Rick Dykstra

[Royal Netherlands Army, April 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honour Mr. Albert Hartkamp and retired major, Frans Rondel, of the Royal Netherlands Army from the Thank You Canada and Allied Forces group.

The group helps to ensure that the legacy of Canadian and allied forces in the liberation of the Netherlands never fades and that those who lost their lives are never forgotten.

As the son of two immigrants from the Netherlands who both lived through the second world war, it is an honour to recognize these men.

Along with their yearly commemorative events, they are also organizing a special 65th anniversary ceremony for 2010. This special event will incorporate veterans and dignitaries and will be attended by thousands of Canadian students.

The Thank You Canada and Allied Forces group is ensuring that Canadian and Dutch youth will know the shared experiences of sacrifices made.

So, as they organize a big “thank you” to all Canadian veterans, I call on all members of the House to recognize the great work they do in organizing their tribute to remember those who gave their lives for our democracy.

[March 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, there is one thing the member for Etobicoke Centre and I will agree on, and that is the commitment and contributions Ukrainians have made to this country once they have arrived here.

However, let me say that it is under this government, and only this government, that we have moved forward in a positive partnership with Ukrainian Canadians. This government takes second place to no previous government in terms of the commitment made to Ukrainians across this country. The member spoke often while in government about the commitment that Ukrainians deserve in this country. The member opposite knows full well that it is this government that has delivered on every single one of those issues. We do not have to apologize for anything when it comes to our love for and our commitment to Ukrainians in this country.

[March 30th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly would like to push back on the member for Etobicoke Centre. I would like to thank him for giving me the opportunity to respond, but at the same time his last sentence speaks volumes to what I think he should consider doing himself, which is to spend a lot more time in the House and in Ottawa working positively in a very focused fashion on behalf of his constituents rather than spending this time criticizing each other.

However, I am pleased to rise to speak to the question of the hon. member for Etobicoke Centre regarding emigration from Ukraine. My hon. colleague is completely and totally mistaken in his statements about staffing at the Canadian embassy and the impact on emigration from that region, so I am glad to have this opportunity to enlighten him.

Contrary to the hon. member's claims, there have been no reductions in staffing in the visa section of the Canadian embassy in Ukraine, which has been delivering all permanent and temporary resident services since 2006.

All aspects of the hon. member's questions are full of factual errors. For instance, I refute the claim that as a result of the cut in “consular staffing levels” there has been a one-third decline in emigration from Ukraine to Canada.

On the contrary, I can assure the hon. member and the House that the total number of immigration visas issued by our office in Kyiv rose from 1,399 in 2004 to 1,527 in 2008. We are planning to issue a higher number of visas this year. Perhaps the member should take a few minutes before he officially speaks about an issue relating to Ukraine to speak to the government first to ensure that his facts are correct.

Furthermore, I deny in the strongest terms his statement that the Canadian embassy in Kyiv has the fourth slowest processing time for visitor visas in the world. I am very proud to point out that in 2008 alone, 85% of applications made in Kyiv for temporary resident visas were processed within two days of the time the application was made. This turnaround time is in fact well above the worldwide average. Our visa processing office in Kyiv has maintained these processing times despite the increasing numbers of applicants from this area.

Our government has prioritized our relationship with our friends in Ukraine. Our government strongly supports the inclusion of Ukraine in NATO. Under a Conservative government, Canada was the first western nation to recognize a free Ukraine after the fall of Soviet tyranny.

We have also worked productively with the Ukrainian community in Canada. We are providing funding under the community historical recognition program to commemorate past mistreatment of Ukrainian Canadians during World War I. We were also the first Canadian government to recognize the Holodomor as a genocide. I would like to congratulate my colleague, the member for Selkirk—Interlake, for his work on this particular issue.

I also want to correct a misunderstanding on the part of my hon. colleague. If there were cuts to consular staffing anywhere in the world, these would have no bearing on any aspect of immigration, as consular staff do not deal with immigration issues.

My hon. colleague is mistaken in almost every respect. There have been no cuts to the number of visa officers in Kyiv over two years. There has been no drop in the number of immigration visas issued by our visa office in Kyiv and processing time for temporary resident visas in this office is in fact well above the worldwide average.

I am very glad to have been able to set the hon. member straight on these important points.

[Artists, March 27th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member opposite for presenting the motion to the House.

We all welcome the opportunity to stand in the House and inform colleagues and all Canadians about the government's record level of support for arts and culture. We are proud to support Canada's artists, and the actions of the government proves exactly that.

The Canada Council for the Arts supports the work of individual artists and cultural organizations and the government is very supportive of the work it does. That is why the government has made the decision to increase to the CCA by $30 million, which is a record level of funding. We have clearly demonstrated our support for the arts community with the investment. We are proud of the results it is achieving and it has earned the investment.

Our support does not end there. In 2008-09 we invested a record $2.3 billion in arts and culture programs through the Department of Canadian Heritage. We heard the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages speak to that exact point time and again during question period today. The programs through the department and related crown corporations, agencies and boards have been very productive on behalf of Canadians.

We have announced a series of new investments that will directly support the arts, culture and heritage. We will continue to make wise investments and we will continue to do so in the fiscally responsible manner that Canadians expect from the government.

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I completely disagree with the premise of the question that the member asks.

In fact, it is this government that actually changed the process of appointments and ensured that we have a process that is dealt with outside of political appointments, and done through an agency that ensures that they are done correctly.

At the same time, the member also indicates that these are the minister's appointments. In fact, what happens through the process is that people who are qualified are appointed. In the most recent list of reappointments, eight members who were appointed by the former government were reappointed to their positions.

[Official Languages, March 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has in fact worked extremely hard to ensure that every department within the ministry follows the guidelines set forward, and quite frankly, the government expects all agencies, boards, including the Canada Border Services Agency, to operate in full compliance with the letter and spirit of the Official Languages Act and the charter in allowing individuals to be represented and heard in the language of their choice.

[Child Care, March 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, in these difficult times, Niagara families are facing unprecedented challenges as a result of the global economic downturn, but despite this uncertainty they can be assured that our government will deliver them the resources so the parents of Canada's two million preschoolers can choose how they care for their children.

Niagara families, like those around Canada, have varying priorities in their lives that require a more flexible child care plan that best suits their circumstances. The universal child care plan achieves this goal by annually providing $1,200 per child so that parents can choose how to raise their children. The plan also provides funding for the provinces and tax breaks to help create additional day care spaces.

Despite all of this, the opposition wishes to scrap the universal child care plan. Why? It is because the opposition refuses to accept that parents know better than it does about what is best for their children.

This government believes in Canadian families and will continue to give them choice in child care despite what the naysayers on the other side say.

[Committees of the House, March 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the parliamentary secretary and member for Richmond for her comments. I thought she did an outstanding job explaining and expressing the position of the government.

One of the issues that has come through the House here is the issue of compassion, the issue of emotion that should be somehow interjected or intertwined into this discussion. I certainly have no problem with that. At the end of the day of course we have to base our decision on fact and law.

The member represents the riding of Richmond and I know she has many cases dealing with refugees who come to her office and ask her for help. Could she explain, in her words, the type of emotion and compassion that needs to be shown for them?

[Committees of the House, March 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his intervention in this debate and ask him to continue to work hard at committee where, hopefully, we can move all the work there that is necessary to be done on behalf of the government and this House.

Throughout his speech, the member spoke with an element of emotion and compassion. I certainly am one to agree with him that all of the issues that we face here are not just hard, fast and cold issues. They are issues that also have an element of emotion involved and an element of compassion.

The opposition is saying that they will be compassionate by taking the position they have, but I do not understand something. We have thousands upon thousands of refugees who apply legitimately to come to this country based on the oppression of a dictatorship, the oppression of their choice of religion and the oppression they see on a totalitarian government that is placed on them, and they are desperately seeking to come here to this country. That is also the compassion and emotion that should be displayed and we need to see that. Why does the member not show the same emotion and compassion to those refugees that he is showing to the individuals he is speaking about today?

[Committees of the House, March 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the impassioned plea of the member for Etobicoke Centre. His perspective is one that he has been able to make in the House and he has done so. However, it is an emotional plea. It is not one based on any legal foundation. It is not one based on the rules, regulations and stipulations that an individual makes when taking on the responsibility of joining the armed forces, certainly in the United States.

I have a two-part question.

First, his leader was very vocal in his support of the war in Iraq. His leader has now done a reverse on that after coming back to Canada. Does he believe his leader made the right decision to change his mind on that perspective? He was in favour of it and now he is not.

Second, could he comment on a quote from Prime Minister Trudeau on this issue? He said:

—surely a person who deserts from the armed forces of the U.S. is guilty of a criminal offense and accordingly would be inadmissible to Canada on that ground—