Foreign Affairs  Mr. Speaker, from that answer, I am not sure whether or not the government thinks there is a potential threat of missile attack. Let me ask another question about Canada's national interest. We are being left out of the evolution of air defence in North America. It is clear

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, I was hoping the Prime Minister would celebrate his 40th anniversary with a clear answer. He seemed to be both for and against regime change in that answer. Let me put it this way. The Liberal motion before us today, the Prime Minister's own motion, calls

Situation in Iraq   to justify action in Iraq; certainly saying nothing to the contrary; then condemning our friends and allies for taking action under that resolution; and now supporting the action, in a sense, once it is clear they are winning. Let me give specific examples. On January 23, the Prime

Supply  . That is the only way I can put it. This is not a testament to our independence. It is a testament to a streak of immaturity and irresponsibility that this party does not share and will never embrace. Let me be clear and let us all be clear on all sides of the House, because I know

Canadian Forces  Mr. Speaker, it may not be so clear to our troops as the bullets fly over their heads. In the beginning, this government said that Canada would not take part in the war against Saddam, but our soldiers are taking part in it. The government also said that Canadian soldiers were

Iraq  . It is shameful. Let me ask the government a very clear question. We have troops in the war against Saddam Hussein. Do our troops in the war against Saddam have the unconditional support of their government? Yes or no.

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, we do not believe in sacrificing our friends and our interests to a veto of Jacques Chirac. A reason the government should reconsider its position is that it appears some allied POWs may have been executed by Saddam's soldiers. It is certainly clear that Saddam's

Iraq  Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister should not be vague. He should make it clear that the statement of the Minister of Natural Resources is unacceptable. This anti-American statement follows a long pattern of such statements from all levels of the Liberal government, from staff

Supply   be hijacked by those who simply want to delay and who ultimately want inaction. In recent months this party, the Canadian Alliance, has been strongly supportive of these diplomatic efforts. However it is clear now that in some cases Saddam Hussein has guessed right. For example, Jacques

The Budget   to the public and political pressure by announcing some tax cuts at the eleventh hour, days before the calling of the 2000 election campaign. I will deal with these tax cuts in a few moments. The reality remains, and let us be very clear, that without this party, without all the efforts

Iraq  . Now that the Blix report has been delivered, can the government be clear, will it stand unequivocally with our allies, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and others, in stating that they have the right to act and that Saddam Hussein will be disarmed?

Foreign Affairs  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that position. I wish we could have received that kind of clarity when we asked on Monday. We keep getting a lack of clear answers. This is a government that says that it is against pre-deployment of troops in the Persian Gulf, yet it quietly

Canada Elections Act   down and rendering these provisions unconstitutional. As has been noted, this particular litigation was initiated by the National Citizens' Coalition at the time when I served as its president. Rather than accepting this clear statement of the highest court of Alberta

Foreign Affairs  Mr. Speaker, while we appreciate that, I thought I asked a clear question and I would like to get a clear answer. Dr. Blix was clear. He already said that Iraq was in non-compliance of the UN resolution. The allied coalition, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia

Health  Mr. Speaker, as the first ministers prepare to meet this evening, Canadians are clear in what they want from the health care system. They want results. They do not want grand schemes. They want to see the current system fixed. They want more doctors, more hospital beds