Lost his last election, in 2008, with 29% of the vote.
Year 2000 Problem June 12th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite knows full well that the work on the Y2K program has been extensive within this government and outside with business and industry. The continuous programs as brought forward by the Monty report and the soon to become Statistics Canada report on the progress of the Y2K program is very effective for making sure that this country is ready for Y2K.
Committees Of The House May 28th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Industry which was presented to the House yesterday was the wrong document. I seek the leave of the House to present the correct ninth report at this time.
Competition Act May 27th, 1998
Madam Speaker, today I am addressing the House on the subject of private members' Bill C-235, an act to amend the Competition Act. Unfortunately I cannot support the bill.
I wish to congratulate my colleague, the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge, for his work in preparing this bill and for his laudable efforts to find solutions to the problems facing many of our small and medium size businesses. While his efforts were well intentioned, the proposed means to resolve this issue will not bring about the results he seeks and will most certainly have serious adverse consequences on the Canadian economy in general and on a number of specific industries which I will explain shortly.
Bill C-235 seeks to prohibit vertically integrated companies from selling their products to retailers competing against them in the same market at prices which would inhibit the retailer's ability to make a profit similar to that enjoyed by the vertically integrated supplier.
The bill also seeks to prohibit vertically integrated suppliers, by virtue of their dominant position, from coercing retailers into adopting a specific pricing policy.
According to the bill, both of these proposals would be effected by amending sections 50 and 78, respectively, of the Competition Act.
The bill as it is currently worded will potentially apply to every vertically integrated supplier no matter what industry it is in. My colleague across the way also explained that earlier.
While many of us are aware of our colleague's interest in providing assistance to independent gasoline retailers, we should ask ourselves if tying the hands of all integrated players in the Canadian economy is not unlike using a bomb instead of a fire cracker. Do we really wish to see our selection of tires, auto parts, jeans, electronics products, computers or green plants diminished by overbearing government regulation? Do we wish to push some firms out of the Canadian economy because they find our laws burdensome? I think not. Indeed, we wish to encourage Canadians to open and expand their businesses and create jobs. We wish to welcome foreign investment as a further stimulus to job creation and to the Canadian economy.
Furthermore, did we not adopt a policy of deregulation in the 1980s? We have been furthering that agenda for some time with the specific purpose of cutting down the costs of doing business in Canada in a attempt to provide Canadian businesses with an equal chance to compete in foreign markets and to meet import competition here at home. To be more specific, experience has shown us that in markets where similar legislation has been enacted prices for the products covered by the legislation have risen. Higher prices of inputs to major manufacturing in Canada would harm the overall competitiveness of the economy and inhibit Canadian firms from competing on a level playing field with foreign firms not subject to the same constraints.
Allegations that vertically integrated suppliers have retailed their product below cost have rarely, if ever, proven supportable upon close analysis. Forcing these suppliers to underwrite the return expected by competing retailers could easily lead to the supplier's legitimate refusal to sell their products through independent retailers. In a nutshell, there is little good to come out of these proposals.
In addition, these amendments would discourage price wars which can be of benefit to customers. The resulting price inflexibility would introduce price rigidities, impeding the ability of businesses to quickly react to changing market conditions—and we all know that market conditions change continuously—and set their prices accordingly.
The amendments would force companies to check with their accountants and financial controllers to determine whether a new price offering would cover all their market costs and mandated rate of return even if short term requirements to sell off product or meet competition in the marketplace was urgently needed.
Looking specifically at how regulators would administer such a law, I draw the attention of members to the following scenario.
The competition bureau would be expected to act upon any complaints arising from each and every price increase at the retail level of products covered by these proposed sections of the act. Just looking at price changes at the pump, which happen as often as three times a week, in the 20,000 markets across Canada, we can expect the annual administration costs of investigating and pursuing such complaints to be easily in the billions of dollars.
Add to that the price increases for tires, car batteries, computers or plants, or the myriad products sold at stores like Price Club, and the costs could soar. I doubt very much that this is what was intended by the proposal.
Furthermore, I have studied the sections of the Competition Act which relate to abuse of dominance and price maintenance. Sections 50(1)(c) and 78 on their own, without any amendments, are currently drafted in a manner which addresses the concerns of the hon. member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge. Predatory pricing, which is defined as selling products at prices unreasonably low, having the effect of substantially lessening competition, or pricing which is aimed at eliminating or impeding the expansion of a competitor is a criminal offence under the act as it now stands.
In addition, abuse of dominance in situations where substantial lessening of competition results is a civil provision. One of the subsections of that provision deals specifically with the issue of dominant vertically integrated firms squeezing the margin available to non-integrated customers and competing with the suppliers for the purpose of impeding or preventing the customer's entry into or expansion in the market.
Since these provisions already respond to the issues raised in the proposed amendments, I ask why we need to add redundant provisions to an existing law.
Finally, the Competition Act already has a provision which deals with coercive pressure to resale a product at a price dictated by the supplier. This provision, known as price maintenance, is criminal in nature, allowing for greater use of the provision when warranted by the director of the competition bureau and the Attorney General of Canada to deal with competitive problems in gasoline markets.
As a matter of fact, on January 26, 1996, Mr. Justice David Dempsey imposed a fine of $50,000 against Mr. Gas Limited, a local Ottawa gasoline retailer, for having influenced upwards, by use of a threat, the prices charged by one of its competitors in Ottawa, Caltex Petroleum Inc. Since this prosecution Ottawa has become a very competitive gasoline market which last year had the lowest average gasoline prices in Ontario. I give this example to show that there is already a very effective provision in the Competition Act to deal with gasoline suppliers attempting to coerce their competitors with respect to prices.
Historically the competition bureau has undertaken 11 prosecutions under the price maintenance provision in gasoline markets and has been successful in obtaining 9 convictions. This is obviously an effective provision in the Competition Act. Canadian business does not need new duplicate regulations.
The price maintenance provision has also been used successfully in literally hundreds of prosecutions. The business community, in general, knows its content and what conduct is expected of them to stay within the law. A new, similar provision to price maintenance, which one of these amendments contains, only complicates the life of business persons and adds no additional benefit for the economy, consumers or small gasoline retailers.
We are not here to determine for our citizens what a reasonable rate of profit is today. The market does that. Economies which have tried to establish so-called planned economies have recently lived through the utter failure of their efforts.
We need to find solutions that encourage innovation, new and efficient entrants, consumer choice, new jobs and economic growth. Let us work together toward that end and not adopt the proposals before us today.
In conclusion, I would like to again congratulate the member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge for his hard work in studying gasoline prices. I am sure he will continue to do good work in that area.
Holidays Act May 6th, 1998
Madam Speaker, I am pleased that the hon. member for Lévis has given me the opportunity to speak on the subject of federal shipbuilding policy. I appreciate some of his concerns.
Let me first say that most Canadian shipyards are generally in good shape, providing repair and refit services and some new construction to the commercial marine market and government fleets.
However, Canada is only one of many players in shipbuilding internationally. We must recognize that fact and ensure that our industry is geared to realistic market opportunities. That is why between 1986 and 1993 the federal government spent nearly $200 million on an industry-led rationalization process. The industry itself decided it was necessary to reduce its capacity so that the remaining shipyards could survive and remain competitive.
I must also stress that this government already has a shipbuilding policy. It consists of support to the industry in the form of the following measures and the Minister of Industry has repeated them over and over in this House: domestic procurement by the federal government for all its ship construction and repair requirements where it is feasible to do so; a 25% tariff on most non-NAFTA foreign built ships; an accelerated capital cost allowance of 33.3% on new ships built in Canada, which many other sectors have requested; financing through the Export Development Corporation for commercially viable transactions; and a favourable R and D tax credit system that encourages shipbuilders to keep pace with new technology.
I work with various shipbuilding and repair companies. I encourage them to become more and more competitive, but subsidies are not an answer.
In summary, this government is now and always has been supportive of the shipbuilding industry and we will continue to encourage its development.
St. Catharines Collegiate Institute And Vocational School May 6th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in the House of Commons today to congratulate the St. Catharines Collegiate Institute and Vocational School on its 75th anniversary.
To celebrate this historic occasion the collegiate is hosting a reunion for the many thousands of students and teachers who are alumni of the school.
When the collegiate first opened its doors in 1923 it was the only secondary school in St. Catharines. Over the next 30 years everyone who attended high school in the city went to this school. More than 20,000 students have walked the halls of the collegiate and grown up in the classrooms of this historic place of learning.
On the weekend of May 15 to 17 several thousand of these alumni are expected to return to the collegiate to celebrate its anniversary at a huge three-day reunion.
This is a very important event for the school and indeed for the entire community. It is an opportunity to celebrate our youth, our past and our present, to celebrate the teachers whose work has inspired and guided our young people and to gather together to commemorate 75 years of education in St. Catharines.
I congratulate the St. Catharines Collegiate Institute and Vocational School and send best wishes on this special 75th anniversary.
Sts. Cyril And Methodius Ukrainian Catholic Church May 1st, 1998
Mr. Speaker, today I am honoured to celebrate the official heritage designation of Sts. Cyril and Methodius Ukrainian Catholic Church in St. Catharines.
The church was constructed from 1944 to 1946 to support a growing Ukrainian population. The first Ukrainian settlers had come to St. Catharines in the early 1900s. They came to work on the Fourth Welland Canal, in the papermills and the automotive industry. More importantly they came to work the soil for the tender fruit, vegetable and wine industry, for it was the warm weather and the rich soil of Niagara that reminded them of their native land.
As a Canadian of Ukrainian descent I am proud to say that my father Michael was one of the church pioneers. He and many other Ukrainian settlers founded this beautiful church, designed in the Byzantine revival style by Belgium architect Reverend Philip Ruh.
I join with the congregation in honouring those who built this church and in celebrating its official heritage designation. Sts. Cyril and Methodius Ukrainian Catholic Church has always been and will continue to be a special place of worship and fellowship in St. Catharines.
Income Tax Act April 30th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss in not congratulating the member for Mississauga South for his continuous work in this area. I take great pride having a member in the House who touches the hearts of all members in an area of expertise that he is devoted to and continually brings to the attention of the House. This is an area of democracy that brings home to us the importance a member like the member for Mississauga South can have. He has made Canadians aware of this area. He has allowed members to discuss properly and with decorum a matter that is very close to Canadians. I congratulate the member for Mississauga South.
Shipbuilding April 2nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to answer the question. This government has always had a shipbuilding policy. There are five items involved in the shipbuilding policy and perhaps the member does not understand.
There is the accelerated capital cost allowance we have put in place, a 25% tariff on non-NAFTA ships that are imported, a domestic procurement by the federal government, Export Development Corporation financing, and a very favourable research and development program that is also available for the shipbuilding industry.
Copyright Board March 30th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the government recognizes the importance of the copyright board.
I should mention that the copyright board has operated, without incident, for many years. The amount of work required by the copyright board has been minimal. However, now the copyright board is getting more and more items coming before it for review.
The appointments will be looked at in the future by the Minister of Industry.
Official Languages March 30th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry has spoken on this subject once before. He has taken note of the questions brought before this House. The Minister of Industry endeavours to continue to work toward the programs on the Internet being fully bilingual.