Brian Fitzpatrick

[Scouts and Guides Week, February 21st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, international scouting calls tomorrow “Thinking Day”. It was established in 1926 by girl guides and boy scouts to think about the goals for the youth of Canada and the world. It is also the birthday of Lord Robert Baden-Powell, the founder of scouting.

I believe it is important that “Thinking Day” reflect the positive values of scouting. Scouting promotes personal character, love of learning, self-reliance and pride in country. Scouting gives our youth the opportunity to build strong bodies and minds, and respect for our traditions.

That is truly something to think about as we salute our girl guides and boy scouts of Canada today.

[Hockey, February 18th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's decision to tax amateur junior hockey is killing the hockey dreams of thousands upon thousands of young Canadians.

Canadian junior “A” hockey teams do not want government welfare, but the Liberal government wants to tax them. Why should amateur junior hockey not be treated the same as other amateur sports in the Olympic program? This injustice must stop. Junior hockey is about making dreams come true. The government's decision to tax junior “A” hockey teams is killing those dreams.

Hockey is Canada's official national sport. Apparently it is not the Liberal game. Why does the Liberal government insist on attempting to bankrupt junior “A” hockey teams?

[Divorce Act, February 4th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I was interested in the comments about the explosion of the divorce rate in the last 20 or 30 years in our country. It struck my mind that one of the biggest causes for breakdowns is financial problems in the family. It also occurred to me that in a lot of cases there is a heavy tax penalty to being married in this country.

I would like to ask the member if he can enlighten us as to what specifically the Liberal government is doing about addressing the real negative discrimination there is in the tax system against married folks.

[Agriculture, January 31st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the agricultural policy framework implementation date will soon be here. Three provinces and the majority of farm groups have fundamental objections to many of the proposed changes. The prospects for thousands upon thousands of Canadian farmers are bleak at best.

Our farmers need an effective long term solution. Will the minister extend the implementation period by one year to ensure the program will meet the needs of our hard pressed Canadian farmers?

[Criminal Code, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would still like the undertaking on the Olympic program because the very points the member raised apply to anyone involved in the Olympic program as well. I would like to know the answers to those questions. They participate in amateur sports, are receiving remuneration, accommodations and so on. I want to make sure the government is applying these rules fairly and equally across the board.

I have just one final comment. Government should be promoting Canadian heritage and dreams, not attacking them. The decision of the CCRA could seriously drive a lot of the teens in the Saskatchewan junior hockey league, the communities that support them and the people involved in it into a bankruptcy situation. A Canadian tradition and heritage will be killed by that. This league has survived for many decades without the CCRA being involved. I really do not see the need for it to become involved in this situation or harass a Canadian institution.

[Criminal Code, January 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure the member will have the answers for my questions but if he cannot provide the answers, perhaps he could provide an undertaking to provide the answers.

The questions are about the Canadian Olympic program. We are talking about our elite athletes and the remuneration they receive by way of payment and free accommodation, room and board and so on. What is the CCRA's position in regard to the tax treatment of those benefits?

The other question I would like an answer to is whether the CCRA decision to tax Saskatchewan junior hockey league teams is going to be applied to all 130 plus junior A hockey teams across the nation.

The Saskatchewan junior hockey league is an old and strong tradition in Saskatchewan. I began following the league in the mid-1950s, which kind of dates my age. There were some pretty good players back in those days: “Mr. Goalie” Glenn Hall, Rod Berenson, Terry Harper, Dave Balon, Orland Kurtenbach, Marshall Johnston who later became the general manager of the Ottawa Senators, Autry Erickson, and many other players.

Over the years the league has evolved. It is no longer a major junior hockey league. It has become a small market developmental league that emphasizes education and development of hockey skills.

The important relationship in that league is the relationship between the parents who entrust their sons to league teams on some pretty clear understandings.

The first is that players will be billeted into solid homes in a community and the teams and billets will become the parents and guardians of those boys while they play hockey in that community.

The second understanding is that there is a strong emphasis on education, schooling and skill development in hockey.

Third, the players will retain their full amateur status with the hope of receiving a full athletic scholarship to a major American university or college.

It is also an understanding that teams will provide the room and board and the expense money that the players would normally receive if they stayed at home to receive their schooling with their parents in their home communities.

In the history of the league the CCRA has never treated that relationship between the teams, the players and the parents as some sort of employer-employee relationship. By adopting this position now, the federal government is undermining the special relationship that exists between the parents, the teams and the players. The decision, in addition to casting doubt on the eligibility of the players to receive athletic scholarships, undermines the hockey dreams of these people.

The Saskatchewan junior hockey league is about dreams. Hockey is Canada's official national sport. The decision of the CCRA is all about destroying a whole host of dreams and a Canadian institution, amateur junior hockey.

The government should be about promoting Canadian dreams and not about destroying them. In this case--

[Kyoto Protocol, December 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the members for Kootenay—Columbia, Calgary Southeast and Kelowna.

I will start with a couple of quotations. Approximately 500 years ago a fairly intelligent man said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I have heard a lot of passion about the environment and the need to take action, whether it will work or not, to deal with the problem, that it is urgent and must be dealt with. I cannot help but think of what that fairly intelligent man said when he said the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I also came across a quote from Warren Buffett the other day. I have heard a lot of models and forecasts on economic projections from the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of the Environment. Mr. Buffett said we have economic forecasters so that fortune tellers look smart. I think there is a lot of truth in what he had to say.

I want to focus on Saskatchewan. There are a number of areas in which Saskatchewan would be devastated by the Kyoto protocol. For the benefit of all the government members who are here tonight, let me explain that in Saskatchewan we have a government owned crown corporation that provides all our public power. Seventy per cent of our power comes from coal generating plants. Reducing dependence on that by 30% within 10 years would have a devastating effect on that crown utility. The only way it could be done is through major capital investment, with money the province does not have, to find other energy sources. In the interim what it will have to do is drive up the power costs to very high rates. It is going to be hard on seniors, farmers, businesses and everybody who is dependent on power in that province. It is going to be devastating.

I want to focus in on one business alone, IPSCO. It directly employs 1,500 people in Regina. It is a green industry and is probably the North American leader in scrap iron. Everyone wants to recycle, but IPSCO has looked at the implications of the Kyoto protocol and has made it clear. If it passes, IPSCO will be closing its operations and moving out of Saskatchewan. That will have a devastating effect on the province. I have talked to the CEO and he has said it is not a manageable problem. It is an unmanageable problem and is insurmountable for them. It will be moving its operations to Davenport, Iowa, with the rest of its operations and that will be another industry out of Saskatchewan.

Let us look at government revenues. The Government of Saskatchewan is going through rough times with fiscal imbalances. It is projecting a deficit heading into the next year. We are back into deficits. The federal government may not know that, but if we look at the provincial level it is coming. Saskatchewan is into that territory. Over 10% of its revenue is derived from petroleum royalties. If we are going to decrease our reliance on petroleum by 30% of fossil fuels, it is pretty easy to see that the imbalance will get worse in that province, not better. What does that mean? It means that health care, education, highways and other important government services will be shortchanged as revenues dry up. That is another area of concern.

A third area of concern is farming and transportation. Both those industries in Saskatchewan are totally dependent on diesel fuel and they will be hit hard. One thing I am amazed at is how the government totally neglected the uranium industry in Saskatchewan. We are sending uranium to France, Japan and other places that are going to find it much easier to meet the Kyoto standards because they are using atomic power, but we get no credit at all for being the major exporter of uranium to these other countries. To me that is either incompetence or something else, and I do not want to get into problems like the Prime Minister did with George Bush and use other words, but it really makes me wonder what the government was doing when it was negotiating this agreement.

[Taxation, November 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, federal tax collectors continue to squeeze the Saskatchewan Junior Hockey League for every dime, but these are non-profit teams. They do not pay salaries and they operate in the red.

Last week the minister said she had the responsibility to review this situation.

Why is the revenue minister bodychecking these teams into bankruptcy?

[Taxation, November 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, federal tax collectors are now auditing teams in the Saskatchewan junior hockey league and have assessed some for up to $14,000.

Let us consider the facts. All teams are non-profit. All teams are operating in the red. No player receives a salary. The players are billeted out to homes that receive $250 to $300 a month for accommodation and meals.

Why are federal tax collectors attempting to bankrupt an amateur junior hockey league?

[Parliamentary Reform, November 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the member for Winnipeg--Transcona. As far as House procedures and understanding this place, he is a prestigious person in the House.

With respect to question period, it has occurred to me that it brings a lot of disrespect to the House. It comes down to one single problem and that is the inability to get government cabinet ministers to answer questions. They are masters of evasion and of using devices to avoid answering.

It seems to be in vogue at the present time not to comment on personal cases or individual cases. However, when I open the newspaper, I read an article where the minister is commenting to the media about a personal case. It seems to happen quite often.

My past experience is as a lawyer. I have often thought that perhaps the Speaker should have the power of a judge in a trial and direct the minister to answer the question and not use evasive attempts to steer around being accountable.

What would the member suggest for bringing some real meaning to question period?