Stephen Harper

[Iraq, January 29th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, in 1998 the Prime Minister said:

Make no mistake, Saddam's behaviour to date indicates that he will not honour diplomatic solutions so long as they are not accompanied by a threat of intervention. The least sign of weakness or hesitation on our part will be interpreted as incitement...We believe that Canada cannot stand on the sidelines in such a moment...Canada will be counted.

Does the Prime Minister still hold to this opinion?

[Iraq, January 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the government and the Prime Minister should not be spectators. The government should have its own opinion on what is happening in this situation.

We never used to be a spectator. A multilateral coalition of countries, including Great Britain, Australia, the United States, Spain, Italy and others is prepared to keep the pressure on Saddam to comply with United Nations resolutions, including resolution 1441.

Is the government prepared now to stand with the allied coalition to seek enforcement of this resolution?

[Iraq, January 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister neglected to answer the authority question, but let me continue.

Yesterday, as the Prime Minister noted, the United Nations inspectors' report said that Saddam Hussein has not fully complied with his obligations. Today, the Prime Minister of Australia said the same thing. The British foreign secretary said the following:

The conclusion is now inescapable that Iraq is in material breach of resolution 1441.

Does the Prime Minister agree with this position?

[Iraq, January 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to head toward a serious international situation, and this government needs to have a clear plan of action.

We have looked at the responses provided by the Prime Minister yesterday, and I would ask him the following in order to allow him the opportunity to clarify his position: does the government feel that resolution 1441 is sufficient on its own to give the international community the assurance that Saddam Hussein is disarming his country?

[Iraq, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the government has not been working closely with the allied coalition. After September 11, 2001, the Canadian economy suffered a significant blow as border traffic was negatively impacted.

Given the mixed signals Canada has sent the United States on this issue, how can the government assure Canadians that our borders will remain open in the event that the situation with Iraq escalates?

[Iraq, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, today the United Nations inspectors said that Iraq was not fully complying. The United States, Britain, Australia and the allies have been clear, as is UN resolution 1441, that non-compliance by Saddam Hussein must have consequences. The government has not been clear on that point, as have some others.

Is the government today working with the British-American allied coalition to ensure that all possible steps are being taken to ensure that Saddam Hussein complies with the UN resolution?

[Iraq, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, last month the Prime Minister stated:

If the United Nations says there shouldn't be a war, we in Canada never went to war without the authorization of the United Nations.

This past weekend he said:

If the Americans or the Brits have great evidence that Saddam Hussein--who is no friend of mine--is not following the instruction of the United Nations... of course Canada will support an activity in there.

The Prime Minister has said both that Canada will take action only with the United Nations and without the United Nations. Which of these two statements is the government's position?

[Leader of the New Democratic Party, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the official opposition, I also wish to congratulate Jack Layton on his successful election Saturday as the new leader of the New Democratic Party. I managed to catch the announcement of the first ballot on television with my wife and saw that he received 31,149.9502 votes. I am really interested to know how he missed out on someone's .0498 of the vote, but maybe we can talk about that later.

While I hesitate to actually wish him good luck, I believe that I speak for all of us in the House in saying that we look forward to his active involvement in federal politics and presumably in the House itself.

Jack Layton has dedicated more than two decades of his life to public service. He has earned a reputation as a passionate advocate of social justice with a great love for the country.

While we will probably rarely agree with most of his ideas, the Alliance looks forward to his contribution to a positive public policy debate.

On a personal note, if the last year has taught me anything, it is that leadership and politics are very much a family affair. Therefore I wish to extend my congratulation and welcome to Jack, to Jack's partner Olivia Chow and to their daughter Sarah and son Mike.

[Firearms Registry, December 12th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the government has been unable to respect its own deadlines. It has bungled the system. There has been no accountability for minister after minister who has screwed up the system. Now today it has announced that it will have a general amnesty for the bureaucrats who screwed this up, so why not a general amnesty for the gun owners who cannot meet the deadline?

[Firearms Registry, December 12th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I will remind the government that violent criminals do not register their guns.

We obviously will not get a straight answer to that question, so let me just follow up on the minister's statement this morning. He admits that the gun registry is running at minimal levels. Gun owners across the country are trying to register by the year end deadline but they cannot get through on the 1-800 number and they cannot get forms.

Will the government announce a general amnesty for gun owners who cannot register by the January deadline?