House of Commons Hansard #70 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was quebec.

Topics

Ways And MeansOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Scarborough East Ontario

Liberal

Doug Peters LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), I wish to table explanatory notes and a notice of a ways and means motion to amend the Excise Tax Act, the Excise Act and the Income Tax Act.

I ask that an order of the day be designated for consideration of the motion.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-28, an act to respecting the making of loans and the provision of other forms of financial assistance to students, to amend and provide for the repeal of the Canada Student Loans Act, and to amend one other act in consequence thereof, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

May 24th, 1994 / 3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Stan Keyes Liberal Hamilton West, ON

Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure on behalf of the constituents in Hamilton West to speak at second reading of Bill C-28, the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act.

Contrary to the views espoused by certain members opposite, this bill should have nothing to do with the politics of separatism or the political autonomy of our provinces. All we are trying to do with this legislation is ensure that our citizens have adequate access to post-secondary education.

The government realizes that many Canadian students need financial assistance in order to achieve their academic goals. The government also realizes that the provinces cannot address those needs alone which is exactly why the Minister of Human Resources Development has chosen to work in concert with provincial authorities to try and provide sufficient financial aid to college and university students in this great country.

The legislation before us today provides proof that the government is committed to the principle of protecting access to post-secondary education. This principle is an extremely important one to uphold if for no other reason than simply to ensure that all Canadians have the opportunity to intellectually empower themselves through post-secondary education and training initiatives.

Debate on the issue of financial assistance to students across Canada seems quite timely and highly appropriate when one considers the fact that thousands of secondary school students will receive acceptance to a Canadian university or college within the next 30 days. Many of these students will apply for and receive financial assistance from federal and provincial sources in order to obtain enough money to finance their post-secondary education.

However unless we act now, many more students will either be unable or unwilling to pursue a college or university education due to a lack of funds.

In addition to the students trying to enter college or university for the first time, there are several thousand who will graduate this year with a substantial debt load, in some cases as high as $15,000 and even $20,000.

The time has come for the federal government to respond to the increased financial burden faced by those Canadians who seek to further their education. We must work together to provide incentives for people to pursue higher education by replacing the archaic provisions of the Canada Student Loans Act with legislation that is more reflective of the changing financial needs of Canada's student population.

In the process of representing a riding with a high university and college student population, I have had the opportunity to speak with a number of students and parents of students at McMaster University and Mohawk College, both of which are located in the great city of Hamilton.

The students in my riding have brought forward a number of concerns related to the Canada student loan program. For example, with the rising cost of university and college tuition, students are uncertain whether their weekly student loan allocation will cover their basic educational costs. Students who have received loans from the federal government are frightened about the debt and increased burden they will have to bear by the time they graduate from college or university.

In this regard many students are calling for the reinstatement of the six-month post-graduation interest free loan period that was removed by the previous government. Many students who cannot afford to go to school on a full time basis have been forced to attend school on a part time basis while holding down part time jobs in order to earn enough money to keep food on the table. In some cases these students are single parents or re-entry women and men trying to upgrade their academic skills while supporting a family at the same time.

To make matters worse, there has been a ceiling of $2,500 per academic year applied to students enrolled in part time studies even though the cost of part time post-secondary studies often exceeds that amount in tuition and textbooks alone, not to mention room and board.

There is also the issue of the often exceptional costs faced by students with special needs such as students with disabilities and students who suffer from severe financial disadvantages, many of whom would benefit from a national system of targeted grant funding.

These are just some of the fundamental concerns that the government is attempting to address by means of Bill C-28. After nearly 30 years it seems reasonable to think that the Canada student loans program is long overdue for fundamental reform.

When we look at weekly student loan allocations, for example, we see that they have been frozen for over a decade now. Yet in the same span of time, the costs associated with post-secondary education have skyrocketed by some 58 per cent. This scenario is absolutely ludicrous and appears to defeat the principle of trying to provide adequate financial assistance to those who need it in order to defray the rising costs of their education.

In addition to addressing issues of access to post-secondary education, the government is also prepared to address the costly inefficiencies that have been identified in the Canada student loan program as well. Outdated eligibility criteria, inconsistent need assessments, loan defaults and inefficient program delivery are some of the key problems that are recognized and addressed by the proposed legislation.

It should be noted that the proposed changes to the Canada student loans program have met with positive response from many of the students in my riding of Hamilton West. For years student organizations such as the McMaster Student's Union and the Canadian Federation of Students have called for higher weekly loan limits, greater repayment flexibility and a national system of grants for needy students.

The proposed legislation will increase weekly loan limits by 57 per cent from $105 to $165 for full time students and will also increase the part time student loan limit from $2,500 to $4,000. The government also intends to establish special opportunity grants for disabled students and students with serious financial needs.

In addition to raising loan limits and providing needs based grants, the government is also committed to establishing a more flexible repayment schedule for college and university students. The proposed legislation allows the federal government to conduct a meaningful income contingent repayment pilot project in order to determine whether or not this type of funding model which has been implemented with mixed results in other nations is worth pursuing at all.

Perhaps the most important aspect of the proposed legislation is the message it sends out to all Canadians about the degree of importance the government has placed on protecting access to higher education for all Canadians. By proposing the stated reforms to the Canada student loan program, the federal government has taken a giant step toward strengthening our overall system of education and training.

In closing, I want to point out that this legislation is not about separatist politics or the constitutional implications of provincial responsibility for post-secondary education. Bill C-28 is about access to higher education in Canada, plain and simple.

All we are trying to do is ensure that Canadians who have the desire, the ability to pursue post-secondary studies are provided with the funds to do so. A high quality accessible system of education will be the salvation of this society.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

St. Boniface Manitoba

Liberal

Ronald J. Duhamel LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his comments.

I was disappointed that this rather comprehensive and bold initiative that responds to actual problems that young people are experiencing has not been applauded by the opposition parties.

I stand to be corrected if I am wrong. From the official opposition we have heard some noises, some rhetoric about our getting into provincial responsibility. There is an opting out clause there. Provinces can opt out if they wish. I do not see why that point was made and I wonder if my colleague would explain why the Bloc Quebecois would want to do that.

We all know that young Canadians need more assistance. That was documented in the 34th Parliament and finally in the 35th Parliament the government has acted. It has not only raised the amount of loans available and grants for those who are under represented and made repayment much more sensitive to those who have to repay but it has taken a number of measures quite apart from the job creation initiatives to make life more bearable for students.

How in the world is that involved with politics? I wonder if my hon. colleague at the same time, because there are two questions, would care to briefly define the Reform Party's position on this legislation.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Stan Keyes Liberal Hamilton West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether I want to thank the hon. member for St. Boniface for the question because I would not dare try to speak for our separatist friends opposite.

To answer my colleagues question in its simplest form, the parties opposite, especially the Bloc in this case, have to realize that education is not some sort of commodity like pork hocks or apples. It is a national principle. Education is a national principle. Education is a natural resource and I am now working with

the minister to prove how the country can actually export this natural resource.

We have a natural resource called education. With this bill, as I have outlined, we want to do many things to make post-secondary education accessible to all Canadians, whether they are working or not working, whether they are young or old, whether they want to be retrained or whatever their situation. They must have equal access and not just because they have some money in their pockets they can go to school. That is not very fair.

If the Bloc can take politics out of the issue, if the Bloc can understand that we are not talking about the resource of education being something with which to balance the books or to trade off. If Bloc members say that with the bill the federal government is attempting in some way to make a power grab away from the provinces, especially the province of Quebec, they are missing the fundamental point that education is not a commodity.

Education is a natural resource. Education is something precious that must be made available to all Canadians whether they live in B.C., in the Northwest Territories, in Ontario or in Quebec.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Bloc

Antoine Dubé Bloc Lévis, QC

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member says a lot about the value of education in his speech. We can easily go along with him on that because education is important, that is a fact. But when we educate our young people, we explain to them that contracts are important. We tell them that a contract is binding, whether it is a handshake or in writing. From being with educators, I know that they spend a lot of time telling them that it is important.

Well, the best-known contract in this country is the Canadian Constitution. What does this Canadian Constitution say? It says that education is exclusively in provincial jurisdiction. We can take a long time explaining the values of education and where we stand on it, but everyone in Quebec seems to agree that education is important. We must do everything required to make education better. One way to do that is to avoid duplication and to act as consistently as possible in co-operation with the educational partners in a province.

Now the hon. member opposite tells us not to worry about the Constitution, that it is not serious, that these are problems and annoyances which the Bloc Quebecois seems to want to bring in. So I ask him whether the Constitution and a contract and everything legal really have any value for him. I would like to know his position on that.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Stan Keyes Liberal Hamilton West, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I suppose we have to keep in mind that if the federal government could unilaterally afford to provide students with enough money to carry out their educational requirements it would do so. If the provincial governments could provide the funds necessary all by themselves for students to obtain post-secondary education, there would be no argument. Obviously there has to be some teamwork. Even in question period today we saw the wall going up between the hon. member's party and the Government of Canada. As much as we see that wall going up we are not going to be threatened. The Bloc must understand it cannot do it by itself. Quebec cannot do it by itself.

We can all work better in education if we work as a team. Together we can make that education possible without money being the inhibiting device for our students. Ask any one of our pages in the House today. They know what it is like to work all kinds of hours, go home, grab a meal where they can grab one and get through their education. Do they care whether Quebec is paying for it by itself or whether the feds can? I do not think so.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased today to speak on the issue and in support of the government bill.

I graduated from university about 11 years ago, in 1983. Since then or over the past 10 years there has not been any increase in loans for students. The bill is about our future. It is about our young people. It is about education and access to education for people so they can go to university and take part in our society.

From 1990 to 1993 people with lower than high school education saw a loss of 17 per cent in the number of jobs they could have access to. For those who had a high school education there was a loss of about .5 per cent. Those with beyond high school education, with post-secondary education, there was an increase of 17 per cent in the number of jobs available for them.

We can see the impact and the importance of education. We can see the need for us to have access to education and the need for a bill that finally remedies the problem we have seen over the past 10 years of erosion of student loans because of inflation. It is very important that we support the bill.

The reforms being made to student aid are an essential part of the government's broader strategy. We want to work with the provinces and interest groups to revitalize learning and training in Canada. To compete in the global marketplace and to respond to increasing technological advances we have to ensure that our education and training systems are relevant, effective and accountable. We have to take action now so that tomorrow's graduates are able to compete and prosper.

It has long been a hallmark of Canadian society that every person should have access to educational opportunities to develop to his or her full potential. It is well known that education and training have two important goals: to prepare individuals for

fulfilling social and cultural life and to prepare them to contribute as productive members of our society.

Provincial jurisdiction over education in Canada is clear. The provinces have already begun to implement reforms which seek to make Canadian learning systems more productive and accountable for results. Canadians in all provinces are well aware of the importance of ensuring that education meets the challenges of modern society as we approach the 21st century.

Their recognition of the need for new visions and new approaches is shared by the federal government. As education and training are crucially linked to the economic health of any nation, the federal government would be remiss not to facilitate and support all efforts which seek to prepare young Canadians for the future.

It is recognized that the concept of lifelong learning requires the involvement not only of governments but of parents, teachers, business, industry, labour and communities. Substantial financial support is provided by the federal government for education at the post-secondary level. Over $6 billion a year is provided to the provinces under the established programs financing arrangements, the EPF program.

The federal government has always maintained a strong interest in fundamental values relating to quality education and training which are shared by educational jurisdictions across the country. In this regard the government remains committed to assisting the provinces in providing whatever support it can to ensure the efficiency of our learning systems.

The new Canada Student Financial Assistance Act is an important part of efforts being made in this area. Our youth employment and learning strategy announced on April 15 committed the federal government to support along with the provinces a number of other key initiatives. These include the development of clear national goals and expectations, updating and improving existing measurement tools, promoting technology and innovation in learning, and facilitating the dissemination of information on important learning and labour market issues.

We are confident that all these measures will contribute to improvements in education and learning throughout Canada. They will greatly assist Canadians in developing, acquiring and maintaining the skills and knowledge they need in today's world. Our citizens must be able not only to enter the workforce successfully but to be able to adjust to changes in the labour market. For that they need education.

Indeed it is important to recognize that education and training processes are seldom if ever constant. While it would obviously be much easier and less costly merely to maintain what is already in place, it is not good enough. In view of rapid unwilling changes in today's global economy, we must always be alert to ensure that our learning systems are relevant and current. Modifications and new initiatives must be introduced to address emerging issues and new realities. This is what the government intends to do. While we do not dispute that these challenges are formidable we must not be fearful to act.

Canadians do not lack the initiative or desire to compete. We have every confidence in the ingenuity and commitment of individuals who are endeavouring to get ahead by pursuing post-secondary educational opportunities either full time or part time. Canadian students must have the right tools to enable them to undertake their studies and produce results that are meaningful and positive. This is why the government has introduced the bill before us.

Obviously one of the major barriers standing between students and post-secondary education is the lack of significant financial resources. Students have repeatedly indicated over the years-I heard this during the election campaign and since-that they need more financial aid to meet the rising cost not only of their education but of their basic living expenses. And our pages know it well.

We should make clear at the outset that students are not asking for a handout. They are seeking financial support for the time while they are in school. They are well aware of the expectation that they will repay what they borrow as the great majority of former students do and as I did about three years ago when I finished paying off my student loan. The great majority of students pay them off once they begin to work.

Student aid reforms therefore seek to increase the maximum amount that students both part time and full time may borrow. While it may seem to be a big increase, let us not forget that loan levels had been frozen for the past 10 years. The new loan levels the bill proposes merely reflect the realities of today's costs. These measures will also make grants available to students with special financial needs, including those with disabilities, women in certain doctoral programs and high need, part time students. Deferred grants will also assist borrowers with significantly high debt loads.

New financing arrangements with lenders, revised eligibility criteria, improved need assessment and greater flexibility for new federal-provincial approaches to student aid are part of the reforms being provided in the bill. All these measures are aimed at establishing a fair, consistent and accessible student aid program. The government is confident the reforms will contribute significantly to achieving the overall objectives of the youth employment and learning strategy.

The emphasis of our strategy is toward greater effectiveness, inclusiveness and accountability. A learning system shows its true value if the end results are clear, meaningful and relevant.

The federal government will also contribute to support the efforts of provinces, the private sector and community groups to develop initiatives designed to reduce dropout rates. That is absolutely a critical part of this bill and of our government's program.

Canadian youth must be made aware of the vital importance of education and training in terms of their own futures and be encouraged at every opportunity to develop their skills and abilities to full potential. That is what life long learning is all about.

We must ensure access to learning systems based on excellence and relevance in terms of providing people with the skills needed to be productive and self-sufficient members of our society. We must ensure a smooth transition from school to the workplace.

Many people today are understandably disillusioned if their education and training does not enable them to move into the workforce. It is only natural that students expect their hard work and commitment to yield positive results and it is most discouraging when this does not happen.

In fact, I have students in my riding who have graduated in various areas and are looking for jobs. They are having a tough time and for them it is discouraging. I see that in people when I meet them in my riding. Not only does the individual suffer in this case but the loss in terms of wasted resources and untapped potential hurts the educational system, the labour force and indeed the Canadian economy and society as a whole.

Accordingly, a number of key elements of our youth employment and learning strategy relate to the important goal of providing young Canadians with practical labour market skills and meaningful work experience, like the co-op programs at Mount Saint Vincent University located in Halifax West. These programs are a key element in moving into the workforce.

Our initiatives are aimed at addressing specific problems which prevent Canadians from participating fully in society, including high dropout rates, limited access to post-secondary education and lack of work experience. We are certainly not willing to nor would we need to begin from scratch. There are many positive features of our education and training systems and we intend to build on what has worked well in the past.

It is imperative however that we also consider new approaches to meet today's realities. We are seeking to build solid structures which will help to eliminate problem areas associated with the transition from school to work.

It is important to recognize that our reforms and initiatives relating to youth employment and learning are not meant in any way to offer anyone a free ride or an easy way out. Individuals have a responsibility to take advantage of the opportunities available to them and to apply themselves to the fullest extent possible.

If governments can ensure that world-class education and training systems are in place and that access is maintained through viable student assistance programs, we are confident that Canadians throughout the country will provide the determination, hard work and commitment which are all necessary components for success.

Basically, what all Canadian students are saying is: "Give us a fair chance. Give us the support we need as we pursue learning and training opportunities".

Canadians from all walks of life and from all regions of the country recognize the vital role education plays in their lives. They are willing to make sacrifices and to do what it takes to achieve their learning and employment goals.

Canadians are not expecting guarantees. All they really ask for is access and opportunity. They have the confidence it takes to succeed. We must build upon that confidence by providing all citizens, including those with special or exceptional needs, with a chance to develop and show their talents and abilities.

We cannot expect individuals to contribute to society in a meaningful way if they believe they have received unequal or unfair treatment or have been excluded from opportunities.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Order. I know it is difficult when members share their time, but I regret that the member's time has lapsed. It is time now for questions and comments.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Reform

Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is the third speaker from Nova Scotia to address this issue today.

My question relates to how universities are funded in the various provinces. It is interesting to note that Nova Scotia, perhaps more than any other province, funds students from outside the province. Dalhousie and some of the other universities attract a lot of out of province students. Unfortunately, under established programs financing the funding these universities receive is on a per capita basis, based on the population in the province.

Does the hon. member agree that it makes a lot more sense to give this funding over to the students? They could purchase their education with a voucher. This would ensure that some of these Nova Scotia institutions would get the funding they need to continue to support the high level of students they get not only from their own province but from other provinces as well.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for the question. I am glad to see he is so aware of the situation in Nova Scotia. We do have a large number of universities and it is a concern. With so many universities per capita we are providing so much brain power for Canada from Nova Scotia.

The question of funding of course has been an issue in our province certainly because of the fact that we have a large number of universities producing excellent graduates. With the funding coming per capita it is a problem and a concern.

I have talked with students in my riding of Halifax West who have been very involved in their universities and have been involved in looking for improvements to the student loans program and student financial assistance. They have strong objections to the idea of this voucher system. They do not feel that it is workable.

The first and most important step is to give students the loans and the kind of financial support that will give them real access to university and this bill does that. By substantially increasing student loans for the first time in 10 years this bill finally takes that major, most important big step of moving us toward a situation in which people can actually gain equitable access to universities and post-secondary education. That is the key and it is very important.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Canuel Bloc Matapédia—Matane, QC

Mr. Speaker, helping students is an excellent thing. I have two short questions for the hon. member. First, why not give these amounts directly to provinces, so that they can help students? Second, in regions such as my riding, where there is no CEGEP, college or university, would it not be possible to provide a little bit more financial help to people who live far from these institutions?

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I was not able to hear entirely what the member said as I had a problem with the translation. However I want to point out that I know there has been a lot of-

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

If I can be of assistance, I will beg the indulgence of the House and I will ask the member for Matapédia-Matane-

-to repeat his two questions as concisely as possible, so that the hon. member for Halifax West can understand him and give his reply.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Bloc

René Canuel Bloc Matapédia—Matane, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to oblige. I started by congratulating the hon. member by saying that helping students was an excellent thing. I asked him first if it would not be better to send the money to the provinces, so that they could help students.

Then, I asked if it we could be a little more generous in those regions, particularly in rural areas, where there is no university or college. Indeed, if you live close to Laval, that university is easily accessible from your parents' home, which makes things relatively easy, but it is a different matter if you have to travel 200, 300 or 400 miles.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your indulgence. I thank the hon. member for his question.

Next time I will try to listen more carefully. I tried to listen in French because I wanted to make sure I understood, but I was trying to translate. I apologize for that.

It is an interesting idea that we should transfer this whole responsibility to the province, but I think we have a joint responsibility. People from my part of the country believe very strongly that we need to have a strong education system all across Canada, that we have an interest across this country, whatever province one is in, in having students coming out of post-secondary education who are well educated and have had access to education all across this country. They look to the federal government to be part of that system, to be part of providing and ensuring that access.

To relegate it entirely to the provinces is not what people are asking for in my view. In fact, they are asking for us to be involved and to play a role. For instance some of the provinces lack the financial wherewithal to overcome these problems if they did do it on their own.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:40 p.m.

Reform

Ken Epp Reform Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, I join in this debate with great delight today, since I am one among all members of this House who have received an education.

I remember seeing a bumper sticker which said: "If you can read this, you're too close", but I think a much more poignant bumper sticker reads: "If you can read this, thank a teacher". All of us are beneficiaries of the education system in this country, myself included.

I began my schooling in a very small rural school in Saskatchewan. As a matter of fact I was instrumental in saving the school from being closed. I was the fifth student and that was at the margin where it would have been closed. Later on I had the privilege of being one of the first young men from my community to go to university in Saskatoon. There I jumped into classes of 200 to 250 students which was a remarkable transition from my earlier school years.

I am one who is a very firm believer in education as are all the members of the Reform Party. I think I can say that unequivocally not only for the members of this caucus but also for the members of our party throughout this country.

There was a question asked not long ago in this House by the parliamentary secretary. He asked one of his fellow Liberal members to explain the Reform position on education. Fortunately the Liberal member declined.

During the last campaign various attempts were made at stating what the Reform position was by our opposition parties. If I can say so with great respect, there was a great deal of distortion in the explanation by our opposition.

It should be known that we based our position on consultation with a wide variety and a large base of our constituents, of people in our ridings, on a consensus for what the priorities of spending should be. It is totally clear that this country is in financial trouble. I am going to come back to that a little later in my speech, but we are going into debt at the rate of $1,200 per second. That is how fast we are going into debt. That cannot continue if we are going to keep this country from going down the tube. Consequently the Reform Party has assumed leadership in asking the people of this country what should we do first, what are our priorities?

Contrary to what many people said about us, our own members, Canadians, told us-and we are a party that responded to it-that the very first item to be maintained in terms of spending and keeping it healthy and strong was our health care system. That was the very top item. That was in our platform. We stated it, it was in our documentation, and there was no excuse for there being any misunderstanding on that point.

The second point on which we were unanimous and where we said it was very important for us to be strong and healthy was in the education of our youth. In fact our policy stated-and I challenge any member here to check it out if they want to go back to the documentation from the campaign-that present levels of funding for education should be maintained or even increased, if possible. There will be found in the Reform Party a very strong level of support for education.

All of us know how important it is. I do not think I need to spend a great deal of time speaking about how important education is. Can we imagine living in a society where very few of us could read or write? The majority of us can read and write, but we occasionally hear of this thing called marginal or functional illiteracy.

That is something that we must continue to address but the fact is that in this country every individual is entitled to that starting education. As students proceed through the years, for various reasons they reach a certain level of education and stop their formal education.

I want members of this House to know that I have a lifelong career in education. I chose to become a teacher when I graduated from high school. On the influence of a very effective teacher whom I had in high school, I changed my career choice to one involved with young people.

I was a young person at the time, but he challenged me to become involved. I am still young, yes, half way to 110. I was challenged to work with young people. Frankly, I have enjoyed it. I taught high school for four years. During the first three years of that career, I was the math department in a small rural school with some 150 high school students. I taught all of the maths from grades 9 to 12. It was a delightful experience.

I taught in a very large city high school for one year. For reasons that I will not go into here today, I decided not to stay there. A wonderful opportunity came up. I received the opportunity to work in a technical institute, a post-secondary education institute in Edmonton, the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology.

Prior to this rather abrupt career change that I experienced last October, I worked there continuously for 27 years, teaching and working with young people. I always felt that I was a failure as an instructor if I only taught my students what I knew. I had to go beyond that and teach them how to learn.

My greatest successes were those students who passed me in knowledge and who went on from the technical institute. In some cases they went back to the university and exceeded even what I knew which-I suppose I should be modest here-is not that great.

During that time I encountered a number of students who quit school during the time they were at the institute. They stopped for various reasons. Some realized that after they got into this program of studies it was not the right one. Some left because of home pressure or home difficulties. The most heart wrenching ones were those who stopped because they ran out of money.

I feel very close to this question today. How do we effectively arrange our affairs so that our students can go on in their education to the very apex of what they are capable? Only as we do that will we have a society which benefits from that.

I know that we are all pleased that the majority of us can speak, read and write. Unfortunately in my field of math the academic strengths out there are not that strong. In fact, I have been doing a little ongoing survey. When I tell people that I am a math instructor, I find that about 95 per cent of them right away respond by saying they hated math. I guess there is a flaw in that.

Not many years ago the question of sex education in school came up. When we were discussing whether this should be taught in schools, one of my colleagues indicated: "Why not? If the schools teach it the way they teach math and physics, the children will lose all interest in it".

I need to get back here. We want to train our young people to the very apex of their abilities. Though we like the majority of them to be educated, it is true that we owe our high standard of living to a select few among them. These are the students who go past high school, past their undergraduate degrees. They become our scientists, engineers and researchers and we must do all that we can in order to accommodate them.

In his opening comments today in introducing this bill, the minister said that we need reform. As soon as I heard the word my heart just fluttered with delight. After that he said we need fundamental reform. While I gave an accolade to the government for at least addressing the question and recognizing that in the past number of years our financing and our help for students to carry on with their education had suffered, I looked to see where this real reform was coming from in this proposed bill.

I would like to humbly recommend some changes to this bill. We need to get down to the fundamentals. What I observe in this bill is not a reform, a rethinking, a reinvention or real good creative thinking. What I picked up was "We are going to take what we have done before and just make more of it". Where we used to limit the loans to $2,500, we will now make them $4,000. Where we used to have students under great financial pressure to pay their loans back, we will now make that a little easier for them. I applaud that. Those are very necessary steps if that is the route that we are going to take.

However, there is a marked absence of creative and lateral thinking in actually looking at the solution to this problem. Regardless of which method is chosen to finance education, it costs the taxpayers money. We want to use that money as efficiently as possible. There is no doubt in my mind that dumping money from the taxpayer to the different levels of government and then dumping it back again with these big dump trucks, having no accountability for how it is used, is one of the greatest detrimental features to the effectiveness of our educational system. I certainly think that we should do something a little more creative.

Other speakers in our party talk about the concept of the voucher. It has a great deal of merit. I challenge members opposite to stop and really think about what it does. First, it grabs on to a catchword that we have nowadays, and that is choice. If we were to give individual students a sizeable voucher, one that would cover their total cost of education in whatever university of college or technical institute they choose, they would then have a total choice. Too often their choice of where they go for their schooling is imposed on them by financial restrictions. If we gave them the voucher, they could go to the school where they themselves have determined they can benefit most and therefore return to us the taxpayers the maximum benefit.

I have also thought that we should not have students working when they are studying. Most of the time that is a distraction from their studies. I have thought of this: Why do we not reward them for what they are actually supposed to be doing when they are students? Why do we not give them the opportunity to earn money by being good students? One thing I thought of was why do we not have tuition that is refundable as a percentage of their performance in their classes? Give them a real reward for the effort that they put out.

I was a student way back in the mid-fifties. I realize now in looking back at it that I lived in an ideal world. When I wrote my university exams in spring, if I finished in the morning I was on my job at noon. A week or two before the exams my boss whom I had worked for the year before asked me: "Ken, when can you come to work? I need you". I drove a truck as my summer job. He had some hauling to do and he needed me. It was wonderful.

What is the difference between then and now? I went through school without a loan. I came out of school after five years of university, having been completely self-supporting without any debt. I paid my room and board, my clothing, tuition and books and I had money left over. I made a dollar an hour on my job which was about 50 per cent more than I needed.

What was the difference? There is a remarkable coincidence. If we go back to the mid fifties and sixties-I graduated in 1961-those were the years before our government started cranking us into a huge debt hole. Those were the years when there was consumer confidence. There was business confidence. As a result there were jobs for us during summers and on graduation that were waiting for us.

When I graduated from university, I had a choice of jobs. I cannot help but make the connection that there is some correlation between the level of debts of government and the burden that has placed on all of us and the dampening effect that has on our economy. That is the reason why our young people are now in this bad situation.

I cannot help but think that this government is missing a great opportunity. This government thinks in terms of: "Let's borrow more and spend more and thereby get out of our problems".

I am very disappointed with this bill which among other things provides a mechanism to allow students to graduate from university or college with a maximum debt load. I wish we could stop thinking about borrowing and debt and start being creative so that students can earn their way as they go and come out without a debt as we did away back then. We would really have a strong economy as a result.

I believe that my time is almost up. I conclude by saying that there are some areas in this bill which I think we really ought to look at. I am not sure that we are wise in choosing to target certain groups for special consideration. I really do not believe that we should be saying that you are special if you are of a certain gender.

When I fly in an aeroplane, drive in a car or go over a bridge I really do not care about the gender of that engineer, but I do care a lot about the competence of that person who designed and built the structure to which I am entrusting my life.

I think it is myopic at this stage in our society to keep dividing people into this category, that category and that one. We ought to begin treating all of our students equally regardless of gender or race or ethnic background or what language they speak. Let us treat them equally. Let us give them a voucher. Let us give them freedom of choice. Let us give them the maximum opportunity to go out there and do the very best they can with their lives.

I really encourage this government. I think it is on to something here. It is starting and at least facing the question. I sincerely wish that it would step back and try to be more creative.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Julian Reed Liberal Halton—Peel, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. friend from the Reform Party. I commend him for his dedication to education and recognize his long career as an educator. Certainly he has some very positive things to say to government about education.

I was so encouraged by much of the hon. member's speech that I expect he will be supporting this bill when it goes through. I certainly hope he will do that.

I would make a suggestion to the hon.member, and I speak from experience also, being someone who worked his way through college without student loans and so on. I recall those days in our situation just breaking even with what one could earn the summer and what it would cost in the winter. In thinking back on that education system we had in the late 1950s, our course was very heavily subsidized by government. Therefore our tuition was relatively low by today's standard. We lived in residence and our board was relatively low by today's standards. I suggest that all the costs cannot be laid on the shoulders of the national debt. It seems to me there was a different approach toward education at that time. In my case, which was agricultural college, agriculture was considered enough of a priority so most of the costs of those courses were paid for by government.

I would like to respectfully ask the hon. member if he will support this bill and in so doing be able to contribute to the education of our young people across Canada. Perhaps he could bring these new ideas and suggestions to our government.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4 p.m.

Reform

Ken Epp Reform Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member. I respectfully differ with him in terms of government involvement in our education vis-à-vis what it is now.

If I am not mistaken, I believe the involvement of the government directly in education then was about in the same proportion as it is now. Somewhere between one-half and one-third of the costs were borne by the students through tuition and the other part was subsidized. It depended again on what kind of study was pursued. If you went to medical school or some of the highly technical oriented places where the lab and shop equipment was very expensive then of course the government involvement was higher.

However I do not quibble with that. As a taxpayer and as a citizen I think we are very, very wise to invest in education. That is one of the things government should be doing. It is not something that should be left to go by itself. The government has a legitimate role to play. However in the actual practice of it, to introduce a degree of competition by vouchers, to introduce a degree of accountability by that I think can only improve our educational system.

The member asked whether I would be supporting this bill. If the choice is between the status quo and what this bill provides as an improvement, I think I will have to support it because it is an improvement. It is better than what we have, but it is not going far enough and it is going in the wrong direction.

I still have to study the bill some more to see the details. Hopefully the committee will come up with some good amendments. Maybe we will be able to introduce more elements into it which will reward those who are diligent, who work and come out the other end without the debts instead of penalizing them at the expense of those who incur a debt.

One of the features of this bill is that if you happen to run up a really huge debt you can get part of it forgiven. However if you are astute and you live on potatoes and rice because there are those times when you have to be really frugal-as some of us did, and you can see I had my share-the fact is the frugal individual is the one who forgoes the benefits. In a way he is penalized.

In education, as in all areas of life, we need to reward the actions and activities we want. We should somehow be punishing those we do not want, instead of vice versa.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4 p.m.

Liberal

Reg Alcock Liberal Winnipeg South, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is with some pleasure that I join in this debate today.

I am the member for Winnipeg South and the University of Manitoba is in my riding. I was post-secondary education critic for our party when I served in the Manitoba legislature. I have taken a great interest in the situation as it affects students in my province at the university in my area and certainly in all of this country.

I am one of those, and I expect it is shared by most members in this House, who believes that education is a public good. I note a member opposite who serves with me on the human resources committee. We listened to submissions on employability on that committee.

One of the things which was noted very quickly is that the job creation rate for people with a university education, college training, or a profession is something in excess of 10 per cent a year. However, the job creation rate for those without post-secondary education, for those with less than high school education, is minus some 17 per cent and declining. It is a very, very serious situation.

We all benefit, all of us. Not just the person being trained but all of us who live in this country benefit by having a populace that is well educated, well trained, productive, et cetera.

The question is what do we do in support and in pursuit of that public policy? That is what this bill is attempting lay out a framework for. It does not answer all of the questions but it does make some very innovative changes to the current legislation which provide for some fairly major improvements in the way we as a community support those people who are able to achieve a standing at a university or college.

I want to deal briefly with one piece of information which was mentioned just before I stood up to speak. That is the question of the level of support which is currently provided for students versus what was provided.

While there is some variation between smaller colleges and universities and the more major institutions, students do not pay one-third to one-half of their education. At large universities they paid 15 or 16 per cent. This has slowly ratcheted up over the last few years as a result of, I believe it was the Smith commission report which looked at the share that students should pay.

At the University of Manitoba it is around 19 per cent right now that the student revenue is comprised of total expenditures at the school. There is a covert, if not an overt, policy in place to bring that up to 25 per cent, which I think was the level recommended by Dr. Smith, believing that gave students more power and a little more clout in their negotiations with universities.

The dilemma is that despite the fact we give lip service and stand up to make statements about the importance of education and we examine the value of an education and understand this is something which is a major improvement to life in our communities, as a country we have not provided very significant support to students, particularly in this last eight years.

One of the things we did right away in 1984 as a country-it was done by the former government, but it was done in this Chamber-was we froze the amount of money a student could borrow or could claim for cost of living. From 1984 until this year the amount of money they could claim for food and housing was frozen. That put students in a very difficult position. The cost of living did not stop going up. People still had to pay for their apartments and their meals.

What we did part way through the last eight years is we changed the regulations relative to work. I think the previous government felt what should be done was to allow them to work more part time but still consider them full time students. By doing this it would somehow allow them to shoulder more of the costs and therefore pay for their own education and not be a drag on the public purse.

Unfortunately that put students under enormous pressure. People began working at those part time jobs. They had to in order to pay for their living accommodations and to feed themselves. As someone who has had the proverbial potatoes and rice also, I can assure you students are not eating a whole lot better now. It forced them to take time away from their studies. It took time away from the pursuit of excellence in their education. It put them in the position of having to work continually to sustain themselves and at the same time trying to get that education.

You could get by if you were a student from a family that was intact and you could live at home, or your family lived close to a university and you could live at home and commute. If your family lived in the rural area or in the northern parts of the province and you had to live in residence, or you were a student who for any one of a number of reasons came from a home that was either too impoverished or too disparate to offer any support, you were in a very difficult financial situation.

Almost from the time the government changed the regulations we saw a very gradual but significant increase statistically in the number of part time students at universities and a decrease in the number of full time students. That was even factoring out the influx of older students who pick up the odd course.

That was because students found they could not do both things. They could not go to university full time and work what they had to in order to sustain themselves. All of a sudden three year degrees were taking four or four and a half years. Those students who, had they been able to concentrate and work full time on their studies, would have come out with degrees and excellent averages in good preparation for graduate school were unable to do that because they were forced to spend so much time just sustaining themselves.

What did the government do just prior to the last election? It announced an increase in student loan limits. Looking at that increase and at the regulations which support that increase, the government also changed the identification of what were personal contributions. This was done to the point whereby even though it was seen that more money could be borrowed, it did nothing to alter the underlying ability to assign greater cost to the cost of living.

The government changed the regulations. Instead of basing accommodation on two people sharing an apartment, it based it on three people sharing an apartment. It took things out of the basket of goods students were deemed to need in order to survive at university. The result was that students were put under more and not less financial pressure.

There is another element to the provision of student aid which needs to be talked about because we are the federal government and we deliver these services for the most part through a relationship with provincial governments.

What was happening in my province was that the federal government was providing about $3,500 in total support. If a student required more support than that, another $3,500 could be obtained from the provincial government. A very small number of special needs students could access another chunk of money through the provincial government.

One of the concerns we had was that when one was tied to that provincial assessment and delivery of support, as the federal government increased its ability or willingness to subsidize the interest on certain loans, the provincial government rather than also increasing its support would simply decrease its involvement.

I am sorry to report to this Chamber but that is exactly what has happened in my province. I do not know what has occurred in some of the other provinces, but in the province of Manitoba as the federal government has moved to increase the loan limit, the provincial government has withdrawn certain support.

All we have done in one aspect of this program is to transfer an expense on to the back of the federal government. That has to open the door for a discussion about the federal role in funding, the federal involvement with provincial agencies in the assessment and delivery of support. Perhaps we need to look at some new vehicles for delivering support to students. I think you will find that the possibility of that is contained within this bill.

My concern since I first began to work with this is that over the last eight years we were successively constraining the support given to universities through established programs financing. We were holding back on the support that we in pursuit of a public policy took on to the public purse to the point where in some cases the annual increases universities were getting were in the negative numbers.

That certainly happened in Manitoba and in some other provinces. Even when they were getting positive increases they were increases of a point, a point and a half, or two points versus the total cost of living, inflation, et cetera which was at the three or four point range back in the late 1980s.

This caused the universities to look to that 18 or 19 per cent of revenue coming from students in order to make up for the shortfalls in their revenues. We were seeing student fee increases of 15 and 20 per cent year over year. Student fees at the University of Manitoba increased over 100 per cent during the last eight years.

In our pursuit of that policy we were taking something that had been deemed to be a public good, that had been funded by the community, by the government in pursuit of a well-educated, productive population, and we were transferring responsibility of that from the government on to students. It has created some very difficult situations.

We gave the students no options on the repayment. We gave them no way out of the hole that we were forcing them to dig for themselves.

I have been given the high sign by the Speaker so I will draw this to a close now and perhaps I can go a little further in response to a question.

I support the bill because it does many things. It enables us to provide some repayment options for students, it opens the door to link good performance to some opportunities in community service, it allows people to deal with their debt management, it provides more badly needed support to students, and it allows us to assess a reasonable level for the cost of living that is also regionally sensitive. These are very profound and long overdue changes which I hope we will pass quickly and get into play.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Bloc

Antoine Dubé Bloc Lévis, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. member how concerned he is about the indebtedness of Canadian students. As you know, on average, and I quote from Quebec figures, students owe $8,500, but for those who graduate, the debt level sometimes reaches up to $16,000 or $18,000. The member talked about the tuition fees which have tripled since 1984. Somehow, it seems like the load was transferred after the subsidies for post-secondary education were frozen. That led to an increase in tuition fees.

Also, I think the increase in the debt level should be a concern for all of us. How far are we ready to go? In this bill, when we talk about financial assistance, we are mostly talking about loans, and not necessarily about grants, so that also contributes to the debt level. With the public debt in Canada standing at $17,000 per capita, we are asking our students to further increase their debt level. Add to that the rather shaky employment situation, and you have 16 per cent of Quebecers going

bankrupt, including students unable to pay back their loans. Students account for 10 per cent of personal bankruptcies in Canada.

I would like to ask the hon. member if he is concerned about the alarming debt situation our young students are in.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Reg Alcock Liberal Winnipeg South, MB

I thank the member for Lévis for the question. We serve together on the human resources committee and I have found his interventions to be always thoughtful.

It is a difficult problem. The member puts his finger exactly on the problem that has confronted students up to this point. We say it is a loan but there is an element of grant here because we pay the interest on those loans for the three, four, five years, up until the time that people begin repayment, and then we pay a subsidy up to a certain amount.

At the same time we know that if we allow people to successfully complete their education, the economy is still performing relatively well for people at that end of the scale. The question is that until this bill we have not allowed them any options, any opportunities to repay. If they get stuck, if they cannot find a job, we have not provided for them or given ourselves the opportunity to provide any way in which they can repay their loan. This bill begins to speak to that. It begins to offer some opportunities, whether it becomes income contingent repayment or some form of community service as an alternative to work.

We know that if you graduate university right now, job creation for university students, depending on the region of the country, is somewhere between 11 and 17 per cent. That is pretty healthy. It provides a lot of options, a lot of opportunities for work, a lot of options for people to access employment and repay these loans.

The bigger question is, are we allowing people to have an adequate educational experience or are we just simply putting them into a no-win situation in which they perform poorly because they have to work so hard to get by day to day that they are less competitive in the marketplace when they get out?

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take the opportunity to voice my support for Bill C-28, the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act. Indeed this is a necessary pillar to ensure quality in higher education in Canada.

Financial assistance to Canada's students is in a very real sense an investment and there are few investments in the country which can be expected to yield as great a dividend as an investment in the human potential.

In many respects the intellect, diligence and perseverance of young Canadians is our biggest asset as a nation, our most precious natural resource. Imagine nearly 1.5 million students, both full time and part time, trying to reflect the future of our country. Indeed, the youth and students of today, though they only represent a portion of our total population, represent 100 per cent of our future. The government is committed to making certain that the rich vein of talent which courses through our youth does not go untapped.

As is the case with other natural resources that are mined the key raw elements of youth, namely creative and artistic minds, idealistic and visionary hearts, and adaptable hands are most useful when refined through education and training.

Bill C-28 is just one important facet of a comprehensive youth employment and learning strategy. It is designed to break the traditional dependency of a young person's educational opportunities on his or her financial capabilities. The bill provides increased financial assistance for students whose pockets may not be as deep as their commitment and potential to achieve.

Generally speaking, the bill has two principal features. First, it provides for agreement between governments and lenders in so far as loans to students are concerned. Second, it allows greater flexibility where the student loan program is concerned respecting eligibility, the total amount to be granted in terms of loans and grants and as well in terms of repayment of these loans.

The bill provides for a new risk sharing agreement with lenders which will see them assume liability for loan repayment to a greater degree.

Bill C-28 also contains measures aimed at simplifying the joint federal-provincial administration of the student loan programs by way of agreement, not by coercion, and thereby diminish the cost of administration of the program and saves that money for actual loans and assistance to students.

The second major component of the bill is flexibility. Under the bill there is greater flexibility with regard to both the type and maximum dollar amount of loans available to students. As well the provinces have the option of opting out of the current program and receiving an alternative form of federal payment thereby respecting provincial jurisdiction and taking into account provincial and regional interests.

Also pilot programs may be established to determine whether repayment plans can be structured on an income contingent basis, taking into account a student's total debt load as well as the student's earning capacity at any given time.

In addition, the new allocation formula provided for in the bill means middle class students may find it easier to qualify for loans than they do under the current guidelines.

As well Bill C-28 portends great things for part time students who will have greater access to funds, both loans and grants, than ever before. The new flexibility will also address segments of our society, including women pursuing advance degrees, and the disabled who have been under represented in certain areas of higher education.

Some members of the House have taken issue with this provision, saying that such a provision will create a division in the country. I submit that the government wants these women as well as the disabled to have an equal opportunity to pursue the higher levels of education. Contrary to what others say, we are only trying to make the playing field level for them as well, and where in the past, history has made a mistake, to correct the past mistakes of history.

It is important to note that these general improvements will translate into very specific and measurable benefits for students. First and foremost, loan limits will be increased by 57 per cent, thus the full time loan limit increases from $105 to $165 weekly.

Students with permanent disabilities may qualify for grants of up to $3,000 annually to help cover transportation, interpretation and other technical courses necessary as a consequence of their disabilities.

A special opportunities grant would be made available to women pursuing doctoral degrees in fields where they are currently underrepresented and part time students will have the ability to apply for loans whose maximum will be raised from $2,500 to $4,000 annually. A $1,200 grant will also be available to part time students who are able to demonstrate other exigency needs. Different grants would alleviate the heavy burdens which rest with so-called high need borrowers.

These sorts of provisions are intended to respond to the demands the government has heard from students nation wide. These measures are the best indication yet that the government is not simply talking about tending to the needs of our youth but is in fact acting quickly and with an eye toward sweeping future improvements.

The young scholars of today are the women and men who must have the tools to lead Canada into the 21st century with research, innovation and determination. It is they who will need to lay the cornerstone of the much talked about information superhighway. It is they who will need to provide the brain power necessary to realize innovations which will make life more productive, more enriching and more fulfilling for all of us, for all Canadians.

To accomplish these formidable goals they will require the kind of exhaustive training and educational background which is most often furnished by Canada's many excellent colleges, universities and vocational schools.

It is for this reason that the government will not force young Canadians to make tremendous debilitating financial sacrifices in order to further their education. The government is acting in partnership with the leaders of tomorrow, effectively extending its right hand to them in a gesture of co-operation and respect and in recognition of their needs and potential to contribute to our Canadian society.

In this way we are today striking a bargain which will ultimately benefit tomorrow's Canada, for our youth of today will be prepared to compete in the global economy and as well to contribute to our national economy and our social cohesion.

They who represent 100 per cent of our future as a nation shall secure the future for us as today we grant them the necessary tools to enable them to secure their national dream.

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Reform

Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, several people have commented today it is a shame that students should be going so far in debt while they are pursuing a university education. However I point out that when they go into debt they are the ones who are getting the education. They will be the ones earning the income and therefore they should be responsible for paying it back.

I put to the hon. member who has just spoken that contrarily the part of the bill that would allow for outright grants to go to members of society in essence forces people like me and people working at fast food restaurants or driving cabs to pay through taxes for the university education of people who quite conceivably could have extremely good careers, make a tremendous amount of money, but never have to pay for a big part of their education.

Would the hon. member comment on the fairness of that type of system?

Canada Student Financial Assistance ActGovernment Orders

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to comment on the fairness of the provision.

The fairness of this provision can only be understood if we look at our students as not only working for themselves, for their personal aggrandisement or for their selfish interest in the future. If our thesis is that the students of today would only earn for themselves and for nobody else, not for society, of course society would have no obligation to them.

The students of today, I should remind the hon. member, do not only work for themselves. Their success is the success of our nation. Upon them the future of the country depends. To say they will have the education, the income and therefore should pay for themselves alone is to forget that the students of today will be the ones contributing to our national economy in the future.

They will be the ones contributing to the social cohesion of our country.

To forget those very important principles is to overlook the very essence of education itself. I therefore submit that when the hon. member reflects on these principles he will come quickly to the conclusion that there is no merit to the question he posed.