House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 45% of the vote.
Industry February 8th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry. Will the minister tell the House if Inco or any subsidiary company has applied for research and development funding to assist in the overall development of the Voisey's Bay project?
What is the status of the request, if there is one, and is the request for site specific funding? I refer to Argentia, Newfoundland.
Budget Implementation Act, 2001 February 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, today the Federation of Canadian Municipalities is meeting in Ottawa. The Minister of Finance will be speaking this evening. Perhaps he should be asked what I am going to ask the member.
We look at the downloading that has happened from the federal government to the provincial governments, and the provincial governments to the municipal governments. We pay property taxes so that certain basic services can be provided at the municipal level. How can municipalities deliver the basic services we need when that downloading has occurred, and the money they should have for those services has been grabbed by the federal government?
Budget Implementation Act, 2001 February 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions for my hon. colleague.
First, he talked about HRDC. Although we cannot put the blame on local offices which must do what they are told and operate with what they have been given, in the member's dealings with the upper echelons of the department has he found that the department is in a state of complete and utter chaos?
Second, I would like the member to comment on a comment he perhaps made when he talked about the grants given to corporations. I agree with him to a large extent that is what they are because of the payback ratio. Most of these grants came from the Department of Industry. The member is perhaps casting aspersions on the former minister. I wonder how he can rationalize that when the same minister, as premier of Newfoundland, as has just been determined by the auditor general's report, took our budget from a $30 million deficit to a $350 million deficit?
Does he not think that he should have the same right to contribute to the deficit here federally?
Supply February 5th, 2002
Madam Speaker, following up on the previous question, the government continues to say that it has an adequate registry. I am beginning to wonder if it is talking about the one that is supposed to be in existence. If we look at the amount of time and money it is spending on the gun registry, is it trying to tie it into that? Certainly the present registry is not the one Canadians want. Would the member comment on that?
Supply February 5th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's remarks. He talked about the fact that this was not new, that it had been here before and that it was an issue that seemingly everyone supported.
Along those lines, I would like him to answer his own question, which is why the government has not moved on this. Does it not care? Are the ministers in charge are so incompetent that they cannot put the necessary piece of legislation together? Are they perhaps afraid of turning off some of the provinces? I think everyone in the country would like to see this issued settled and settled quickly. I would appreciate his comments.
Youth Criminal Justice Act February 4th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I have a short question for my colleague. I have listened to the debate over the last week or so on this very important issue. Everyone who has spoken, except the governing party, refers to the great act the province of Quebec has. It is recognized by most of Canada as being the pace setter in that area.
Why would the government not learn from that and use it as an example and a basis for a good piece of legislation? What is wrong with this government?
Broadcasting Act January 31st, 2002
As my colleague mentions, a Liberal few is perhaps correct.
That is dangerous in more ways than one because public opinion is quite often affected by the media. If the media brings a certain message from a certain direction then, undoubtedly, if we only hear one side of the story we tend to believe it.
A lot of agencies would like to express concerns about what is happening in the broadcasting field and it is up to us to make sure they have that opportunity.
As we move forward to really do something with the Broadcasting Act, we need to establish the kind of Broadcasting Act that will be good for everyone in the country, regardless of where they live or their political affiliation, a broadcasting system that is fair, accurate and unbiased, and one that covers all regions of the country, that not only brings news to Canadians but brings news from them so that all of us know what is going on in the more remote regions. That is starting to disappear.
As we advance in technology it seems we regress in doing what technology should be able to do.
By passing the bill as quickly as possible we would have the opportunity to make sure that those who want to appear before the hearings on the Broadcasting Act have the opportunity to do so.
I encourage my colleagues in the House to make sure that we not only pass the bill but push for its implementation so that those who are scattered around the country have equal opportunity to express their views on what is happening to us in the country in relation to the broadcasting industry. The broadcasting industry, radio, TV or whatever, but particularly radio, has such an influence on the decision making powers of the country that we cannot let it be taken over by a small group of people who will manifest to the rest of us their views depending on political affiliation or who is funding them. Average Canadians should have every right to express their views and this is perhaps one opportunity to create a balanced playing field. I am all for it.
Broadcasting Act January 31st, 2002
Madam Speaker, I also stand to support the legislation, particularly because of its importance to the smaller, more rural regions of our country.
I was a bit shocked to listen to the member for Elk Island ask all of us to vote against the legislation because a review of the Broadcasting Act is presently underway and we would be infringing on the openness of presentations to the committee that will be holding the hearings.
However, I feel entirely different because the hearings on the Broadcasting Act are just commencing. The committee has not gone out from this area yet to hear any witnesses, although I understand some witnesses may have made presentations here in Ottawa. Over the next few weeks, months and years perhaps, the committee will move around the country to hear the views of people who are concerned with the Broadcasting Act. There are a lot of concerns about what is happening in relation to broadcasting in this country.
Many of the groups and individuals who would like to present to the committee as it goes forth will not be able to do so because of the costs involved. If we pass legislation now and the results are implemented, then perhaps the funding would be available to individuals or groups who want to make presentations next month, next year or whatever the case might be, depending upon the length of the hearings. I would think they the presentations will be extremely long and extensive because of the importance of the review itself. The act has not been reviewed for several years and we have had many changes in the broadcasting field.
If we were discussing the Telecommunications Act, the costs of making a presentation by anyone designated as an intervener are covered. However, because it is the Broadcasting Act, for some reason it is not looked upon as being important and those people wishing to intervene are left entirely on their own.
I would suggest that the Broadcasting Act perhaps has a lot more relevance in the rural, smaller areas of this country than it has in larger regions. Throughout the country we have a tremendous amount of people who get knowledge solely through one or two radio stations. I am thinking of CBC in particular.
If we look at what is happening to CBC, it is extremely scary. As an agency funded to be the national mosaic, to weld the fabric of the country together, to be the voice of and to the people, we have to say that it has failed miserably because its direction seems to concentrate on the larger areas and cut programming and opportunities from local areas. Certainly in our own province of Newfoundland, the contributions of CBC programming today compared to five or ten years ago are almost insignificant, to the point where the ratings for this publicly funded station have almost dropped off the board entirely.
Some might say that there is nothing wrong with that, that is what competition is all about and that the private sector should step in. I have no problem with that. However, it is very difficult to encourage or, in some cases, to even expect the private sector to deliver programming to small, rural regions where it is just too expensive to maintain proper operations. That is where the Canadian broadcasting system is supposed to step in.
As all of this is unfolding, more and more concerns are being raised across the country. The concentration of media in the hands of a few is becoming a major concern.
The Budget January 29th, 2002
Madam Speaker, I have a brief question for the member. First, let me say to her that she should not knock CNN, because without it the Prime Minister would not know what is going on in Afghanistan.
Second, the hon. member mentions CBC being so important to the fabric of the country. I agree with her and many others do.
The problem is that the people who run CBC do not care about rural Canada. They have cut the guts out of the programming to these areas. That is reflected in the polls, as the member just said. Its ratings are going right to the bottom because that is the type of service it is presently supplying to local service areas in rural Canada.
How can the member justify funding an agency that does the reverse of what it is supposed to do?
The Budget January 29th, 2002
No mention of the fisheries at all.