Tony Ianno

[Research And Development, May 11th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I bring to the attention of the House two research achievements developed in my riding and in the riding of Rosedale at the University of Toronto.

The first involves a computer interface design called EID by industrial engineering Professor Kim Vicente. This innovation could lead to improved safety and reduced human error in the running of nuclear power plants of the future.

The second involves work done by a team at Mount Sinai Hospital headed by Dr. Joseph Fisher. They have discovered that the main airway, the trachea, can constrict and dilate significantly during breathing, a discovery that could help in the understanding of asthma.

I congratulate these individuals for their work. These examples continue to prove our investment in research and development produces tangible results.

As we mentioned in the red book, a technologically centred industrial policy is the key to create a new economy and accelerate growth, thus creating badly needed long term and permanent jobs.

[Supply, March 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it was very interesting to listen to the hon. member and her approach to the government's budget.

Independence is very important to women and to all Canadians. The budget is taking a first step toward encouraging more independence. Child care is an important aspect of that. It is not just a lifestyle, as the hon. member has indicated, but a need to allow single women especially to get back into the workforce, which gives them and their families dignity. They can then act as role models for their children and contribute in a very meaningful way to Canadian society. Their children will have the independence to do the things they want to do.

One aspect of the budget of the Minister of Finance concerned small business. We should take into account the statistics the

hon. member has stated regarding the increase of women entrepreneurs in the system. That should be commended because it will spur the country to become self-sufficient and reduce the overall debt. We should take into account the one way in which small business people can get money to improve and enhance their business opportunities is through the source of capital from banks.

As the minister stated, through the budget the banks have to be encouraged to sit down with government to find ways to lend more money to small businesses. Considering that small businesses run by women are becoming more and more a factor, it is in the right direction to give them the tools they need to help our economy get stronger.

We should take into account the benchmark to which the minister was alluding. We should take into account that some banks are lending small businesses less than one-third of all their corporate loans. One recommendation I put forward was that the government should encourage banks to lend to small businesses at least one-third of the amount lent to all corporate donors. Then we would find an increase in loans to small businesses from $33 billion to $49 billion, or a 50 per cent increase. That would encourage many small businesses to expand and give women more tools to do much better.

Would the hon. member agree that would be a good step by the Minister of Finance?

[Petitions, March 15th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of some of my constituents of Trinity-Spadina.

The petitioners call on the Government of Canada to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act so as to protect individuals from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

On behalf of my constituents, I humbly submit these petitions.

[Petitions, February 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I also rise today for members of my constituency of Trinity-Spadina who call on the government to enact legislation of a national policy on child care that is unifying and provides non-discretionary, equitable and sufficient service to all residents of Canada.

On behalf of my constituents, I humbly submit this petition.

[Petitions, February 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to present several petitions. Several members of my constituency of Trinity-Spadina call upon the Government of Canada to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act so as to give statutory recognition of homosexual relationships and to enshrine their equality before the law with that of heterosexual relationships.

On behalf of my constituents, I humbly submit these petitions.

[Department Of Canadian Heritage Act, December 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to voice my concern and to basically state that I do not believe this motion should be adopted.

The main reason is, as we have discussed in committee, that the Multiculturalism Act is really a Canadian reality. What we are dealing with here is an opportunity for us as an institution, as a government to ensure that Canadians and those coming from abroad continue to understand the differences that make up this country.

I think multiculturalism helps on the basis of trying to reduce the barriers that exist between us. There are many aspects to multiculturalism that are a new reality in the global sense. That is from an entrepreneurial perspective and business opportunities. I think that when we take into account that the world is becoming smaller with satellites and telecommunications, faxes et cetera, there is an opportunity to encourage our businesses to do more trade which is the fundamental aspect of growth that we in this country are looking forward to.

This act and the Minister of Heritage will continue to increase the understanding of our realism, the Canadian identity as it exists today. We also have to continue to strengthen the cohesion that exists in this country and reduce the lack of understanding that sometimes exists in different regions.

If we take into account the rich human resources and the opportunities that exist for increasing that trade, we will see more Canadians working and we will reduce our deficit problems as the member across stated.

I also believe that multiculturalism policy is an eloquent testimony to our commitment to uphold the values of equity and fairness. It is a visionary statement about the kind of society we are all working to achieve, one in which each Canadian can realize his or her potential, economically, socially, politically and culturally. Multiculturalism is appropriately part of the department of heritage because it is a fundamental characteristic of our Canadian identity.

Therefore I believe the motion should not be adopted.

[Ecodek, December 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday saw the opening of EcoDek, a brand new environmental tourist attraction at Toronto's CN Tower.

EcoDek is a state of the art, cost effective exhibit that promotes the principles of environmental learning and citizenship. Through this high tech, innovative, interactive and entertaining exhibit, EcoDek has the potential to reach 1.5 million visitors who annually go to the CN Tower.

EcoDek's ability to raise public awareness of and encourage involvement in environmental issues goes beyond the actual attraction. It includes an educational package that has been developed to help teachers maximize the educational value of field trips to EcoDek before, during and after classes.

To this end I am happy to report that over 600 schools from many parts of Ontario and the Great Lakes states have already booked visits to Toronto beginning in January.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister of the Environment, the CN Tower and its many partners for advancing environmental awareness in a manner that is commensurate with the city of Toronto as a world class destination for foreign travellers.

[Canada Development Insurance Corporation, November 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions.

In a report released on Tuesday the Senate banking committee recommended that the $60,000 guaranteed deposit by the CDIC be reduced from 100 per cent coverage guaranteed to a lower level where depositors, that is Canadians, would assume more risk and the banks less.

Can the Secretary of State tell us if the government is prepared to implement these changes and why?

[Supply, November 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, first it is our intention to introduce what our commitment was in the red book, as we have done with many of the commitments we have stated in the red book and have fulfilled.

There is a slight concern now. That is we want Canadians to get back to work. That is much more important than worrying in three or four years time about who is thinking about running for this Parliament. Our ultimate responsibility is to make sure that Canadians participate in the economic viability of this nation.

Working with small businesses and many of the issues we are dealing with to try to get the economy back in gear is very much more important than this aspect the member addresses.

[Supply, November 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to speak on the motion before us. I am delighted because this is an important issue, an issue which the government has pledged to resolve.

The motion talks about replacing the existing MPs' pension plan with a pension plan that reflects the commitments made in the document entitled "Creating Opportunity, the Liberal Plan for Canada".

I am glad the motion recognizes the significant contribution that the red book is making to the debate on MPs' pensions. The red book has helped to focus public attention on the changes required such as double dipping and, one step further, the need of a minimum age requirement.

It is on double dipping that I wish to speak today. As we know, double dipping means simultaneously drawing a salary from the federal government and a pension as a former member of Parliament. It is a practice that many of us have problems with.

Let me remind hon. members of the red book statement on double dipping. We said that a Liberal government will reform the pension plan of members of Parliament to end this double dipping. MPs should not be able to leave office and receive a pension from the federal government if they accept a new, full-time, paying job from the federal government. Nothing could be clearer than that.

This commitment has been repeated by the government since the last election. We will end double dipping. Former MPs will no longer be able to receive a pension and a salary from the federal government at the same time.

Before I go further let me say that I do not wish to cast any aspersions on former members of Parliament who were entitled under the existing act to receive both a pension and a federal salary. There are many former MPs who have served this country well and who continue to do good work in other federal positions. It is clear that the drawing of a pension and a salary at the same time from the public purse is unacceptable though. It is time that these rules are changed.

In the mid-1970s pensions were viewed increasingly as an earned right. Some people viewed pensions as deferred compensation. In their view reducing or suspending pensions on gaining another job was similar to retroactively cutting a pensioner's salary.

In 1975 the government decided that the fairest approach would be to allow federal pensioners to draw pensions and salary unless they again came under the same pension plan. Today this government believes that double dipping must go.

The act which this opposition motion attempts to address is of course the Members of Parliament Retirement Allowances Act. However, the optimum word is retiring. The act was not intended to supplement working former parliamentarians but to provide a retiring allowance for them.

Many Canadians are expressing dissatisfaction with their politicians' pensions and double dipping is contributing to this negative image. We must continue changing the attitudes Canadians have toward their members of Parliament. Turning it around will require time and firm decisions. One of those decisions must be to end this double dipping.

Personally I am not sure that pension changes will single-handedly turn around this perception but I am convinced that removing the right to double dip will help.

I recognize that double dipping is a term that can be applied in different ways. There are several types of double dipping: governor in council appointments where the salary is met by statute; governor in council appointments where the salary scale is discretionary; appointments to the public service under the Public Service Employment Act; serving as a member of the RCMP or the Canadian forces; or by acting as an independent contractor to the federal government. Therefore, dealing with the double dipping question is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

Some members opposite speak of the need for urgency to end double dipping. There is somewhat of an urgency but not as much as some members would like to think as of today. Members will not quit tomorrow to get their pensions. Many of them work hard and serve their constituents. They continue to do so and will continue to do so.

There are some members opposite who do not feel the urgency. One is already collecting a federal public service pension and another is collecting a provincial pension as well as their federal salaries. These members have said they earned their pensions and will not give them up. Could not the Governor General make the same argument?

One of the aims of this government since its election has been the responsible reform of the MPs pension plan. I am sure that hon. members opposite share with us the desire to see that the job of pension reform is done well and not in a haphazard manner. We will not cut the pension plan in order to appease certain interest groups. We must be thorough and fair in what we do.

The political representatives in this Chamber serve Canadians well, as I said earlier, but there is a widespread perception that politicians want to feather their nests. That view is wrong. Yet it will remain as long as we fail to deal with the irritants such as this double dipping.

Politics is a noble calling, referred to earlier by the member opposite, and reflects members' wishes to serve the people of Canada and give something of themselves to their communities.

I reject the claim that most politicians are in politics for the money. No one comes to this place for the sake of money. It does not pay. Many members of Parliament were doing better financially in other careers before they entered politics. They were making contributions to their pension plans and RRSPs which reflected their financial positions.

We must ensure that entering Canadian politics is not a financial drain and that no one is unduly penalized. This place must be accessible to all, not only the rich. It must reflect all aspects of Canadian society. The sacrifices are not only monetary. All members can attest to the time away from their families. One member opposite said: "Of any criticism I ever made of a politician I am now biting my tongue, having lived the life for a year. It is quite demanding."

Although the sacrifices are real they are not an excuse for double dipping. The pension and the salary come from the same taxpayer who has a single pocket. That is why I consider the government's commitment to end double dipping as a very positive signal to the country. It is a sign that this government is listening to Canadians and acting on what it believes in. It gives me hope that Canadian political life will gain in stature in the eyes of the people.

Again, Mr. Speaker, it pleases me that this motion was put forward today. I am pleased that the movers of this motion saw the importance of the red book position, particularly the statement on double dipping. I look forward to their support when the government introduces legislation in the near future.