Roger Simmons

[Social Security Programs, October 20th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, on Bill C-54, an act to amend the Old Age Security Act, the Canada pension plan, the Children's Special Allowances Act and the Unemployment Insurance Act, any sane, reasonable scrutiny of this bill would very quickly indicate to almost any informed reader that this has to be what has become known in Parliament as comma legislation, that is to say legislation which seeks to make certain technical changes but substantively has very little impact.

There is a need for comma legislation, technical legislation, to tidy up the business, to make it of more service to the people it is purporting to serve. That is the reality, this is in effect comma legislation. It is legislation that will seek to do a number of important but relatively minor things in the scheme of things.

That is not to say they should not be done. I support the bill and in a moment I will state two or three reasons why I support the bill. However, if we accepted as the reality of the bill and then listen to some of my friends opposite, we would wonder if we are both talking about the same piece of legislation.

As I listened to a bit a of the debate this morning for some strange reason I found myself deciding that what I needed to do was reread an old poem that I learned and taught in high school called "Matilda".

[Petitions, October 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to present petitions on behalf of several hundred residents of Newfoundland. The signatories of these petitions come from my riding of Burin-St. George's as well as from the riding of my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the member for Gander-Grand Falls.

The petitions salute the importance of the mining industry as the mainstay of employment in more than 150 communities across the country and as an important contributor to Canada's gross domestic product and exports.

The petitioners call on Parliament to take action that will increase employment in the mining sector, promote exploration, rebuild Canada's mineral reserves, sustain mining communities and keep mining in Canada.

I have much pleasure in presenting these petitions and in giving them my full support.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

I submit that the question has been put. I also submit that we had an arrangement and we should in honour stay with that particular arrangement.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I made some preliminary comments during my speech. I had intended to make a speech on the issue but I was informed there was an undertaking among the parties that there had been enough debate on the issue and that it was the general wish of the House to conclude the debate. I co-operated by sitting down and yielding 15 minutes of my time to allow the vote to go forward.

I think a deal is a deal. I appreciate the member for Vegreville would have liked to make some remarks on the matter. He should have told his whip or his House leader in due time so that could have been communicated as part of the deal. We had an arrangement here. We have observed the arrangement and in so doing I have forfeited my speaking time. I am sure there will be other opportunities for the member to participate in debate.

I would suggest that technically the Speaker has already put the question anyway. I believe the Speaker has effectively called for the question and I think we should get on with it.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

That is his sin. That is the Prime Minister's sin, I say to the gentleman from Crowfoot. Is that a terrible sin? Is that a terrible gaff? Imagine, the member for Crowfoot has gone right to the nub of the issue. Some people, no matter how many helmets they put on or which way, would not protect anything important.

We can change the name of the department and the sooner we do it the better.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

I say to my friend from Winnipeg South that the idea of being the first Reform cabinet minister of Newfoundland and having my own clothing allowance had its appeal, but I said no. I said it was a good opener but it was not enough. I asked what else they had. It is a question of time.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

Only yesterday I was musing with my friend here about how times have changed. This crowd came to Ottawa not to heckle. They were going to be pipsqueak quiet all the time. It is beautiful; I am feeling more at home with this crowd. I might join this crowd.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

Now the member for Kindersley-Lloydminster wants to qualify it. There is only one kind of politician. Either he is a politician or not a politician. He should stop apologizing for it.

If we had the time-we certainly have the audience; there is no question about that-I would tell the House about agriculture in Newfoundland. There the combines do not break down. They are all green. Roadrunners, almost.

You will be interested to know, Mr. Speaker, in the very short time I have at my disposal that in my riding alone we have quite a diversity of farm activity.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

Are they ready for this now? Even the member for York South-Weston will appreciate this one, I am sure. The gentleman from Lisgar-Marquette said something just now that has to be absolutely historical. He sits with the group that said: "We are not politicians. We are going down there to get them politicians". He started his speech today beautifully. I commend him as a politician and as a farmer. Welcome to the real world.

[Department Of Agriculture Act, October 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I say to the member for Lisgar-Marquette that I thought the story of the combine was absolutely fantastic. However he missed the essential point. He should have told us why the operator, to wit himself, was punishing through with that kind of machinery. Why would he not do what we are doing with this bill? The time comes to refurbish, to trade your equipment in or at least refurbish it instead of trying to punish it out in the field with very low production. That is what this bill is all about.

The member for Lisgar-Marquette said something else and I wrote it down. I will probably get it framed. I want the House to realize, all my friends to realize-