Bev Desjarlais

[Budget Implementation Act, 2005, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, with the make-up of the number of provinces and territories in Canada, there is no question that we often have jurisdictional disputes. I deal with them every day. There are always jurisdictional disputes with provincial, municipal and first nation governments. We have to respect the jurisdictions of the provinces.

When I say what is best for Canadians, I also include Quebec among Canadians. I know there are some who do not want to see that happen, but I always have acknowledged Quebeckers as Canadians in the same way I have acknowledged people from Saskatchewan as Canadians, or people from Alberta as Canadians and others. We are all part of one great country and we need to respect that as well.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2005, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the ultimate answer is more New Democrat members in the House. We have an opposition, the Conservatives and the Bloc, that has huge numbers.

I want to point out that the Conservatives supported the first budget, which did not have near what is in there now. Therefore, I find it hard to be critical of the NDP now getting something better for Canadians, and that we should feel bad about that. It is not perfect, but it is better.

As I indicated, we are very disappointed that we could not get movement on the EI fund and have those dollars spent where they should be spent. It is not a matter of continually lowering premiums. We need to see an improvement in benefits which were cut year after year, again with the support of the Conservatives.

There had been numerous program cuts. Those program cuts happened at a time when there was an increase of Conservative members and less New Democrats. We have a minority government. Right now we have a situation that is better for Canadians and we will do whatever we can in the House, even if we are limited in numbers, to do what is best for Canadians.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2005, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in the debate on Bill C-43. I want to comment on a couple of areas that have come up in the debate and I hope not to bore anyone by being repetitious.

My colleague from Mississauga South praised the government on its support for education and for keeping tuition rates down. He indicated that this was a great move by the government. I want to remind him that the only thing that was in the initial bill with respect to support for students was that if they happened to die, they would not have to pay. That was all. That can be found on pages 89 and 90 of Bill C-43.

The New Democratic Party told the Liberal government that was not good enough. Students across the country need to know they can afford their education. The government needs to provide some support to the provinces and to the universities and colleges to help keep tuition rates down so students can afford to go to school. Education is crucially important.

The NDP moved to get the Liberals to change some of the budget to reflect the different process, and that is what the Conservatives are criticizing. The Conservatives are criticizing the NDP for acting on behalf of students in Canada to keep tuition rates down.

They can go ahead and tell all the students in Canada that the NDP was bought by keeping their tuition rates down. They can go out there and tell it like it is. They can say we were bought by keeping tuition rates down instead of giving corporate tax cuts. I am proud of that.

The Conservatives should be ashamed for criticizing the fact that we arranged additional dollars to keep tuition rates down. Quite frankly, the Liberals should be ashamed that they had to be forced into a situation in order for students to get that. Throughout their campaigns they promised to help students. They promised to help them afford their education. They did not do that. Prior to the NDP agreement, students would not have to pay their debt if they happened to die. That was all the Liberals gave them.

Other Liberal promises were made during the election and some have come up a number of times since then. During the last campaign the Liberals promised dollars for child care, dollars for affordable housing and dollars for education. They also promised dollars for aboriginal communities like we could not imagine. They promised millions of dollars to aboriginal communities for infrastructure, for roads, water, and education for aboriginal students. What did the Liberals offer in the budget? Zip. It is shameful.

The New Democratic Party made sure that part of the dollars for affordable housing would go to aboriginal communities where there is the greatest housing needs in this country. We made sure that the money was marked for aboriginal housing because we know it would never flow to those communities otherwise. It is all promises.

During the last election I listened to the President of the Treasury Board promise money to a community in my riding. The government had promised that same money three years ago but it had never been paid out. The government made a big news announcement but it was the same money from before. The government promised the same money again to the same community. The reality is that money is not going to flow unless the New Democratic Party is here to hold the government accountable because it did not follow through on its promises in the last election.

The government made promises to assist in education. The New Democratic Party made sure some of those dollars would go to aboriginal education assistance. What did the Liberal government do? It is going to tax the support dollars that first nations students get.

The Auditor General identified education for aboriginal people as a crucial area. We have improved some of the access for first nations and aboriginal people to education. We are going to give them some additional dollars. What is the government going to do?

Aboriginal students have to leave their communities to get an education. Heaven only knows, we are just starting to see senior high schools in first nations communities. They were disallowed for decades by a plan to keep aboriginal people uneducated, and there is no doubt in my mind that is what it was. Some communities are just beginning to get senior high schools, and the government is going to tax what little dollars aboriginal students are getting to go to school.

After there was an outcry, the Liberals said they would look at it again and see what they could do and come back to it in 2006. Of course they would say that, because they are pretty sure there will be an election. Once again they promised to look at it. They did not fix the situation. They made another Liberal promise. The only way that Liberal promise will be kept is if the New Democratic Party is here to make sure that those promises are kept.

My Bloc and Conservative colleagues are a little touchy about this. They are upset that the NDP made a deal to get a better budget. Anybody who has negotiated, whether they be union people or business people, knows that in negotiating, we go back and forth, saying, “Okay, you give this and we will do this”. That is what negotiations are about. It happens all the time in the House on pieces of legislation. Members can talk all they want that things do not get changed. We all know there is negotiation behind the scenes to get changes made.

The reality is that we were not happy with that first budget because it did not give back to Canadians what they rightfully deserve. They deserve to benefit from their tax dollars. We did not want to see increased corporate tax cuts. There had already been a number of corporate tax cuts over the years. I am not denying that if there is lots of money out there and we can afford it, go ahead. The reality was that the government was paying for it on the backs of everyday ordinary working Canadians who do not have the kind of money that the corporations have. That was not acceptable to us, so we negotiated a deal.

How can that be wrong? How can it be wrong for us to negotiate on behalf of the Canadian people for a better budget for them? The Bloc members and the Conservatives, and the Liberals as well, should go out there and tell Canadians how much better the budget is because of the work the NDP did. The Bloc and Conservatives should go out there and criticize that Canadians have more money for education, affordable housing and child care and that more dollars will go to foreign aid. They should go out there and tell Canadians that it is happening because the NDP made it happen. That would be truthful in the next campaign and throughout the next number of days. That is why we are seeing a much better budget than we had before.

The other part of the changes that I have not mentioned is in the area of meeting our Kyoto commitments. We strongly support changes within our industries that will help to benefit the environment. We have a plan on implementing Kyoto and trying to meet the needs to address the ongoing climate change.

Anybody who lives anywhere in Canada over the last number of years has seen how our weather has changed and how it is affecting our environment. Certainly in my riding, the northern part of Churchill where the polar bears are, it is having a drastic impact. Already we can see the impact on our polar bear population. It is not something we have to worry about 10 years down the road. We are already seeing those changes. I do not have to be convinced there is a problem out there, so we are committed to implementing our Kyoto plan.

The Liberal government talked a fine line on Kyoto and sustainability, but there was nothing concrete. We ensured that there were more dollars there for the environment and for Kyoto.

I will try to wrap up really quickly. There is no question that the budget is not great. There is no question that we are not happy with the fact that there are no changes to EI. We know that the government is using the EI fund to offset its surpluses and there needs to be changes, but we got a better budget. It is not perfect, but it is a better budget. It is a budget for Canadians.

[Question No. 133, May 17th, 2005]

With regard to the budget plan for the Canadian International Development Agency and the Official Development Assistance Program: ( a ) does the government plan to introduce legislation that would give clarity of purpose to Official Development Assistance Program spending; ( b ) is there a review on expenditure being conducted at the Canadian International Development Agency and, if so, is it causing cuts to programs that do not meet policy priorities rather to programs that do not meet an administrative spending formula; ( c ) what impact will this expenditure review, if any, have on non-governmental organization (NGO) partnering programs; ( d ) has the expenditure review process, if any, caused the cancellation of the NGO project facility; ( e ) what effect will the expenditure review, if any, have on programs for Africa; ( f ) does the $223,000,000 for tsunami relief and the $185,320,000 for humanitarian relief laid out on page 129 of Supplementary Estimates (B), 2004-2005 come exclusively from the government surplus; and ( g ) does the government intend to reach 0.7% of gross national income going to official development assistance, and, if so, when?

(Return tabled)

[Justice, May 11th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the body of another murdered woman was found near Edmonton just a few kilometres away from where three other women have been found since 2003. In Winnipeg this past weekend, the body of another sex trade worker was found in a dumpster. In Vancouver at least 69 women are reported missing and presumed dead.

These women are vulnerable to violence because they have been pushed to the edge of society. My colleague from Vancouver East was instrumental in creating the subcommittee on solicitation, which is looking at ways to ensure that sex trade workers are protected the same as all Canadians.

Poverty can force women into addiction, homelessness and prostitution. Aboriginal women are among the most vulnerable. Throughout Canada, more than 500 aboriginal women have gone missing or been murdered over the last 30 years.

This Mother's Day more than 300 people participated in the Sisters in Sprit march in Winnipeg, focusing attention on the plight of women who are missing and murdered. How many more women will be murdered or go missing before Canadian governments move to action?

[An Act to Authorize the Minister of Finance to Make Certain Payments, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, if my colleague from Cariboo—Prince George is serious about listening to Canadians, he should be accepting the changes that the NDP saw fit to have the government make within that budget so that we could support it.

These are changes that Canadians wanted. There are dollars for child care, affordable housing and foreign aid, which his own party supported but now is not going to. There are additional dollars for tuition and education for Canadians throughout the country. Canadians are going to benefit from that.

I am at a loss as to why the Conservatives would not now be supporting this budget with those changes. However, I do recognize that it definitely wiped the smile off their leader's face, that smile he had after the first budget. The moment that budget came down there was the Cheshire cat with the biggest smile in the world. He was so happy about the budget that he could not even get out of this House without that smile. It was a budget that did nothing for ordinary Canadians but did everything for corporate tax cuts.

Now the smile is wiped off your face and you have to do something for Canadians, not just for your leader.

[Housing, May 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the minister should feel great shame for that kind of response to Canadians. The Liberals are once again ignoring a growing health crisis. It is only a matter of time before we see more Zonolite induced cancers.

Why is the government once again risking the health and lives of Canadians? Has it not learned anything from the tainted blood scandal?

[Housing, May 6th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there are at least 250,000 Canadian homes contaminated with Zonolite insulation. This deadly substance contains asbestos which has been proven to be deadly to those exposed to it.

The government used Zonolite in military bases and in first nations communities. The federal government also subsidized its use under CHIP, leading thousands of Canadians to use it in their attics and walls.

Will the minister commit today to a removal program which includes the full disclosure of Zonolite in all home sales under CMHC mortgages?

[Committees of the House, May 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that nobody deserves the dishonesty that has come from the Liberal government.

The member himself said that the New Democratic Party voted against the budget before, and rightfully so, because it did not reflect areas of concern that we wanted addressed.

The member should tell the people of Canada that the NDP brokered a deal to put dollars back into the pockets of Canadians, to provide funding for education and for students' tuition, to provide for affordable housing. He should tell Canadians that the NDP is working on the Kyoto plan. He should tell Canadians that it was the NDP that brokered a deal for child care. He should tell Canadians that it was the NDP that worked out a deal to make sure the gas tax would get to the municipalities. He should be honest with Canadians and tell them that.

[Committees of the House, May 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, if the RCMP commissioner was given additional dollars because Parliament and the people of Canada felt there was a need to have additional RCMP officers in smaller detachments, I would be greatly surprised if he would turn that down. I would also be greatly surprised that he would not close those detachments if he saw that there was another risk somewhere else and he had to decide where he had to move those members.

The reality is, if there is a mandate given by Parliament and the government to ensure that there is representation in smaller areas of Canada, the commissioner would follow through, but we cannot give a mandate without putting the funding behind it.

There is no question there has been an increase in dollars. There is no question there has been an increase in need. There is no question there needs to be proper funding for the security services. The parliamentary secretary should think about the reality for a second. If Parliament and the government gave a mandate to maintain offices and detachments in smaller communities, and the commissioner turned that down, I would be shocked.

I am using my own riding as an example. I have gone door to door in communities. I have been told by people, “If we had a detachment, it would be a deterrent for crime. We want the RCMP here”.