Betty Hinton

[October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that the previous government had more than 13 years to do what the member is asking for today.

This government is committed to veterans and their families. This government does not break its promises.

Our record of achievement speaks for itself. The veterans independence program, or VIP as it is commonly referred to, is one of the most successful and popular programs offered by Veterans Affairs Canada. The objective of VIP is to help veterans remain healthy and independent in their own homes, not only helping to maintain their independence but ensuring a high quality of life in their later years.

Over the years, the veterans independence program has been made available to more and more clients since its inception. Today, approximately 94,500 Canadian veterans and primary caregivers, 70,500 veterans and 24,000 caregivers, now receive VIP services across the country at an approximate cost of $270 million per year.

The program has become a model for programs both in Canada and throughout the world designed to help senior citizens live independent lives in their homes and in their communities until long term care becomes an absolute necessity.

The program assists veterans to maintain their independence through a combination of services that can include home care, housekeeping, grounds-keeping, meals on wheels and home adaptations. It is a customized plan for each client based on a needs assessment, which is created with support from Veterans Affairs staff and is self-managed by recipients in cooperation with provincial and regional health authorities.

The program also assists primary caregivers to maintain their independence after the veteran has died by providing housekeeping and/or grounds-keeping services depending on what the veteran was receiving at the time of death. Its goal is achieving nothing less than healthy living within the community, an emphasis that was all but unique in North America in 1981 when this program began.

In addition to VIP. Veterans Affairs Canada provides a wide range of support to veterans. If any veteran or his or her primary caregiver feels that they have a need that is not being met and for which they are eligible, we will work with them to assist them to receive the care they need.

The government remains committed to ensuring its programs and services meet the changing needs of its clientele. In its continuing effort to achieve this goal, Veterans Affairs Canada is currently conducting a comprehensive review of its health care programs and services. This review will include a thorough examination of access to VIP services.

The impact on this review will undoubtedly lead to a transformation no less profound than the one we achieved through the consultations and planning that brought us the new veterans charter.

[National Peacekeepers' Day Act, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by commending the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing for his desire to recognize the tens of thousands of Canadian men and women who have served our country and the cause of peace with such dedication and distinction.

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, I can assure all members of the House that this government, more than any other in recent history, is committed to giving every possible support to serving members of the Canadian Forces and to ensuring that our honoured veterans are treated with the dignity and respect they have earned from a grateful nation. They have brought honour to Canada and we will honour them.

Therefore, I am pleased to rise and speak in support of the proposed legislation at first reading.

Since 1919, Canadians from coast to coast to coast have paused each year on November 11 to remember their brave countrymen and women who have given their all in the service of Canada. In this remembrance we remember and honour all veterans. We honour those who served in war and those who served in peace. We honour those who served in France, in Italy, in Hong Kong, in Belgium, in Korea, in the Middle East and in the Balkans. We honour those who have served in Canada helping our communities respond to and recover from natural disaster. We honour those who continue to stand for peace and freedom today in Afghanistan.

We have made no distinction in our remembrance because all who have served in the past and all who serve today have made no distinction. Their commitment to honour Canada was the same, no matter where they served, when they served or under what conditions they served. Our commitment to honour them must be the same.

At the same time, the veterans of Canada's peacekeeping missions have earned special recognition. The concept of peacekeeping was a Canadian invention. It brought our country one Nobel Prize for Peace and a share of a second when the United Nations peacekeepers were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1988.

Our peacekeepers, all peacekeepers in fact, continue to be recognized internationally on the International Day of the United Nations Peacekeepers. This day is marked in countries around the world, including Canada, each May 29. Canada also joins nations around the world in commemorating United Nations Day on October 24 each year.

Our peacekeepers are recognized by the world and they are recognized by Canada. Their contribution is celebrated and commemorated in a very prominent way not far from this very building. “Reconciliation”, the peacekeeping monument, stands in the centre of one of the busiest intersections in the national capital. It is, I believe, still the only monument of its kind in the world.

Our peacekeepers are also recognized by the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal. This award which depicts the peacekeeping monument on its obverse was created in 1997. The Peacekeeping Service Medal honours Canadians, primarily members of the Canadian Forces, and members of the Canadian police services who have served on international peacekeeping missions.

The peacekeeping service medal is in keeping with Canada's traditional expressions of honour to members of the forces for their service. It follows in a long line of such decorations from the Atlantic Star and the Korean Medal to the Dieppe Bar and the Gulf and Kuwait Medal. Tens of thousands of veterans of Canada's peacekeeping missions wear this medal with pride. It is treasured by the families of those brave Canadians who have made the supreme sacrifice in the cause of peace.

The Peacekeeping Monument and the Peacekeeping Medal recognize the special honour our peacekeepers have brought to Canada and the often very difficult and dangerous circumstances in which they have served. On many deployments there has been very little peace to keep. On others their task could perhaps be best described as peacemaking rather than peacekeeping.

We know the risks are all too real. As stated in the preamble to the bill, more than 150 Canadians have given their lives on peacekeeping missions. These missions can be exceptionally difficult and stressful. Time after time and mission after mission, Canada's peacekeepers have demonstrated exceptional discipline and professionalism.

It is not just the physical risk. Our peacekeepers have too often seen examples of man's inhumanity to man that defy imagination. The emotional wounds can be every bit as debilitating as a bullet or a bomb. I am proud to say Veterans Affairs Canada is a world leader in providing the special support and services that are keeping our veterans and helping them to recover from those wounds.

I began my remarks by talking about November 11, Remembrance Day. It is our national day of remembrance for all those who have served, and its meaning will never change. The bill proposes August 9 as a national peacekeepers' day, the day being chosen as it was the day nine Canadian peacekeepers lost their lives when their aircraft was shot down over Syria in 1974. We must never allow the great meaning and significance of November 11, Remembrance Day, to be lost, as more and more days are added to recognize specific groups involved in peacekeeping.

Further discussion on a specific day for peacekeepers, as is indicated in the bill from the member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, or a day of recognizing peacekeepers, as is noted in the resolution by the Royal Canadian Legion this past June, is warranted. It is warranted because the government respects the views of Canadians on either side of the issue. We know there are those who strongly support a day a recognition for peacekeeping or peacekeepers, and we know there are those who never want to see the significance of remembrance on November 11 diminished.

We want Canadians to have an opportunity to decide. By having this discussion, through the parliamentary process, they will be given that opportunity. We are debating it here in the House and it will be debated at the committee level should the bill proceed further.

Again, I commend the hon. member for bringing the legislation forward. There were a couple of comments made that have me slightly concerned, but I am certain that, in his heart, the member opposite recognizes that peacekeeping missions are not safe missions. Peacekeeping missions are every bit as dangerous as peacemaking missions.

I have the great fortune of having in my riding some unsung heroes who have served this country very well. They were peacekeepers. Some of them were RCMP members. There have been many cases where these people have been put in situations that would be very difficult for even the longest serving soldier to experience without any ramifications. I honour those men and women who have done this service for our country and who have kept the tradition of Canada alive. Those are the kinds of people who make us what we are as a nation. Whether they be peacemakers or peacekeepers, we need in our hearts to hold what they have given us and that we take for granted very dear.

The people of Afghanistan are currently in a position where they may yet understand what it is that every day Canadians take for granted. We will give that as a gift from Canada to Afghanistan: freedom, peace, the right to religion and the right to an education. Those are all things we should mark.

Once again, I thank the opposite member for bringing this forward, and I am thankful for the opportunity to speak to this very important issue.

[Champions of Mental Health Award, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today and recognize an outstanding constituent who is also the winner of the 2006 Champions of Mental Health Award.

Denise Taylor is an accomplished Métis woman with a wealth of both personal and professional experience in the field of mental health. This impassioned woman has raised the profile of aboriginal people suffering from mental illness and delivered her message regarding the need to identify and embrace cultural identity as a tool to heal mental health afflictions. Denise has accomplished this through volunteerism, for which she won the 2003 Woman of Distinction Award from the YWCA, and her work as an aboriginal policy advisor for interior health.

Denise is also a noted speaker. She has presented at conferences and has addressed numerous groups from youth to elders in first nations and urban aboriginal communities.

I congratulate Denise on a well-deserved award. She truly is a champion of mental health.

[Fern Niblock, September 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, early this week Kamloops lost a volunteer extraordinaire. She will be sadly missed. Fern Niblock grew up right here in Ottawa, but shortly after marrying her husband John, an RCMP officer, they moved west and eventually settled in Kamloops.

Fern was a loving mother to her three daughters, Jackie, Rachel and Jeanne, and she doted on her grandchildren, Sara-Jane, Anthony and Hanna.

Even with her hectic schedule, Fern always found time to devote to the Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo constituency association. During an election, there was just no stopping her. Whatever needed to be done, Fern was already there and doing it.

Fern remained a devoted Canadian to the end. She requested that in lieu of flowers donations be made to the Western Canada Theatre Company or the Kamloops Symphony Orchestra, two more organizations she fully supported.

Fern Niblock was a personal friend and a community asset. Fern will be missed but never forgotten.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to what the member opposite said. There are a couple of things I would like to clarify for him, since he seems to be a bit confused. There is actually $1 billion allocated to pine beetle and $200 million of it will go out within the next two years. The $1 billion itself will go out over a 10 year time period.

He suggests someone is playing politics. I suggest he look in the mirror. The politics that are being played in this room today are being played at the expense of the lives and the livelihoods of communities and industry workers. This is beyond contempt to do this sort of thing. The Liberals had a long time when they were government to implement something that would be helpful, and they failed to do it.

Is it true that the member opposite does not understand that this is a seven year minimum deal, that there is $1 billion on the table and that $5 billion Canadian will come back? The statements he just made are very contrary to the facts.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the member to hold his passion. I am trying to answer him as best I can. When we negotiate a deal, as we did in this case, and we get more than 83% of what we asked for, that is really good negotiation.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy any remarks from passionate members of the House of Commons. The member who just spoke is obviously one of those very passionate members.

I do not remember hearing an exact question, but I do remember thinking to myself that he sounded an awful lot like a lawyer for a moment, because only the lawyers are going to benefit from this going on and on.

In the meantime, there are going to be communities, families and whole areas of the country that will be totally devastated. The longer this goes on, the longer the opportunity is there for big companies to do what I call the Pac-Man game. They come along and gobble up all the little companies and pretty soon those little companies that used to be the mainstay of small communities and were considered players in the industry suddenly have disappeared.

I am not certain if the member opposite has ever had any experience in negotiations, but I have. In negotiations, there is give and take. The rule of thumb is that one side asks for the moon and the other side offers the dirt on the floor. Somewhere in between an acceptable agreement is found, one that actually benefits both sides, and everyone walks away, saves face for another day, and we go on to do what we are supposed to be doing.

In the case of this lumber agreement, there are a couple of things that the member opposite is mistaken about. We are not leaving money in the hands of the United States. There is actually going to be a group of people from both Canada and the U.S. who will use part of that money to which the member referred.

[Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, 2006, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today to talk about the softwood lumber agreement and add my support to Bill C-24, which will bring it to life. I ask all members of the House to join me in supporting it.

As the Minister of International Trade indicated in his speech yesterday, the softwood agreement is good for industry, good for lumber communities and good for Canada. This is particularly true in my riding of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, which relies heavily on the softwood lumber industry.

This agreement eliminates U.S. duties, ends costly litigation, takes our lumber producers out of the courts, provides stability for industry and returns more than $5 billion. It is a practical and flexible agreement that ends the dispute on terms that are highly favourable to Canada and will put Canada and the U.S. back on track for making North America more competitive for the future.

I am pleased to note that the agreement has won a wide base of support from both industry and the provinces. There are a number of good reasons for this support, but perhaps one of the more significant reasons is that this agreement respects the diversity of Canada's lumber industry.

As the House knows, the lumber industry across the country is varied and different regions have unique challenges and opportunities. Today I would like to highlight some of the regional benefits of the agreement and explain how it responds to a wide variety of needs across the country.

First, the agreement gives provinces flexibility in choosing the border measure that best suits their particular economic needs. Exporters will pay an import charge when lumber prices are at or below U.S. $355 per thousand board feet. When prices reach this threshold, Canadian regions, as defined in the agreement, the B.C. coast, the B.C. interior, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, can select one of the following two export charge regimes: option A, an export charge with the charge varying with price; or option B, an export charge plus volume restraint, where both the rate and volume restraint vary with the price.

This innovative mechanism will allow provinces to choose the export charge that is right for their individual economic and commercial situation. I should point out that funds collected under either option will stay in Canada.

Provinces and industry also asked for flexibility in export quota rules to be able to meet their U.S. customers' requirements. In response, the government negotiated provisions allowing companies to carry forward or carry back up to 12% of their monthly export quota volume from the previous or next month. This is a significant improvement over the current environment.

Under the current system, the duties imposed by the U.S. are reassessed annually. The industry never knows from year to year what duty rate will apply. Under the agreement, they will know and can take full advantage of a stable, predictable business environment.

The agreement also contains a provision allowing provinces to seek an exit from the border measures based on a process to be developed by Canada and the U.S. in full consultation with provinces within 18 months of the agreement entering into force.

It provides for reduced export charges when other lumber producing countries significantly increase their exports to the U.S. at Canada's expense.

It protects provincial jurisdiction in undertaking forest management policy reforms, including updates and modifications to their systems, actions or programs for environmental protection, and providing compensation to first nations to address claims.

It includes an innovative mechanism to ensure that the $4.4 billion U.S. in returned duties will be back in the hands of our exporters within weeks of the agreement's entry into force. It also ensures that independent lumber remanufacturers, which do not hold tenure and are independent from tenure holders, do not have to pay an export charge on the value-added component of their products. This represents a significant improvement in treatment compared to previous agreements.

In addition to these benefits and the flexibility built in for provinces, the agreement also addresses region specific concerns that were raised by different provinces and stakeholders throughout the negotiation process.

For example, the agreement provides a limit on the export charge imposed on high value lumber products such as western red cedar lumber, which is primarily produced on the B.C. coast.

Through the agreement's anti-circumvention provisions, it also recognizes the importance of B.C.'s forest policy. B.C.'s market pricing system and any updates or modifications to the system have been given a full exemption under this agreement.

In response to Canadian industry concerns regarding the exemption of coastal logs and lumber and running rules that govern the administration of export measures, the U.S. has also confirmed that it is prepared to engage in early discussions to ensure the agreement operates in a commercially viable manner.

The agreement also directly responds to concerns expressed by Quebec, Atlantic Canada and the territories.

For instance, the border measures will not apply to the export of lumber products manufactured at Quebec border mills, a key position supported by the government of Quebec and its industry. In fact, the government achieved exclusions from border measures for a total of 32 companies in Quebec and Ontario, including the Quebec border mills.

The agreement ensures that lumber produced from logs harvested in the Atlantic provinces which are certified by the Maritime Lumber Bureau will not be subject to border measures. It ensures that lumber produced in the Atlantic provinces from logs harvested in the state of Maine is exempt from the border measures, a key component of bilateral trade in that region.

Also, it exempts from border measures lumber produced in the territories.

These elements of the agreement respond directly to the concerns raised by the provinces and industry throughout the negotiation period. They have helped garner a broad, substantial base of approval for this agreement in regions across Canada.

I am proud to lend my support to this hard-won agreement and to Bill C-24, which will bring it into force. Today I ask my fellow parliamentarians to do the same.

In conclusion, let me echo the words of Premier Gordon Campbell from my home province of British Columbia:

It's time for the costly litigation and instability experienced over the last decade to end and for a new chapter in British Columbia's ongoing forestry revitalization to begin.

I could not agree more.

[Petitions, September 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand in the House today and present a petition from my constituents regarding their support of raising the age of consent from 14 to 16 years.

[Veterans, June 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, July 1 will mark the 90th anniversary of the Battle of the Somme in Beaumont-Hamel. During the first world war, on the morning of July 1, 1916, the soldiers of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, in an extraordinary display of bravery and determination, advanced over open ground at Beaumont-Hamel into a relentless barrage of artillery and machine gun fire. It lasted only 30 minutes. Just 68 of the 801 soldiers answered roll call the next day.

In marking this anniversary, overseas events at the Beaumont-Hamel Newfoundland Memorial and other sites in France have been planned to honour the sacrifices and contributions of Newfoundlanders and Canadians who served in the first world war. The commemorative events in Canada will be focused in Newfoundland and Labrador and in Ottawa. Veterans Affairs Canada is working with the government of Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure that this anniversary of the Battle of the Somme is appropriately marked.