John McKay

[Petitions, September 21st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition on behalf of ethnic Chinese people from Indonesia.

The petition makes reference to human rights abuses and describes in some detail how 1,300 people were killed. It states that these human rights abuses cannot continue.

The petitioners ask that Canada, as a leader in human rights areas, ethically and morally, not stand by and do nothing. They call upon parliament to appeal to President Habibie of Indonesia to protect the human rights of ethnic Chinese.

[Human Rights, September 21st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the civilized world was fixated when Pakistan detonated the so-called Islamic bomb. At the same time a number of MPs received letters from the Religious Liberties Commission and the Ahmadi movement in Islam.

The Ahmadi letter anticipates that changes will be made to the constitution of Pakistan which would make it a violation for Ahmadis to keep the holy Koran in their homes. These sanctions could include capital punishment.

The religious liberties letter makes reference to a Christian who was sentenced to death for blasphemy.

I believe that these two are linked, that the so-called Islamic bomb and the widespread persecution of religious minorities in groups in Pakistan are linked and prevent Pakistan from taking its rightful place amongst civilized nations.

I would call upon the Government of Canada to express its displeasure at this fundamental breach of human rights in the same manner as it expressed its displeasure at the detonation of the bomb.

I would also call on my fellow MPs to demand that the Government of Pakistan immediately repeal its—

[Petitions, June 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present on behalf of the member for Parkdale—High Park a petition calling upon the Parliament of Canada and the Minister of Industry to strongly reaffirm its commitment to chair the copyright board immediately upon a judgment with respect to parliament's intent.

I would appreciate if it could be accepted by parliament.

[Youth Employment, June 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the President of the Treasury Board. Canada's youth unemployment is nearly double that of any other age group. Thousands of young Canadians are looking for work to complete their education.

As the largest employer in the country, can the President of the Treasury Board tell this House what this government is doing to alleviate this desperate situation for students?

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, that was a very fine question.

As far as I know Eddie the Eagle was a ski jumper with Great Britain in one of the Olympics. I suspect that Eddie the Eagle as a ski jumper was not terribly successful, as will this not be very successful.

The simple fact is that in this justice system, as imperfect as it is, it is working. I argue that crime is down. The perception of crime is up but the fact of crime is down. That is a good message. That means this government is working properly.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is appalling to the extreme that one of the leading members of the Reform Party should speak in this fashion. The two parties that would like to lead us into separation sit opposite. Those are the two parties that degenerate this country and make it a very difficult country to govern.

The hon. member's infatuation with Diane Francis, who is nothing other than a mouthpiece for the Reform Party, fails to understand in its essence the point of my speech. I can see that the hon. member has missed the point of the answers that he has been getting from the finance minister in the House of Commons as well. He is obviously not listening.

He is not listening that the CHST was in fact raised from $11 billion up to $12.5 billion. He obviously does not understand the point of tax room. He does not understand that tax room has in fact created more money in the hands of the Mike Harrises and the Lucien Bouchards of this world. He just simply does not get it.

It is typical of the Reform Party members. They do not get it. If we continue to downsize the federal government there will be no Canada as we know it.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that statistically most offences involving firearms are committed by people who are known to the victim. It is something in the order of 80% or 90%. Anytime a piece of legislation is being passed which makes guns and weapons generally inaccessible to those kinds of classes of people, we are ahead of the game.

This is a matter of registration. As loath as I am to adopt the remarks of my colleague sitting with me here from Mississauga West, I am of the view that this is a simple form of registration. It is a registration that is easily filled out. It is similar to a car registration. It is similar to birth registration. It is similar to other forms of registration which a civilized society requires.

What we are trying to fashion in this country is a civilized society which is distinct from Ms. Francis' favourite country, the one to the south of us.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is one thing to speak to empty seats and it is another thing to speak to empty heads. The issue that was raised was the fronting of the Reform Party by this particular columnist.

To go to the member's question, it reminds me of the election and particularly of a constituent on whose door I was knocking. I was getting quite a beating about this particular piece of legislation of interest to the member opposite. As I was getting beaten up I could see that his wife was coming to the door. She had a tea towel over her arm. She slapped him and said “Don't listen to that idiot, he doesn't know anything about gun control”. That was the response of many of my constituents in Scarborough East.

Any piece of legislation, and this is under the how part, which removes guns, which makes guns less accessible to the citizens of this country is a good piece of legislation by definition. During this past election we had a terrible incident involving long guns which I know the member opposite is quite interested in, resulting in the death of a spouse and four children.

I do not care how the legislation is drafted. I do not care how the regulations are drafted. In my community of Scarborough East this is good legislation and it gets guns inaccessible to more and more citizens. Anything that does that, I am in favour of.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, one hesitates to say that one will get to it in a timely fashion. It is difficult to determine relevance for members opposite since one has to speak so slowly to get to the point.

Having elucidated that in fact only about 33% is available for federal government program spending and in that program spending are justice issues, I would say that is a matter of relevance and concern to all members.

As I pointed out, absent a strong federal government to provide a role of leadership in this issue, we play into the hands of the Lucien Bouchards, the Mike Harrises and the Glen Clarks of this world who fervently desire the little flag sur le hood exercise.

Ms. Francis is a great admirer of California. If we follow her suggestion, that is exactly how we will end up, one of the states governed by Washington. That is exactly where some members opposite would wish us to go. I would put a number of members in the category of fervently desiring to be nothing other than a state of the United States.

It has been a 150-year struggle to continue to identify Canada as a nation and we are by and large, in spite of members opposite, doing rather well in accordance with the United Nations identifications. By any UN standards we are doing very well.

I would recommend to members opposite as they peruse the justice estimates that they also refer to the Fraser Forum for bedtime reading. That in and of itself identifies Canada as a foremost country in this issue.

Ms. Francis and her political front, the Reform Party, do not understand Canadian history and government finances.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intervention of the hon. member, but you will note that Motion No. 1 accounts for $193 million worth of spending in areas of justice. In my riding that is an area of extreme significance.

These are areas of spending with which we have already dealt. We are down to 33% of the balance of the federal government's moneys, and in those moneys, of course, are justice moneys.

I am assuming that Ms. Francis approves of our spending in areas of veterans affairs. I assume she does not wish to cut off veterans from their benefits. I also assume that she does not want to cut aboriginal expenditures. She neglected to mention anything with respect to those issues, out of oversight rather than any intention on her part.

I do not wish to get too detailed for fear that the essential point will be lost on hon. members opposite.

The federal government has gone to great lengths to remove itself from overlapping jurisdiction and wasteful expenditures particularly in the area of justice. The hon. member should be aware that the justice system is largely administered by the provinces. Not only is the federal government far leaner than it was before, it is now arguably one of the most efficient governments in the world.

When you read the overblown rhetoric of this particular columnist and members opposite it sounds like sound bite journalism. One has to wonder whether members opposite and this journalist have been in a coma since 1993.

Far from being one of the most overgoverned jurisdictions in the world, just the opposite is true. Sixty-seven per cent of government revenues require virtually no bureaucracy at all. We collect it and then we ship it out.

Again I quote Ms. Francis “We have too many layers of bureaucracy doing too many of the same things. We have too many municipalities and school boards complicating our lives and adding to costs. We have too many provinces. We have too big a federal government”.

The facts point in exactly the opposite direction. To the extent that the federal government is able to remove itself from overlapping jurisdictions, it has. In some respects and arguably it has become somewhat too remote from the daily lives of Canadians. Absence of a strong federal government to provide a sense of being Canadian, Canada will degenerate into a bunch of separatist entities which plays into the agenda of the Lucien Bouchards of this world, and the Glen Clarks of this world. This is the world they—