taxes?

[Aboriginal Affairs, April 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the issue here, at least in part, is why the NDP have settled for so little: nothing for child care; nothing for the Kelowna accords; nothing to fight climate change; nothing for student aid; and nothing for science and innovation.

This is rather pathetic given that the government has inherited the strongest economy and the best fiscal position of any incoming government in Canadian history. Will the government at least commit to the $5.1 billion to fully honour the Kelowna accords for Canada's aboriginals?

[Child Care, April 25th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on Bill C-48 the surprising thing is not that the Conservatives have flip-flopped. It is not even that the NDP was bought and paid for. The surprising thing is that the NDP members sold themselves so cheap.

They settled for less than Bill C-48, 25% less, and they have nothing to increase child care spaces in this country. Last November, the NDP traded off a national child care system for their own short term partisan gain.

The Minister of Finance cannot comment on the high value of the Canadian dollar, but could he please comment on the low value of the NDP?

[Finance, April 11th, 2006]

Tell her that poverty is down five points, Jim.

[Softwood Lumber, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. members across the way are fond of talking about the last 12 years. Well let us talk about 12 straight years of unprecedented economic growth, eight balanced budgets, world leading debt reduction, a triple A credit rating, low interest rates, low inflation, lower taxes, 3.5 million new jobs, the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years, the best fiscal record in the G-7 and the best fiscal performance since 1867.

When can Canadians expect the $1.5 billion that we booked to help the softwood industry in this country?