Debates of May 8th, 2000

Voice Mail Service

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the federal government should encourage the CRTC to establish regulations that require telephone companies to assist community agencies with providing affordable voice mail service to Canadians who cannot afford or do not have access to telephone service.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to be in the House today to speak to my motion. The purpose of this motion is to mandate phone accessibility and phone service for low income and homeless Canadians who, as it stands today, have absolutely no access to this very basic service that most of us take for granted.

My motion before the House today was inspired by a project that was initiated a couple of years ago by a very well known community organization in Vancouver's downtown eastside, the Downtown Eastside Residents Association, which started what was called a community voice mailbox system.

In starting up this system, the organization found that many low income and homeless people who had no access to phone service were incredibly limited in terms of being able to find employment or make contact with doctors offices or even family members. This organization worked very hard. It was approached by a young man who had developed a computer software program to create the program. For a very modest amount of $1,500, it received the computer and the software program, the voice mail service.

The organization found that many people, not just in the downtown eastside but in other neighbourhoods in Vancouver and on the lower mainland, desperately needed access to phone service. As a result of providing this service over the last couple of years, about 1,200 people are now registered. The use of the service is increasing on a daily basis.

The statistics provided to me by the organization are quite interesting. They show that approximately 79% of the users of this service are single men and that 60% of the users have annual incomes of less than $8,000. I would ask anyone in the House to imagine what it would be like to live on less than $8,000. It would mean no money for bus fare, no money for a phone and no money for the basic necessities of life. It basically would mean scraping by and surviving day by day.

What is most interesting is that more than half of the users of this voice mail service have said that having a community voice mail and having one's own phone number has given them a starting point for having more control over their lives. I cannot emphasize enough what that means to an individual. Imagine what it would be like living on welfare and looking for work or maybe living in a homeless shelter and looking for work.

I experienced this last year when I travelled across the country and visited emergency shelters and spoke to homeless people and front line service workers. I was told many times by people that they felt humiliated when they did not have an address or a phone number. If they wanted to apply for a job and the prospective employer needed a phone number, they had to reply that they lived in a homeless shelter. They had no chance of receiving a phone call back from the employer.

Having a program that gave them access to their own phone number and their own voice mail messages enabled them to provide a possible employer with a phone number. When an employer called that number it would be their voice recording on the phone asking the caller to leave a message. They could then dial into that from any location by hopefully using a free phone.

Having their own phone number or voice mail gives people a sense of dignity, a sense of worth and a a starting point for them to find employment and put their lives together. This is a very basic but important thing.

The sad irony is that the federal government has many job creation initiatives to help lower income Canadians. But it is provided on a very spotty basis. Industry Canada has spent millions of dollars getting Canadians on line. I know a lot of agencies that have accessed funds from Industry Canada to help set up Internet access for low income Canadians. That is something I agree with.

Is it not ironic that while on the one hand the government is doing that and sees it as a priority, on the other hand we have information from Statistics Canada which shows that 157,000 Canadians have no phone. That is a very conservative figure because it does not include the homeless people who are not listed in the census. Here we are in our modern society getting people on line, but there are still hundreds of thousands of people who do not have this basic access.

I was in the downtown east side in my riding on Friday and visited the DERA service. I met with the folks who run it and with people who use the service. It was really amazing to see how this operates. They can walk into the office and for a minimum cost of $3 a month, which is what it costs, with no questions asked, they can sign up for their community mailbox.

In fact, I met a young man who had walked into my into my constituency office on Main Street. He came from Saskatchewan and moved into east Vancouver. He was looking for work. I said he was welcome to use my office if he wanted to send a fax or anything. He said he was really glad that at least he had a phone number. I said it was great that he had a phone in his place. He said “No, no, I have voice mail”. Sure enough it was the DERA voice mail. He came to Vancouver looking for work and had somehow managed to find out about it.

The reality is that this service is only available in Vancouver. The Government of Manitoba has just announced a very good initiative where, with the co-operation of the Royal Bank and other private partners, it is setting up a province-wide community voice mail service. Other than that there is really nothing that exists. It seemed to me in bringing forward this motion, and based on my travels and talking to homeless people or people who have totally insecure or inadequate shelter, that to have a program that is mandated through licensing through the CRTC is something that could be easily done.

In this parliament we debate big issues. We debate things that are very complex. Yet, here we have a tool, something very straightforward that could help hundreds of thousands of low income and homeless Canadians by simply saying to the CRTC that we want to make sure that as part of the CRTC licensing the telephone companies, it mandates that there be funds provided or phone lines that are given over as access to local community agencies to set up these projects across Canada.

The DERA community voice mail system has 12 phone lines. I could actually see the information on the phone lines which were in use as people were changing their greeting or accessing their voice mail box or dialling in to retrieve messages. Just think of what that would mean to Canadians from coast to coast who are living in communities where they feel isolated and cut off because they do not have that basic service.

The purpose of this motion is to say that here is an easy, straightforward, simple, logical, reasonable way of ensuring that Canadians have access to the most basic phone service that we all take for granted in this country.

I want to say that this issue is very much linked to people who are living in poverty. Because people are living way below the poverty line, they cannot afford to have the basic phone service. As I have mentioned, in many instances it is related to employment and the need to get employment that they need that phone number. Also, I have come across examples and instances where it is a matter of personal health and security.

The DERA folks told me of one instance where one of its clients was in hospital. The doctor phoned and said that he was ready to be released, but he would need to have a phone by the his bed so if he got into trouble there was somebody he could call. This gentleman did not have a phone so he faced the prospect of staying another six weeks in hospital until the doctor was assured that he was completely better before he went home.

As it happened, the DERA advocacy office spent countless hours dealing with the local welfare office trying to get this man a telephone. I believe it was eventually successful, but how much time and energy was spent to get one person a phone so he could go home from the hospital which was costing thousands of dollars a day. The contradictions and the ironies in these are just simply astounding. If it were not so serious it would be laughable.

I want to encourage members to think about the motion and to see the wisdom of supporting it as a way of doing something straightforward and simple that will actually help people in a real concrete way on a day to day basis.

In a few days time we will bear witness to the 10th anniversary of the Liberal task force report on affordable housing that was chaired by the now finance minister and then an opposition Liberal member. Ten years ago the Liberals in opposition wrote a darn good report with 25 recommendations talking about the needs of Canadians in terms of housing. Here we are now 10 years later and we know that during the period between 1984 and 1993 we lost more than $2 billion in housing funds in the country. Then in 1993 the same member, who was the chair of that Liberal task force on housing, at the finance committee wielded the axe and ended the construction of social housing in the country.

It is because of that, because of increasing homelessness and because more and more Canadians, something like two million Canadians, are paying way more than 50% of their income for rent that people do not have enough money to pay for a phone.

I draw that comparison because this issue of phone service is very much related to the issue of the housing crisis in the country and the shameful record of the government in abandoning a national housing strategy and abandoning the construction of desperately needed social housing.

I do not want to go to another shelter. I do not want to have to talk to another person who says “I want a good place to live. I want to go to work. I want to be employed. I want to have a phone so that I can have some sense of dignity”.

That story is all too familiar for hundreds of thousands of Canadians. I urge members of the House to put aside the partisan politics. From time to time we come together and we say “Yes, this is the right thing to do”. That is what we should do here. We should say to the CRTC “Get on this. Make it a requirement of licensing. Make sure that every telephone company across the country ensures that they require some lines or some funds that can be dedicated to a community organization to open up access to phone service for low income and homeless Canadians”.

I ask for the support of members to do just that.

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak on Motion No. M-361 that was just outlined before us by the member for Vancouver East.

The member would like the CRTC to establish regulations that would require telephone companies to provide voice mail services to low income and homeless Canadians. My understanding is that voice mail service is something like an add-on, like power windows on a car. Basic telephone services is quite a different matter.

I understand that the motion was inspired by a very worthwhile project in the member's Vancouver East riding. The Downtown Eastside Residents Association project to provide a secure voice mail service for $40 a year is an innovative program. By facilitating communication for low income residents and the homeless, I have no doubt the Vancouver project has increased their opportunities for employment as well as their access to community and medical services. It is a good idea.

Unfortunately, Motion No. M-361 is another example of the NDP's deep fondness for centralization and regulation as the answer to every problem. The Canadian Alliance on the other hand believes that the market is the best place to respond to the needs of individuals for telephone service, not top down government intervention from Ottawa.

If there is a need—and I understand in this case the member certainly demonstrated that in her riding—to expand this type of service in other communities, the Vancouver project can be a model for other communities wishing to assist the homeless and low income residents in their area. However, community groups, municipal governments and in some cases provincial governments are much closer to the people and are best positioned to tackle these local issues, such as telecommunication services for low income and homeless Canadians.

I think she gave a good example of how the group in her riding served a need that was out there. I think there are many methods to address this concern. I would suggest that the one in her riding of Vancouver East that was serviced by the Downtown Eastside Residents Association is the best vehicle for this service.

In my opinion, the real failing of Motion M-361 is that it is not clear why another federal regulation governing the telecommunications industry is necessary for communities to launch similar projects. It can be done now. Therefore, I think that is the better approach. This motion flies in the face of the current trend in the telecommunications industry which is to move toward less regulation and more competition and I would endorse that.

In 1998 the CRTC's publication “Vision” stated that the agency hoped to reinvent itself and rely more on market forces to permit fair and sustainable competition and to move from detailed regulation to broad parameters. That certainly is something we in the Canadian Alliance support. From that perspective Motion M-361 would be a step backward.

With respect to the CRTC, I would love to debate the effectiveness and the necessity for much of the CRTC's mandate. I certainly would not fall for the blunt regulatory tool of CRTC intervention in this case, as in Motion M-361, for that purpose. The Canadian Alliance would like to review the mandate of the CRTC to see greater accountability and responsiveness in the CRTC.

Much of the CRTC's mandate is out of date and new developments in technology have made the CRTC irrelevant in many respects. My colleague, who is the deputy industry critic from Calgary Centre and who is our spokesman in this area, has pointed out on many occasions that the CRTC's bureaucratic pace makes it ill-suited to effectively respond to the needs of the fast moving telecommunications industry.

The Canadian Alliance would like to take this opportunity to call for a larger debate on the role of this agency into the 21st century in Canada rather than remaining stuck in the old mindset that more government regulation will solve every problem. I suggest that community organizations are also great vehicles, much closer to the people which can provide service that government may not be able to provide with the same flexibility. Therefore, I am not in support of this motion.

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, Motion No. 361 that the member from the NDP is bringing forward requires the CRTC to mandate the provisions of subsidized voice mail service to community agencies.

I would like to go a little more in depth and quote verbatim what Motion No. 361 is all about. It says:

In the opinion of this House, the federal government should encourage the CRTC to establish regulations that require telephone companies to assist community agencies with providing affordable voice mail service to Canadians who cannot afford or do not have access to telephone service.

That is exactly what Motion No. 361 says.

I took the opportunity to quote Motion No. 361 for the purpose of telling the House and through you, Madam Speaker, the country as a whole that this type of motion that comes forward, which is a non-votable motion, is not necessarily a step that has to take place here in the House. It is great that it comes to the House and is discussed, et cetera, but this government, previous governments and future governments are not the instrument by which this request should be put forward.

The commission could be asked by any individual, community, or organization to look into the possibility of having these services provided. As I have said in the past, this is an arm's length relationship. The member would do well to work as aggressively as I know she can and has in the past with the area, with the community, to bring this issue to the attention of the commission and indeed move positively forward to carry out the hearings. As we know, and I want to point out, on some of these avenues there has been public consultation on an ongoing basis to look at specific areas, the types of needs, et cetera, so that indeed if the commission and the findings are there, service can be provided.

I will not take up much more of the House's time but I wanted to clarify this issue. Without going into the details, our government will continue to make sure that each and every Canadian no matter where they live has the tools needed to carry on their daily lives. We will continue to address some of the concerns that communities and individuals face, whether they are health, community, business or personal issues.

I know that with Motion No. 361 the intentions of the member from the NDP are honourable and good and I commend her for that. However, there is a vehicle, a venue, and that is to bring this request to the commission so that it can have more consultations. As I said earlier, there has been a lot of consultation. If it warrants, it shall be done.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am very proud to participate in the opening discussions on this Monday morning. We are debating the important topic of providing basic phone services to those in our society who probably need them the most in terms of their own personal security but also in terms of providing them with a very important vehicle to obtain employment opportunities.

For most of us in the House it is second nature to have a phone stuck to our ear, whether it is a cellphone, a regular phone or a headset. Most of us spend a good part of our waking day talking on the telephone to our constituents or receiving calls from people on various issues. We certainly know the importance of telephones.

Phone companies and the telecommunications sector in general have expanded greatly in the past number of years. As the economy globalizes and as society becomes much more of a global village, communication plays a crucial role in our everyday lives now more than ever.

My hon. friend from Vancouver East made the point that people now are online and have personal websites, e-mail and all sorts of sophisticated telecommunications techniques to communicate with others, but it is hard to believe that there are still hundreds of thousands of Canadians who do not even have a simple telephone in their homes. Why? Because they do not have the money to pay for it. Many Canadians simply do not have the income to afford basic telephone service.

For most of us in the House, it is hard to imagine a world without a telephone. Our house has three telephones and they seem to be busy most of the time. Of course anyone who has children can forget it if there is only one telephone line, because the chance of getting in touch with that household is minimal. That household might have two or three telephones as well.

At a time when society itself has appreciated the value and the importance of communication, as my hon. friend from Vancouver East has indicated, there are at least two million Canadians who use more than half of their income to pay for their housing. A good percentage of those households would not have additional funds to access basic telephone service. Tens of thousands of people who live on the streets do not even have homes. Obviously those people who do not have homes do not have telephones, and if they do not have telephones they are out of touch.

More important is when people apply for a job and make an effort to find meaningful employment. An application form asks how to get in touch with the applicant and if there is no way of doing that, it poses a problem. Not only does it pose a problem, but it is probably the end of the line. If a company cannot communicate with a person to come to work, it will probably go to the person who has a telephone number.

How can society level the playing field? A level playing field is a very apt phrase these days. This is fundamental New Democrat philosophy. We have always wanted to level the playing field so that everyone in society has an equal opportunity to be the kind of citizen they ought to be and to have the same opportunities, whether they are education, health care or employment.

I congratulate the member for Vancouver East for putting the motion on the record this morning. In this motion we are saying, let us give all Canadians an equal opportunity, a level playing field to access the job market. To do that these folks have to have telephone access. The motion reads:

That, in the opinion of this House, the federal government should encourage the CRTC to establish regulations that require telephone companies to assist community agencies with providing affordable voice mail service to Canadians who cannot afford or do not have access to telephone service.

Some may ask who does not have access to telephone service. They are looking at a member of parliament who has a number of constituents who do not have access to basic telephone service. They live in relatively remote areas or areas where there is simply no telephone line. It is hard to believe that in the most wired country in the world there are still a lot of people who live in areas that do not have access to a telephone line, but that is a fact. They also do not have access to cellphones because there is no cellphone service in these remote areas.

These people conduct businesses and they certainly live very full lives, yet they have no access to a basic telephone. We have to provide some assistance. The motion concerns just that and thus today's debate in the House of Commons.

Has this been applied anywhere? My hon. friend from Vancouver East has indicated that in her constituency, the Downtown Eastside Residents Association has a program where people in that area who cannot afford or are unable to access telephone service can have access to voice mail. Imagine the difference that makes in people's lives when others can get in touch with them. People can leave a phone number and they can get back to them with a message or important information. The association has found a way to do it at the local level.

As hon. members probably know, the Government of Manitoba has initiated a program over the past number of days which will encourage similar opportunities to exist in Winnipeg and other places throughout Manitoba.

The motion says that if it works well in Vancouver East and if the Government of Manitoba thinks it is needed, why not make it a national program? Will this be a major imposition on the telephone companies? The answer is clearly no. This simply sets aside a number of lines for community based organizations or others. It makes the case that these services ought to be provided by the various telephone companies across the country.

For example, I cannot imagine going to Telus, which is one of the telephone companies based in British Columbia, and it would not endorse this enthusiastically. It would be a great public relations exercise. That is one thing we ought to consider as well. This is something the telephone companies ought to be offering people within their jurisdiction. I am sure the telephone companies would fall over themselves to initiate these kinds of programs, perhaps with a little encouragement by the CRTC.

Today in accessing employment opportunities, we all appreciate how important a telephone number is. The hon. member for Vancouver East has come up with a very creative solution.

I know my friends in the Reform Party have some concerns about the motion. My hon. friend who made the presentation on behalf of that party spoke in favour of the concept, that this would be useful for anybody, but that party has some concerns on the mechanism. I wonder if my friends in the Reform Party would not agree at least to this small measure that while we are debating this motion today, perhaps even all of us, not only the Reform Party—

[An hon. member]

The Canadian Alliance party.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Excuse me. It is the Canadian Alliance. My apologies to my friends in the Canadian Alliance.

Rather than simply let this issue die today at the end of this debate, which it will be destined to do, at least we should agree that the member ought to write to the CRTC to ask if it would be prepared to initiate further talks with the telephone companies or to take this issue to another level as opposed to letting it die here.

I have listened to all the political parties. We all agree with the intent. We all agree with the idea. Everybody says it is good. Let us face it. Who would not support providing telephone access to someone from a low income family who is trying to get a job or a homeless person who wants to get a job and needs a telephone number in order to qualify? There are also the personal security aspects my friend raised and health reasons and so on.

If we agree with this, I ask my colleagues in the House of Commons at least to consider not referring this motion to the committee as would be done normally, but that we encourage the member for Vancouver East to write to the CRTC and ask if it would consider this issue and find ways and means of resolving it. Maybe her idea is not the best one but it is a good one. Others have said there may be other ways but at least we should not let this issue die because I think all of us would agree it is an important initiative.

At the end of today's debate perhaps my colleague for Vancouver East could ask for the unanimous consent of the House to do that. All we are saying is that we would ask for permission of the House of Commons for the member to write to the CRTC. We are not endorsing anything.

[An hon. member]

What is stopping her?

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

It would be nice to have the voice from the House of Commons. Let us get away from this mindless partisan bickering where we fight each other for no particular reason when there is a good idea. We could all share in this, that the House of Commons has encouraged the member to write to the CRTC. That is all we are asking.

[Jean-Paul Marchand, Bloc, Québec East, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois is in favour of today's motion by the hon. member of the NDP that the federal government should encourage the CRTC to establish regulations that require telephone companies to assist community agencies with providing affordable voice mail service to Canadians who cannot afford or do not have access to telephone service.

The Bloc Quebecois member responsible for this issue being on official duties outside the country, I will merely offer my support to this motion in his absence.

Access to the telecommunications system is not a luxury these days, but a necessity. In fact, the Telecommunications Act states clearly that access to telecommunications is in the public interest.

In these times of technological revolution, it has become indispensable for everyone to be connected to the world, in one way or another, via the telecommunications system.

The CRTC has adopted certain measures, including those to enable schools to have access to Internet services at lower cost. It must see that all Canadians and all Quebecers have access to the telecommunications system. Where community initiatives have been developed, particularly those to connect the homeless and the disadvantaged, these must be studied.

The Bloc Quebecois is therefore open to the motion by the NDP.

[Dick Proctor, NDP, Palliser, SK]

Madam Speaker, I too take pleasure in speaking to the private member's motion put forward by my colleague the member for Vancouver East.

The initiative for this private member's motion comes from the Downtown Eastside Residents Association of Vancouver. The member represents her constituents in that area so well. It is a coming together in support. The motion calls on the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to assist with providing voice mail for low income and homeless Canadians.

As the member for Vancouver East said in her opening remarks, telephone companies should be required to provide community service as part of their licensing. Providing access to affordable voice mail for homeless people and low income Canadians would be an invaluable community service.

The reference point for the private member's motion is the voice mail project of the Downtown Eastside Residents Association. It allows anyone in the lower mainland to set up a secure telephone mailbox that can be accessed from any phone.

The basic cost is only $10 for three months, a mere pittance. It benefits more than 1,000 users, mostly based in the downtown east side. We are getting a tremendous potential return for a very modest outlay of funds.

The hon. member is calling in her motion today for the CRTC to act as a vehicle and a lobby toward the telephone industry, much of which has been privatized in recent years, encouraging it to come up with a voice mail project that would benefit people who do not have access to telephones in order to help them to get on their feet and to find employment.

It has made a tremendous difference in peoples lives in the downtown eastside. The executive officer of the DERA Voicemail project, Terry Hanley, has said:

Voice mail has made it easier for people to get in touch with potential employers, with family members, and to access community and medical services. It provides previously marginalized people with a way to reconnect. That's not only good for them—it's good for the community at large.

The benefits of voice mail should be expanded and made available to low income and homeless Canadians across the country. While governments and industry spend millions to get Canadians and Canadian households on line, some people are without very basic services in the 21st century.

We hear from the Minister of Industry and the Minister of Finance that the goal for the country is to become the most wired country in the world as quickly as possible. We on this side do not object to that, but at the same time we do not want to leave other people behind in this process. Folks who are without homes, basic shelter and telephone service are the folks who are most at risk. We see the disparities growing between the haves and have nots. This is a very modest attempt to try to bring those people along and get a minimal amount of service for people who do not have access to telephones at the moment.

I want to pick up on the valuable point my colleague from Kamloops made a few minutes ago. We in the House do not have the greatest reputation in the world if one listens to Canadians who sit in on Oral Question Period. They hear the bickering and the back and forth that go on all the time. It would behove us to pay some attention to doing the right thing. If that means encouraging the CRTC to encourage the mostly privatized telephone companies across the country to get involved and onside with a project like this one, I think it would be a benefit to each and every one of us. The motion before us states:

That in the opinion of this House, the federal government should encourage the CRTC to establish regulations that require telephone companies to assist community agencies with providing affordable voice mail service to Canadians who cannot afford or do not have access to telephone service.

I encourage all my colleagues in the House to support this very important motion.

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Madam Speaker, as the member for Vancouver Kingsway I wish to commend my colleague from Vancouver East on her Motion No. 361 to encourage the CRTC to provide affordable voice mail service to Canadians. However, the CRTC is an independent federal agency responsible for the supervision and regulation of telecommunications in Canada.

The CRTC has a process by which such suggestions are heard. The public consultation process is available to all Canadians, including the hon. member. It is the best and most appropriate way to address the relative benefits of providing voice mail service to community agencies.

The CRTC has already run a number of hearings on this issue. In October 1999, after an extensive consultation process involving public interest advocacy groups, telecommunications companies and the local community, the CRTC released its high cost service area decision.

In this decision the CRTC identified a basic level of telephone service to which all Canadians should have access and took steps to ensure that over time those few areas of the country that are unserved or underserved would have access to the level of service currently available to most Canadians.

The basic level of service is defined as individual line local service with touch tone dialling; the capability to access the Internet at a low speeds without incurring long distance charges; enhanced calling features and services including privacy protection features, access to emergency services and a voice messaging relay board services for the hearing impaired; access to operator and directory assistance services; access to the long distance network; and a copy of a current telephone directory.

This decision will require significant investment by telephone companies to upgrade networking in rural and remote areas. In addition the CRTC has implemented a local service subsidy based on contributions from long distance carriers along with other measures to ensure the continued affordability of basic telephone service. As well, the introduction of competition has benefited Canadians at all income levels through lower prices for telecommunication services, more innovation and more choice.

The member for Vancouver East has a good idea for use by low income families, but I suggest that she should go through the public consultation process like any other group of Canadians.

[Dennis Gruending, NDP, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Madam Speaker, I will be brief today in full support of the motion put forward by my colleague from Vancouver. She has brought it forward based on the bedrock principle of our party that people in society should have, if not equality because we know that is not a practical possibility, equality of opportunity. We should do what we can to provide that for people in whatever ways we can.

It is absolutely surprising and incredible as the hon. member and other members have said that in a country which is probably the most wired country in the world thousands of people do not have even basic telephone service. We are not only talking basic telephone service but about the ability of people, even if they do not have a telephone. The member is not saying that everybody has to, because that is a practical impossibility, but access to voice mail which is becoming almost as basic a service for many of us as telephones are. The member is asking that we look at a creative and inventive way for people to have access to voice mail service, even if they do not have a telephone. She has given some examples in her city of Vancouver where a project like this is under way.

I do not have to add a great deal to what other members have said about the importance of staying in touch. Let us think how important it is now to be able to access and use voice mail service and how great a disadvantage it would create to anyone who does not have that opportunity.

We are talking about equality and accessibility for people who do not now have it. We are talking about their ability to make improvements in their lives, which most people want to do. We hear stories of people moving to cities where they are actually working but the housing is so expensive that they cannot purchase housing. Calgary is an example.

There are people who are actually working but cannot afford housing. From where will they get their telephone service? How will they have the opportunity, if they are looking for new work, to have messages left for them so that they might apply for that work? How will they have the opportunity to stay in touch with loved ones and take messages, if they have moved across the country from Cape Breton to Calgary to work but do not have a telephone?

My hon. colleague is trying to find a solution to this problem in an inventive and compassionate way. There has been mention this morning of various problems which might be associated with this kind of idea. I urge members, rather than simply looking at something and saying there are problems and asking how we can do it, to spend more of their time on the how and begin to talk and look at exactly how we might put something like this into place.

The motion as it reads is not prescriptive in that way. That would come later once members of the House pass the motion, as we hope they will. Then we can begin to work on approaches to the CRTC and perhaps approaches to telephone providers to see how such a concept might come into being.

Basically I find this to be a very exciting and inventive idea. I offer my hon. colleague my full support. I urge other members of the House to think about it again and to give that support as well.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank hon. members of the various parties in the House for giving their comments on the motion today.

By way of reply, when motions come forward it is easy for any one of us to say this bit is wrong or that bit is wrong, or this would not work and in effect shoot it down. The issue is whether we understand that this is a very basic issue affecting low income and homeless Canadians. I have heard all representatives who spoke basically say that they understood there was a problem in that hundreds of thousands Canadians do not have access to basic phone service.

If we agree on that, the next question is whether it is a good idea to do something about it. Various comments have been made and some of the hon. members on the government side have said that we should go to the CRTC. I certainly will do that. I absolutely will follow it up.

As a member of parliament I want to get the support of my colleagues. This is about generating debate and support for ideas that are reasonable and sound and asking if we can work on it together. In that regard I reply to the Alliance members who say it is just another idea of centralization from the NDP. That is not what it is about.

I agree with the Alliance members who said that the DERA model is the way to go, but are we saying that small underfunded community organizations dealing with huge demands in their local communities should spend a year or two years trying to get a small project like this under way? Let us be realistic about it.

The issue of going to the CRTC and asking to make this part of the licensing requirement is to say that it could be easily done. Yes, we could go to a group in Saskatchewan, in Newfoundland or in Ontario and say to go ahead and try to set it up, but the fact is that the DERA organization is actually subsidizing the project.

What is being requested in the motion is to suggest to the CRTC that it should look for ways for these huge telephone companies to provide some support to local communities, for example by providing access lines.

The DERA project has 12 lines that are in constant use but it has to pay for those lines through Telus communications, which used to be B.C. Tel. It would be so easy for that telephone company to say that it is on board and will support it.

The reason for bringing the motion forward was to look at a creative way of asking whether it would be a good idea to ensure easy access to Canadians. It has nothing to do with creating regulations for regulation sake. It is about creating equity in society. It is about creating justice. It is about saying to organizations that we mandate, the CRTC, that part of its job is to ensure there are basic levels of service in the country, whether it is health care or education. Here we happen to be talking about phone service.

I urge all members of the House not to dismiss this issue but to agree that it an idea that could be followed up with the support of members. I will certainly follow it up because I am very committed to doing so.

The suggestion by my hon. colleague from Kamloops is a very good one and is something the House could do. I thank the member who spoke from the Bloc who clearly understood what this issue was about and is willing to support it. I think other members obviously have some questions. Frankly, I was surprised to hear the comments from the member for Vancouver Kingsway because there are low income members in that particular riding who would love to have this kind of phone access. To say that the CRTC is already doing this is simply not the case.

I urge members not to let this go by the boards but to find a way to support this motion. I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to support me in writing to the CRTC asking it to give this matter consideration.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The hon. member is asking for the unanimous consent of the House to support her writing to the CRTC. Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

There are about three minutes left in the time for consideration of Private Members' Business. Is there unanimous consent to see the time as 12.04 p.m. so we may proceed immediately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The period set aside for the study of Private Members' Business is now over. Since the motion has not been selected as a votable item, the item is dropped from the order paper.

Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I move:

That in relation to C-11, an act to authorize the divestiture of the assets of, and to dissolve, the Cape Breton Development Corporation, to amend the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of the second reading stage of the said bill and, fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government business on the day allotted to the consideration of the second reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required, for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

[Some hon. members]

Shame, shame.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.