Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I have a very simple question for the hon. member. She has attacked the throne speech and said nothing positive about it. Her colleague from Yukon listed, I believe, at least six things that he approved of in the throne speech. He was honest. Since the hon. member criticized everything in the throne speech, why did she sit on her duff and not vote against it when she had the chance yesterday?

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I did notice that my colleague referred to the whole issue of Canada supporting its children. I think she encouraged Canadians to have more children. I do not know if I misunderstood her, but I think I am correct that she was encouraging Canadians to have more children.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I appreciated working with the hon. member on the heritage committee. I know she is very knowledge about heritage issues, having being an actress on CBC Television. However, I want to focus on something that she did not mention. The Liberal opposition in the House has opposed our proposal to cut the GST even more.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, one thing the member did not spend a lot of time on, and it is the one area of our throne speech that clearly benefits the poor in Canada, is the reduction of the GST by another 1%. As she knows, the GST is the one tax in Canada that when it is reduced, it benefits all Canadians, not just those that pay income tax.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, of course the member will know that I disagree with her on virtually every point she has made. In fact, she refers to Canada going in the wrong direction under our Conservative government, but Canada has never had economic fundamentals as strong as they are today. We have record low unemployment rates, the lowest unemployment rates in the last 33 years.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, I was very encouraged by the hon. member's comments. He started off talking about all the great things in the throne speech. I think that is echoed in Canada. Canadians have picked up on the fact that the throne speech is a very forward looking document. It was a clear statement of where Canada wants to go.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, I by welcoming the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot to this august chamber. I hope she has as much satisfaction in serving her constituency as I have had in my first 20 months in the House. As time goes by, she will notice there are many opinions floating around this chamber and, as she knows, opinions are, at the very heart, subjective.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully as my Liberal colleague misrepresented our anti-crime legislation. If we ask Canadians across Canada whom they trust on the issue of crime, two-thirds of Canadians say it is the Conservatives. They like the Conservative crime agenda. They know we are getting tough on crime.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to commend the Minister of Justice for his campaign to tackle crime. Today he brought forward our comprehensive tackling violent crimes act. A recent survey has shown that two-thirds of Canadians like the direction our government has taken in fighting crime.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply  Let's talk about the RCMP investigation.

Resumption of debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member's comments in the House. What disturbed me is his reference to the government's anti-crime agenda, our efforts to make our communities and streets safer as being neo-conservative. Yet had he listened to his own leader's comments, the response to the throne speech, his own leader referred to and claimed that he was supporting five of our six initiatives in our anti-crime legislation.

Aeronautics Act  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his intervention but, of course, I disagree with him profoundly. It is interesting that at committee stage even the Bloc members initially opposed our legislation, but once they understood what it was about, once we introduced some amendments, and once they were able to introduce some amendments, we actually came to a consensus and realized this legislation was good for Canada and aviation.

Aeronautics Act  Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the International Civil Aviation Organization, which is the organization that represents all the major airlines around the world, gave testimony at the committee. When asked where Canada stands in terms of aviation safety, the response was that Canada is the leader.

Aeronautics Act  Mr. Speaker, unfortunately at the committee there was some confusion about the number of inspectors that Canada had in the past and the number that we have today. Initially the suggestion came from the NDP, the Bloc and a couple of the witnesses that supposedly at one time there were 1,400 inspectors.

Aeronautics Act  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the privilege of speaking to Bill C-6, which is clearly a bill that would lead to improved aviation safety in our country. Once we cut through all the rhetoric we hear in this House, the bill would move us a huge step forward in improving the safety of aviation in Canada.