Scott Brison

[Public Works and Government Services, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it would be more fair to say that the hon. member has no idea what is involved in our trade agreements or in parliamentary purchases.

As stated from the beginning, we will endeavour as a government to abide by our trade agreements. We will respect the principle of national treatment because our trade agreements are there to protect Canadian manufacturers as they compete anywhere in the world and to protect Canadian jobs.

Even Ken Georgetti now supports free trade. I am shocked that the hon. member does not. Free trade created 1.8 million new Canadian jobs in the six years after NAFTA. This reversal is shocking from the Conservative Party that is no longer opposed to progressive--

[Public Works and Government Services, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again we will operate as a government within the confines of our trade agreements. At the same time, we will seek within those trade agreements any exemptions whereby we can purchase from Canadian manufacturers. It is important to know that the company involved was a Canadian company that sourced the pins from a Chinese manufacturer.

Further, I am shocked that it seems now that party, the Conservative Party, is now opposed to abiding by our trade agreements. As I said the other day, I knew it was not progressive any more. Now I know it is not even conservative.

[Public Works and Government Services, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I guess I will have to explain the decision very slowly to the member because he is obviously not paying attention.

I said that we have to, as a government, abide by our trade rules which means that we have to respect the principle of national treatment, and as such buy items that we purchase on behalf of Canadians and on behalf of parliamentarians within those trade rules. There is an exemption for parliamentary purchases, and as such we will purchase those pins used for parliamentary purchases from manufacturers in Canada.

[Sponsorship Program, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians watching this question period must be mystified that the opposition, the Conservative Party, is not actually asking questions of interest to them.

Why is it not asking questions about health care, why is it not asking questions about agriculture, why is it not asking questions on issues that actually matter to Canadians, instead of scandalmongering and letting Justice Gomery do his work?

[Sponsorship Program, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have a judicial inquiry headed by Justice Gomery that is doing its work on a daily basis and achieving the end that Canadians desire, and that is getting to the truth on this issue.

The reason we have that judicial inquiry and why that hon. member can comment on individual daily testimony is because our Prime Minister has had the courage to do the right thing which was to set up Justice Gomery's commission and to move forward to get that information.

I am absolutely appalled that the opposition, the Conservative Party, does not understand the charter of rights, does not understand the Constitution, and does not even understand the independence of a judicial inquiry.

[Sponsorship Program, February 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again it is not appropriate to comment on individual testimony. Further to that, recently 130 of Canada's top legal minds wrote a letter to the Leader of the Conservative Party telling him he did not understand the laws of the country

I would suggest that if he does not understand the laws of the country, his party should not be trying to operate a parallel judicial inquiry on the floor of the House of Commons.

[Points of Order, February 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as a member of this government, I am certainly entitled as a member of Parliament to comment on the result of the last federal election and the fact is they did lose and they will lose the next--

[Public Works and Government Services, February 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize the hard work of the member for Etobicoke North, who has worked on this file for years. A competitive contract for the lapel pins was actually awarded to a Canadian company, which then sourced the pins to a Chinese manufacturer.

As a government we respect our trade agreements, but we do have a parliamentary exemption which we can apply within those trade agreements to purchases for members of Parliament and senators. As such, I have directed that Canadian pins made for the use of senators and members of Parliament will be manufactured in Canada from this point forward.

[Citizenship and Immigration, February 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again, Canada is recognized for both the fairness and the diligence of our immigration system. I know that the minister is working very hard to address the issue the hon. member has raised. We look forward to addressing it in the coming weeks and months.

[Sponsorship Program, February 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I hope the Bloc Québécois understands the importance of independence in a legal inquiry. We have to wait for Mr. Gomery to finish his work. I am anxious to read his report.

However, it is inappropriate to keep discussing his work, here in the House of Commons, day after day.