Strengthening Aviation Security Act  Mr. Speaker, when we put forward these amendments, the idea was to work with the government and the other parties in the House of Commons to ensure that Parliament works. First, we talk about the need to conduct a review of the measures two years from now and every five years thereafter so that two years from now we will be able to see if these amendments are as effective as they can be; second, with regard to the data transfer to the U.S., the original version of the bill would have allowed the Canadian government to add other countries by order in council; and, third, airline and travel agents would be instructed to ensure that passengers travelling are well aware that their information will be shared with the U.S.

Strengthening Aviation Security Act  Mr. Speaker, clearly there will be an onus on the U.S. government to work with the Canadian government. Canada will acknowledge that it is prepared to share the information with it but recognizing as well that Canadians have some concerns. Yes, we expect that the government will be able to do a review of the information that has been shared, how that information has been handled and the impact of sharing that information on Canadians.

Strengthening Aviation Security Act  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the important matter of Bill C-42, concerning the personal information of Canadians on flights over the U.S. Although we will support the legislation, I will speak to the history of the bill, how we got to that point and why we can now support the bill.

International Co-operation  Mr. Speaker, we know that not one minister in the government is allowed to make a decision without the Prime Minister's approval. The Prime Minister and his office pull the strings and his cabinet members are the puppets. The minister responsible for CIDA has misled the House and misled Canadians about why she cut funding for KAIROS, and we all know why.

International Co-operation  Mr. Speaker, for months we have heard different excuses. First the funding did not meet CIDA's priorities. Soon after the Minister of Immigration went to Israel and said it was because KAIROS was anti-Semitic. Now we have seen the handwriting. We know that CIDA recommended the funding, but the decision was later reversed.

Points of Order  Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to request unanimous consent to table the document, “Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and Ministers of State”, which says: Ministers are accountable to Parliament for the use of all powers vested in them. This demands constant attention to their parliamentary duties, including being present in Parliament to answer honestly and accurately about their areas of responsibility—

International Co-operation  Mr. Speaker, this is an issue of integrity. It is about dignity and honesty. It is about respect not only for the position the minister holds, but for the people she is supposed to represent. If she really believes Canadians and her own constituents think she is in the right, why can she not just say so?

International Co-operation  Mr. Speaker, we now know the Prime Minister supports his minister's contempt for Parliament. He supports her mistakes, and shamefully, he even says it was the right thing to do. Is it because, as he said, he makes the rules? Why is the minister allowing herself to be manipulated by the Prime Minister?

Abolition of Early Parole Act  Madam Speaker, interestingly enough, when the Conservatives stand to speak to an issue, it is always to point the finger in the other direction. They always blame someone else for a backlog and suggest that it is someone other than themselves who is holding up the process. If the Conservatives were willing to work with all of the parties on the legislation, if they realized that they do not have all the answers, that other parties have some good ideas as well and if they acknowledged that, then I am sure things would move much more quickly.

Abolition of Early Parole Act  Madam Speaker, the Conservatives will stand in this House and put questions across the floor, but they will not agree to the idea of getting this right by having a discussion in committee about what we need to do with this legislation to respond to the needs of victims of crime.

Abolition of Early Parole Act  Madam Speaker, I did not hear a question, but I acknowledge the input from my colleague on how important it is that we get regulation right. As he said, this issue is as much about trying to deal with white-collar crime from a regulation perspective as it is about dealing with the situation where people like Earl Jones are taking advantage of others who want to invest.

Abolition of Early Parole Act  Madam Speaker, that is precisely why we need to take our time with the legislation. We need to listen to the victims. We need to listen to the legal experts. We do not need to rush this legislation through. Let us send it to committee. Let us listen to the very people from whom she has quoted.

Abolition of Early Parole Act  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today to Bill C-59 even if the other parties have had no real interest in seriously debating or discussing it. Today we are here so the Bloc and Conservatives can pay lip service to getting tough on crime. Bill C-59 is hastily prepared legislation that introduces sweeping changes to the Criminal Code that would alter the parole rules for every non-violent first-time offender, regardless of the severity of the crime.

Child Care  Mr. Speaker, struggling families are wondering how the minister can be so out of touch with reality. If she were in touch, the minister would know that 70% of working women with children two or younger need child care. Offering Canadians one-tenth the cost of monthly child care, and taxing it I might add, does not give Canadian families a choice in raising children.

Child Care  Mr. Speaker, if the government actually took the time to listen to Canadians, it would know that the cost of having a child in child care is upwards of $8,000 per year. The government thinks that a so-called child care benefit that provides less than $1,000 a year after taxes gives parents some choices or options.