Debates of Feb. 22nd, 2005

Supply

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Madam Speaker, it drives home the point that I made in my speech. If I were sitting in the chairs of the individuals from the government side, I would be the first one to be calling for a performance audit on the moneys applied to these foundations and not being used appropriately. I would want another pair of eyes making sure that the money was being used appropriately.

If the individual members from the government side vote no, as the parliamentary secretary did at health committee yesterday, the suspicion falls back on them. Why would they vote no? Why would they not want accountability? Why would they not want the performance measures so that whatever is there can be improved? This is money that would be very well spent on the Auditor General.

A few hours from now when we stand in the House to vote on this motion, I and all Canadians will find it very interesting to see if the government will do the right thing or whether it will hide behind the curtain and not do what needs to be done for transparency, accountability and regaining the trust of the Canadian people.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James, MB]

Madam Speaker, the issue of accountability is very important, especially in light of the recent scandals of the current government and the waste of taxpayers' money.

I think Canadians are a compassionate people. They appreciate the fact that we have a society where we try to look out for one another. Canadians also appreciate the value of a dollar. They do not appreciate moneys being wasted, and this government has demonstrated time and time again that it is able to waste billions of dollars without any accountability.

The latest Auditor General's report detailed how government foundations are beyond the scrutiny of the auditors. As of March 31, 2004, $9 billion had been paid to foundations.

Often this money is paid up front, many years in advance of the actual need. The Auditor General's report expressed concerns about the governance and accountability of the foundations themselves and the accounting for government transfers to the foundations.

Several of the largest government foundations are either directly or partly mandated to address health issues.

Canada Health Infoway was established to accelerate the development of electronic patient records. It has received $1.2 billion, yet has spent only a fraction of this amount.

As many as 24,000 Canadians are dying each year due to adverse events, including prescription error. It is inexcusable that the implementation of electronic records, which could significantly reduce these adverse events, is progressing very slowly. The money is there, yet it does not seem to be used in the way it was intended.

The Canadian Health Services Research Foundation is mandated to support research to improve the organization, management and delivery of health care services. As of a year ago, only a fraction of the $152 million the foundation originally received had been spent. In eight years, nearly $200 million sat in a bank account while the organization, management and delivery of health care services have deteriorated.

These two foundations fall directly under the purview of Health Canada. However, there are other foundations that, although not sponsored by Health Canada, still cover health related issues under at least part of their mandates. A few of these foundations are Genome Canada, the Canada Foundation for Innovation and the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.

With all these foundations, a familiar pattern repeats itself. Hundreds of millions of dollars transferred to improve the health of Canadians sits unused. No one can say exactly what effect the money had or where it has been spent. Foundations lack the most basic fundamentals of accountability. They are not answerable to Parliament through a minister, the Auditor General does not have access to them, and Canadians have no idea if they are getting value for the $9 billion they have forked over.

The Auditor General also indicated that the government has no authority to interfere in the management of these foundations unless they are in violation of their funding arrangements. Thus, if the government's priorities change, the taxpayers and the government itself are powerless to redirect the foundations. In other words, there are no checks and balances in place to prevent, let alone detect, mismanagement and waste.

The Liberals continue to deny the Auditor General access to foundations for no good reason. They claim that foundations are doing good work for Canadians, but if that is the case, why does the government not allow these books to be open? If they are doing good work, what do they have to hide?

Obviously the lessons of ad scam have been lost on the government. The Auditor General has repeatedly recommended that foundations be subject to closer scrutiny, yet the Liberals offer weak excuses and ignore her suggestions. They continue to toss money to foundations despite the absence of needed accountability measures. There is little ministerial oversight. Parliamentary oversight is non-existent. Outcomes are not reported at all. External audit regimes suffer huge gaps.

To paraphrase the Auditor General, there is a lot of data but very little information. That little progress has been made since the Auditor General first made the recommendations in 1997 demonstrates a total and utter contempt by the current government for her office and for Parliament itself.

There is hope that the situation can be changed. Yesterday the Standing Committee on Health passed a motion requesting that the federal government appoint the Auditor General to provide external performance audits on health related government foundations. This motion passed with the support of all opposition parties. The Liberals however voted against the motion which indicates that they are against transparency and honesty when dealing with taxpayers' money.

It should be noted that the Auditor General stated at the meeting yesterday that her office often audits departments and agencies on the recommendations of committees. It is my hope that the Auditor General will follow the health committee's recommendation and submit government foundations to full scrutiny.

The issue is not just about government accountability. Canadians already know that the Liberals cannot be trusted with the public purse. Therefore the need is obvious that government foundations be subject to strict accountability and checks and balances.

This issue also concerns the health and well-being of Canadians, making it far more serious an issue than the loss of $100 million to Quebec ad firms. The fact that the Liberals, the supposed saviours of our health care, or that is how they try to portray themselves, instead of using these foundations to save lives would use them as a front to hide budget surpluses is truly unbelievable. The issue demands extra vigilance not only to protect taxpayers' money but also to ensure that commitments made to health are honoured.

I am a user of the health care system and I am also a taxpayer. It is very important to me that the services that I require are provided. It is my hope that Canadians do not have to endure some of the challenges that I have had to endure in the health care system.

As a taxpayer it is also my hope that my tax dollars are used appropriately so those who need the money can get the money, and that inefficiencies are not occurring. Unfortunately I fear that these foundations are not performing the way Canadians intended, or perhaps even the way the people who set up the foundations intended. There is simply no way of knowing.

Given the government's track record on ad scam, the gun registry boondoggle, the HRDC fiasco and countless other examples of waste, it is completely appropriate to give the Auditor General the power to review the foundations to ensure not only that government tax dollars are not being wasted but that the services these foundations were set up to provide are indeed being provided in a cost effective and timely way.

It is very important to support today's motion. Any party or members who do not support the motion I think leave a cloud of uncertainty over them that suggests they are not in favour of transparency, accountability or value for the taxpayer's dollar. I hope that all parties support the motion.

[Réal Lapierre, Bloc, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Madam Speaker, everyone is expecting elected representatives to be beyond reproach. It is therefore quite appropriate that decisions made by hon. members be transparent, so that members can be accountable for them to their constituents.

We must recognize that accountability in connection with the establishment of the many foundations put in place by this government is totally non-existent. The fact is that it is rather unusual to sink billions of dollars into programs without these investments being subject to external audit.

Ideally, the Auditor General is the best choice for scrutinizing the existing foundations inside and out. We are told that there are already audit mechanisms in place for these foundations, but we must recognize that they do not have as much authority as anything the Auditor General could do.

I would like to ask this question of my hon. colleague, the government member opposite, who so brilliantly orchestrated such a subterfuge. What reasons could there be for all Canadian taxpayers agreeing to the creation of a structure involving huge amounts, without those responsible being subject to even the most basic accountability?

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James, MB]

Madam Speaker, there was a technical problem and I did not hear the first part of the member's question, but in principle we are all Canadians and we are all contributing to these foundations. Therefore, we deserve to know if these foundations are providing the resources and services that are necessary for proper and effective health care in Canada.

The Liberal government seems to continuously waste Canadian taxpayers' money on all sorts of things and that is just where the Auditor General has the power to audit. I think most reasonable people would see the fact that the Liberal government seems to be restricting the Auditor General's ability to audit the foundations as a suggestion that the Liberal government has a lot to hide and that there may be more funny business to be found. That seems to be the only reason the government would take the position that it has, as recently as last night at the health committee.

I hope that for all our friends, from Quebec to B.C. and all the points in between and in Atlantic Canada see that these books are indeed audited for the greater good.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will repeat what I stated earlier, that wherever taxpayer dollars are involved, we should have the assurances that there is accountability. I would certainly support that aspect of the motion.

Each of these foundations does have an auditor. It has an annual report. It is reported to Parliament. There is an external auditor who goes through the process.

Specifically the motion calls for a performance audit but it also calls for the Auditor General to be appointed the external auditor for foundations. I have some difficulty with that.

The government operations and estimates committee, of which I am the past chairman, reviewed many of these foundations. It was very clear that the Government of Canada was not the sole funder of all of these foundations, and in fact did not have the majority of the members of the boards of directors. As a consequence, there are some of these foundations where the federal government does not have the authority, discretion or jurisdiction to appoint the Auditor General as the external auditor.

Having said that, I wonder if the member would consider asking the mover of the motion to amend the motion to add after the words “external auditor of foundations” the phrase “where such decision is the jurisdiction or discretion of the federal government”.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James, MB]

Madam Speaker, the motion is completely valid. The Auditor General should have, and must have, the ability to audit these foundations. What the member is suggesting is a way of undermining the integrity of the motion.

Again I find it very disturbing that transparency, accountability and a wide dissemination of accurate information seem to be things the Liberals continue to reject. It is like the facts are an obstacle to--

[The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)]

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Madam Speaker, first, I would like to point out that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Jonquière—Alma.

Over the past few years, the Prime Minister transferred $9 billion to the various foundations. Of this, $7.7 billion has yet to be used. It is essential that the Auditor General have access to the accounting data of these various foundations and report on them to this Parliament, which is the trustee of the taxes paid by Canadians and Quebeckers. That is essential.

Through my hon. colleague, the Bloc Québécois introduced Bill C-277, which I supported. Hon. members will understand that we are in favour of this motion. To us, it is the least objectionable solution; of course, our preference would be for the abolition of these foundations, which this government is using as part of its trick to reduce surpluses and hide from parliamentary scrutiny the amounts previously mentioned.

Why do we think that the foundations should be abolished? I will be brief. The foundations are unacceptable for a number of reasons. They are unacceptable because parliamentarians lose control over the mission of the foundations. They are unacceptable because parliamentarians do not know whether these foundations are managed properly in accordance with the various policies of this Parliament. They are also unacceptable because, as I mentioned earlier, they have served too often to hide the budget surpluses of the current government and Chrétien government preceding it.

In addition—and this is an eminently Quebec concern—I think that the role played by foundations is really unacceptable because they have been used too often to trample—and I weigh my words carefully—on the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. For example, there are the Foundation for Innovation, the Millennium Scholarship Foundation, the Health Services Research Foundation, the Canada Health Infoway. If there are areas that are clearly the jurisdiction of the provinces and Quebec, they are health and education. In addition, these foundations are outside the application of the Access to Information Act.

The foundations exist. What do we do? Let us ensure, as parliamentarians, that we know very clearly what is being done with these funds. The very person to exercise this financial control over the foundations is the Auditor General. I want to underscore this because, in a very important opening, the President of Treasury Board acknowledged this morning the importance of Bill C-277, which would give the Auditor General this responsibility. He said that he agreed with referring Bill C-277 to committee for further study.

This is essential because we, as parliamentarians, want to give the Auditor General this mandate so that at least there is some control over the financial operations of the foundations. The Auditor General must have access to the books. I said it before on another occasion. The government regularly states of course that the accounts are audited by experts. That is certainly true, but what do these experts do?

They really audit what I would call the basic accounting of these foundations. In the end, I am quite certain, the external auditors will recommend that the figures are correct according to generally accepted accounting principles. The Auditor General can go much further than that. She can comment on how these funds are managed and whether they are always fully in keeping with the mission of these foundations and the wishes of Parliament.

In her follow-up report of February 15 on the accounting of foundations, the Auditor General made a point that is important for people to know.

On the audit, she mentioned that, overall, progress was unsatisfactory and that the foundations were largely unaccountable. She mentioned that the transfer of funds to these foundations continues to keep public funds—not private but rather public funds—from an effective parliamentary review.

Furthermore, given the importance of the amounts at stake, she was concerned about the lack of proper accounting to Parliament. Ultimately, this is what it comes down to. These amounts were taken from workers and our fellow citizens. And we as parliamentarians are being told that we cannot do a proper examination in order to see how these funds are being spent. This is truly unfortunate.

As I said, we are in agreement. And with Bill C-277, we are going to give the Auditor General the tools she needs to act as auditor or joint auditor for the following organizations: crown corporations; bodies established by acts of Parliament and to which the Government of Canada has paid $1 billion or more over any period of 12 consecutive months; any corporate entity without share capital, to which the Government of Canada paid $1 billion or more, in money or in kind, over any period of 12 consecutive months and in respect of which the Government of Canada has, either directly or through a crown corporation, the right to appoint or nominate a member of the governing body.

The government is doing its best to earn a reputation as an open government, one that promotes transparency and that says, contrary to reality, its estimates are realistic and correct. If the Auditor General is given access to the figures of the various foundations, if she can do her job as guardian of public funds, then she could—we all hope—confirm what the government is saying. However, if this is not the case, she will be able to say so. She will be able to tell all parliamentarians whether the amounts that were—I will not say misappropriated because it is perhaps too strong—but whether the amounts allocated—to put it politely—to the various foundations were spent correctly or not.

It is our job as parliamentarians to be able to reach this conclusion, to have the tools we need to do this and to report back to the public.

Last weekend, I had the pleasure of a meal with my father-in-law, and the first topic of discussion he raised was this: “How is it possible that, with all the money there is in those foundations, you people have not a word to say about it”? I would have loved to defend the foundations, but what could I do as an MP? The only answer I could give was: “Yes, you are right. We have no control over that money. The government does not want us to. It blocks access to the Auditor General, the key instrument.” I added: “Don't worry. We are onto it. I have supported a bill to bring about some concrete control, and we will not give up.”

I am very pleased, as I have already said, with the openness offered to us this morning by the President of the Treasury Board, in order to get the bill referred to committee. It can then be examined in detail and we will be able to get to the bottom of the matter as far as the funding allocated to the various foundations is concerned.

What we are dealing with here is a fundamental principle of democracy: the public must know where and how the taxes the government collects are spent. These taxes are essential to the government's mission, and that is perfectly all right. That mission, however, must be fulfilled properly.

Care needs to be taken to ensure that there are no more incidents like the ones we have witnessed in recent years. I will mention just the one: the sponsorship scandal, that's it. Because of that alone, the Auditor General must ensure that the funds in the foundations are properly spent.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary across the aisle stated a few minutes ago that she would support our Conservative motion calling for performance audits of foundations only if it would not be the Auditor General who would do the audit. She stated that if we would drop this requirement from our motion so foundations could choose their own auditors, she would support it.

This seems to me to be one of the most baseless reasons for not supporting our motion. For the Liberal government, a government that has brought this nation some of the greatest scandals in our history, the sponsorship scandal, the HRDC boondoggle, the gun registry, to say that it welcomes accountability but not from the independent parliamentary appointed Auditor General is absurd and speaks of how little it desires transparency.

I ask my colleague in the Bloc this Why does he think the government does not want the Auditor General, who has been extraordinarily effective and who has developed tremendous expertise at exposing the corruption of the government, to audit these unaccountable foundations?

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Madam Speaker, my Conservative colleague has asked an excellent question. That is one reason why it is so important for the Auditor General to have access to the foundation's figures.

If the government is as transparent as it says it is, if it has the interests of the people of Canada and Quebec at heart as it says it does, if the money involved is managed well by the foundations as it says it is, I do not understand the logic of not allowing the Auditor General to confirm what the government says. It would be quite proper and normal.

As I was saying earlier, there is a basic principle of democracy at stake. This money has been collected by the government but does not directly belong to it; this money belongs to the workers of Canada and Quebec, because it has been taken out of their pockets for the public good.

It would, therefore, be a matter of course for us as parliamentarians to get the correct information. The person who can give it to us is independent of the government and reports to Parliament. This person, in the current system, is the Auditor General.

It is healthy and normal for questions to be raised. I shall briefly suggest a few.

For example, the Canada Foundation for Innovation began receiving funding in 1997. It has received $3.651 billion. After nearly eight years, it has only given grants totalling $1.23 billion. What did the government gain by putting nearly $3.5 billion into it, when nearly eight years later, just over $1 billion has been paid out in grants? Moreover, we see that $39 million of that has been spent on administration.

These are questions that all of us as parliamentarians are entitled to ask, since our constituents ask us the same questions. The person who can provide answers in this situation is the Auditor General.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I do not think many members in this place would disagree with the need for accountability wherever taxpayer dollars are concerned.

I have a concern with the motion, and I have asked questions about it. I would like to ask the same question of the member from the Bloc. The last part of the motion states that the Auditor General be appointed as external auditor of foundations. I am aware that there are at least a couple of foundations in which the Government of Canada is not the exclusive funder. In fact, it does not have the majority of board members on the foundation. Therefore, it does not have the discretion or opportunity to appoint the Auditor General.

Would the member concur that a small amendment would be required to the end of the motion which would say, “foundations where the Government of Canada has the authority and jurisdiction to do so”?

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Madam Speaker, unfortunately I may well be mistaken because, unlike government members, I do not claim to know it all. However, as regards the various foundations, it seems to me that most if not all the funding is provided with public money.

In my opinion, the fact that members of the public or people from various organizations or companies in the private or public sector, sit on the boards of directors should not, in my opinion, prevent the Auditor General from examining the books of these foundations.

Earlier, I referred to the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which is not the one that we are most concerned about. I would like to mention another case that is of concern to me as a parliamentarian and regarding which I would like to get some answers: Sustainable Development Technology Canada—

[The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)]

I apologize for interrupting the hon. member, but we must resume debate. The hon. member for Jonquière—Alma.

[Sébastien Gagnon, Bloc, Jonquière—Alma, QC]

Madam Speaker, first, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier on his excellent presentation. Our new colleague, who is our deputy finance critic, has a lot of expertise, particularly since he recently took part in a prebudget tour and came to the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. He explained a number of issues about which people in my riding may have wondered. I was very pleased and proud to see him, and also the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, who also took part in the tour.

Today's issue was a source of great concern to our voters, including in my riding. Many economic development areas are currently affected in my riding of Jonquière—Alma and in the whole Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. When we talk about these foundations and the fact that they are not audited by the Auditor General, people are entitled to be concerned. It is to their credit. Indeed, considering the astronomical amounts of money, the billions of dollars involved, we have every right to be concerned. We also have every right to think that it is important that these foundations be audited.

I am fortunate to sit on the Public Accounts Committee and to be able to check what the government does and how it spends its money. However, I want to focus on the Auditor General's mandate and her importance to the parliamentary process and healthy public management. I am very proud of the work the Auditor General can do. She clarifies a lot for us.

I call on all hon. members to join me in supporting this motion. This motion will help improve accountability and also ensure that the Auditor General can conduct this external audit.

At some point, we should perhaps the question the significance of having these types of foundations outside the government reporting environment.

Early in my career, I had the opportunity to be the director general of a major fund for the Government of Quebec. It had been created in the spirit of the Quebec youth summit. I was in charge of a $240 million fund to help young people in Quebec. I should point out that the Auditor General was involved in the activities. From the moment the fund was established, the Auditor General became involved in the process, even when the fund was being set up, to ensure, for the good of all young Quebeckers, that it responded to their needs and expectations properly.

Indeed, it is not always easy to work with someone as important as an auditor. Sometimes it can disrupt the department or the employees, but I believe it is always with the idea of having better accountability.

I also want to draw your attention to the objective of achieving results. It is essential to establish funds the way the government did with the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Allow me to come back to this because I have already expressed my opposition to it. When funds are outside the government reporting environment, and existing agencies are given certain flexibility in using them, it is important to ensure their original purpose and the reasons they serve the public are respected. In my experience, I was lucky to have the important cooperation of the Auditor General.

Brampton

[Gurbax Malhi, Liberal, Bramalea—Gore—Malton, ON]

Madam Speaker, Brampton is now Canada's 10th largest city with the second busiest construction market in the nation. Construction is booming. In fact, the city hit an all time high of $2.7 billion in new construction last year. Much of it was residential construction, which enjoyed a 50% increase over 2003. That made Brampton number one in Canada for residential construction value.

Brampton's average house price hit $260,000 last year compared to $242,000 in 2003. City officials are managing this growth with a growth management plan.

I would like to congratulate the city councillors in Brampton for putting together a plan that balances new construction with the need for sustainable development. It will provide a number of new economic opportunities for everyone who works, lives and plays in the city.

The growth Brampton saw in 2004 reaffirms its place as a major urban region. In fact, with stable growth Brampton should remain among Canada's growth leaders for a long time to come.

Health Care

[Belinda Stronach, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Madam Speaker, the Minister of Health will visit Newmarket and Aurora this weekend for a $125-a-plate political luncheon.

While the minister stops in our community, it is important that he not come away thinking all is well and that he sees the challenges that face our health care system.

While there, he should visit the Southlake Regional Health Centre where wait times force residents into my constituency office. He should speak with his provincial counterpart to encourage that the federal health dollars transferred to the province be delivered to the regional cancer centre as promised. The minister must also be reminded of the shortage of doctors and nurses in the area.

He should also know that many of my fellow citizens are very concerned about plans to run electricity transmission lines through our back yards. I believe he and his department have a responsibility to regulate the EMF risk as a public health issue.

I invite the minister back to Newmarket and Aurora any time for a public town hall meeting to discuss the better delivery of health care for our community.

Canada Export Awards

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, I wish to offer my sincere congratulations to a constituent and a friend, Mr. Ed Shinewald, who, as president of Melet Plastics in Winnipeg, has just been awarded the 2005 Canadian manufacturers and exporters excellence award.

Melet Plastics, a company that specializes in injection moulding, moulds up to half a million plastic parts per day which are used in automobiles, medical devices, agricultural equipment and other unique products.

Melet's secondary line, AmbuTech, produces a line of canes and accessories for the visually impaired which are being sold around the world. In the last three years its export sales have soared by 180%, clearly a Winnipeg company well led, well run and helping people in all corners of the world.

I congratulate Ed and all of the very dedicated employees for this notable achievement.

The Attikamek

[Marcel Gagnon, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Madam Speaker, despite the numerous battles that they had to fight for their survival, the Attikamek in the northern part of the Mauricie region never gave up. The obstacles in their way taught them that they have to fight without giving up and face adversity, whether it is related to housing, employment, the environment or the preservation of their language.

Yesterday was a day of celebration for the Attikamek. They celebrated Attikamek Language Day. They succeeded against all odds in preserving their language, Attikamek, which is reminiscent of their history and which they will use to transmit that history to their descendants.

Bloc Québécois members are pleased to join me in congratulating Grand Chief Awashish and all Quebec Attikamek, and in wishing them the best of luck for the future.

World Pond Hockey Championship

[Andy Savoy, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, it is with enormous pride that I rise in the House of Commons today as the MP for Plaster Rock, New Brunswick, home of the now famous World Pond Hockey Championship.

Plaster Rock is a small town with a whole lot of spirit and a whole lot of spunk. The townspeople have combined their love of the sport and their love of the community to turn a frozen lake into a field of dreams for hockey purists around the globe.

This year's tournament drew 96 four-man teams from 8 provinces, 16 states, England and the Cayman Islands, not to mention media interest from CNN, TSN, ESPN and the list goes on.

The tournament returns to the traditional roots of Canada's game, playing hockey as it should be played: with fun, fellowship and old fashioned values. It stirs fond memories of open air matches from earlier times, turning 40-year-old men into 14-year-old kids.

I have had the privilege to play in the World Pond Hockey Championship and to preside at its opening and closing ceremonies. I know firsthand the tremendous preparation and hard work that goes into organizing an event of this size and stature.

I want to congratulate the organizers on another hugely successful World Pond Hockey Championship and may they be rewarded for their efforts with a new arena.

Heart and Stroke Foundation

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, St. Croix—Belleisle, NB]

Mr. Speaker, February is heart and stroke month. The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada report card for 2005 issues a wake-up call for all Canadians.

Cardiovascular disease accounts for the death of more Canadians than any other disease. In fact, this year over 80,000 Canadians will die. Thirty-five per cent of all male deaths in Canada are due to heart diseases. For women the toll is even higher. Thirty-eight per cent of all female deaths in Canada will be due to cardiovascular disease this year.

Most of us know someone, family or friend, who has experienced firsthand the devastation of heart disease or stroke. One in four, or approximately eight million Canadians, have some form of heart or blood vessel disease or are at risk of a stroke.

The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada urges all Canadians to make a concentrated effort to live a healthy lifestyle and reduce those sobering statistics.

[Beth Phinney, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member just mentioned, February is heart month. It is the time of year when thousands of people on behalf of the Heart and Stroke Foundation donate generously of their time and money. The funds go directly toward continued research.

Heart disease and stroke continue to be the number one killer of both men and women in Canada each year. It is likely that each one of us will be directly or indirectly touched by heart disease or stroke at some time in our lives. It is important for Canadians to know that they can make a difference.

I applaud the efforts of those who have joined in the fight. Again, it is because of the thousands of volunteers, canvassers, donors and countless others that important advancements in medical research can be made.

Child Care Centres

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw attention to the excellent child care services provided in Quebec, particularly in the riding of Verchères—Les Patriotes. In fact, two child care centres operating in Sainte-Julie were awarded three prestigious prizes at the annual gala of the Montérégie's child care centre organization on October 30.

The Grande Ourse child care centre received the golden award in the “family spirit” category, and the silver award in the “some people and others” category, for the quality of services provided to its clientele.

The “rare find staff member” award was given to Adrienne Parent, from Sainte-Julie, for her great generosity and tremendous dedication since the Julie-Soleil child care centre first opened, in 1978.

I also want to congratulate the Montérégie's child care centre organization on its 30 years of existence, and I sincerely thank the 123 child care centres belonging to this organization and caring for some 25,000 children in the region.

Veterans Affairs

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on January 6 the Minister of Veterans Affairs invited all Canadians to bring forward any information regarding Canadian Forces servicemen and women who have died while on duty in Canada or serving overseas since October 1947, with the exception of the Korean War.

To date, Veterans Affairs Canada has identified more than 1,200 members of the Canadian Forces whose names will be entered into a seventh Book of Remembrance to be titled “In the Service of Canada”.

Veterans Affairs Canada is asking families of deceased CF members and the Canadian public to view the names of the men and women already identified and to submit any other names that may be eligible for the book.

I invite the hon. members and all Canadians to visit the VAC website, under the “Past Features” heading, and to click on “The Seventh Book of Remembrance” icon.

In the year of the veteran we would like to enlist all Canadians in this campaign to remember these brave Canadians who served our country with duty and honour. Recalling them by name--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Wild Rose.

Government of Canada

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is my 12th year in the House of Commons. I arrived here looking forward to improving life for the average Canadian.

I know all members in the House have met the average Canadian and have knocked on their door during elections. I am sure they still remember them, or do they?

Average Canadians worry about paying their bills, about raising their children and about the safety and health of their family. Here in this House where the air is rare, we debate philosophical issues that we feel will affect the average Canadian, such as same sex marriage. Is the government so far out of step that it feels the average Canadian thinks this should be the most important piece of legislation passed?

I have to admit that I admire the Prime Minister's passion for same sex marriage. I just wish he had the same passion for issues like tax relief, true health care reform, fighting child pornography, corrections reform, and the list goes on.

I beg the Prime Minister to remember who he works for. His paycheque is signed by the average Canadian.