Lost his last election, in 1997, with 18% of the vote.
Petitions March 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present three petitions.
The first one was signed by 26 people from Killarney, Manitoba. The attention of the House is drawn to the fact that 38 per cent of the national highway system has fallen below accepted standards and that the benefits of the proposed national highway program are numerous.
The petitioners call upon Parliament to request that the government support all measures to make the national highway system upgrading possible.
Rail Strike March 24th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the rail strike continues and the availability of goods for the service and manufacturing industries grows scarce. Grain stocks lie dormant in the elevation system throughout western Canada.
While some members opposite have seen fit to support the government in this matter and the government has great reluctance to be engaged in direct dispute settlement, there reaches a time when economic damage exceeds the right to negotiate.
I commend the minister for her timely and appropriate actions. The long term structural changes to eliminate these difficulties remains a challenge for this House. I congratulate the minister. We will support her in the future in these matters.
Firearms Act February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, no, I have not. Yes, I am reasonable. I will pursue the same privileges as the hon. member from Edmonton; I will follow my conscience.
Firearms Act February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I did not really hear a question, so I will comment on his comments.
At the present time we do have a registration system. A firearm can be tracked: where it was manufactured, through the distributor, wholesaler, retailer, to the end purchaser. However, to do that requires hundreds of hours to go through the ledgers of various organizations.
The kind of system that I envision would be almost like a charge card. All the rifles would be shown in black print. We would instantly be able to locate a rifle by running it through the network, which would reduce the cost and time which is now required.
Firearms Act February 27th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I thank you and for that warm applause across the way. My friend and colleague from Crowfoot was a police officer at the time of my younger years, still living in the area where he was serving. I respect him very much since those days and even today.
It is an honour to make the point that I am speaking on this bill with the desire to pursue a fair and equitable bill that permits reasonable and equitable use of firearms in our society.
Having said that, I do feel that the bill the minister has presented goes a long way in achieving those types of social goals. Therefore, I deem it an honour to rise to speak on this bill respecting the use of firearms and other weapons.
The extended discussions and debates have waxed and waned throughout this country. Western Canada is certainly no exception. The first meeting I attended was with the minister and the executives of most of Manitoba's firearm associations coming together in Winnipeg in July, 1994.
In a short time thereafter I had what I cannot say was necessarily a pleasure. I have never been yelled at by 2,000 people at the same time before, so it was a unique experience. There was a rally in the Keystone centre in Brandon at which time the organizations in favour of not producing any more firearm controls brought together a number of people and we heard their concerns. Fundamentally they were persons who were trap shooters, recreational pistol shooters, but in the main they were ordinary hunting members of the public just like some members in this House.
After attending these forums I visited several clubs and ranges. I continued to meet with concerned individuals on an individual basis as well as in small groups. Any new regulations concerning firearms have deep cultural implications, gender bias and some rural-urban division of support. As well, many citizens did not wish to see our nation reach a situation where they feel we must have access to a firearm in order to feel safe.
We have had some information coming forward. I will quote a couple of excerpts. One is from the Western Producer , January 26. It was entitled ``Most women for gun control: pollster''.
The Saskatchewan Women's Agricultural Network had an annual meeting on January 21 and debated a resolution to oppose gun control. The resolution was not passed. The director, Elaine Kacsmar, said they were not totally against the registration of guns but that they were against having to pay an enormous amount of money to register guns.
The second point I would like to raise is that the now famous Alberta poll done by the present Government of Alberta is registered in opposition to gun control. It in turn did not believe the federal polling that was done in that province. I am sure the member for Yorkton-Melville was possibly thinking of these results when he made his remarks earlier.
On February 2 the data seemed to indicate in Alberta that there were different pockets and regions but rural Alberta was in some regions as high as 72 per cent in favour of registry. Central Alberta was about 50 per cent; we will even drop a couple to 48 per cent. Northern Alberta was 56 per cent. Overall the data would indicate at that snapshot of time that over 65 per cent were in favour.
I have enjoyed many open and frank discussions with the Minister of Justice and my caucus colleagues as well on the entire issue of the firearms proposals. Throughout these caucus discussions, some formal, some not so formal, at no point was I ordered, threatened or instructed to vote in favour of or against this bill.
Unquestionably I will be voting in favour because I sense it does show some movement to allow for a middle of the road position for all members of society.
I believe that our caucuses, regional and national, provided every member on our side of the House every opportunity to contribute and develop those components that were of concern to them.
Bill C-68 reflects the November 30 action plan but has been changed to accommodate some legitimate handgun owners' concerns. Like all other owners of prohibited firearms, individuals who possessed handguns on or before February 14, 1995 will be able to buy and sell in the same class those firearms which are now listed as prohibited.
Owners will be able to use the handguns for the purpose of which they were originally obtained whether target shooting or collecting. Might I comment that to the very avid target shooters in my riding that is the same as golf is to me. They fire off 300 rounds in a very controlled, safe environment. They tell me that they feel great. I wish them well and I hope it continues. I am sure it will.
The bill is the outcome of consultations with many individuals, groups, organizations across Canada. It is intensive work involving the justice department, Revenue Canada and the Department of the Solicitor General, among others.
Owning a firearm is a privilege. It is not a right. As such, it is subject to regulation by government because firearms can be dangerous and it is only sensible to have some degree of regulation. People can lose a privilege. In fact I am informed that 40,000 Canadians for sundry reasons have lost the right to own firearms, about 700 in Manitoba and about the same number in Saskatchewan. Of course, it will vary with the level of population from coast to coast.
It has been my desire to see that reasonable guidelines are put in place where hunters will continue to hunt, recreational and competitive programming will continue to produce world class
competitors and collectors will be able to trade, buy or sell with reasonable guidelines in place.
In the end the thrust of this bill is to achieve a safer Canadian society. I hope that my hon. colleagues will bear with me while I explain the background from which I speak today.
My twin brother and I, who I am sure my colleague across the way will remember, grew up on a farm in central Manitoba. For whatever the reasons my parents saw no need to own firearms.
However rummaging in the attic one day-of course it is my twin brother who did all these nasty things-we located two old firearms. One was a shotgun with absolutely no trigger action left and the other one was an old Snider rifle which was used in one of the wars, the first world war or earlier.
We played with those for a number of years. I do not know what has become of them but obviously they were relics. If we had the same rules then that we are going to have, we would be in some legal difficulty.
I do recall however that my friends purchased .22 calibre firearms for their use when they "came of age". I would go hunting with them. The admonition from my parents at that time was to be careful.
The point that I make is that for most cases, that was enough. Most of us were. In the 1940s and 1950s, one could acquire firearms by mail order, could use them without training, could will them without any inhibiting regulation.
Those of us who survived without regulatory interference feel that we have somehow lost some freedoms and privileges in the intervening years, as we have moved into an era where because of societal difficulties we have developed a system of regulation for the training, acquisition, sale and storage of firearms.
In conclusion, I would have to say that my age group can look back to a very idyllic time where responsibility was a given, care and caution was expected. It is these memories that tend to anger the firearm owners of today.
Airports February 16th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the House is aware that the Ministry of Transport has introduced new long term regulations and guidelines for local regional airports.
To increase understanding I was active in facilitating an airports conference in Brandon, Manitoba on February 7 and 8, 1995. The main conference objective was to bring together stakeholders from central Canada to discuss the challenges of assuming ownership and operation of community airports.
I can confidently say the majority of 91 participants left the Brandon Airports Conference respecting the minister's efforts of establishing a more affordable, integrated, efficient and competitive transportation system that still remains safe, secure and accessible.
My thanks to the inspired participants, informed speakers and my staff for making the conference such a great success.
Western Grain Transportation Act February 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, if I may be so bold concerning plebiscites, having served as a mayor of a community for many years I have had great concerns about engaging in the plebiscite game. Once you start, where do you stop?
In terms of elected representation, I have no problem if the farm community feels that is the most applicable means of putting a knowledgeable board in place. I sense that the majority of appointed commissioners have a very strong agricultural background that makes them very effective.
In terms of whether elected they could do a better job, I do not feel I can evaluate that kind of question.
Western Grain Transportation Act February 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, it is simply because of those high mountains. Once we climb to those heights, it runs downhill all the way to the west. To the east it is because of the high air density that is created from Winnipeg that blows in that direction.
Western Grain Transportation Act February 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I will work in reverse on the questions. In terms of a plebiscite and getting membership on the wheat board, I have concerns to some degree about the political process that may come into play by having people seeking the appointment, perhaps currying favours in some areas geographically, somewhat like the advisory committees to the wheat board.
I believe the first question was on the impact of the WGTA subsidy being removed. The minister indicated that there were 909,000 tonnes or $22 million in place. I have no reason to believe that is necessarily going to change. However, I do not have any data at my disposal to honestly answer the question.
Western Grain Transportation Act February 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, our wheat from Brandon-Souris will be going everywhere.