Lloyd St. Amand

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, November 22nd, 2006]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-383, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Brant.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to introduce this bill to change the name of the riding of Brant to Brantford--Brant--Six Nations. I have spoken to many constituents in my riding who feel that this name change will better represent the composition of my riding.

I would like, in particular, to recognize the city of Brantford which is approaching 90,000 now in population and is the 38th largest city in Canada, as well as Six Nations of the Grand River which is the most populated first nations community in Canada.

I am honoured to table the bill with the support of my colleague, the hon. member for Churchill. I hope I will ultimately have the support of each member with respect to this bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Anna Mae Simington, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Anna Mae Simington, who passed away on October 19 of this year. Anna Mae was passionate about establishing new programs and generating public awareness about drinking and driving.

Lawrie Palk, who volunteered with Anna Mae on the Brant/Brantford impaired driving committee, echoed the thoughts of many who knew her, saying, “She inspired countless numbers of people to the cause. Because of her work, a number of laws have been changed and things are a great deal better”.

Anna Mae was also a trailblazer in the area of victim services and helped establish victim crisis assistance services in my community and across the province. She was the president of the board of directors for Victim Services of Brant, a position she held since 1990.

Anna Mae was the beloved wife of Skinny Simington, mother of Kathy and Jennifer, and grandmother of two grandchildren. She will be missed by many and has left a tremendous legacy.

[Criminal Code, November 3rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the speech of the member opposite. He surely knows, and members of his party know, that the Conservative Party by no means has a monopoly on the desire to make Canada's streets and communities as safe as possible. There is no monopoly on that side of the House.

On this side of the House, as the Liberal Party, we feel very strongly that streets have to be as safe as possible. That is why 13 years of Liberal government have resulted in Canada still being recognized as one of the safest countries in the world.

Because often members opposite will talk about certain examples, I would like to ask the member directly, with respect to auto theft, for instance, if an 18 year old, hypothetically of course, succumbs to peer pressure and joins with two or three buddies, perhaps to some extent under the influence of alcohol, and they decide in concert to steal an automobile for an evening, should that 18 year old automatically go to jail, as is proposed by the member? That seems to me a rather unimaginative solution to a problem.

I would like to ask the hon. member to comment on that specific hypothetical.

[Aboriginal Affairs, November 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, local residents are demanding action from the federal government and from their own member of Parliament. Despite calls from the area and the fact that the Minister of Indian Affairs hired Barbara McDougall, a former Conservative cabinet minister with no land claims experience, to handle the issue, the Conservatives pretend they should not deal with the issue.

Why does Caledonia's own member of Parliament, the member for Haldimand—Norfolk, refuse to take any action to help in the situation, despite the fact that she is the region's representative at the cabinet table?

[Aboriginal Affairs, November 1st, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's Constitution makes it perfectly clear that land claims issues are the sole responsibility of the federal government. For the last eight months, the Minister of Indian Affairs has been missing in action on the Caledonia dispute. The situation remains very tense in Caledonia. It is costly. It has been going on for far too long.

The minister committed to speeding up the land claims issue if the blockades came down. The blockades came down months ago. Why is the minister not living up to his commitment?

[Tobacco Industry, October 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture.

The government made an extensive list of promises to tobacco farmers, yet today there is still no strategy, no timeline and certainly no money for these farmers. How can tobacco producers in my area plan for the future without a concrete timeline from the federal government? When will tobacco growers know what their future holds?

In short, when will the government keep its promises to tobacco farmers?

[Older Adult Justice Act, October 23rd, 2006]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-360, An Act to establish the Office of the Ombudsman for Older Adult Justice and the Canadian Older Adult Justice Agency and to amend the Criminal Code.

Mr. Speaker, the bill is intended to protect Canada's older or oldest citizens from physical, psychological and financial harm.

The bill would establish the office of the ombudsman for older adult justice as well as the Canadian older adult justice agency. As indicated, it would also amend the Criminal Code.

The office of the ombudsman would promote the protection of seniors' rights, investigate complaints and refer certain matters to the Minister of Justice.

The older adult justice agency would provide resources, protecting seniors, including information on preventing and detecting abuse, and the treatment of seniors' abuse, neglect and exploitation.

It is my view that the bill is long overdue. It will, if adopted, increase the awareness among all Canadians that elder abuse is a significant problem that impacts the life of many older adults across Canada.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the speech of the member opposite. What I hear from my constituents is that by and large the government has figured out the price or the cost of things not badly, although it yet has work to do on that. However, when it comes to the actual value of services and programs, my constituents are telling me the government is falling very short.

What about the cuts to museums? How is it possible to put a price or a cost on preserving Canada's rich history? The government seems intent on putting a price only on our museums with no regard whatsoever for the value of those museums.

Could the member comment on that?

[Committees of the House, October 17th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member touched on a variety of issues in his interesting speech. He talked about the court challenges program, the Supreme Court of Canada and the seeming reintroduction by the government of a bill to re-establish or restore the traditional definition of marriage.

As I understand the law on that point, every legal expert in the country, without exception, has said that if the government were to introduce and ultimately pass a bill restoring the so-called traditional definition of marriage, that such a law would be ruled unconstitutional and contrary to the charter by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Is the hon. member's understanding the same or has an expert actually now come out in support of what the Prime Minister, seemingly, is intent on doing.

[Leading Hands of Canada, October 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I recently met with JoAnne Durham and Ron McBride, two individuals involved in Leading Hands of Canada, an organization designed to break down barriers between employers and employees with hearing loss.

In Ontario alone there are at least 85,000 persons with hearing loss. The need to provide training and support programs for such individuals as well as their employers is enormous. Often employers will look the other way from a potential employee with hearing loss because of various misapprehensions about the suitability of persons with hearing loss to maintain gainful employment, a lack of tax incentives for employers, and other factors.

With $17.7 million recently axed from literacy programs, there is a pressing need for the government to take a leadership role in providing educational and training opportunities for those who are without the tools to function at home, in the community and in the workplace.

The right to be treated equally has been sacrificed at the altar of those who can only think in terms of money, those who know the cost and price of everything, but the value of nothing.

I call on the government to reinstate funding for literacy programs--