Lost his last election, in 1997, with 39% of the vote.
The Budget March 14th, 1995
Have respect. These are legitimate Canadian citizens who have a right to speak. A second one said this: "Ottawa treats deficit and debt as a serious problem to be dealt with prudently. There is no crisis mentality here. Indeed, there is ample time to plan orderly change rather than risk the chaos that swift and deep cuts can bring". That was another Canadian.
This is one other: "It's the budget-"
The Budget March 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I understand that some of my friends in Reform do not agree with that. It pains me to stand here and say something they do not agree with. Sometimes we do not agree on every point. One of the things we do not agree on is that we need a slash and burn budget, that we have to have a budget that destroys essential programs. There is another way.
They shake their heads at me. I am just a bumpkin from Newfoundland. Let me read for them what some other people are saying. I will let them decide whether they are bumpkins and where they are from.
This is what somebody said: "Martin's '95 budget chewed heavily into spending reductions while taking a relatively light tax bite. The result is a budget the Canadian economy should be able to digest without an extreme amount of heartburn or acid indigestion". That person was not from Newfoundland.
Another person said this.
The Budget March 14th, 1995
Is the gentleman from Wild Rose not interested in what one of my constituents said? Would he deny that constituent the right to be heard here through me?
One of my constituents called and said, "Simmons, did you really clap for that budget? Did you applaud that budget?" I proceeded to tell him why, indeed, I did clap for the budget. I started by saying: "Is it the best thing in the world? Is it what we would really have liked to have done if circumstances were absolutely right? No". Then I put it to him in terms of his family budget. I said: "What a great morning it would be if you could get up and say to your wife, `This month I have a plan. We are going to buy that Cadillac we have always wanted, the yacht and the extra skidoo"'. She would say: "How are you going to do that?" "We are just going to borrow more. Whatever we need we will borrow."
Contrary to Reform doctrine there is nothing particularly sinful about borrowing. If so, many millions of Canadians sin every day on that score. Borrowing is not to sin. Being unable to pay back the loan is a sin.
The credo that says that somehow it is a great crime to borrow is not the issue and that is not what I was saying to my constituent. I was saying that it is a sin if we borrow beyond our capacity to pay back. As I took him through the example I said: "Suppose you say to your wife that you are going to buy the Cadillac, the skidoo, et cetera, and she asks how you are going to get the money and you say, `We will borrow more. If that is not enough we will borrow more after that"'.
Eventually, of course, he put the question to me: "Do you have to pay it back?" I said: "Forget paying it back, just pay the interest on it". Then he said: "Does that not get to the point where you are using all of your income to pay interest?" I said: "Buddy, you have it. You have exactly the problem that the Minister of Finance had".
I told my constituent there was another approach. He could say to his wife in the morning: "Let us pay off all our bills right now. Do not buy any groceries. Tell the youngsters they will not eat for six months because we are paying off the debt". He said: "Come on, Simmons, what are you giving me?" I said: "Basically the Reform budget". "Do not eat now youngsters, just hold your breath. Do not get too thirsty or hungry for six months because we will be back when all the bills are paid."
We cannot do that. What the Minister of Finance had to do, and what I support him in doing, was to present this necessarily tough budget that goes down the middle. It tries its best to reduce the debt and at the same time tries its best to maintain essential programs.
The Budget March 14th, 1995
The gentleman from Lethbridge has had 30 years to get it right. I bow to his wisdom on many points.
One of my constituents phoned me-
The Budget March 14th, 1995
I say to my friend from Halifax that it is all right. We have just demonstrated that sometimes these people sing in tune. From time to time they sing in tune.
Madam Speaker, despite the heckling and despite the shouting, the government and the Minister of Finance are on the right track. Is it a perfect budget? No. We are working at getting it right. There are some things in the budget that I do not like. There are some things that other people do not like. On balance, is it the right approach? Yes.
One of my constituents told me-
The Budget March 14th, 1995
That is one of the not tough enough people who just spoke. It is a good opportunity for the gentleman from Vegreville. Does he disown or want to be part of the so-called Reform budget? Is he part of that budget? If so, let his constituents know that he would slash old age pensions to start with. It is not that kind of tough.
The Budget March 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, first let me congratulate my friend and colleague from Perth-Wellington-Waterloo.
I want to say a few words on the motion of the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot. It goes without saying that I do not agree with the sentiments in his amendment. If we read what he is saying about offloading on the provinces and doing nothing for the unemployed and so on, I do not believe even he believes that really. It is a nice motion, nicely worded and grammatically correct, but factually incorrect, very incorrect, almost to the point of being irresponsible.
Sure the budget is tough. Is it tough enough? It depends on whether we listen to the Bloc or the Reform. The Bloc says it is much too tough and the Reform says it is not tough enough. I guess that means, as I say to my friend from Lotbinière, that we are probably doing something right over here.
It is a tough budget but it is not tough for the sake of being tough. There are people in this world who get their jollies out of doing tough, rough and crude things. This is not a tough budget for the sake of being tough. This is tough of necessity. This is the way we had to go.
Atlantic Groundfish Strategy February 16th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
The good news is that 27,000 Newfoundlanders are benefiting from the TAGS program. The bad news is that many hundreds of fishermen and plant workers, all of whom have had a long work attachment to the fishery, are being deprived of benefits. I say to the minister that the culprit is the appeal process. There are rumours, for example, that more than 95 per cent of second level appeals are being rejected by HRD officials.
What is the minister doing to ensure that the appeal process is fair?
Questions On The Order Paper February 16th, 1995
What action will be taken on the recommendation made by the Auditor General in his 1994 annual report that the "Ice Services Branch must ensure that its contingency plans can be put into effect quickly and successfully" in the event of systems malfunction or communications failure so as to avert any possible "rerouting or disruption of ship traffic in and out of Canadian ports or, at worst, loss of life and property?"
Supply February 14th, 1995
Yes, some government and some good government. I say to my friend that we not only have some government, we have good government. The program review we are undertaking is one of the ways in which the government is bringing about smaller, efficient, effective government.
In the last budget the government launched a review of each and every program. Departments were asked to justify programs and activities on the basis of several tests.