Stephen Harper

[Softwood Lumber, June 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government concluded a historic agreement that is good for the Canadian industry, widely supported by the Canadian industry, and it gets our trade relationship with the United States back on track.

I can understand why the party opposite would like to undo that because it would like to have an excuse for its terrible decade of economic mismanagement of our relations with the United States, but we are getting those things fixed.

[The Environment, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I can explain the difference. The climate change agenda is principally about carbon dioxide, which is not a pollutant. The government is also concerned with pollutants such as nitrous oxides, sulphur dioxides and other organic compounds. There are differences and that is the difference.

In terms of the particular security arrangements the RCMP uses, that is its decision, not mine.

If this really is an NDP budget proposal, people will be wondering why this government voted for it and why the NDP voted against it.

[The Environment, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in the budget, this government announced a federal-provincial program to support public transit. But the NDP voted against the program. This government supports programs for the environment.

[Kyoto Protocol, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are smarter than the stereotype the Bloc is promoting.

The reductions in income tax in the budget are for consumers and workers. Must of the cuts involve taxes on consumer purchases and personal income.

[Kyoto Protocol, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, I was one of the Calgary cowboys and now I am one of the oil company boys. The truth is that in our budget—

[Kyoto Protocol, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great day for national unity when the Liberal Party of Canada and the Bloc Québécois defend Quebec within Canada.

This government's policy is to lower taxes for all Canadians. That includes a historic lowering of the GST, which will drop from 7% to 6%. All consumers in Canada and Quebec will benefit.

[Canada Elections Act, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government's position is clear. We brought in legislation, modelled on those of the provinces, to set elections every four years and set the next election for October 2009.

I think the real problem is the Liberal Party of Canada does not know whether it is for fixed election dates or not for them. It does not know whether it is for limiting the terms of senators or not for limiting them. This party is for reforming the political system.

Some day we will find out whether the Liberal Party has positions on any of these issues.

[Canada Elections Act, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government is clear that it will not be seeking an early election. At any time Parliament can defeat the government and provoke an early election, if that is what the opposition irresponsibly chooses to do.

I point out for the hon. member that the legislation is based on similar legislation that has been presented in British Columbia and Ontario by Liberal governments. It is about time the Liberal Party of Canada got into the 21st century.

[Canada Elections Act, May 30th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the opposition can make a comparison between this bill and the proposal I made as a private member when I was leader of the opposition.

In all these measures—and the same is true in the provinces that have adopted fixed date elections—it is necessary to respect the constitutional powers of the Governor General.

[The Environment, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, once again, as I said in French, the hon. leader of the NDP is mixing up two subjects, the control of pollution and the control of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases. They are both important problems. In terms of the control of greenhouse gases, he asked for a plan. I would simply note that the budget of this government provided billions of dollars of new money to public transport and subsidies and tax credits for those who use public transit, as well as new money for renewable fuels, and he voted against it. This party voted for those things.