Rick Casson

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that besides having courage over in Afghanistan, there are some people who have a little courage in the House this evening as well.

I have worked on a project with the member for Cape Breton--Canso in the past. We collaborated and saw some action. I will commit to him that I will try to continue that action.

I will relay a story to him and get him to comment on it because he is on the right track. I was conversing with a soldier in Afghanistan. He was part of the troop that was involved in one of the first accidents over there, when people were very seriously hurt. He was explaining how automatically the training they had been given kicked in and how it was absolutely impressive to see that happen under fire.

He also talked to me about going into the communities in Afghanistan and working with the children and the people who had nothing. Even though the troops supplied them with very little, the people were so grateful to receive it. He described that as being the face of Canada.

Could the member comment on that aspect of it? We are seeing some positive results and we are going to be able to measure those results. We are going to see that we are making a difference.

His comments tonight in support of this extension are very valiant and faces some of the other comments from members of his own party. Would he comment on the feeling that he gets when he talks to the troops and people in Afghanistan?

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

It is ridiculous. We ought to stand in this House and support our troops, because if we do not, they are listening to every word.

I would like to ask the Leader of the Opposition a question. He was the minister responsible, the minister of defence, when this country went into Afghanistan. There is a commitment until the year 2010 that he is very well aware of, the Afghanistan Compact, a commitment for everybody to be involved, for 51 nations to get involved to bring stability back to that country. How can we do it one year at a time?

[Canada's Commitment in Afghanistan, May 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly endorse your comments about keeping the debate at a high level tonight because, as the Leader of the Opposition knows, our troops in Afghanistan listen to every word that gets said in this House of Commons in reference to their mission. Hopefully everybody in this House will remember that as they go through this evening's debate.

The member opposite is asking for the commitments. I think the Prime Minister has indicated another $310 million, for a total of $1 billion, to help with the reconstruction. He has talked about the refugees coming back into the country. He has talked about children going to school. He has talked about women's rights being restored, about education, about clean water. The very basics of life are being provided, plus there is an opportunity for a future.

Surely even the NDP could vote to support such action. This is what our men and women in uniform are doing in that country. I think it is just amazing that people can stand up here and discuss and argue about the details of how the debate was structured or the timing of it. That is ridiculous.

[Winter Olympics, May 15th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, today a number of Canada's Winter Olympians and Paralympians are in Ottawa to be recognized for their great achievements. Like all Canadians, I am extremely grateful for the dedicated and skilled athletes who so proudly wear our maple leaf.

During international competition, the focus and measure of success is often tied to the winning of medals. However, I believe such measurements are secondary to the sacrifices these athletes have made to reach the pinnacle of their chosen sport. With hearts of gold, brilliance of silver and resolve tempered like bronze, our Olympians shine for Canada, yet behind every athlete, coach or trainer there is a personal story. In their personal stories we find reflections of our great nation.

The courage, determination and dreams that form Canada can also be found in the character of our Olympians. Their stories are Canada's story. Like Canada's success, their success did not come easy but it was achieved nonetheless.

To the Olympians here today and to all of Canada's Olympians, I thank them. They make this nation proud.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, May 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to get my comments into the time allotted to me.

I compliment the member on her obviously well researched, albeit somewhat off track, presentation. She did refer to the government being silent on the environment and I have to take exception to that and I will point out a couple of reasons why.

In our budget we have outlined a $1.7 billion investment in new, cleaner transportation to get Canadians out of their cars and into public transit. That is an important initiative for Canadians to help end the pollution that we see in our cities.

Really important to me is that we will be moving to a 5% average renewable content in Canadian motor fuels. I am excited about this for a couple of reasons, for the benefit to the environment, which is important, but also for the benefit to our primary producers, our farmers. It will give farmers an opportunity to have one more market for their products to help them get through the terrible crisis they are going through right now and help the environment at the same time.

The government has also stated that it will review the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, CEPA, which will be the first serious review of it since 1987, and will also look at the Great Lakes water issue.

The government is fully engaged on the environment. The environment minister has started us down the right path.

The hon. member stated that our budget was silent on the environment. I ask her to comment on the points I made.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, May 12th, 2006]

With regard to payments made to Canadian farmers through the Pesticide Residue Compensation Act: (a) what is the total amount of payments made to date under the authority of the Pesticide Residue Compensation Act; (b) what is the breakdown of those payments between the provinces of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick; and (c) how many individual payments have been authorized by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and, of these, how many were made as part of cost-sharing payments with provincial governments?

[The Budget, May 4th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this week's budget has been accepted by Canadians for being incredibly family friendly. Hard-working, law-abiding Canadians, who have struggled under an oppressive Liberal tax regime for 13 years, also like it.

Unfortunately, the former government, now in opposition where it belongs, continues to fearmonger and spread misinformation.

Would the Minister of Finance tell the House the true facts on the many benefits low income Canadians will see in this week's budget?

[Divorce Act, May 4th, 2006]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-252, An Act to amend the Divorce Act (access for spouse who is terminally ill or in critical condition).

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour today to table this bill to amend the Divorce Act. It would allow terminally ill or critically ill parents the right to see their children one last time. It adds a section to the Divorce Act.

I hope, when this comes back to the House for debate, that I can get all party support on this issue.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Norad, May 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my hon. colleague across the way who is the defence critic for the Bloc.

He mentioned a couple of issues where Norad would respond to airplanes or objects going into North American airspace. I think we have seen that happen in a couple of instances. I think we had a plane that landed in Yukon that was escorted down. We saw a plane coming from Europe which was reported as suspicious and it was escorted in. This is a function that goes on every day.

Norad is watching over the entire North American continent every day and has been doing that for almost 50 years.

We may read about something happening and Norad being mentioned a few times a year at the most but the rest of the time this organization and its system is in place doing its job and, when the need arises, it will do its job.

What I do not understand is why the NDP is undecided as to whether it supports Norad. It wants to delay the agreement. The agreement will lapse on May 12 so it has to be done. The agreement has been renewed a number of times in the last 48 years and it has been changed a number of times.

We are adding the maritime aspect to it because we have been told that Norad was created to look north for incoming long range ballistic missiles. That is no longer the entire threat to this continent. We have all kinds of possibilities coming at us from all directions.

I personally believe that this expanded mandate for Norad is necessary. I would appreciate it if the hon. member opposite would relay his thoughts on what he thinks of the expanded mandate that Norad will have.

[Norad, May 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the member opposite.

The fact that this debate is even taking place tonight is precedent setting. The fact is that this government campaigned on this issue and said that any major treaties that were signed would come to this House for a debate and for a vote, and that is about to happen.

I can remember, in my past nine years here, many treaties being signed by the former Liberal government that never did come to this House for a debate or a vote.

I have served on the defence committee with the member opposite. I have a lot of respect for him, because I do believe his heart is in the right place when it comes to the armed forces. Over the years I think our committee has developed that rapport where we work together for the betterment of the armed forces in this country.

It seems to me it would be a little disingenuous for him to stand and complain about the fact that we are even having this debate. His ability to stand in this House and raise these issues is an opportunity that has not been granted to the other parties in the past by his own government.

I would like him to clarify his position on the fact that tonight we are standing in this House, we are having this debate and we will have a vote.