John O'Reilly

[Supply, March 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the motion deals with the infrastructure program. The member for North Vancouver has indicated nothing in constructive alternatives to that program.

I wonder what he wants me to tell the people in the town of Lindsay and the Lindsay police force which is planning to build a new building under this plan and the people in the town of Haliburton who I have met with who have plans to spend money under the infrastructure program. We have 30 per cent unemployment in the town of Haliburton. What does the member want me to tell those people who will not get a job because of that?

[Petitions, March 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased and honoured to present a petition signed by a number of constituents from Victoria-Haliburton, duly certified by the Clerk of Petitions.

The petition signed by many seniors who live in and around the Diplomat apartment building in Lindsay, Ontario, request that a mailbox be located near the residence to provide them with better access to Canada Post services.

The petition was circulated by Mrs. Jean Birchard, a resident of the apartment building, and calls on Parliament to consider locating a mailbox in the vicinity of 53 Adelaide Street North for the convenience of the residents of this building and the surrounding residential district.

[Petitions, March 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of the constituents of Victoria-Haliburton who are vehemently opposed to the importation of serial killer cards.

This petition adds to the growing list of Canadians who are opposed to the killer cards which glorify serial killers and send a negative, violent message to the youth of our country.

The petition calls upon the Parliament of Canada to amend the laws of Canada to prohibit the importation, distribution, sale and manufacture of killer cards in law and to advise producers of killer cards that their products, if destined for Canada, will be seized and destroyed.

I note the first signature on this petition is by an 18-year old, my daughter.

(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

[Agriculture, March 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian farmers from all regions have been waiting for several months now following the conclusion of the GATT negotiations for definitive word whether resolution of our various bilateral trade disputes with the Americans will be possible.

What can the minister say to the House to reassure Canadian producers and farmers that their interests will be protected.

[Agri-Food Industry, February 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture or, in his absence, the deputy minister. The recent settlement of the GATT agreement may necessitate some changes in the supply management system for the Canadian dairy, egg and poultry sectors.

Could the minister tell the House what is being done to ensure the future and continued success of these important Canadian industries?

[Supply, February 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the member for Blainville-Deux-Montagnes.

He obviously is not aware that a member of his own party, the member for La Prairie, was appointed chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts this afternoon.

Is he, then, leading us to believe that a member of his own party is not capable of doing this job? If so, then he should ask for his immediate removal. As his own party now chairs the committee on public accounts, elected this afternoon, perhaps he should consult with his member for La Prairie.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I will keep my comments as brief as I can.

It is with great pleasure that I rise tonight and for the first time speak in the greatest forum of our country. I further wish to express my thanks to the people of Victoria-Haliburton who sent me here and instilled confidence in me to do my best.

The matter we are discussing today is one that is of concern to all Canadians. This discussion is long overdue and I thank the Prime Minister for this opportunity.

Peacekeeping has long been viewed as a made in Canada concept, which is understandable since former Prime Minister Lester Pearson developed the program and subsequently was awarded the Nobel peace prize for his efforts. Canada has long been a vocal and active supporter of organizations for international stability and order and now has in the area of 2,300 troops stationed around the world in various peacekeeping operations.

For the most part, these operations have been peaceful. However, more and more often violent encounters are occurring in day to day peacekeeping. The role of peacekeeping is changing.

In today's debate we must be careful about what is being discussed. We can easily dismiss peacekeeping by saying that we must get our troops out of dangerous peacekeeping areas. However this sort of thinking is short-sighted.

We must expand our discussions and ask what we want our peacekeepers to do. We must develop a clear and concise mandate for our peacekeepers. Are we committing troops to a

peacekeeping operation because Canada has never refused to commit troops to a UN operation, or do we commit because it is in the best interests of Canada to have a presence in a particular operation?

We must think of our financial situation and come to terms with the implications of a shrinking defence budget and how it might affect our participation in future peacekeeping operations. Furthermore, when we do commit our troops to an operation we must ensure they have the proper equipment and training to address whatever situation may arise in that operation.

Although we are somewhat isolated here from the realities of peacekeeping, we owe it to those who are risking their lives in frightening situations that they have the best equipment and training available to adequately protect themselves and to ensure the operation is carried out with success for Canada.

I did have 21 pages, but I have condensed it.