Reed Elley

[Supply, October 15th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing I would say to my hon. colleague is that if he had a choice between having a brand new Porsche in his driveway and a 40 year old car that he has to take to the garage every time he uses it, which would he choose?

[Supply, October 15th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I want to advise the House that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Prince Albert.

It is a pleasure to join in today's debate. Unfortunately as some other members have already stated, I do find the motion from the Conservative Party fairly innocuous. It is a bit of a motherhood statement, things we can basically all agree on, but it really gives us very little substance to debate. However it is before the House and I am prepared to debate it. The motion calls for several things and I will take them in order.

The first is that the House reaffirms its condemnation of the terrorist acts against our NATO ally the United States of America. Like many in this Chamber, I have gone on public record stating my abhorrence of the September 11 acts of terrorism. The horror we all felt at seeing these particular acts committed against a democratic nation will be etched in our minds forever.

Many have stated, and I agree, that our world has changed since that day. Some have said that the western world lost a sense of innocence. Others have said that there was no way for us to anticipate such an attack. Whatever our thoughts on this, all reasonable people would condemn these acts of terrorism and I would certainly urge the House to continue to do so.

The motion continues with support for Canada's courageous men and women in the Canadian armed forces who are responding to defend freedom and democracy in the international military coalition against terrorism. I am pleased to note that currently around 200 members of the armed forces live in my riding of Nanaimo--Cowichan, representing perhaps 200 families and many more people. I am honoured to represent them as their member of parliament because I know they in turn are proud to serve their country especially at this time of international crisis.

It is with pleasure therefore that I support the Canadian men and women who are moving to protect our freedoms. The commitment and challenges they face are enormous. We all recognize the challenges that are faced on the military side. Consider for a moment the challenges which they face at a personal level. On the home front with moms and dads away for extended periods of time, there are lots of changes in the family unit. Hockey games and dance recitals will be missed. Birthday parties and holiday events will only be celebrated through pictures and letters. We see these men and women make a commitment to this military effort which many of us do not have to face and I thank them for it.

I would offer a challenge for those of us who remain at home. Let us look around us and support those families who have a loved one on duty during this current conflict. Take a youngster to a hockey game. Support the moms and dads who tend the home front.

Since September 11 we as a nation have felt a stronger level of support for one another than for many years past, so let us not lose that sense of community. We are indeed our brother's keeper so let us reach out to those who need our support.

As a nation Canada has a long and proud military history. In the past we have done what other armies were not able to do. In many ways we became a nation during World War II when we first sent our finest and bravest to the front as a cohesive unit under Canadian authority.

Therefore I support the action of our armed forces being a part of this international coalition to fight terrorism. I must confess however that at the same time I feel this great pride in our armed forces, I am also somewhat concerned. I am concerned that the government has not given them the equipment necessary to perform their task in the most effective and safest manner possible.

I shudder to think that we might send troops into war zones with those old Sea King helicopters. Yes, the Sea Kings have served us well, but let us face the fact they are 40 years old. I am 50 and I know how I feel at times. We have all heard the horror stories of Sea Kings that have either not lifted off the ground or have gone down in some cases with a loss of life. I am told they need 30 hours of maintenance for every hour of flight time. Is this really the best the government can do for our military?

In 1993 the Prime Minister campaigned to cancel the EH-101 contract put in place by the previous government. Here we are almost 10 years later and we are still using the Sea Kings and there are no new helicopters in sight. While I have a lot of pride for the members of our armed forces, I am ashamed of a government that has failed to best equip them to do their job.

When the real numbers are looked at since the government took power between 1993 and 1999 Canada's defence budget was reduced by 30%. My hon. colleagues in the Conservative Party must also share some of the blame as these cuts came on top of two successive defence budget cuts by the Conservatives in 1989 and 1991.

The net effect has been a reduction of our forces personnel by some 35%. The latest numbers tell us that we only have about 50,000 men and women in our regular forces and even less who are combat ready.

It is not just partisan rhetoric when we talk about budget shortfalls for our forces. We note that most of the 2000 budget increases will go toward pay increases and quality of life expenditures. While these are long overdue they do nothing to assist with equipment. The auditor general has stated that the equipment budget faces a potential shortfall of $30 billion by the year 2012.

The last part of the motion would order the Standing Committees on Foreign Affairs and International Trade and National Defence and Veterans Affairs to meet jointly to hold frequent meetings with ministers and officials of the government and the military. That is another nice bit of apple pie rhetoric. Perhaps we should also add the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to the list because of Canadian concerns that our lax immigration policy can allow terrorists to come into our country.

There is no question that we need to increase our communication levels in times of national and international crisis. It is also important that our citizens be kept up to date as to how their government is handling such a situation. There is sensitive information which cannot be passed along to the general public, but all Canadians would want me to say to those who are in our military and government that while we give them the power they should not abuse it to the detriment of our own personal civil liberties.

What I have noticed in the way our American neighbour has been handling the situation is the frequency of President Bush's television interviews and briefings to the general public. It is this up close and personal relationship of a leader to his people which helps to draw a country together in times of crisis. May I suggest that our Prime Minister and his cabinet do what they can to make the same thing happen in Canada.

Those who make our laws, especially those of us who are opposition MPs, should not be hearing of pending legislation in the newspapers long before it is tabled in the House. If the government cares about that it should show the courtesy of briefing all MPs long before legislation is tabled. The Prime Minister only shows his disdain for parliament when he makes decisions for all Canadians yet fails to consult and seek approval from those who represent them.

I offer my support for this motion and will closely review the legislation that the justice minister has brought before the House today. I applaud and commend these men and women in our armed forces who enter into conflict in an effort to ensure that elected officials and all Canadians have the right to speak freely. I can think of nothing greater than seeing these same rights and freedoms being extended to those living all around the world, for this is indeed a fight for freedom.

[Softwood Lumber, October 4th, 2001]

Madam Chairman, I am somewhat pleased to rise on debate today. I wish I did not have to. I come from a riding that has been hit very hard by this. Contrary to what the parliamentary secretary and the minister have inferred, we know that this is a far bigger issue than just British Columbia. We know it affects many people across the country.

However, after all, I am a member of parliament from British Columbia and I have been elected to represent my constituents. I think my hon. colleagues in the House need to know that people are phoning me to tell me about the hardships they are now enduring because they have been laid off.

We had nine major mills in my riding. We now have eight. One has closed completely, four are in a stage of lay off and are not producing at the moment. The other four are not by any means at capacity in terms of production. The people calling me are feeling, and I have to say this, that their government has failed them on this issue. That is about as blunt as I can be about it. They are the people who are directly affected by this. They are the people having to go on social assistance or EI and who may not have a job when this thing is settled. Their mills may not re-open. They are the people who are having to turn to help from family, churches, food banks and every other kind of support system that we have in the country when a major industry like the softwood lumber industry goes into such a serious position.

It is not unusual, then, for us to be standing and fighting on behalf of our constituents who find themselves in such a terrible state. I make no apologies for it at all.

It is on this basis that we believe the government has failed Canadians on this issue. This is a huge part of our economy, as has already been stated in the House during this debate. In 1995 it employed 100,000 people. It contributed $14.5 billion to our economy. Those are big statistics and mean that this industry has a significant contribution to make to the total economic well-being of the country.

I live in a riding that is a major producer of softwood lumber. It covers approximately 3,837 square kilometres. Any people going to my riding would agree, I am sure, that there they would be able to see some of the most beautiful tree covered mountain scenery to be found in the world. Anyone standing at the top of the mountains to look out over the riding would get an understanding of how dependent we are upon this industry.

There are approximately 115,000 people in my riding. Of those people, over 20%, or almost 23,000 of them, depend upon forestry as their primary income. That is 23,000 individuals plus their families. By the time the economists extrapolate the family members, the circulation of the dollars through the local community and so on, it is certainly crystal clear that forestry is a major industry in my riding. Until recently it has been the number one economic stimulator in the riding of Nanaimo--Cowichan.

Therefore I cannot just stand idly by and watch in silence as the government allows our forestry sector to be stalled due to the whims of a few American lumber barons, primarily in the American southeast.

The minister accused us of not having said anything about this in the House during the last three weeks. It is quite clear that international events have overtaken us in the House. It is still appalling for us to even think of the terrorist acts that took place and the loss of life. What we have done today is simply make sure that this issue does not go off the radar screen. It is at this point that we felt it was timely to bring it up. It ought not to slide.

The U.S. trade representative, Mr. Zoellick, stated that U.S. needs to join in with more free trade agreements around the world, that the U.S. needs to "advance the causes of openness, development and growth". He acknowledges that NAFTA has led to gains for the average American family of approximately $1,300 to $2,000 annually in income.

I believe that it is time, then, for our government to stand up to the American tactics and clearly say to them that it is time for them to act on their own words, if that is what they believe. Simply put, softwood lumber should be a freely traded commodity.

The devastating effect of the recently imposed 19.3% tariff on our softwood lumber exports has really negative consequences. In B.C. alone there are already an estimated 15,000 forest workers laid off. Without any changes it is estimated that this number will double to 30,000 by the end of the year. This, then, is a very serious issue and I hope the minister can see beyond the rhetoric, beyond all of the meetings and everything else that he has done and see that these are real people who are in a really desperate situation.

What can we do? I have several thoughts. Some of them have already been shared in the House. The first thing that must be done is to send a clear and consistent message. So many times Canadians have watched the evening news and have heard different government representatives make wildly diverse statements around this issue. That simply cannot continue. We need to hear clearly and unequivocally from our government what it is doing.

Part of the problem and the reason why we are having this debate today is that the government has failed to communicate to us as legislators and certainly to the ordinary British Columbians who are losing their jobs exactly what it is doing.

Therefore I would ask the minister and his department to make sure that he clearly shares with Canadians what he is doing. Somehow he has to get those communication tools working better so that Canadians understand that the government, the party in power, is doing something about this.

The second point is to negotiate from a position of strength. A weak bargaining position is tantamount to a losing position. Simply put, the Americans not only want our natural gas and other energy sectors, they need them. If we have something that the Americans want, let us make sure that we get something that we want, namely free trade in the softwood lumber sector. There should be no shame or any kind of hesitation for us to bargain hard with the Americans in terms of energy. In spite of three senior cabinet ministers at some point offering their support to the linking of free trade and softwood lumber to the energy sector, the Prime Minister has flip-flopped on this issue several times. He did it not too long ago on a trip to Alberta. Simply put, if the Americans want our energy they must allow free trade for our softwood lumber.

Third, the government must make a strong representation to the U.S. trade representative on behalf of all Canadian companies, stating our concerns and our position unequivocally. To date we have not seen the government helping this to take place in Canada. I urge the government to stand up and act in the interests of all Canadians whether they be in British Columbia, Quebec or any other place in the country.

Fourth, the government must work quickly to remove those parts of the forestry industry that should not be included in the U.S. 19.3% tariff, specifically in the case of a number of producers in British Columbia, from where I come, in the cedar industry. The stakes are high and more jobs are at risk if those things do not happen.

This is a very serious issue for us. We want to have the government continue to act boldly and decisively on our behalf. We want it to communicate with Canadians clearly what its position is. We want the government to get tough with our American friends. They can be nice, but they can be tough. We need to be able to say that at the end of day we truly have free trade in this commodity as well as any other.

[Softwood Lumber, October 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber dispute is costing Canadian and American jobs and is benefiting only a handful of U.S. lumber producers and forest landowners.

Members of American Consumers for Affordable Homes wrote to President Bush yesterday and asked him to intervene in a preliminary decision to impose countervailing duties of 19.3% on lumber imports from Canada. They are appealing to Bush on the basis that the tariff is negatively impacting the housing sector and other lumber dependent industries that provide seven million jobs in the United States.

The dispute has also caused 15,000 forestry workers to be laid off in British Columbia alone, including many in my riding of Nanaimo--Cowichan. Federal government bonding guarantees will help put some people back to work.

The deadline to apply for an exemption to the U.S. tariff has recently passed. Now we discover that the Liberal government neglected its duty to apply for a blanket exemption for Canadian companies. This is the kind of neglect and inaction the government has displayed from the beginning on the issue. The 2,000 laid off workers in my riding want to know why the government has put them out of a job.

[Petitions, September 25th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure, pursuant to Standing Order 36, to present a petition on behalf of 90 constituents in Nanaimo--Cowichan who are deeply concerned about the fact that many health care workers in Canada are expected to assist in providing controversial services, such as abortion and promoting controversial material against their conscience.

The petitioners urge the Government of Canada to enact legislation that explicitly recognizes the freedom of conscience of health care workers.

[Supply, September 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, there is always a danger for us in some sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Spiritually we probably have done that in this country when we try to be all things to all people. From a faith perspective we get to the lowest common denominator and we do not do anything.

That is very dangerous for us as a nation. I was very taken by the service in Washington, D.C., which had a multi-faith component to it. They were very sensitive to the various religious expressions. There is no reason we in this country who claim to have a cultural and ethnic mosaic could not have demonstrated that very visibly at the service in Ottawa where we could have had shared expressions by representatives from the various faiths.

At the local level I know that happened. It happened in my riding as well as across the country as people of various faith backgrounds got together. Again it is a question of us in leadership being bold enough to exercise leadership in this area. We should not be afraid to exercise spiritual leadership if we believe strongly in it. We should not be relegating it to the back rooms of our lives.

[Supply, September 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Wild Rose. It is interesting that subsequent to the times of national mourning that were held in Ottawa, in Washington and in other capitals around the world, a number of people called my office. They talked to me personally about their deep concern that the whole issue of spiritual values had not been raised at our own national service here in Ottawa.

In fact one lady was so exercised about it that she was in tears for her nation. She felt that we had lost our spiritual foundation. I know that many Canadians deeply care about that. We Canadians are not necessarily a demonstrative people about our faith. However I do think that in times of great national tragedy those feelings come very close to the surface. It is appropriate for us as leaders to not only allow the free discussion of those questions that arise out of these national tragedies, but to somehow exercise some kind of moral and spiritual leadership that would give our people hope. If a nation does not have hope for its future, it will soon lose its direction very clearly.

I am sometimes concerned that we as a country have lost some of the direction for the future.

[Allotted Day--Anti-Terrorism Legislation, September 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, a week ago as we sat glued to our television sets, all of us were horrified by the events that took place in Washington and New York City. None of us will forget the image of that airliner flying into the World Trade Center. As we all try to make sense of those events, surely we would agree that what we saw was a the personification of evil itself.

I believe we are aware that along with great good in the world there is also great evil. Long before the events of last Tuesday took shape that evil began as a thought, or an attitude or a belief in the minds of those terrorists. What we saw was unfortunately the logical outcome of it.

We cannot grab hold of an evil thought any more than we can grab hold of a loving attitude. They are not something that we can place in our hand and say that this is evil or this is good. So what we are talking about, from my point of view, is a spiritual reality.

Evil is a spiritual condition of the human heart and at moments of great national tragedy it is logical for us to ask the spiritual questions. Why did this evil occur? Where did it come from? How can we eliminate it?

As our citizens grappled with these questions, tens of thousands of them came to Parliament Hill last Friday where we paid tribute to the other thousands who died or were affected by the terrorist attacks. We came with these questions on our minds and we were looking for a word of hope in a seemingly hopeless situation. However, there was no words of hope for our people as a nation. My own personal word of hope came from watching similar services in Washington and London.

I know we live in a pluralistic society and that we are so politically correct in this country that we do not want to offend those who may have other beliefs, but the vast majority of Canadians believe in the same God. We may call this higher power God or Jehovah or Allah, but he is the same God worshipped by Jews, Christians and Muslims.

Why then in this tragic situation would the leadership of our nation, namely the Governor General and the Prime Minister of Canada, not even call out to this higher power to provide the help, the comfort and the hope that we could not provide for ourselves? It saddens me greatly that our nation has become so secular and so politically correct that we cannot even name the name of God publicly.

A scripture recognized by Jews, Christians and Muslims alike says “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord”. We must ask ourselves, can we truly be blessed in this nation of Canada if our leadership will not even recognize and call out to God even in times of great national crisis? When will we learn that we are not alone in this universe and that the God who created us still wishes to intervene in our lives?

I would like to take this opportunity to express my condolences and prayers for the victims, the rescuers and indeed every one of us who has been so affected by these bold acts of tyranny and hate. I have heard from many of my constituents in Nanaimo--Cowichan who expressed their sorrow, their outrage and their support and solidarity for our American friends in this instance. Like other Canadians all across the country, they have lined up to donate blood, contributed money and sought out ways to offer support.

While many people have referred to the events of last week as being surreal or likened it to some kind of scene out of a movie, we know that we cannot go back for our world has been irrevocably changed. We cannot change what has already taken place, but we can now stand firm, first with our American friends and allies, but also with all free democracies around the world.

This deadly assault was not merely an attack on the World Trade Center or the American people, it was an attack at the very heart of worldwide democracy. To heal the past we must grieve and mourn for our losses, but we must also learn from our past and make the necessary changes to ensure that these events and circumstances do not continue in the future.

Terrorism is a hideous thing. We Canadians have been very fortunate to have escaped this terrible reality in the main, but we are no longer innocents. Perhaps as many as 70 Canadians lost their lives in this awful event. Now we must consider how we can make sure that this never happens again. Unfortunately we know that as long as this evil is in the world, the world will never be completely safe. Any action we take, any law we pass will not make us safe. As I said previously, I believe that this is primarily a spiritual issue. It is a condition of the human heart and only when the human heart is changed will we be safe.

Let us remember what terrorists' objectives are. Their intentions are to strike fear into the hearts of everyone. They intend to disrupt our way of life by scaring our children, by constantly forcing us to look over our shoulder and by disrupting our economies. I for one am not willing to accept that. I will not allow their false ideologies to affect my core values. The faith, principles and values that I live by cannot be swayed merely by someone who violently disagrees with me. I am committed to these beliefs and I will not give them up merely because someone is able to inflict so much widespread pain and suffering. We must remember that terrorists may kill the body but they cannot destroy the spirit. An idea cannot be killed, it can only be changed by a better idea.

Let us remember that while Muslim terrorists have called for a Jihad or holy war, this is indeed an oxymoron. War is not holy. Perhaps it has been more succinctly said that war is hell. Let no one be fooled by the ravings of these terrorists. No major religion of the world ever calls for violence as an answer.

There have been accusations and reports that Canada has and is being used as a haven for terrorists. The recent Kelly report from the Senate states that Canada has already been used as a haven for terrorists. We must take steps to ensure that this infiltration stops. There can be no room for debate on the matter. The government must act decisively. It has often been stated in the past few days but the statements bear repeating: “We are at war with terrorism”.

I would urge the government to listen to the opposition parties in the House. I would urge it to listen to its own members and listen to Canadians. They want action and they want action now. This action may mean changing our old laws. For instance, if it became clear that Osama bin Laden was the leader behind this awful act and for some reason we found him in Canada, would Canada extradite him to the United States to face punishment for his deeds or would we refuse to do so because he might face capital punishment in that country? This is the kind of tough decision that the government may be faced with. The question I ask is this: Is the government prepared to make tough decisions in the face of terrorism?

I remind the government that time and time again the official opposition has called for the bolstering of our defence resources. We made loud calls for changes to our refugee and immigration policy, not to keep legitimate claimants out of Canada but rather to ensure that those who would destroy this great country are not allowed to stay.

While the official opposition has made calls for changes to border security, tightening immigration clearances and the provision of adequate resources to our armed domestic forces, the government has often resorted to name calling and false bravado. Such noise will no longer be tolerated by Canadians. Will the government now recognize that past policies have not and are not working? Canadians want to see changes now and now is the time for us to work together as elected representatives and put forward new legislation that will fully address these issues.

I want to say again that any law or action will not guarantee the end of terrorism. All nations around the world, including ours, must recognize that we are fighting a spiritual battle. As the Apostle Paul says in the New Testament “We are not fighting against flesh and blood but against dark spiritual powers in the heavenly realms”.

Let us not allow this evil to overtake us either becoming like the terrorists themselves and seeking only revenge, but let us resolve to seek the will of the Creator whose purpose in the beginning was to make a world that he could look out over and say “It is good”.

May God help all of us by his wisdom to make the right decisions in the days that lie ahead.

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has said that he will consult with native people through the use of the Internet and chat rooms. When I talked to native people they said that they would rather have adequate plumbing in their houses than be plugged into the Internet. Maybe the solicitor general and the minister of Indian affairs ought to get together on this.

When will the minister get his priorities straight and ensure that native people across Canada have the essential tools to live healthy and productive lives?

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in a leaked cabinet document dated February 15, 2001, and entitled “Consultation Strategy for First Nations Governance”, it is clear that the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development wants to bring in legislation to the House by the fall of this year.

If this is true and if the bill is not already drafted, does the minister think that a few months over the summer are sufficient to consult with thousands of native people on this very important matter?