Stephen Harper

[Dissolution of Parliament Act, April 1st, 2004]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-512, an act to provide fixed dates for the election of members to the House of Commons and to amend the Constitution Act, 1867.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to move first reading of this bill which would provide for fixed election dates for members of the House of Commons. The bill would effectively remove from a prime minister the right to call an election whenever and however he or she wanted. Instead, it would substitute a fixed date of every four years.

The bill obviously could not come at a more opportune time, with election speculation rife and the Prime Minister polling overnight and deciding at his personal whim whether and when Canadians have a right to exercise their most critical democratic rights.

It is not the way it should be. Elections should be held based on the interest of the Canadian people, not on the whims of a prime minister.

The current power of the Prime Minister stands at the heart of the democratic deficit. It has been criticized by Mr. Kent, the stalwart Liberal, and changed by a Liberal government in B.C.

Passage of the bill would fix this problem and go a long way to fixing the democratic deficit.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[The Prime Minister, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the public accounts committee would not have to do it all itself if the Prime Minister were trying to get to the bottom of this scandal.

Let me ask about another failure, the failure to fix the democratic deficit. No real reform at committees, instead the same old games the government is playing with public accounts. The government invoked closure in the House after only six days. There is no reform or election of Senators. He is driving opponents out of his party, appointing candidates and playing with the election date as a personal political football.

How does the Prime Minister explain his total failure to implement even a single, meaningful democratic reform?

[The Prime Minister, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised to get to the bottom of the sponsorship scandal and instead we see today that he is undermining the chairman while he has been blocking the release of documents, hurrying to get a whitewashed, premature report, and his own public inquiry has not even started yet.

How can the Prime Minister explain his total failure to accept accountability for the sponsorship scandal?

[The Prime Minister, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the Prime Minister that in a few weeks he will be asking the questions and I will be sitting where he is.

[The Prime Minister, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, before the Prime Minister runs out of town once again, I would like to observe what a disappointment his government has been.

He promised Canadians an ambitious agenda but all we have is empty plans and recycled legislation. Now he wants to bury all the important issues until after the next election, whether it is the judicial inquiry into sponsorship, the Arar inquiry, the gun registry review or his own plans for health care.

After more than a decade of coveting this job, how can the Prime Minister explain his total failure to offer an agenda?

[National Security, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a big deal about reorganizing national security. Nevertheless, there are huge security gaps, 25 passports lost or stolen, a two and a half month backlog for fingerprint analysis, and thousands of airport personnel with possible criminal associations.

Once again, why should we believe that things are going to be better now?

[National Security, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the AG's report condemns the government's handling of terrorists and criminals. There are huge security gaps, 25,000 passports lost or stolen, a two and a half month backlog for fingerprint analysis, and thousands of airport personnel with possible criminal associations.

Once again, why should Canadians trust the government after 10 years of these failures?

[National Security, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in 1996 the Auditor General said that the government had inadequate information to support frontline officials responsible for national security. Eight years later, nothing has changed. The Liberals are still asleep at the switch on national security matters.

Given the Prime Minister's track record, a scandal, incompetence, and mismanagement, why should anyone believe things are going to change now?

[Sponsorship Program, March 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister just failed to answer the question put. I would really like the Prime Minister to stop embarrassing himself by just getting up and answering questions put about his own conduct.

The question is this. When the Prime Minister interviewed for the cabinet, did the Prime Minister ask the President of the Privy Council and was he told about that minister's relationship with Pierre Tremblay? Was he told, yes or no?

[Sponsorship Program, March 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, hiding behind a minister of cabinet is not personal responsibility.

The Prime Minister said he would release all pertinent information going back to the Korean war, if necessary. Now he has an opportunity to make good on those statements. Instead, he refuses to answer questions and blocks information.

Will the Prime Minister stand in his place and explain to Canadians why he will not send all of Gagliano's documents to the public accounts committee?