Stephen Harper

[The Environment, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, there are two types of problems mixed up in this issue. They are the problem of greenhouse gases—including carbon dioxide—and the problem of pollution. That is why, in our program, we intend to propose measures to deal with pollution and greenhouse gases.

[The Environment, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this government encourages discussions between the federal and provincial governments on climate change and the programs that could improve the situation. If, however, a provincial government wants to make its own decisions within its own jurisdictions, it can also use its own money.

[The Environment, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc knows that the latest budget—which his party supported—contains measures to improve the reduction of carbon dioxide gases. It provides, for example, support for public transit and its users in addition to new money for renewable fuels. In my opinion, these measures will make progress possible both provincially and federally.

[The Environment, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the Leader of the Opposition changed the subject when he asked me a question in French, because he decided not to ask a question about a child care program. We realize that child care is a provincial responsibility.

The Government of Quebec already has such a program, without the help of the Liberal Party of Canada. And we have also given parents in Quebec a universal family allowance of $1,200 a year.

[Child Care, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will certainly admit no such thing nor will the Canadian people who cast judgment upon this issue in the last election.

Canadians want a program that creates real spaces and delivers real benefits to real families. That is what the Liberals failed to do and what this government is doing.

[Child Care, May 29th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, not only did the party opposite fail to create a national child care program in its 13 years in office, but members of that party topped that off by recently voting against the universal child care benefit that the government will deliver to Canadian families.

It is about time Canadians received a benefit, which is what this government is doing. We are proud of the progress we are making.

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

Mr. Speaker, I was in Afghanistan. I know the Minister of Foreign Affairs and others are in contact with our allies. The Dutch and the British are proceeding. I can tell the House that the Dutch, in large measure, are proceeding because they know Canada is behind this mission and they have never forgotten the Canadian role in the liberation of the Netherlands during World War II.

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

Mr. Speaker, the House, especially the party opposite understands the mission in Afghanistan. I hope that, before sending our troops, our young men and women, into a military campaign, it understood the mission in Afghanistan.

This government wants strong support for our troops in Afghanistan. This is why we responded to calls from the parties to have a vote.

We know the NDP may vote against the motion. However, indications are that the other parties support the motion. It will be a good message for our troops.

I would just add that, in my own opinion, the comments by the parties have been clear up to this week. Our troops and the public have a hard time understanding why the parties suddenly change their mind when there is a vote.

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

Mr. Speaker, members across various parties in the House have requested a vote. Members of all parties, in particular the hon. member and his party, are more than aware of the details of our engagement in Afghanistan, which we are seeking to extend.

Let us be serious. The government believes there should be a vote. The government offered a vote and that vote was accepted. The process was accepted unanimously by the House, including by his party. If he does not like that, he should take that up with the leadership of his party.

However, we have men and women over there who are doing great work, who are prepared to take bullets for our country. If the hon. member and his party are not prepared to stand up and simply endorse the mission, then they are, frankly, not supporting the people on the ground they claim to support, and that is what they should do.

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

Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things that I want to respond to in the questions.

First, as I said earlier, the government would quite frankly be surprised if we did not have the support of the same three or four parties that supported this mission from the outset and up to at least last weekend. If it were the case that we were surprised by the result of tonight's vote, I do not think it is feasible for Canada to simply walk away in the next few months. The government has to take its responsibilities and the safety of its soldiers and its diplomats seriously.

What we would do is proceed cautiously for a year, as I said. If we believe we need to go further beyond that, we will seek a mandate from the Canadian people.

What we are asking for here is to extend the mandate in this motion for a clear two years. That would bring us to the end of President Karzai's term, and that is where the allies, which have been with us from the beginning, are by and large at today.