Jim Hart

[Education, April 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Yesterday the Reform Party suggested the concept of post-secondary education vouchers given to students and income contingent repayment plans for student loans.

Could the minister tell the House if education vouchers and income contingent loans are specifically on his agenda?

[National Volunteer Week, April 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, in Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt we are particularly proud of the efforts of our local volunteers. Lynn and John Bremmer of the town of Oliver in my riding recently returned from the Slovak republic where they worked with CESO on a development project, helping a producer of agricultural products with their expertise. Perhaps more than money their volunteer efforts will help those people stand proudly on their feet as their country emerges from the dark ages of communism.

Volunteers have made a personal choice to make all our communities better places to live, whether it be through working with a service club, organizing a community event, helping the disadvantaged or leading a youth group.

I call on all hon. members and all Canadians to join me in honouring volunteers during National Volunteer Week.

[Government Expenditures, April 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we are just trying to determine that there will be additional cuts as the Prime Minister stated yesterday. Surely members of cabinet must have talked this matter over. I hope the minister of defence is not the only minister who is bearing the brunt of these cuts. I know he is pulling his hair out over them.

The minister would suggest that his department is not making those significant expenditure reductions so I will direct my supplementary question to the Minister of the Environment. What is that minister going to do to reduce her $737 million departmental budget in order to further reduce spending as the Prime Minister has promised?

[Government Expenditures, April 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is a real shame the Prime Minister feels that budgetary matters are irrelevant to the Canadian people.

Yesterday the Prime Minister affirmed three times that the government would be making additional expenditure reductions not presently included in the budget in order to further reduce the deficit. We on this side of the House and millions of

Canadians are simply trying to find out where these additional expenditure reductions are coming from.

Could the Prime Minister tell me what additional expenditure reductions the Minister of Transport will make in his $2.8 billion departmental budget in order to reduce spending as the Prime Minister has promised?

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 12th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this House to speak in favour of the motions that the Reform Party has placed before all members of this House today. I do this because I feel so strongly that we need changes in government. We need changes in the way we have been operating.

These amendments to this motion would limit the delay to 12 months on this process and would formally keep the commissioners who are already in place. I am very strongly in favour of those motions. Of course my preference and the preference of all members of the Reform Party would be that Bill C-18 not proceed at all.

I am an ordinary Canadian, an ordinary person. I have serious concerns about the things that have been happening in this country such as the way our country has been run, the enormous deficit and debt that all Canadians face, and unemployment. One of the biggest items that every member in this House heard people speak about during the election campaign was that Canadians wanted more accountability. That is worth repeating. The Canadian people demanded more accountability from their

elected representatives during this last election. They demand it now and they want to see it.

This is a sad, sad day for ordinary Canadians, for ordinary people. What has happened here is that the government members opposite are trying to ram through something that takes away a process that the ordinary people in this country can get involved in. They can make their presentations and recommendations to a body that has been set up for redistribution of electoral boundaries. It is a sad day and I urge everyone in this House to think about that. People want more involvement in government and the government is taking that away from them.

This bill sends a message loud and clear that the government and members opposite and some members on this side do not believe that people should be more involved in what happens in the process. They do not believe that what happens in this House should be a part of what the people of Canada are thinking.

I spent some time in the last two weeks in my riding. I heard of major concerns throughout the riding about the way the redistribution was laid out. We would be losing two communities in my riding which have a strong economic tie to the rest of the region of Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt which I represent. Merritt and Princeton would become separated from that riding and would join Coquihalla riding, a new riding that would be established in B.C.

I had a meeting with the mayor and council of Merritt while I was there last week. They want to make their presentation. They want to go to the commission. They want to submit a presentation on behalf of the people of Merritt. That sounds like a good idea. It sounds like a way for all people to get involved if they have concerns. It is not up to us in this House to draw the boundaries, to draw the lines.

The reason this whole process was established was so that politicians would not be able to tamper or tinker with the drawings of electoral boundaries.

I have had the opportunity to speak to many of my friends across the way in conversations over coffee and sometimes just in the hallways or on the bus from the Confederation Building to here. I have heard from them the underlying reason for trying to stop the redistribution process. They know it is taking way some Liberal stronghold areas. There is no other reason. They are tampering in a process that was set up so that the government and members of Parliament could not tamper with it.

It is unacceptable that this is going on. Possibly, as one other member of the Reform Party has already indicated, this is even unconstitutional. It is a sad day for Canadians. It is a sad day for all of us.

There has been a lot of talk about the cost of this process. Let us take a look at the costs. It budgeted $8 million for this process. So far there has been $4 million to $5 million spent. I thought it was $5 million but this morning I heard that maybe it was only $4 million. It seems that the government is not quite sure how much it actually spent to date on this process. Anyway it is in the area of $4 million to $5 million.

It wants to scrap the whole process. It wants to put everything on hold so that in 24 months it can spend another $8 million to $10 million and restart the whole thing. Is that in the interests of the Canadian people?

Do members opposite believe that Canadians will stand by when the country is facing a massive deficit and debt and place before them another $8 million to $10 million bill when it is not necessary? We could simply put the process on hold for a12 month period, have a committee study it if they wish, as our amendments suggest, and then Canadians can get value for their dollar, something that they are not doing by eliminating this redistribution process.

Would it not be worth mentioning that we are kind of crowded in this House? We are at the maximum probably in seating without major adjustments to this place. I received a letter yesterday from a constituent who said we should look at capping the number of members in the House of Commons. That is a good idea and I think we should look at it.

People are tired. We have too much government. It is a good idea. Absolutely we should do that. He also suggested we should reduce the number of seats. I think we should reduce the numbers on that side of the House, but maybe strengthen them over here.

What we should be looking at is Senate reform. The west, the northern regions, the Atlantic provinces want accountability too. If we limit the number of seats in the House, then we have to look at strengthening the other place, the Senate chamber. It is something that requires serious consideration.

This whole process, as I said earlier, should have Canadians wondering what the government is all about. Does it really mean that it wants the people involved in government, because it is stifling that by stopping this right now? It is stifling the process for the people of Canada so they cannot make their representations, their concerns and their presentations to these commissions. The commissions were set up independently so government could not be involved and would be at arm's length from the whole process. That is the way it should be.

I have serious concerns about my riding but I am willing to make presentations on behalf of the people of Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt regarding those concerns. I will not have that opportunity now and the people of Canada do not have the opportunity to do it either.

In closing, I would like to urge all members in every corner of the House to please consider once again what Canadians have asked us to do, to bring accountability back to the House of Commons and to let them be more involved in the democracy process. I want every member of the House consider that. I ask hon. members to support the amendments that are before us today.

[Petitions, April 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today pursuant to Standing Order 36 to present a petition which has been certified correct as to form and content by the clerk of petitions.

The petitioners request that Parliament review Canada's foreign policy through a process involving broad consultation and participation and improve the official development assistance program so as to support more effectively the solutions put forward by poor countries to meet their own peoples' needs.

These petitioners are from Summerland, Penticton and Naramata in the riding of Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt. I present this today.

[Petitions, March 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise pursuant to Standing Order 36 to present a petition that has been certified correct as to form and content by the Clerk of Petitions.

On behalf of constituents of Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt, the petitioners are requesting the enactment of legislation providing for a referendum of the people to accept or reject two official languages for Canada.

[Veterans Affairs, March 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a proud tradition of honouring our war veterans. There is a fast dwindling group of veterans, however, who have been poorly treated by us. I speak of the merchant navy vets who were held prisoners of war for as long as five years. They had to contend with terrible conditions and treatment at the hands of their captors. Yet we currently compensate them for only 30 months of incarceration.

We have many programs that are less urgent than fair treatment for those few vets whose numbers are dwindling because of their age. This is not a request for the government to spend more money but to get its priorities straight.

Some distinguished members of this House defend the current cash for life MP pension plan. Instead, I call on those members to support fair treatment of these vets by paying the debt we owe them for up to the 50 months they suffered in defence of Canada.

[Apple Growers, March 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, world renowned Okanagan valley red Delicious apples are a major crop in my riding of Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt.

This industry is also a major employer in the area. Recently apple growers have been threatened by the dumping of apples into Canada at prices below the American growers' cost of production. This not only affects Okanagan growers but apple producers across Canada.

Unless fair trade provisions under the current Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement are enforced, our apple producers may soon be forced out of business.

On behalf of the growers in my riding, I call on this government to immediately protect Canadian apple producers before severe damage is done to this important industry.

[Agriculture, March 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the answer from the minister.

The Canada-U.S. free trade agreement is supposed to contain mechanisms to resolve unfair trade practices. Is the minister taking action to use those mechanisms to help Canadian apple growers?