Loyola Hearn

[Fisheries, March 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans has just returned from Newfoundland, where members witnessed the devastation caused by foreign overfishing.

Yesterday a Russian vessel, the Olga , under Icelandic control, was arrested for polluting Canadian waters. The boat, according to confirmed reports, has 70 to 80 tonnes of mature breeding cod in its hold. This species is under moratorium.

Has the minister asked his officials to deal with this blatant abuse of regulations?

[Post-Secondary Education, March 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, one of the main flaws with the Canada student loans program is that it does not take into consideration the issue of regional disparity.

Will the minister responsible make the necessary revisions so that loans are adjusted for students who live in the more affluent areas and require extra funding and for people who come from outside the university towns where board and lodging is a factor? Both groups need much more than the average funding they can get under the present program.

[Observance of Two Minutes of Silence on Remembrance Day Act, March 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is very appropriate today that we have young cadets in the House, listening to the ongoing debate. It is truly young people like that, and through the youth of our country, who will remember the sacrifices which others made for us.

Let me, as my colleague before me did, congratulate the member who brought the bill forward. It is something that is of extreme importance to all of us, to the veterans who are still alive, to the ones whose families are here and, in general, to the people of the country, not only the people who are Canadian, have been Canadian and were Canadian when the wars took place, but also others who were not.

We have to remember that during the first and second world wars people from two great nations were represented; Canada and Newfoundland. As members would know, Canada did not join Newfoundland until 1949. Consequently, we cannot forget that. In fact, every year we have the celebrations at Beaumont Hamel. Who cannot remember the Newfoundlanders who went over the top and only a handful, less than 10%, answered the roll call the next day to pave the way for victory with their lives? That is what Newfoundlanders and all Canadians did. Their sacrifices gave us this great, free, democratic nation that we have today. This cannot be forgotten.

Each year we remember on November 11, particularly in Newfoundland where it is not only a holiday but a holiday which must be observed on that exact day. We cannot transfer the holiday to the following Monday or whatever should it fall on the weekend. The holiday is observed on November 11, as it should be and perhaps as it should be throughout the country.

The least we can do at this stage is to ensure that we have some remembrance for all this. Two minutes of silence across Canada is very significant. I can picture the country coming to a standstill, as the world perhaps came to a standstill when we realized that the great wars were over, that we could start rebuilding and that there would be peace.

However, as we know that is an awful lot for which to hope and wish. We have never found lasting peace in the world but perhaps we have avoided major world conflicts and hopefully we always will. However we can only do that if the young people today learn from the past. The old saying is “If we don't learn from the past we're doomed to repeat it”.

Hopefully, by having this two minutes of silence, people will ask this is being done. Hopefully the answers they get will lead them to appreciate the sacrifices made by the people who went to the fronts, who sailed in our naval ships and who flew in our planes to ensure that Canada was protected, that our freedoms were protected and that forever and a day we would be the great nation that we are. In return, it is very little to ask that we pause and keep quiet for two minutes each year to remember their sacrifices.

We certainly support the bill. Again, I congratulate the member. It is a significant gesture that we cannot, and I am sure nobody will, say no to.

[Trade, March 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has asserted himself into the softwood lumber dispute in order to bail out the Minister for International Trade. Will the minister tell the House what progress he is making on the removal of the tariff on Canadian shrimp into the European market, or should we bring the Prime Minister in on this one also?

[The Environment, February 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, a few years ago the St. John's weather office was closed and services were moved to Gander. Now the Gander services are being downgraded as a cost saving measure, according to officials.

Does the minister responsible realize the significance of this service to marine safety, storm tracking, air travel, et cetera? If so, what will he do about it since it affects the traveller, the tourist, the fisherman, the hunter and, in this case, even the baker?

[Canada Student Loans, February 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the government's commitment to post-secondary education has been abysmal. Young people all around the country are stuck with huge student loan repayments. HRDC collection services are now imposing setoffs on individual tax refunds due to people defaulting on their Canada student loans.

I have been informed that a decision will be made after an individual collection agency makes the recommendation to the Canadian student loan group. If a person's income covers basic necessities CSL will not remove the lien. Real hardship must be demonstrated. Single mothers who live below the poverty line are told they will not qualify for an exemption.

The agency works on a percentage so it will try to get as much as it can. People are not even considered because they have car loans or whatever. Their income tax will be clawed back. People who depend on this money for such things as buying beds for their children are told they will not get it. CSL will claw it back.

[Sports, February 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, everybody loves a winner, especially governments. To hear the Prime Minister talk yesterday one would think that Canadian athletes won 17 medals at Salt Lake City simply because of the few paltry dollars governments put into amateur sport.

The extra funding this year represented $4,500 per team member attending the Olympics. This equates approximately to the price of a ticket to see the hockey game between Canada and the United States. Wayne Gretzky did more for Canadian sport and Canadian patriotism in nine minutes than the Prime Minister has done in nine years.

What our athletes need from all of us, and yes, especially the press, is our support, encouragement and financial assistance throughout their careers, not just when they win.

It is not who wins or loses, it is how one plays the game. Our athletes of whom we are so proud could play even better if we supported them properly.

[Supply, February 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I was amazed to hear the member talk about health care funding being at an all time high in Ontario. Of course if we look at the real value of the dollars we see an entirely different story. We can buy a car today for $25,000 that a few years ago we could have bought for $10,000, so let us be realistic about this all time high funding.

Maybe he would like to talk about a province like Newfoundland and Labrador, where not only are we getting fewer dollars because of a declining population, but because the young people are leaving and we are stuck with an aging population, health care demands are that much higher. How does he rationalize the fact that this province is suffering because of the way the federal government has cut back on health care funding?

We can look at the richer provinces with increasing populations and say “Look at all we are doing”, but what are we doing for Canadians generally? The answer in health care is that we are doing a pretty darn poor job.

[Fisheries, February 18th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, a recently released study conducted by an international group of fisheries scientists has revealed that fish stocks are in decline and that fishing fleets in the North Atlantic must be seriously reduced if depleted fish stocks are ever to recover.

Many of these stocks are within Canadian waters. Others are within the waters we should manage, such as the nose and tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap.

It is time for the government to show some leadership in addressing this problem and to show some intestinal fortitude by unilaterally extending management control over these regions which are really extensions of our continental shelf. Unfortunately, we have not learned from past experience. As the old saying goes, those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

If the fishery dies, then much of rural Canada will die as well. That is not a legacy any of us want to leave.

[Budget Implementation Act, February 8th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is again with pleasure that I stand to say a few words in relation to the bill and to comment on the budget such as it was.

When I read the budget of the few months ago sometimes I think of my old days as a schoolteacher. I often say that if some of my students passed in an assignment that was so incomplete and contained so little about the subject I would send it back to them.

We talk about a six month hoist. I think we should talk about just sending it back. We should forget about the period of time and demand that the government produce a real document. Having said that, we have to deal with what is before us.

A previous speaker from the NDP talked about the government squeezing every cent out of the Canadian public. It is so true. Poorer people are being squeezed left, right and centre.

It reminds me of the old story of the five parties in the House having a social together. Five flies were flying around and happened to pitch into each glass. The four parties on this side automatically threw away their drinks. The Liberal member took the fly, squeezed the beer out of it back into his glass and drank the works.

That illustrates the way the government operates. It is trying to grab every possible ounce, every possible cent it can out of the Canadian public.

I will mention a couple of examples. One is the $24 tax on air travel. That might sound insignificant to most members. Many of us travel to the far reaches of the country and the cost of our airfare is horrendous. That is another issue.

To fly return from Newfoundland to Ottawa is anywhere from $1,800 to $2,400 for a return trip. People in British Columbia are paying just as much or more. Some people will say that $24 on $2,400 is only 1% , big deal. What about the shorter flights taken every day by people who have to use air travel to get to work or small business people who have to use air travel to get to meetings across the country where the flights are perhaps a little over $100? Now we are looking at 24% extra. What does that do to the people who travel?

What does it do to the budget of students who are trying to get back and forth to colleges and universities? Students have not been helped in any way by the budget. A country such as ours should depend on youth because they are our future. We invest less in our main resource, our greatest resource, than we do in anything else. We completely ignore our youth just as I would say we ignore our aged.

There is nothing in the budget to help seniors. What is happening as all this unfolds? As our interest rates drop, seniors, many of whom are on fixed incomes, are surviving on their little investments. They have seen the return on their investments diminish to the point where they have absolutely no income. What has been done to offset that? Nothing. Of course that is the operable word with the government.

The EI fund with its $30 billion surplus is an insult to working people and small businesses. Did the government take into consideration suggestions such as a $3,000 exemption that would help many students who work during the summer and see a lot of their money being deducted to pay for EI premiums which they never draw back? No. It certainly was not even considered.

What about small business people who hire a lot of part time employees? I am thinking particularly of those in the restaurant, bar and hotel industry. Are these people who earn very little exempt? Do they have a basic exemption? No. That was not considered. Why? It would help a lot of people help themselves and the government has shown that it does not care.

When I talk about what is in it perhaps I should also talk about a couple of positive points. Let us not be totally negative because we get accused of doing nothing except criticizing the government. I had problems finding anything positive. One interesting one was in relation to a new infrastucture fund of $2 billion that would be set aside to deal with special projects such as water, sewer and environmental projects which could not be handled under ordinary infrastructure funding.

It is a bit ironic but a couple of weeks before the budget came down I spoke at length one day on the same topic. Several of the ministers over there responded to me when I asked questions about funding for the cleanup of St. John's Harbour, Halifax Harbour or Victoria Harbour. It does not matter which one. They are all in the same boat, pardon the pun.

The answer was that the government gave infrastructure funds to the provinces and they could do whatever they want. If they did not use them to clean up the harbours, that was tough. We know that the one-third, one-third, one-third cash shared municipal, provincial and federal funding is not enough to deal with the pressures on provinces to deal with water and sewer concerns throughout the many towns and villages within the different provinces.

That money could not be used for major projects. I suggested at the time a special fund be put in place to deal with major projects such as harbour cleanup.

Apparently the minister was listening to me. The former minister of industry who represented our province had been saying to use the old money. He did not have the creative mind to come with the possibility of a new fund. Anyway the new fund is there. Will it be delivered fairly and squarely? We thought so because an arm's length organization was to deliver it. Now we see the minister will be responsible. The government will be responsible. It is to handle the fund directly.

Will the funds within that fund be delivered to the different provinces fairly? We do not know. We hope there will not be political manipulation. We hope the funds will be used for what they were originally intended to do and that a place like St. John's will benefit from that fund to clean up a harbour, which will mean so much to the port, to the tourism of the province and so on.

Another interesting item in the budget in relation to infrastucture was the $100 billion cut from marine infrastructure. There was also $10 billion or so to improve the coast guard. What is ironic about that is that it happened after a damning report was tabled in parliament regarding the cuts that had taken place in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

The Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans has done a phenomenal job. I recognize people from all sides of the House who sit on that committee. They have forced the government to make a move on dealing with the horrendous state of affairs within the Department of Fisheries and Oceans simply by bringing into the open what has been happening to the marine infrastucture and the coast guard.

Some good things were included because of the pressure of members on this side of the House. It has nothing to do with members on the other side. What is in the budget is one thing. What is not in it is interesting.

I mentioned there was nothing for seniors, nothing for our youth and absolutely nothing for our homeless. Luckily this is a very mild winter in this region. Ordinarily that is not the case. Quite often as we walk to work on cold mornings when it is 40 below outside we see young people, middle aged and even in some cases older people huddled in corners where they have spent the night. What is the government doing for them? What is in the budget? Not a word. What is it doing for the fishery? The word fish or fishery is not included in the budget.

What is in it? Very little is in it. What is not in it? A tremendous amount is not in it. I could go on for a week about the issue. I hope if we can keep this going we will get another chance. I am sure others want to thank the government for all it has done for all of us in this great country.