Madam Speaker, this is the last opportunity I have during these scheduled debates to speak specifically on the budget.
The budget document outlines the Liberal version of national priorities. It certainly has now been widely accepted that this year's budget lacked courage and does not sufficiently respond to the new realities we are facing in international finance, where money and wealth have no loyalties. At the mere touch of a key on a terminal, disgruntled or nervous investors representing large blocks of funds can turn against an economy when the wrong signals are sent.
We must not forget that much of what is done in investing and international finance is in the realm of what is believed may happen in the future, what is being speculated on.
The range of options a government has in order to perform for the international audience is becoming smaller. At this point the Canadian government still has a few choices left but these in themselves may not be available for long.
Specifically, the enactment of this bill implements various parts of the February 22, 1994 budget. It affects persons employed in the public service as well as federally appointed judges, parliamentary agents, the Governor General, Lieutenant Governors, parliamentarians and members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP.
This law extends the freeze for two years, suspends the upward movement within salary scales for a two year period and enables incentive payments to be made to indeterminate employees of National Defence, Emergency Preparedness and the Communications Security Establishment under the civilian reduction program.
It also fixes a maximum on contributions to provinces under the Canada assistance plan. It extends restrictions on the payment to provinces under the Public Utilities Income Tax Transfer Act.
It makes permanent the 10 per cent reduction in payments to railways under the Atlantic Regions Freight Assistance Act. It increases the reduction in the government share of freight rates under the Western Grain Transportation Act.
The act also allows the CBC to borrow money.
The act establishes a two tier benefit rate in unemployment insurance at 60 per cent for low earners and a basic rate of 55 per cent. It reduces employee premiums to 3 per cent of insurable earnings in 1995. There is also a new benefit entitlement schedule which addresses the link between work history and duration of entitlement. The minimum entrance requirement is increased from 10 to 12 weeks of work.
It provides that workers suspended for misconduct, who take a leave of absence or quit their jobs for a few weeks before the end of their employment will no longer be disqualified from receiving benefits for their entire entitlement period. They will not be entitled to benefits while suspended or on leave or while their contract of employment continues. The benefit of the doubt will be given to claimants on these and other issues related to just cause or misconduct where the evidence is equally balanced.
The act also authorizes the establishment and operation of pilot projects to study ways to make unemployment insurance more efficient.
That is the general description of this bill. However, it really falls short of what the country needs. I am sure the finance minister and members of the cabinet are reasonable people who realize what must be done. The problem is they do not have the political courage to do the right thing for the long term benefit of the nation, compared to the leadership it will demand in the short term to get everyone on side, the vested interests, the self-centred thinkers, the politicians who seek to please for the short term at all costs.
That is what is represented by this bill: a government that is only beginning to say it hears what the majority are saying, rather than being prepared to act on what the majority are saying.
The budget in general terms sounded as if it came from the Reform Party book but when one checked the numbers against the rhetoric all credibility was lost. That is why I say this bill before us today falls so short.
I am not opposing just for the sake of opposing. I truly believe that under the guise of being lean and not mean the government is discovered to be weak in what it perceives is the prescription necessary to be a manager of the national economic climate.
Compared with either the experience of other countries or with our own history, the four decades between the end of World War II and the mid-1980s were a period of some measure of economic success for Canada. The Canadian economy grew to be one of the strongest in the world. The lot in life of the average Canadian greatly improved during that period.
The basic reason was the development of our resource base. We traded our way to prosperity. However the traditional advantages that Canada has had are disappearing and we are being eclipsed. The resource sector will always be important but the rate of growth we have known because of it is gone.
We expect to enjoy continued improvement in our standard of living. If we expect to engage in the kind of public programs at home and abroad that we like then we are going to have to find a new economic vocation and vision.
Canadians are beginning to realize what is needed is a vision of a new Canada and that is coming from this corner of the House. The ethical, democratic and economic visions Reformers have developed in close dialogue with communities outline the prescription of required action, not the timid measures in this bill, but bold efficacious governance that leads with courage and compassion.
The very last thing we should do about our situation is nothing. We cannot afford to assume, like this government, that things would work out for themselves in our favour without much adaptation, without much effort or without using our creative minds. Change begins with the recognition that a problem exists.
I am encouraged that government members are increasingly sounding like Reformers. They are getting the talk. We on this side are getting through to many on the other side. Many more know in their hearts that we are right but they are part of a club, a gang that plays the political game as if it were politics as usual in Canada and that if they just talk nice and do lots of opinion polling they will keep power. Others appear to have a sincere desire to do what is right for the nation but have not yet gathered
the courage to make a difference, to say no to what they rationally know is the wrong course for Canada.
I invite them for once in the history of Canada to vote against this bill, vote against their club. Say to history and to all time there were members with courage and principle who acted for the national interests rather than self interests.
We must secure our economic base as a nation. As a trading nation we must be in the international trading game with courage and vigour and not shrink from trading arrangements that foster openness, yet strongly monitor the international rules, and without fear holds other players to account.
We must restructure our income security to ensure that in providing assistance from public funds those who are given priority are those who need assistance the most. We have built a comprehensive set of programs but these efforts do not adequately meet the requirements of those who should have first call on our national resources, those most in need. We will be forced to do it. We will do it ourselves in a compassionate manner or we will have it done for us in blunt terms from outside forces.
Education at all levels must have a greater level of proportion of resources. Our emphasis in education must not be just to train for a specific task but to prepare the workforce to adapt to changing opportunities. A commitment to education goes with a commitment to research. Enhancing the Canadian capacity to do the basic work of discovery and our ability to apply the results in the marketplace will also be keys to future economic success.
We have another basic economic question in Canada that is not solved by the budget. We must address interprovincial and interregional conflict. Canada must become an open market within its borders. The free movement of goods, capital, labour and cultural pursuits is fundamental.
One of the past strengths of Confederation has been that we have found ways in our political system to accommodate regional differences. Indeed Canadians are generous and tolerant of difference, but we bridle and chafe at the prospect of preference. Therefore we need a new set of institutions which can aid in bringing about a better reconciliation of regional differences.
Finally we have come to expect that we will play a positive role in the world. Attempting to help others is not a Canadian service that is new to this generation. Missionaries from Canadian churches began to play a significant role in other countries in the last century and continue to do so, as our soldiers have done in this one.
We have a proud history of making the world a more stable place and we have been prepared to pay the price. The great powers have their role. Because we are not one of them we can more uniquely play a positive role in international economic and political affairs. We can ensure that the interests of the small as well as the great are taken into account within the community of nations.
While we cast our vision afar, we must also do some repairs at home. We must erase the consequences of our misguided political ideologies and economic policies of the last decade.
In closing, for government to be effective we must be open and honest with Canadians. This will be politically hazardous for some but it will be necessary if the Canadian people are to be involved in charting Canada's course. The more we can bring democracy into this House and involve Canadians in the decision making process we will realize our potential for the 21st century.