Dianne Brushett

[Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act, February 13th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I understand the system has been in place probably as long as the House of Commons, the Parliament of Canada.

As the hon. member recognizes, from community and municipal governments to provincial and federal governments it is necessary that citizens become involved. They should take part in the process of government. The names of those citizens come from throughout society. It has been my experience to keep a resume, as I have at the municipal and provincial levels of government, of citizens in the community who are prepared to give their time, energy and commitment to the process of fair and equitable government and to give their intelligence, which is what is required in managing the regulations and boards in our government process.

The government is prepared to receive names at any time from all citizens in society who may be prepared to participate in the democratic process.

[Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act, February 13th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I intend to support Bill C-61 in the name of my hon. colleague the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Bill C-61 introduces an administrative monetary penalty system that should result in a higher rate of compliance with the regulations respecting imported or domestic agri-food products. It would also enable employees of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to more effectively enforce federal regulations.

Under the current system the only options available to regional inspectors are to give warnings, to seize or detain products that are not in compliance with standards, and to prosecute alleged violations in the courts. Although recourse to the courts is sometimes necessary, in most cases it is preferable not to proceed through the criminal justice system. This saves time and money.

We all know how costly the criminal justice process can be both to government and the private sector. Moreover criminal prosecution is usually considered an excessive reaction to regulatory violations as it can lead to a criminal record and imprisonment. As a result we had to find effective mechanisms that were as non-coercive as possible to bring firms into compliance with our regulations.

In my view the administrative monetary penalty system is the best approach for decriminalizing violations of the regulations. It brings these regulations into the 21st century for higher efficiency.

As the name suggests, the administrative monetary penalty system provides for a broad range of monetary penalties for enforcing Canadian regulations respecting agriculture and agri-food products. For instance, small fines would be issued for minor violations while larger penalties would be issued for more serious offences. That being said, Bill C-61 precludes criminal prosecution in cases of serious and repeated violations. However the criminal justice system would only be used as a last resort when all other options have failed.

The centrepiece of Bill C-61 is the compliance agreements that can be negotiated under AMPS. Officials representing Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada would have the authority to negotiate the terms of compliance agreements with offenders. In addition, inspectors would be able to reduce or waive fines if the offender takes the necessary steps to ensure future compliance. Inspectors would obtain assurances that corrective action would be made at the source.

In some cases this might involve upgrading a plant, replacing obsolete equipment, making changes to manufacturing processes or implementing a more stringent quality control system. In other cases proper employee training at the plant might remedy the situation. In brief the inspectors would have credible indicators that the problem would be resolved in the very short term.

The objective of Bill C-61 is not to punish offenders. In fact offenders can completely avoid penalties by taking immediate corrective action. It is clear this is the best way to achieve co-operation from violators without delays in a very precious time frame.

A monetary penalty system similar to that proposed by Bill C-61 is already being used successfully by Transport Canada and several departments in the United States. In their experience nine out of ten offenders pay their fines outright. As a result very few cases go before a review tribunal or court of appeal.

On the basis of this experience it looks in the future like Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada would be in a much better position to carry out its broader control activities.

As we know, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food must inspect plants and animal products imported into Canada by the travelling public. Among other things, plants, skins, live animals and meat products must be declared to protect the agri-food sector and consumers against the potential risks of exotic disease.

In addition, inspectors are permanently assigned to most ports of entry to control the safety of food products and to ensure compliance with regulations. This aspect is of critical importance for Canadian firms that compete directly with imported products.

The program review currently under way at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is clearly favourable to the implementation of the administrative monetary penalty system. It is felt that inspectors need this tool to improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of the regulatory system.

Canadian agri-food organizations feel that the new system is essential given the current context of the liberalization of trade. I should also mention that the United States, Mexico and a number of countries of the European community have already implemented monetary penalty systems. The implementation of Bill C-61 would ensure a level playing field for everyone.

To conclude, the administrative monetary penalty system would facilitate the job of inspectors and give them the tools they need to be more effective in enforcing regulations. This would improve our business relations with foreign firms and would ensure compliance of both domestic and imported agri-food products with Canada's regulatory system.

The bill ensures the fundamental controls and regulations are in place to take Canada into the 21st century. At the same time it ensures a quality and safe supply of food to Canadians.

[Income Tax Act, February 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to spend a few moments tonight addressing the House on the benefits of Bill C-282 and to congratulate my hon. colleague from Burin-St. George's for his initiative and work since 1993 on this valuable legislation.

No doubt every member's riding, the same as mine in Cumberland-Colchester, is comprised of large numbers of senior citizens, many of whom are disabled. Most members, including myself, have parents whom this bill would potentially affect. In fact, it is the disabled parents and grandparents of this nation to which this bill is addressed and not just a change in the Income Tax Act. It is a statement of principle, namely Liberal principles, of how the government views and treats our rich resource of knowledge and wisdom, our human resource, our seniors, particularly our disabled seniors.

These are men and women who have worked hard all their lives and have jumped one of the last hurdles toward retirement only to find themselves struck with the financial burden along the way having become disabled and not able to enjoy the fruits of their life.

Unfortunately, though, we helplessly watch as they grow older, the ravages of time and disease claiming their strength and vitality. They often require extra support from the medical community which in many cases was neither expected nor

accounted for. This can easily drain their retirement savings, if they have any, and as a result many seniors end up being the responsibility of the other spouse or some overworked social worker.

For many seniors as they go beyond the 65 year mark their medical expenses in ratio to their income rises far beyond their ability to maintain anything human in lifestyle.

It is inevitable that all people will eventually need some form of medical attention as they grow older. However, when the cost of this required attention becomes so burdensome that their overall financial freedom and quality of life are reduced, the so-called golden years become bitter tears.

Added to this indignity, the Income Tax Act in its present form drops an extra load on them by not allowing adequate concession to deduct their medical expenses.

As has been stated by my hon. colleagues, the allowable limit on the medical exemption tax credit is the lesser of either 3 per cent of net income or $1,614. This means that the cash outlay for seniors up to this amount is taxed as part of their incomes.

This should not be. We should be giving every consideration to retired Canadians, especially those who have had the misfortune of falling prey to a disability.

Technology kept in its rightful place is a wonderful thing. It has allowed individuals to progress from caster boards to modern electric wheelchairs. Microelectronics now allow hearing impaired individuals to do away with listening horns and progress to highly advanced optometry. All of these aids cost money. One of the beneficiaries of this great technology is the disabled senior but as it presently stands many cannot afford these technology products.

A Statistics Canada survey on senior's health and limitations says that 8 per cent of disabled seniors who require mobility aids do not have them, 31 per cent who require hearing aids do not have them, 10 per cent of those requiring visual devices do not have them. The reason is financial cost.

The income of many disabled seniors is low. Sixty per cent of seniors with disabilities have an average income of less than $10,000. Many simply do not have the money for medical prescriptions or appliances for their needs.

We must remember that these people are the ones who built this country with their ingenuity and labour, who fought our wars and who endured hardships in the darkest times. They are parents, school teachers, doctors and neighbours.

Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States, defined the quality of a nation: "A strong nation, like a strong person, can afford to be gentle, firm, thoughtful and restrained".

There have been many comments from Canadians in recent years over the faceless and heartless form of government. We have been accepting of the norm and we are tolerant. I do not wish to see this Liberal government remembered as a faceless or heartless government. We must move back toward the gentler, thoughtful and restrained days of the Government of Canada they have known before these present years. Our firmness will not be lost. We are a strong a nation. We can afford to show our elderly consideration.

What this bill is about is the cost of taxation that is too high to a particular sector of society which has a low ability to pay. This is inequitable. It is also very unfair. What this bill is about is putting fairness in the Income Tax Act for our disabled seniors. What this amendment does is allow all medical expenses to be deductible for disabled seniors.

Recently I received a letter from a couple in my riding who are in the position of many disabled seniors across this country. They wrote to me and I telephoned them to get permission to read a little of their letter:

Dear Mrs. Brushett,

I am writing on behalf of my husband and myself to express our concern for the government's proposed changes to social programs such as old age assistance. Our concern is for people like ourselves who are trying to live on fixed incomes, pay our usual living expenses, buy prescription drugs, walkers, wheelchairs and special devices, some of which we pay taxes on when purchased.

While we realize something must be done about the deficit, the answer is not with people who don't have much of a chance of helping themselves.

When we talked to Mr. and Mrs. Tower of Amherst, Nova Scotia, they said "We are getting by. We are able to make do. We do not have much left but we are able to make do".

This bill would allow eligible medical expenses from the first dollar to be effectively income tax deductible. This bill would help people like the Towers of Amherst, Nova Scotia.

We have the opportunity as a government to exhibit strength of character and to make adjustments for those in this country who need it most. We cannot let this issue die only to be brought forward again in the future by those who may not see particularly as clearly as we do today.

Finally, I wish to re-emphasize that Bill C-282 is going to effect the people who need it most. It will not be a set of statistical data sitting on a storage shelf collecting dust. It will not help the research notes of political science students. It will

help living, breathing human beings who need help most in our communities today.

In the spirit of the words once spoken by the Right Hon. W.E. Gladstone I would affirm: "Show me the manner in which a nation cares for its elderly and I will measure with mathematical exactness the tender sympathies of its people, their respect for the laws of the land and their loyalties to high ideals".

[Access To Information, December 14th, 1994]

You cannot keep up with the action.

[Nova Scotia Highlanders, December 12th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, recently I had the distinct honour of attending a Regimental Dining In, hosted by the 1st and 2nd battalions of the Nova Scotia Highlanders, held at "E" company in the beautiful new Armouries in Pictou, Nova Scotia. It was an evening of exquisite dining in the formal military tradition with a Salute to the Haggis.

These battalions have been part of our Canadian fighting forces since their amalgamation in October of 1871. Their service to Queen and country extends from the South African War of 1899 to World Wars I and II and their battles read as a who's who of Canadian history.

I salute Lieutenant-Colonel Chisholm and the men of these two brave battalions of Nova Scotia Highlanders for keeping pride in their calling and faith in their nation. "Siol Na Fear Fearail".

[Violence, December 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House we remembered the fifth anniversary of the tragic death of 14 young women at l'École polytechnique in Montreal. We strongly emphasized the need to end violence against women.

All violence is an assault on the sanctity of human life and the thief of personal dignity. Whether this violence occurs in the home or on the street, whether it is directed at men, women or children, it abuses the soul and violates the body.

Human beings have the potential for immense noble acts while at the same time we can be immensely cruel. By a single word we can make our neighbour feel like a king or a pauper. By a single act we can create life or destroy it.

I call upon all members of this honourable House to enhance their efforts to end not only violence against women but violence against all people.

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, very quickly to the hon. member for Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup. He spoke with great integrity about women, the difficulty of developing careers and raising families, and the need almost to be a super human being, to do it all and to do it well with grace, dignity and respect for the children and family.

What role do you believe that men play in the lives of sharing some of the responsibilities of child nurturing and rearing so that some of that pressure is relieved from the women in our society?

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comments. As he has said, this does go beyond women, men and children. It is a community. Life in my estimation is a process of human relationships. The process of living is developing and sharing those relationships. Those relationships are what accumulate to make up the family which in turn makes up the community.

I believe as the hon. member does that violence against any person is a violation of the dignity of human life. Human life is at the bottom of the foundation of all things we must respect in our communities.

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, on this national day of remembrance and action to end violence against women I believe we should not only remember this act once a year but throughout the year.

This House is well apprised of the statistics relating to the violence and abuse against women. These numbers represent those incidents which have been reported, the ones we know about. However, the number of violent and abusive incidents which have not been reported are even more frightening. It is a tidal wave which must be abated.

When safe houses must be established in urban areas and police must begin escorting women to their homes to claim sometimes only the clothing on their backs or to visit their children, then it is a sad testimony to the state of relationship deterioration between men and women as well as the new face that family life in Canada is taking. When we must stand up in this House and legislate against indecent abnormal behaviour then the time has come for action not only on the part of government but also individuals and corporations, all who live within our communities.

Violence is not some strange enigma which explodes from the ground in random procession. Its seeds are planted carefully years and even generations in advance. The images of violence children are exposed to on television and in society at large and the subsequent lessons they learn from parents sets in motion a cycle of learning aggressive behaviour which is as precise as clockwork.

If through this cycle we instil in our children a low sense of self-worth or never help them to build a sense of self-esteem their lives are threatened. This is extremely counterproductive and increasingly dangerous as they grow older and develop intimate relationships because under the threat of having self-worth challenged they will either withdraw or lash out. Unfortunately more often than not the males in society are prone to lashing out with anger while females tend to withdraw.

More often than not pressures are exerted from poverty, communication breakdown, community decay, alcohol and drug abuse, barrages of messages in the media to possess or acquire material goods in order to be relegated upward from a non-person status. All of these contribute to the already overwhelming pressures of rearing children and making choices in this day and age.

All too often the metaphor that when soldiers are not fighting on the front they are fighting in the camps can be applied to this appalling situation of violence against women and children. Many good decent people who start off in a relationship with the best of intentions end up watching with shock and horror as their relationship decays into verbal and physical abuse as individuals either lash out with threats or actual violence.

Why is this? The pressures of everyday life and finances draw a family's attention away from its primary goal: the establishment of family, roots and future to each other's personal performance and contribution in the relationship. When self-esteem is challenged there is either a withdrawal into separation and divorce or again lashing out in anger.

It is not the function and purpose of this government to interfere in the personal lives of Canadians. However, I believe we have a responsibility and we must make a conscious choice for the future on behalf of the family and on behalf of women and children specifically.

Programs and policies must be developed which provide not only for zero tolerance but also give teeth that will allow law enforcement to implement changes. This must be set as a last resort for those who cross the line, who choose not only to brutalize but to exploit women and children as well.

We must also change our view and our bias of interpersonal relationships. The laws we write must encourage protection of both the immediate and extended families. We must allow for dealing with potential abuse through caring professionals. A sense of community and personal accountability must be developed in the inner cities.

Finally, we must not only begin to communicate but we must also listen. I would venture to say that the 63 women who were murdered in 1993 fell prey to a person who was already in a state of detachment and isolation. If only there had been in existence a network of people with whom these spouses could talk openly

and honestly about their situation. We know that open and honest communication is not a prelude to murder.

Again there must be communication in our society not only among our peers but outside our comfort zone as well. Parents must start talking to their children, grandparents with grandchildren, men with women, and labour with management.

I fear that if the tide does not turn on this problem, if we do not start honestly communicating in a fashion that will solve rather than dissolve our relationships, then we as a society will be so distrustful that our internal growth will cease and Canadian families will continue to perish and die.

[Trade, December 5th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Agriculture and Agri-Food, Fisheries and Oceans.

The Prime Minister's recent trip to China secured trade opportunities and created wealth for our country. On the heels of this success, can the secretary of state tell the House what is being done and what will be done to promote Canada's fishing products in the far east?