Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today on Bill C-29, since I am very close to it as a result of my past experience.
My first job was with Parks Canada in P.E.I. in 1981, and my last federal government job was at the Kouchibouguac National Park. So I have seen a lot of things first hand, particularly the developments between 1981 and 1997. I saddens me to see the direction our parks are taking today.
The first reason to create the agency is, as my colleague has said, downsizing, or job cuts. It is privatization. When the announcement came a couple of years ago that an agency would be created, I can still clearly remember our conference call with Mr. Tom Lee. It was clear that jobs were going to be lost.
We were also headed toward alternate service delivery, which means people get shown the door and then hired again on contract at a considerable loss in salary, from $15 to $5.50 an hour. When that first teleconference was held we were not fully in agreement, and those same concerns are still with us today.
I am giving you the real facts, for I lived them. If one looks at exactly what is going on in the parks today it is true that some have already got to another stage.
If people wonder what my job was, I was a cashier. I was the person who took money at the entrance. Often, families would turn up who did not have the $7 needed to get in and use the beaches, the bike paths, the walking trails. They had to turn their cars around and leave. We would have paid the fee out of our own pockets if we had been able to afford it, so that their kids could get to the beach.
That is where things have got to today. That is what the bill will bring in, a continuity of the process of making national parks accessible only to those who can afford the high fees to rent a camp site, use the bike paths and our beautiful beaches, enjoy nature. The national parks are very lovely, and they exist for a reason.
Today, they are in the process of being destroyed. Today, there is a charge for a little bundle of wood for a camp fire. Before people had to pay for wood, we had no problems with our camp sites. Now people are cutting down the trees in our national parks because they do not want to pay the $3 or $5 extra for firewood. Our parks are now being destroyed.
This agency cannot offer any guarantee that this is for the good of our parks, because that is not true. It is absolutely false.
We must also look at the reasons why national parks were established. They were estaablished to protect nature and to make sure these places would still be there for future generations. Many national parks are located in high unemployment areas. Often, they are the main employer.
Back home, I was one of the best paid employees in the region at $13 per hour, because the park was the main employer. Just think that people in these regions have to accept seasonal jobs that pay $5.50 an hour.
There are other reasons that explain what the government is doing. As my colleague pointed out, the government wants the parks to become self-sufficient and self-financing eventually.
I can see it coming. I can also see how the human aspect is absent from our parks. When I started with the parks, in 1981, the focus was on client services. Clients came first. By the summer of 1996, the priority had become “give me your $7”, or “give me your $18”. Fees are unbelievably high and they are not consistent across the country. In some parks they are very high, compared to other places.
Those who cannot afford such fees have no way of seeing, of discovering the natural resources of our national parks, and the situation will only get worse.
As a former regional vice-president of the public service alliance for the Atlantic region, I have a pretty good understanding of national parks in that region. I heard people's concerns. At one time, people were given this alternative: either we create an agency, or we make this cut and that cut. People have no choice. No one likes this system. People have to choose the lesser of two evils.
The New Democratic Party clearly will not support this bill. It is unacceptable. It goes against what we believe. All Canadians should have access to our national parks. This access should not depend on their income.
The more the government increases the cost of services, the further it is pushing in the same direction. The philosophy is “if you do not have money in this country, too bad. We changed the rules and you will no longer have access to anything”. That pattern can be seen in health care, education and the national parks.
It is very obvious that the government wants to follow the Reform Party's philosophy, which is “if you do not have money in this country, too bad”. I have a problem with that, because at one time I was among those who do not have money. I was also one of those who were expropriated from Kouchibouguac national park. I am very familiar with national parks, and I know why we pay for parks. Today, I can see that the government is changing direction, and this is not acceptable.