Bob Mills

[Income Tax Amendments Act, 1997, March 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, like our last speaker said, I am sure the finance minister may not have had any ill intentions in bringing forward this bill. Certainly Motion No. 2 which we are talking to would suit to chastise the minister for this. Probably he could blame a civil servant for not advising him correctly.

I put forward another concept which might be one of arrogance. Across the way we see a lot of arrogance. We see arrogance which leads to not considering what the real facts are, in fact not really caring much about the kind of perception that is created by the bills put forward in the House. When that level of arrogance reaches all the politicians right from the front bench to the back, we know what usually happens. Possibly that golden age we heard talked about this weekend might well be at its peak at this point when we witness that sort of arrogance across the way.

Politics is so much perception; what people think is happening is almost as important as what really is. I put forward that the perception that is being painted by the government at this point with its patronage appointments, with its special committees, with taking care of all of its members so well certainly starts to resonate among the people. I will relate a few incidents which will bring this point out.

I was at the APEC meeting in Vancouver last fall. It was very interesting. I was sitting at a table talking to foreign delegates from the various APEC countries. At the table were two defeated Liberal candidates.

Just to give an idea of the patronage and the kind of thing that goes on, these two gentlemen made it very clear that they had received two nights accommodation at the Waterfront hotel in downtown Vancouver. Those who know that hotel know the cost. They had received transfers in a limousine to the hotel. They and their spouses had been invited to these various high class banquets.

These men were defeated Liberal candidates. One of them had run in Esquimalt. He said to the gentleman next to him “So you are from Papua. What is a Papua?” This candidate said “Why are you here?” “I am from New Guinea and we are actually a member of APEC”. You can see the perception. All of us at the table said he had just insulted a representative of another government. The guy from northern B.C. was even better. He said to the guy beside me “So you are from Australia. You are not an Asian. You cannot be here. This is just for Asians. Sir, what are you here for?”

Perception. Patronage. That is what this is all about. That is what this motion is all about. Remember that perception is everything.

We could go on to the Senate appointments we have just seen and the sort of arrogance there. Certainly when we go through that whole thing regarding Mr. Fitzpatrick the perception is not what actually happened. That happens in business. I understand that. I come from a business background.

It is the perception. You do not name the guy to the Senate. You do not appear to be rewarding that person for something. Maybe it is more honest in Alberta where Nick Taylor says “I worked for the Liberal Party for 40 years and so I deserved it. Yes it is patronage. Yes I took the patronage. Yes it is part of this whole thing and I do not mind finally getting my freebies, my return for that sort of patronage”.

It is perception. It is why people have so little respect for the today's politicians. We could go on. In the area I represent we talk about Mr. Fowler, a good friend of mine who is our representative at the United Nations. This guy got himself in lots of trouble. We even had to shut down the Somalia inquiry because it was getting too close to him. He was rewarded with patronage. Perception is what it is all about.

We all know that the minister I shadow is the godfather of Winnipeg. Nothing happens in Winnipeg without the godfather knowing about it.

Patronage. Perception. That is what it is all about. That is what hurts this place. That is what hurts this country. That is what hurts what we do here. It is perception. What the finance minister is doing might be just fine, but the perception is that something is not working properly there.

When I am in my constituency I talk about planet Ottawa. I talk about the place that is not related to anything to which the normal person might relate. There is little accountability. There is little transparency. There is little worry about perception and there is a great deal of arrogance. Seldom do the Liberals listen to the people. Seldom do they ask the people what they think because of the confidence and arrogance that is built here does not tend toward that.

With respect to Bill C-28 and taxation, what are people saying about taxation? What are they saying in the streets? They are saying the government should take care of that debt, lower the taxes and stop spending.

We look at it from a business perspective. As I said I come from business. As soon as the business grew too big, there was no more incentive. The government took more and more and more and finally one would say “Why should I keep working for the government? Why should I keep risking my capital for the sake of paying more in taxation?” This government is destroying people's initiative.

What about young people? Twenty thousand young people leave this country every year, PhDs and masters graduates. Why do they leave? They leave because we have the highest tax levels in the G-7. They leave because they see no light at the end of the tunnel. They see a doomed pension plan. They see an insurmountable debt. They start looking around. It is a brain drain we as a country cannot afford.

Going on to payroll taxes, there has been a 73% increase in payroll taxes. What will that do for jobs?

I have to tell this House about visiting with people in three countries where there was a different method for pensions. A method was there for them to look at and to be part of their system. They had a private plan where they could look at their investment and see what it was worth to them. We must provide that initiative, that incentive, that whole thing which makes this country such an important and workable unit.

Very briefly, this is a snapshot of this country looking from outside. We have a $583 billion debt. We have a $45 billion interest payment which is destroying our social programs, our educational programs and is creating unemployment. In our military we discipline the guys at the bottom but none at the top. Our dollar is down in the tank. We have not learned very much. Everything we are doing is hurting our future generations.

I plead with this government to start being concerned about perception, about transparency. Start doing things as the Canadian people ask it to.

[Income Tax Amendments Act, 1997, March 23rd, 1998]

Madam Speaker, as the last speaker pointed out, tax relief certainly is something we hear no matter where we go in the country.

The budget tells us the government's agenda. As we travel around our constituencies the people tell us their concern is for debt and tax relief. They tell us to stop spending. It appears the government has chosen to go in exactly the opposite direction.

The biggest problem facing the country today is debt and interest payments. The bill does nothing to address them or any type of tax relief for the very tired taxpayer.

Bill C-28 attempts to make some cosmetic changes but as usual it does not go nearly far enough. We made some amendments but we know what will happen to those. The government is not prepared to accept amendments. It is not prepared to accept what people are telling us as we travel around. Overall, Bill C-28 gets a very high failing grade.

This bill unfortunately flies in the face of what people are telling us and what a majority of Canadians feel. When it comes to tax reform, Canadians want us to flatten the tax base. They want us to simplify the tax system and they want it to be less onerous, if nothing else, on small businesses, which provide the great majority of jobs in this country. Our tax form is so complex with over 2,000 pages. Amendments come out on a daily basis. Accountants must go to course after course on a monthly basis in order to simply upgrade. They are trying to stay ahead of what the tax man is trying to tell us.

There is enormous frustration across this country by individual taxpayers and small business taxpayers. The Liberal government fails to hear this message. It perpetuates rising taxes and the overspending that is so common in this place. During the past few years there have been over 30 tax increases. Most of them are hidden and the government constantly says that there have been no tax increases. But when we look at the revenue figures it is very easy to see where the tax increases have been.

This bill has a few good points. Encouraging charitable donations is an area that should be sponsored. On the issue of volunteerism, we are now asking volunteers to do more and more. But if we are going to encourage volunteers and if government is going to abrogate its responsibilities, then we must give them tax relief so they can do that. We must prevent the abuses that go on. That is the key message.

Increasing the contributions for registered education savings funds is a positive which has been taken right from our platform. We are pleased the government at least can read and has read our platform.

We can look at other things but overall we find that this bill simply tinkers. It simply touches a few areas but as usual it does not go nearly far enough to provide any sort of tax relief for the taxpayer. Taxpayers must see light at the end of the tunnel. They must know that at some point they are going to get a break so that at some point they can rearrange what their lives are all about and they can do what we all want, provide more jobs.

By constantly raising taxes we are destroying initiative in this country. While we would all agree there are some areas that need help like education and health care, it will come through a rearrangement of spending and not by increasing taxation. The very worst thing we could do is put more money in government hands because government wastes that money. We have many examples of that.

The weaknesses in this bill are obvious. It is our job as official opposition to alert taxpayers that the tax and spend of the Liberal government are back. This kind of piecemeal bill is an indication of how seriously this government takes any kind of tax relief.

Young Canadians are particularly hard hit by this sort of legislation. They are asking what the government does with all the tax money it gets. If these young Canadians are lucky enough to get jobs, when they get their first cheques they will start to look at their deductions. Year by year they are asking more and more what the government does with that money. The government needs to have an answer. The government needs to be more accountable and needs to particularly account for all the waste going on.

In terms of competition we are now a global society. We must compete with other countries, with other businesses. We have the highest personal income tax in the G-7, 56% higher than the average G-7 partner. We are destroying our ability to compete.

I have been fortunate for 35 years to travel to pretty well every country in the world. As I have done that I have started to realize how our country is falling behind.

Yes, it is a great place to live. Yes, I think we can recover, but we are falling behind. One of the key reasons for that is we have too high a tax level.

The government refuses to listen to Canadians. A Liberal member distributed a questionnaire showing that 42% in his riding wanted debt reduction as number one and 37% wanted tax relief. Close to 80% of his riding said they want to have lower taxes and debt reduction. What does the government do? It increases spending.

That is not what the people are asking. The people do not want more spending. They want rearrangement within the spending but they do not want the government to start spending again. Above all, they do not want to pay more taxes.

As the Liberal government goes on and ignores this factor the problem becomes more critical. We could throw in some what ifs here. What if interest rates change? What if the Asian flu affects Canada? What if oil prices stay low? There are a lot of what ifs the government is not taking into consideration.

It says we are now into a golden age. It is a golden age as long as everything goes as predicted but we also know what happens when you assume that.

We have close to 200,000 young people out of work and looking for jobs. We have a whole generation being lost and we know that taxes cost jobs.

Payroll taxes in 1966 were $803. In 1993 they were $3,272. We have the most recent figures. There has been a 73% increase in CPP. In January one of the things I found by travelling to some other countries is that there are other ways to do things such as payroll taxes and pension plans. I will always remember the faces of some of those people who told me how proud they are of the type of pension plan they have. Ask young Canadians about their pension plans and I know what the results will be.

It appears that the government is happy with 9% unemployment. It appears it is happy with a $583 billion debt and $45 billion in interest payments. It appears it is happy and will accept that.

With that kind of thinking, I think on this day, Academy awards night, the government will be much like the Titanic , and of course we know what happened to that ship. I believe the Liberal tax and spend policy will lead to that same sort of final result.

[Foreign Affairs, March 16th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the slaughter continues in Kosovo. On Friday our defence minister suggested that we may have to send troops to that area.

It is critical that we be part of the contact group if we are going to send soldiers to that area. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs tell us whether or not we are on that group? Yes or no?

[Kosovo, March 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have been there since 1991. We are not part of the contact group and yet we have been a major part of this issue.

Why will the minister not at least, when negotiating with the Americans, particularly yesterday with Madam Albright, emphasize the fact that we should be part of that contact group and part of the decision making? Sanctions are just not going to be enough.

[Kosovo, March 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the problems in Kosovo have been escalating daily. The minister's answer to that is that we should impose some sanctions. We know that sanctions will not work in the short term.

People are dying over there and the minister comes up with this idea of sanctions, just a token gesture. Does this minister not have any other ideas that will stop the killings in Kosovo?

[Red Deer Constituency, March 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, like so many MPs, I toured around my riding last week to find out what the people thought. The people of the riding of Red Deer gave me four messages to bring back to this house.

The first one was to demand lower taxes. They do not accept the finance minister's glib comments about tax cuts and how he is helping people.

Second, unlike the Liberals they understand that debt and taxes kill jobs. They expect the national debt to be paid off.

Third, the people of central Alberta demand an elected Senate. It is obvious the days of patronage are quickly coming to an end in the upper chamber.

Finally, the people of the Red Deer constituency are proud Canadians. They are proud of their two Olympic athletes who competed in Japan and they are proud of the Canadian flag. Their message echoes across this country that they want to see the flag honoured in this place.

[Canada Labour Code, February 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, certainly I am getting to Bill C-19. One has to set the stage for the major points one wants to make in an issue like this.

We are talking about listening to the people. When it comes to labour legislation, obviously the government should be listening to the people.

What does Bill C-19 do? Bill C-19 is an example again of that top down, more government, more bureaucracy, more of the same that people are sick and tired of.

I was just trying to point out to the hon. member how many people have talked about so many issues which the government just will not listen to. In half an hour we will probably have another example of where the government did not listen regarding the debt and regarding taxes. That is what people are talking about. They are not talking about more spending.

The member made me deviate and I got off on this other tangent, but I will now get back to what I was trying to talk about which is Bill C-19.

What about democracy? This legislation allows the CIRB to certify a union without support from the majority. What kind of democracy is that where a government agency can certify a union even though the majority do not agree with it? That is not democratic. We have examples now of where the government will do this sort of thing.

As well, this legislation orders employers to release to the union names of reps who are working off site. Again they do not have to ask the employees about that. They do not have to get permission. This is an intrusion on a person's rights as a citizen of Canada.

This legislation does nothing to stop strikes. It does nothing to help the workers who are simply trying to improve their lot in life. This again will be more of the same. There is nothing here that will do anything to stop what both union members and citizens at large are opposed to.

I have an example in my riding. I have been asked to speak to union members. They have invited me but they got a decree from head office that they could not invite me. They were shocked by this. “What do you mean we cannot invite this person? We can invite anybody we want”. “No you cannot”. They cannot invite their member of Parliament to address them on the issues that interest them. That comes from the union, from the top down. The union members are pretty upset about that and I do not blame them. That is a lack of democracy. That is the top down stuff I was trying to talk about, trying to make a point of for the hon. member.

What about the world? Where are we at in terms of the world? Obviously in the world, we are in competition. The world has globalized.

I have been fortunate for 35 years to travel the world. I have been to almost every country. Most everywhere I have been they say “Canada has a labour problem, doesn't it?”

Most recently in Japan, China and Argentina I heard “Is Canada still producing grain? Is it still in the marketplace?” That is a pretty terrible question to be asked if you are a farmer in western Canada.

The unreliability of our transportation system, of our distribution system and of our sales system is putting us behind our competitors. Bill C-19 does nothing to help provide a fix for that problem. That is what the farmers are saying.

The bill does not address the area of investment. When investors are looking at Canada to invest money, to open businesses or to develop joint ventures which are so common in today's society they see antiquated, ambiguous labour laws. They will point out the ambiguities and tell us they do not feel secure investing or dealing in Canada or with Canadians on joint ventures. They do not know for sure how stable our labour force will be. They have real problems with that. It hurts us. It hurts job creation and the whole investment area which is so important to us as Canadians.

What is the solution? It seems to me that the solution is to get back to the grassroots. We must listen to the employees. There is no point in going after unions, saying they are good or bad. Most of the membership are a very positive part of our communities. The problem is the top down nature of labour legislation, the lack of working together.

We need government, business, experts and labour to work together for the good of Canadians.

[Canada Labour Code, February 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I know you have been waiting with bated breath to hear my comments about C-19.

In looking at the problems of this House, members know exactly the one I am going to zero in on. It is is going to be the top down nature, the way this place works, the way political parties work quite often, the way business quite often works and of course, the way unions quite often work. It is my hope to emphasize in the House that the public are sick and tired of the top down administration they get in all parts of life.

The public is asking for accountability. They are asking for transparency. They are asking for grassroots input into what is happening that affects their lives. Certainly when it comes to labour legislation, an area that affects many people across this whole country, they feel they do not have that input. A bill like this does nothing to reassure them that they can have their say about this legislation.

This government has a particularly bad record for listening to the people. This weekend the Alberta winter games were in my constituency. Thousands of people from all over Alberta were in our riding. It went extremely well. The only problem I guess was the plus-10 degrees and we had to haul snow in.

What the people said as I circulated around talking to them was first, to do something about that other place. Everybody is upset about what happens in the Senate. Second, they talked about the debt, about that noose around their necks and the necks of their kids and their grandchildren. Everybody talked about that. Third, they talked about taxes. What is this government—

[Petitions, February 16th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to present a petition signed by 72 people from B.C., Saskatchewan and Ontario.

The petitioners pray that parliament support the immediate initiation and conclusion by the year 2000 of an international convention which will set out a binding timetable for the abolition of all nuclear weapons.

I believe all of us would support the long term elimination of nuclear weapons.

[Foreign Affairs, February 13th, 1998]

He met him in his MP office. The Prime Minister was too busy.