Stephen Harper

[Telecommunications, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government has taken action on that particular file.

However, on the wider point, which is important, not only is the government doing things to help the unemployed in this country but the unemployment rate in this country is a point and a half below the unemployment rate in the United States. That is because hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country depend on trade with the United States and around the world.

We need to be able to compete and we are able to compete. We will not have any part of any movement here or anywhere else in shutting down borders because that is not in the interest of the Canadian economy.

[Telecommunications, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in a global economy, there is foreign investment in Canada. At the same time Canadians invest abroad, which has created global economic leaders here, in Canada. That is one of the reasons why Canada is emerging from the recession as one of the strongest of the developed countries.

This government intends to participate in the global economy. I know that is not the socialist philosophy, but that is the reality. Canada—

[Telecommunications, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, at the same time as we have seen some of those acquisitions, we have also seen many acquisitions by Canadian firms internationally as Canadian champions have been emerging. It is one of the reasons that Canada is coming out of the global recession with one of the strongest economies if not the strongest economy in the developed world.

I know the position of the NDP is that it does not want to participate in global markets but I am afraid the future has passed it by. We are in global markets. We are going to compete and we will succeed.

[Government Spending, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, these are bureaucratic expenses for administrative duties, including for certain files that change from year to year, such as the G8 and G20 summits. It is true that the Prime Minister chairs these summits.

[Government Spending, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is talking about the Privy Council Office budget. The activities of that department change every year. This year there is a lot of activity surrounding the G8 and G20 summits. The restrictions on increased spending apply to my department as they do to the others.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is the Leader of the Opposition who refuses to face the facts. The fact is that Canadian soldiers and public servants have conducted themselves in an exemplary manner at all times.

There is no evidence to support the allegations concocted by the opposition. We are very proud of the work of our soldiers and public servants in Afghanistan.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government's position has been clear. Canadian officials have at all times conducted themselves in a most exemplary manner. The record is clear on that. Whenever problems have arisen, they have acted to address those problems.

Not only did we conclude a new transfer agreement some three years ago, but let me read what a former Liberal chief of staff had to say about this government's work: “The [Conservative] government improved the agreement. The concerns that Ms. Olexiuk had raised and the provisions that she apparently at that time had argued for, were indeed put in the agreement by the [Conservative] government. And kudos to them for doing so”.

[Afghanistan, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition has inferred that somehow Canadian public servants are withholding information that would support the kind of unfounded allegations that it has made. These decisions are made by respected public servants.

We have asked Justice Iacobucci, who is a very respected Canadian, to review that work and ensure that all information is indeed available. I think that information continues to show that all personnel of the Canadian government have acted with regard to their obligations at all times.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, March 11th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, one of the perplexing things in this House is to see the NDP constantly standing up and demanding the very things that it constantly votes against.

This government has made all kinds of important investments into aboriginal programs, not the least of which was the signing and execution of not just the apology, but the Indian residential schools settlement agreement. The member will know that the Aboriginal Healing Foundation is a part of that agreement. The government will execute all of the obligations relative to that particular foundation according to the agreement. As has already been said, the government has made sure it has provided additional money in costs that have been required under that agreement due to higher than expected take-up on some actions. These things have been provided in the budget.

At the same time, I have to say, because I did allude to some of the things we have been doing which the NDP and others have opposed, that this government has had a number of important initiatives in aboriginal communities, not the least of which has been, under not just the Minister of Indian Affairs but his predecessor in front of me here, the important initiative on providing clean water on aboriginal reserves. Through the economic action plan there have been investments in infrastructure in aboriginal communities across the country. That was a particular part of the economic action plan which sadly, the hon. member and her party voted against. There are additional actions in the budget particularly to look at education, which I know is a priority of the new grand chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

For decades, governments have talked about improving the lives of aboriginal people and there have been many grand promises, and at times very extravagant numbers and budgets thrown around. This government has approached these problems in very clear ways, ranging from water to housing to treaties. It has approached it with a desire to have very clear goals to achieve some definitive outcomes, to actually make some progress on things that matter to aboriginal people.

While I believe we are making progress, we recognize that we still have a long way to go. We will continue to work with aboriginal Canadians for a better future.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, March 11th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, the reason we are talking about the Quebec nation is because this government recognized the Quebec nation in this House, and it has supported it from the beginning. I must also give credit to the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party. The only party that resisted the recognition of the Quebec Nation was the Bloc. Why did it resist? Because it was clear in the resolution that we were recognizing the existence of the Quebec nation within a united Canada.

When we saw the performance of our athletes in Vancouver, when we saw the performance of our soldiers and diplomats in Afghanistan, when we saw the performance of our medical professionals during the H1N1 flu pandemic crisis, we saw francophones and Quebeckers who were proud to be Canadian.