Debates of Nov. 3rd, 1999

Speech From The Throne

[David Pratt, Liberal, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise in the House today to participate in the throne speech debate.

First I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Her Excellency our new Governor General on her historic appointment. I wish her nothing but the very best of luck in the years ahead with her new and important responsibilities.

The government's throne speech is a blueprint which lays the foundation for the government's plans in the years to come. As we approach the new millennium, there is an unprecedented optimism in Canada's future which is captured in the eloquence of the throne speech. What an unbelievable change from just a few short years ago.

In 1993, the last year of the Conservative government, Canada's fiscal house was crumbling on its very foundation. The previous Conservative government let the debt skyrocket out of control for years and was operating with a $42 billion deficit. The country was literally teetering on the brink of financial disaster. Liberals understood that if Canada was to be a global force to be reckoned with in the new millennium, we absolutely had to get this country back on track. Canada needed bold leadership, sound fiscal policy and unparalleled political courage to restore our national future.

Six years later, we have delivered. Canada has moved from red ink to black ink, from pessimism to pride. In four short years we eliminated the deficit and recorded a budgetary surplus of $3.5 billion in 1998, the first surplus in 28 years. We have regained the capacity to make choices of how we build the future. We are now positioned to be a leader in the new and ever changing global arena.

This throne speech for the millennium builds upon our original and balanced and comprehensive plan. We are committed to staying the course in an effort to improve the lives of each and every Canadian. Our plan includes developing our children and youth, leaders for the 21st century; enhancing our dynamic economy; strengthening the quality of our health care; ensuring the quality of the environment; building stronger communities; and advancing Canada's place in the world.

In the new global economy, knowledge and technological innovation are the cornerstones of a higher standard of living and a better quality of life. This government is committed to Canada's role as a global leader in high technology. This is very good news, especially for my constituency.

My riding of Nepean—Carleton is situated in the hub of Canada's fastest growing region of high technology firms, Silicon Valley North, as it has become known. This region is responsible for 75% of Canada's telecommunications research and development. It boasts almost 1,000 advanced technology companies that employ more than 48,000 people.

From rather humble beginnings with agencies like the National Research Council and the Communications Research Establishment to companies like Bell Northern and Computing Devices, small companies have grown into large companies. These companies in turn have spawned other companies featuring new products and new technology. This cycle continues to create jobs and prosperity and export dollars for Canada.

It is vital that the government remains committed to promoting Canada's role as a leader in new technologies. Month by month the government's policies aimed at growth in this sector of the economy continue to bear fruit.

Yesterday, Nortel Networks announced that it plans to invest $330 million in Canada to enhance its booming optical networking business, tripling overall production capacity by next year. Montreal and Ottawa are the greatest beneficiaries of this major capital infusion. New high tech facilities will be constructed in both cities with approximately 2,300 new jobs shared between the two. In total, Nortel expects to invest $210 million in Ottawa and an additional $120 million in Montreal.

Just last July, JDS Uniphase, which employs close to 2,400 workers in my riding, unveiled its new 500,000 square foot research facility in Nepean.

Both announcements and the scores of others we hear on a regular basis from this industry are indicative of the high level of confidence in Canada's high technology future and the future of the Ottawa area as Silicon Valley North. This is a clear sign that globally renowned companies on the cutting edge of the new information technologies recognize that Canada is indeed the place to be in the 21st century.

I will say a few words about the finance minister's fiscal update which he delivered yesterday. It is clearly a fundamental and integral component of the government's plans for the years ahead as expressed in the throne speech.

Profound congratulations are in order for the Minister of Finance. Yesterday he delivered an economic statement that can only be described as extraordinary. He has done an absolutely superb job. Together, the throne speech and the economic and fiscal update are a one-two punch for Canada that moves us into a class by ourselves. Together these two documents show tremendous leadership and vision by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Finance's economic statement is consistent with what the government has said all along, that the Canadian economy is very strong and our finances are very sound. Unemployment is at a decade-long low. Interest rates and inflation are both under control. The forecast of unprecedented budget surpluses over the next five years is staggering.

I applaud the finance minister's pledge to keep an open and transparent budget planning process. The more Canadians know about and have input into our economic situation, the better the government can work to the benefit of all Canadians.

I wish to express my unqualified support for the fact that the government is refusing to be complacent about fiscal responsibility. The openness and care with which the contingency reserve funds are to be handled and the commitment to never fund tax relief with borrowed dollars are vitally important. I am sure this is a great comfort to Canadians.

Let me talk about our future prosperity, the foundation for which has been laid by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and the government.

First and most crucial, yesterday's economic and fiscal update made it abundantly clear that skills, knowledge and building a more innovative economy remain the critical investment priorities of this government. Beginning at the earliest stages of development right through to post-secondary education and beyond, the government's plan for the future displays a lifetime commitment to our children for their lifetime.

I speak of the extension of parental EI benefits, of the $7 billion national child benefit system, of the $1.2 billion Canadian opportunities strategy, and of the Canada education savings grant, as merely the beginning of the initiatives which the government will take on.

The investment in Canadian prosperity does not stop there. It is well acknowledged that the societies which will thrive over the next decade not just economically but in all aspects are those societies which excel at innovation. We must foster an economic environment which will make our brightest minds want to stay and innovate in Canada.

The proposed multi-year program for sustained and broad based tax relief is a fundamental component of our economic and fiscal plans. The underlying philosophy of the government's approach to tax cuts were conveyed in yesterday's economic statement.

I quote the Minister of Finance directly: “There are many reasons for reducing taxes. However, there is one I would like to mention because it is too frequently overlooked. It is quite simply that Canadians are entitled to keep more of the money they earn. After all, they worked for it. It is theirs”. Those are the words of our finance minister, a true tax cutter.

The reduction of employment insurance premiums for the sixth consecutive year will also put a further $1.2 billion into the pockets of Canadians. The determination of the government to make our business tax system internationally competitive will keep jobs, and of equal importance, brain power, innovation and excellence in Canada where they belong.

Let me take this opportunity to say a few words concerning how the throne speech relates to Canada's place in the world. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Canadians want their government to play an active, independent and internationalist role in the world.

What are our responsibilities as one of the most peaceful and prosperous countries on the face of the planet? There is an old saying that to whom much has been given much is expected. The world has the right to expect a lot from Canada through our involvement in the global community and we must not let it down.

We have made and continue to make significant contributions to peacekeeping and international development. With Canadian peacekeepers in Bosnia, Kosovo and East Timor, just to mention some of the more significant deployments, we have the largest contingent of Canadians abroad since the Korean war. With the recent announcements of more funds for international development assistance, combined with our peacekeeping, Canada is doing its share, but there is still much to do.

Our foreign minister's human security agenda which seeks to enhance the safety of civilians in armed conflicts is in my view one of the most important foreign policy initiatives to come out of this country in decades. While we have made progress on the land mines issue and the International Court of Justice, the challenges ahead are immense.

To sum up, this is a throne speech that exudes confidence in Canada, our economic and social future, as well as our privileged place in the family of nations. It is a throne speech that speaks to our achievements and looks ahead to the challenges and great opportunities that Canada faces in the 21st century.

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Madam Speaker, once again I heard about the quality of life. The hon. member knows that Canada was chosen by the United Nations as being the best country in which to live. He also knows that if Indian reserves are factored in then that moves us to 35th. That is a quote from the United Nations. It is then far worse than some countries, even Mexico and Jamaica, with the life on the reserves factored in, with the poverty, the turmoil and the difficulties that exist there.

I do not want to be told that we need to put more money into the department because the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is the only department that has had an increase in its budget every year since the government came into power. It is not more money that is needed.

What is the member suggesting that the government should do about the quality of life of the people who are ranked 35th in the world? There are third world conditions in Canada.

[David Pratt, Liberal, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I feel that the hon. member opposite has misinterpreted or misunderstood the human development index.

I took the opportunity just shortly after the index was released and the announcement made to go to the United Nations website and print out a huge document covering all aspects of the human development index. The place that Canada occupies in the human development index is based on a wide range of factors which takes into account things like life expectancy, education and quality of health care. There are an enormous number of criteria contained in that index. As a result of taking into account all the criteria, Canada ranks number one in the world. It is extraordinary that we have been in that place for the last six years.

That is not to say that in certain areas we cannot do better. Clearly, as it relates to our aboriginal population, we must do better. Some initiatives the government has taken, and I am thinking specifically with respect to the Nisga'a treaty, lay the foundation for prosperity for our aboriginal peoples. It points the way in terms of the self-government process which the government has adopted of allowing native Canadians to run their own affairs and to have some control over their future. As bad as things may be for our native population according to the hon. member, things have to be kept in perspective with respect to how other parts of the world live.

I know the Reform Party has never been very keen on international development, but I had the opportunity to represent this country as a special envoy to Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone is ranked last of 174 nations under the human development index. Having seen the conditions in which the people in that country live, I wish in some respects that many Canadians would have the opportunity to go to places like that so they could see how the poorest of the poor live. I am sure they would probably feel as I did. They would want to come back to this country and kiss the very ground we walk on.

We are blessed in this country. We are prosperous. Our country is peaceful compared to many other places in the world. We have an obligation not just to help native Canadians and aboriginal Canadians but to help other people in the world through our international development assistance programs.

We have a responsibility to assist others who are in need. The government takes that responsibility very seriously. I am absolutely delighted that our government has taken the opportunity of the throne speech to announce more funds for international development because I think Canada does have a responsibility. We are doing a great deal but we can always do more.

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will share my time with the member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac.

On behalf of my constituents in the riding of Compton—Stanstead, I am pleased to speak to the Speech from the Throne. I congratulate the new Governor General, Adrienne Clarkson, on her new challenge, which, I am sure, she will meet with dignity and wisdom.

I would like to say a few words on several matters not included in the throne speech, inadvertently no doubt. I realize that, in the throne speech, no one expects all the details, but it should at least contain an outline of all the areas of government responsibility.

I have to mention two items that were not addressed in the throne speech. The first was national defence. There was one line at the end of the speech which basically said nothing. I will quote it:

The Government will also continue to ensure that Canadian Forces have the capacity to support Canada's role in building a more secure world and will further develop the capacity of Canadians to help ensure peace and security in foreign land.

The first line is interesting. I think we all know a lot better than that. We have a national defence system that is dying of equipment rust out. Yes, we do have a few pieces of state of the art equipment but we are lacking in 90% of our equipment.

Governments around the world all know and say that national defence planning is long term. In 1994 we put forth a white paper with a long term affordable plan. This plan has now been put by the wayside. If the standing committee had not concentrated on the quality of life of our soldiers, they would still be living below the poverty line. Imagine working poor in our military.

I congratulate the Minister of National Defence for supporting the SCONDVA in the quality of life report to date. I hope he will continue to do so. There will be reports coming to the House giving us the heads up on quality of life issues, but I only wish the minister would follow through on the 1994 white paper.

The 1994 white paper is this government's document. I would understand if it were from a previous government that it would not honour such a paper. We do see this a lot. This is a plan to which all parties agreed. It is not a grandiose plan. It is a plan to get our military back on its feet and to give our soldiers a better working chance to do their job with safe and modern equipment. Our military is stretched to its limit in both manpower and equipment. We cannot even work under our own flag when we take up peacekeeping duties throughout the world.

Let us look at all the peacekeeping locations in which we are working under another country. Small groups all over the world cost far more than having one brigade group under our own flag with proper rotation so that all our soldiers can get proper rest and family time. This is a high stress job. Many of the problems we see in our military are caused from this stress. Regular rotation and rest would reduce many of the physical and mental problems. I could go on with many more details but there is a lack of time.

I would also like to discuss another subject which I did not see addressed in the throne speech, immigration. I do not think anyone would argue against the fact that our immigration system is broken. This was evident this summer with the west coast migrant problem. This is but the tip of the iceberg. The 600 refugee claimants on the west coast represent only 2% of our annual total.

The former minister had promised a new bill on immigration for October 1999. Today is November 3, and from what I can see, this new bill is not on the agenda of the House or the standing committee.

The problem of illegal refugees is very easy to understand. It is a lot easier and quicker to enter Canada this way even if the practice is illegal and very dangerous for those who choose it.

The Canadian Trucking Association urgently needs 5,000 employees that it cannot recruit in Canada. However, our immigration system is slow to react. Two-year delays are unreasonable and unacceptable, particularly when there is a lack of knowledge about the qualifications required. For instance, seeing a doctor or an accountant delivering pizza or driving a taxi, seems ridiculous to me.

I want to describe a typical case seen by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, another department that stands out, unfortunately, for its inefficiency.

In June 1998, one of my constituents applied to the embassy in the Republic of Ghana for permanent residence for his wife, who was seven months pregnant. The same month, approval was received from the provincial and federal governments. It seems very, very simple. Several months passed and the only information the woman received about her application was that she would be called to an interview at some point in time. She would then be asked to undergo a medical examination.

On February 8, 1999, in other words several months later, her husband came to my riding office to ask me to try to find out what I could about his file.

The woman gave birth on January 8, 1999. An initial e-mail was immediately sent to the embassy, requesting that I be told where the file was at. There was no reply. On February 16, 1999, the man got in touch with his wife, who said that the interview was to take place in March 1999 or as soon as an officer went to Bamako. Depending on how the interview went, an medical examination would follow.

On April 1, 1999, another e-mail went out from my riding office to the embassy. Once again, there was no reply. On April 6, 1999, my office send a new e-mail, and again on April 13.

Finally, on April 15, I receive a reply which reads as follows: “The following is in response to your message of April 13, 1999. The woman will have to be interviewed before a decision can be made. We were unable to reach her on time during our last trip to Bamako, in March. We therefore put her name back on the waiting list for our next trip, the date of which has yet to be determined”. “However, if she can make the trip to Abidjan, she could be interviewed quickly, that is within a week's notice. If the applicant and the assisting relative choose that option, let me know so that arrangements can be made accordingly”.

I therefore informed my constituent and I gave notice of the option chosen by this woman, who will travel to Abidjan. On April 27, 1999, the woman showed up for her interview in Abidjan. On May 19, she underwent her medical examination. She was declared healthy and now simply had to wait for her visa. On July 5, 1999, my constituent came to see me again and told me that he has not heard anything about his wife's visa since May.

That same day, an e-mail was sent to the embassy, asking for information about the wife's visa. On July 6, the embassy replied that the husband's divorce certificate was required.

Is it not odd that a whole year had passed before the immigration adviser realized this document was missing from the file? Yet at the interview the wife was never informed of the obligation to provide this document.

On July 9, the husband's divorce certificate was faxed to the embassy and my constituent has proof that it was sent. On July 16, 1999, I again e-mailed the embassy, asking for confirmation that the certificate had been received. On August 2, I sent another e-mail to the embassy. I have still not received an answer.

On August 17, I still had heard nothing from the embassy. I sent another e-mail on August 27. What is going on? Canada's embassies are understaffed.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I am sorry, but the hon. member's time is up.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague's account. This is clearly a very difficult circumstance for the people actually involved.

We deal with 210 or 212 countries on a regular basis in terms of immigration. It is an extraordinary thing.

I, for example, live in a riding which does not consider itself particularly “ethnic” and yet I represent between 60 and 70 first generation nationalities. I know there are colleagues on this side from the great cities of Canada who also represent 200 different first generation Canadians. I mention that to the member, not as an excuse, but as a fact. It is very complex out there and our embassies struggle with a variety of people.

By the way, when I say 210 to 212, if we are dealing with a country like India they may well be dealing with not just five or six official languages but with hundreds of other languages. There are difficulties and I know my colleague is aware of them.

I, like the member, work as hard as I can on immigration cases. Does he, as a member of parliament, ever consider dealing with people in the department here in Canada? I know e-mail is a wonderful thing, but when it gets complicated and has gone on for 12 months, does he ever pick up the phone and deal directly with the embassies? He is clearly fluent in both of our official languages and can do that.

I have one last question to ask the member. What is the relevance of this to the Speech from the Throne?

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will go through this very quickly and I will do it in English.

To answer part of the hon. member's question, yes, I did do a lot of this myself and I did try phoning several times. As I mentioned at the outset, this is just one of many cases. I live in an area with a very low ethnic population but I deal with cases like this on a very regular basis. I think the biggest problem is a lack of people in our embassies to do the work. We also know there has been a huge cut in the number of people.

In reference to what this has to do with the Speech from the Throne, I mentioned of course the armed forces which was very lightly gone over in the Speech from the Throne, but immigration was not mentioned at all.

The Speech from the Throne is supposed to set out the priorities of the government in general terms. I said at the outset that we were not expecting to see details. We are looking at the generalities. Everything should be covered in the Speech from the Throne. There was nothing about immigration, in particular since immigration has been one of the top problems today.

The case I brought forward is not a refugee problem. It is the problem of getting a family back together, something that is supposed to have a very high priority. At the end of the file the lady finally received her visa a couple of weeks ago after a year and a half. She was pregnant when she applied. In that time period she had the baby. Her husband has had the opportunity to go there but it is very expensive to run back and forth. It seems so unfair when we are trying to get families together that we are not doing it.

There should have been a reference in the Speech from the Throne stating that we should be doing something about immigration. The minister promised to bring forward a bill in October. It is now November. When we look at the agenda there is nothing there. There is nothing happening in committee. The bill is not coming forward. That is what I am talking about.

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

Madam Speaker, today I am talking about what was not in the throne speech. That is what we have to look at. There were a lot of areas not covered and what was in the speech was vague, anyway.

There was no vision in the throne speech for the unemployed who are dependent on social assistance. There was no vision for our youth. The throne speech made absolutely no reference to an increase in transfer payments to the provinces that administer those programs.

There was mention of children. However the day after the throne speech there were as many hungry children as the day before. I am not sure that there was a lot in the speech for children.

Transfer payments have been slashed by billions of dollars since the arrival of the Liberal government, actually $11 billion.

That is a lot of money. If they think that problems can be solved by cutting back programs, they are mistaken. If they continue to take money from the provinces administering these programs, our children will keep on going to school hungry, and they will keep on saying “I cannot afford to stay in school past Grade 12”. This is not acceptable, especially in a rich country like Canada.

What have these cuts caused in our communities? Since 1993 we have 500,000 more poor children in this very rich country. This means more children are going to school hungry.

I must take this opportunity to commend Premier Bernard Lord for initiating and putting in place a breakfast program in our schools, a program very much needed since the arrival of the Liberal government in 1993.

In New Brunswick during the Liberal regime of the McKenna and Thériault governments they slashed over 600 hospital worker jobs during their 10 year reign in New Brunswick. With only three months in power Premier Lord announced 300 new jobs in our health care system. Again I commend him. It shows that if we want to we can. Premier Lord is dealing with the same amount of money that Camille Thériault and Frank McKenna were dealing with, but what they were doing was slashing. It seems to be a habit of theirs as it is in Ottawa.

For our young men and women wanting to further their education after high school there was certainly no vision in the throne speech. To be $50,000 in debt after four to six years of university is certainly unacceptable. The children of our rich country should be given a real chance to be prepared and ready to lead our country in the future. A $50,000 debt is an obstacle that must be addressed. It can be addressed by the Liberal government increasing transfer payments to the provinces.

We have to look at the reality of things. I often hear young people say “I will not be going on after grade 12. It is too expensive and there are no jobs. I have to move here, I have to move there, I have to go to the U.S.”.

Our young people do not have a vision of the future. They must be shown that they can find work in their province and that they can have post-secondary education. Our young people can contribute to their community, but they will not do so by leaving the regions.

Clearly the decisions made here in Ottawa targeted the Atlantic region. We have seen what that meant in federal elections: the number of Liberal members dropped from 31 to 11 here in Ottawa. Clearly, the decisions made targeted the Atlantic regions.

Another reason for the greater number of poor in our country is the cuts to the employment insurance program. No one here can say otherwise. It is clear that there is more poverty.

In the throne speech there is no mention of the negative impact felt by seasonal workers in this country. Seasonal workers are everywhere in this country. They are not only in the Atlantic regions. They exist throughout the country. They depend on the seasons and not on employment insurance.

That is very important. People have to realize that seasonal workers are not dependent on the employment insurance program. They are dependent on the seasons. If we could have summer for eight months of the year in New Brunswick, believe me, we would take it. People would work during that season. If it were a tourist season of eight months, be assured that people would be working.

We have to stop attacking the seasonal workers. They are a very important group. Every day we use or eat something that a seasonal worker worked at.

Obviously, the deficit was paid down on the backs of high unemployment regions, as the fund's surplus is $26 billion. However, people who are not eligible for employment insurance benefits go for weeks and months without any income.

It is clear, with a $26 billion surplus in the fund that we did not get that money where the EI was not being used. That money came from the regions where there was very high unemployment and people either did not qualify or went for two to three months with no income or got a $32 per week cheque. That is how we got that money.

Let us not forget that, for every poor child, there are poor parents. In a country as rich as ours, this is unacceptable.

We also have to talk about health care, a program so important to all Canadians. I have done surveys and we can talk to any group. Our health care program is very important. We want to keep our health care program. Without increasing transfer payments to the provinces, health care services will continue to deteriorate. Our hospitals need more doctors, nurses and other health care workers. Canadians need this now. Lives are depending on the government's actions.

There was also no mention of our fishery crisis. It is a crisis. Our caucus was given a presentation by Mr. Christmas this morning. I was very shocked to hear that the first nations are negotiating to obtain actually between 30% and 50% of the Atlantic fishery. I wonder where the government is on this. This afternoon I made phone calls to different fishermen. I asked if they were aware that the aboriginal people had put on the table that they want 30% to 50% of the Atlantic fishery.

I hope that finally the government will take some leadership and that it will talk to both groups. A lot of families are depending on that. I hope the government is going to do something because to do nothing is not an option at this point.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

It being 6.30 p.m., the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.30 p.m.)