George S. Rideout

[Petitions, April 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present pursuant to Standing Order 36. The first deals with assisted suicide.

The petitioners urge we make no changes to the Criminal Code which would affect that area.

[National Solidarity Day For The Aboriginal Peoples Of Canada Act, April 4th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, is it a request that this matter go off to committee or is it a request for a vote?

[Hibernia Project, March 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, maybe we can do the math for the member opposite. We are seeing private sector involvement to 92 per cent. That seems to be a very strong commitment by the private sector to this project.

[Hibernia Project, March 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the member well knows we are an 8.5 per cent participant in the Hibernia project. It is a project that has been studied with clear indication that it will be a viable project when it is done. It will contribute to our energy security when it is finished.

[Petitions, March 1st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition on behalf of the Minister of Natural Resources dealing with discrimination based on sexual orientation.

[The Budget, February 28th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague opposite. He said that the government did not listen, did not discuss and did not involve Canadians in the process of budget and budget reform in trying to strike a budget that at one time would deal with our financial crisis but at the same time not push the country into recession.

Canadians told us that they did not want us to raise personal income tax, that they did not want us to touch RRSPs and that they did not want us to tax dental plans. They wanted us to make substantial cuts in government so that it would function more efficiently. This government listened and that is what it did.

As I listened to the Reform budget I heard it take on the little guy and make it tough. That budget would impose a direct tax against Atlantic Canada, would attack ACOA and would attack those institutions which make Atlantic Canada function. It would attack seniors and senior women who would see their income taxes rise because of the budget that was put forward by the Reform party.

Did the Reform Party listen to anybody when it put forward its budget?

[Atlantic Canada, February 22nd, 1995]

They are real jobs. We are employing people. On top of that, we recognized that we were a bilingual community and that was an asset. We built on l'Université de Moncton, on the bilingual nature of our community. Now we are employing people and making things happen.

These people do not want to move. They want to stay in Moncton. They want to stay in Atlantic Canada. We even have people coming from British Columbia who now want to live in our community. We are seeing a migration to Moncton rather than away from it.

I say to Reform Party members: They should rethink their budget and their approach to regional development. Recognize that Atlantic Canada is a great place to be. It is going to be a have part of this country in the not too distant future because we are taking advantage of those investments this Liberal government is giving us. That is why we support this motion.

[Atlantic Canada, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as an Atlantic Canadian it is a pleasure to speak on this motion. The motion by the NDP member strikes to the core of what we are talking about in Atlantic Canada as we try to improve our lot and to become a have part of our country.

I would like to talk about the infrastructure program. I would also like to talk about my own community of greater Moncton. It shares some of the problems alluded to in the motion, particularly having a single industry. The Canadian National Railway employed upward of 5,000 people and will effectively close. What does that mean to a community such as Moncton and what we have been able to do both on our own and with assistance? I will quickly talk about the infrastructure program and then move on to my own experiences.

The infrastructure program is near and dear to my heart. In my other life as mayor and councillor of the city of Moncton, I had the good fortune to be on the Federation of Canadian Municipalities task force dealing with infrastructure. It was a program which was advocated for many years and it took the Liberal government to actually put it into effect. We are seeing massive benefits throughout the country, particularly in Atlantic Canada.

In my own riding of Moncton we were given roughly $4 million of federal funding for the infrastructure program. To date with the projects that we have on the go in our community, we are going to see an investment of roughly $30 million.

For a Canadian federal government program, seeing an investment of $4 million turn into $30 million is an investment and not an expenditure. That is why the infrastructure program works in Atlantic Canada. That is why it is of benefit.

I would like to refer the House to some of the things that are happening as a result of the infrastructure program in Atlantic Canada. These agreements represent a total federal investment in the Atlantic region of $181 million. That in turn will generate equal investments on behalf of the provinces and the municipalities for a total investment of $540 million into the Atlantic economy resulting from the Canada infrastructure program.

It is estimated that over 9,500 person years of employment will be created in the region, both on and off the project sites across Atlantic Canada. As of December 31, 1994 over 575 projects have already been approved in Atlantic Canada. This represents a total investment of $450 million in the Atlantic Canada economy and will create over 7,300 jobs in the region.

Projects under way under the infrastructure agreements in the Atlantic region range from installation and upgrading of sewer systems to rebuilding roadways and linking up public schools to the electronic highway.

More than 60 per cent of the federal dollars committed in the Atlantic region are for water and sewer projects. Almost 12 per cent of the federal investment is to construct and repair municipal roads. Another 16 per cent is committed for community based projects. High technology projects are also being supported and account for 4 per cent of the federal government contribution.

Those are all good projects, projects that really make things happen in Atlantic Canada. That is why the infrastructure program is a success.

We are looking for partnerships. We are looking for spinoffs associated with this program. That is what we have done in my riding of Moncton and what we have done throughout Atlantic Canada.

When we see an investment of roughly $200 million in Atlantic Canada spinning off to roughly $600 million and then going higher to $800 million and $900 million, this is an investment, not an expenditure.

We listen to Reform Party members on their position with respect to the infrastructure program but mind you, they still take the dollars when it comes to their ridings. When we listen to what they say about Atlantic Canada and where we should be, the Reform Party is of the view that the only solution offered to Atlantic Canada is to tell them to move. "Get them out of Atlantic Canada," is the Reform Party solution.

To quote the Reform Party again, its finance critic says: "The rest of Canada is not prepared to foot the bill for Atlantic Canada". There is no bill. We are making a contribution in this country. We are making things happen and the Reform Party's view is: "Tell them to move". Shame on them.

To quote the Reform Party's budget on page 34: "There would be some short term costs associated with fiscal retrenchment. These costs would come primarily in the form of adjustments that economic sectors and regions of our economy most dependent on government transfers would have to make". The code words: Atlantic Canada.

Going on to page 36: "Under the Reform budget, the short term employment impact of spending and deficit reduction is negative but manageable". It will not be manageable in Atlantic Canada if it goes through with its program to eliminate ACOA, which has created 42,000 jobs in its first five years and has stimulated major private sector investments of $2.4 billion.

ACOA pays for itself. It is an investment that generates $4.2 dollars of benefit for every dollar of public funding spent.

We are not prepared to sign on to the Reform Party budget that would see 65,000 Atlantic Canadians out of work over the next five years. We are not signing on for the principle that we should move somewhere else because Atlantic Canada, in my humble opinion, is the best place in all of Canada in which to live.

I want to talk about a community that has pulled itself up by the bootstraps. That is my community of greater Moncton. We experienced the upper Canadian and western Canada view that we should just shut down everything in Atlantic Canada. We lost Eaton's catalogue, Swift's and the Canadian National Railway Company. They were all major employers in our community.

We turned around and made investments in our community. We made investments in our downtown and in a new way of doing things. Arising out of those investments now is the fastest growing community in Atlantic Canada, greater Moncton. For the edification of the Reform Party The Wall Street Journal wrote about the community of greater Moncton: "It is the call centre for North America. It is the centre that is showing the way, the new wave of the new economy, to the rest of Canada and to North America".

[Petitions, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition making the safety of our children a priority. The

petitioners request that changes be made to the charter of rights to enable residents to be notified when repeat sex offenders are released into the community.

[Petitions, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, another petition concerns changing the Criminal Code to prohibit assisted suicides. The petitioners are opposed to that.