Paul Forseth

[Public Service, March 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, government administration in Canada is in crisis. The federal public service must become smaller, work better and be more cost effective. If it were a private conglomerate it would be in receivership.

Public enterprise must focus on outputs, what gets done; make decisions transparent, accessible and reliable information; provide real incentives for performance and consequences for failure; establish constraints through modernized budget techniques; promote competition by enhancing consumer choice; and develop competitive benchmarks with the private sector using multiple suppliers.

Contracting out is favoured such as more non-profit organizations for social care. The federal public service can be smaller and provide services more competitively. Government must be more businesslike. We must change our expectations and let the public service concentrate on what it should do. Let it work to become smarter rather than larger.

[Mount Allison University, March 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in 1991 Mount Allison University in Sackville, New Brunswick was in a financial mess. It had a deficit of $2.5 million and a debt of $10 million. Like the federal government it desperately needed to get its financial house in order. The current president of the university, Ian Newbould, was recently quoted in Maclean's magazine as saying: ``If we were a corporation we would have been in receivership''.

In over three years that university has eliminated its debt and created a surplus of $13 million. Clearly the goal of the university president was not to achieve a smaller deficit. Instead, satisfaction would only come with no deficit and zero debt. The goal was achieved through responsible control.

The finance minister stood in this House and expected praise for a deficit prediction of $25 billion. Some provinces, and universities such as Mount Allison, have become the national standard of fiscal responsibility. The minister needs to take a hard look at how the real world manages its finances and reflect on how he failed to measure up to the Canadian standard.

[Petitions, February 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I also present two other petitions on behalf of those in my riding and in the general area.

These petitioners request that Parliament amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to include sexual orientation as a basis for protection against discrimination and to fully recognize relationships based on financial and emotional dependency and same sex relationships.

[Petitions, February 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today from my constituents in New Westminster-Burnaby.

The petitioners wish to inform the government that they are already overburdened with taxation due to high government spending. They feel that the government will increases taxes in this afternoon's budget.

Therefore they pray and request that Parliament reduce government spending instead of increasing taxes and implement a taxpayer protection act to limit federal spending.

[Young Offenders Act, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member. He acknowledges how much we are doing positively and how many millions we are spending within the juvenile justice system to respond to juvenile crime. Sometimes we do not hear about that but a lot of wonderful things are being done and great effort is made throughout the country within the juvenile justice system. It is not a matter of either or, but a great amount of resources are being spent.

He makes the point that we must always evaluate our social programs for what is actually delivered. It is a point that must not be forgotten, and he mentions the role of the Auditor General in that.

The member reflects the experience of the community and how the message has been sent by the operations of the Young Offenders Act. He points out that we have had the Young Offenders Act for 10 years, and if it was working properly it would have acquired the acceptance of the community. The opposite is true. The community's experience with the act has resulted in the act's repudiation and a lack of confidence that it would have earned if it was working properly.

The member also pointed out the fact that the Young Offenders Act represents a Liberal social philosophy that is really not reflective of mainstream Canadian values. He talked about the issue of community accountability. The final measure of what should be done with the Young Offenders Act is, what does the public want?

[Young Offenders Act, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the member finished off by congratulating the minister for taking the first steps. Perhaps we could say they are baby steps. Why not bring in a bill that would comprehensively deal with the problems of the Young Offenders Act?

At the beginning of her speech, the member talked about the importance of rehabilitation. The problem with youth crime is that many young offenders have never been habilitated in the first place. Society needs to respond to protect itself while respecting due process and offender needs.

Throughout her speech, the member recounted the problems very clearly, but does she believe that Bill C-37 will fix the problems identified? I think not.

She talked at length about the reverse onus provision and the whole procedure of transfers especially for 16 and 17-year olds. Perhaps she might address herself to the mind that it is basically an admission that the Young Offenders Act is fundamentally flawed for 16 and 17-year olds.

This brings up the topic that if we have to spend so much time dealing with the special problems for 16 and 17-year olds then the act is fundamentally flawed. Really it deals with the wrong set of kids and 16 and 17-year olds should be dealt with in adult court.

The member repeatedly cited the problems and the dilemmas but then made that unreasonable leap of faith that Bill C-37 is appropriate in responding to the problems that she cites.

However, I was encouraged that the member acknowledged the notion of victims in the process. I would ask her, would she then advocate or be willing to support the giving of legal standing to victims in the young offender court?

[Young Offenders Act, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of his speech the member talked about a more fair and equitable policy. More fair to whom, the offenders or the victims; fairer to law-abiders or lawbreakers?

He introduced a notion of values that should be upheld. He also indicated that there was no single cause of crime. He tried to turn that around to say that we need some long term global view rooted in the basic problems of society. He advocated a more insular cohesive Quebec with reduced interaction with the larger social world and that somehow that would ameliorate the young offender problem. I assert to the member that is just another version of separatist fantasy stories.

Then he talked about Bill C-37, that perhaps it was only requested because of problems arising in the west. I advise the member that the human heart is the same and the propensity for young offenders to offend is the same across the country.

It seems every comment from the Bloc is turned into a territorial turf question about who is in control and has a varied sociological view. This does nothing to constructively build a better Canadian society. The member denies the reality of youth crime in his own province. He advocates a separatist ideology of expansive social order and an inappropriate response to youth crime.

Canadians across the country have subsidized rehabilitation efforts for offenders in Quebec. We do that with transfer payments yet he wants to abandon it. He claims that a separate country of Quebec could do a lot better. I say he is mistaken about his dreams. I advise him that the polls tell us that most Quebecers also say he is just dreaming.

[Petitions, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in the second petition the signators call upon Parliament to immediately add sexual orientation to the list of grounds protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and further amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to ensure that the legislation protects our relationships and our families.

[Petitions, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I present two petitions on behalf of my constituents from New Westminster-Burnaby and other residents of the greater Vancouver area.

In the first petition, 80 want it to be known that physicians in Canada should be kept working to save lives, not end them. They pray that Parliament ensure that the present provisions of the Criminal Code prohibiting assisted suicide be enforced vigorously, and that Parliament make no changes in the law that would sanction or allow the aiding or abetting of suicide or active or passive euthanasia.

[Young Offenders Act, February 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, when characterizing how young offenders are placed in custody in Saskatchewan, the hon. member made a description something like open the door, put them in and then let them out.

I will be contacting the attorney general of that province and I will be getting the information about the millions that province is spending on juvenile offenders for social programming while they are in custody. Millions are being spent across Canada by every province. The federal government has a tremendous share of that cost sharing program.

We are doing a lot to provide social services and community resources to those who are in custody. It is an awful thing to say that in any province in Canada they would treat young offenders in the way that he is describing.