Mike Scott

[Fisheries, November 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister said that he consulted the industry when he dreamt up his new tax, but he sure did not listen. Here are just a few of those who wrote in protest to the minister: the Eastern Fishermen's Federation, Southwest Nova Fixed Gear Association, the Fisheries Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, the South West Nova Tuna Association, the New Brunswick Fish Packers' Association, the Fundy Weir Fishermen's Association Inc., the Ontario Fish Producers' Association. The list goes on: the Atlantic Herring Co-op, the Fisheries Council of British Columbia, the Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters, the Alliance des pêcheurs professionnels du Québec, Fishermen Food and Allied Workers, the Prince Edward Island Fishermen's Association, and many more.

They all said no new taxes. Fishermen are not going to let the minister off the hook. If he does not back down he is going to be done like dinner.

[Fisheries, November 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the fisheries minister said in the House this week that his new $50 million tax grab, which he calls access fees, will be applied in a fair and equitable manner. Reform profoundly disagrees with this intolerable tax, and now we find that native commercial fishermen will pay only half the access fee that non-natives pay.

Will the minister now admit this policy is essentially discriminatory at its core, commit here and now in the House to equality of treatment for all Canadians and stop treating non-native fishermen as second class citizens in their own country?

[Fisheries, November 21st, 1995]

I apologize, Mr. Speaker. We are not talking about changing the structure of the Canadian fishery. We are talking about getting the cost of administration under control.

The fisheries council states unequivocally that the minister's plans to drastically increase access fees will make Canadian fishermen even less competitive in world markets.

Will the minister commit to reducing spending in his department by $50 million rather than saddling Canadian fishermen with another $50 million in new access fees which are nothing more than a tax?

[Fisheries, November 21st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the minister insists on spewing his bilge in the House rather than answering questions.

[Fisheries, November 21st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Fisheries Council of Canada wrote to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans on November 10 graphically pointing out that the government spends more than five times as much as Norway and ten times as much as Iceland on fisheries administration even though both of these countries catch more fish than Canada.

Will the minister admit that his department's spending on fisheries administration is totally out of control and must be drastically reduced if Canada's fishery is to remain viable and competitive in the future?

[Fisheries, November 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, any fishermen who are making the profits which the minister is talking about are paying income tax.

Every year the minister plans to suck another $50 million out of Canadian fishermen by these access fees. This intolerable tax increase will lead to the extermination of family owned businesses. Not just the little fish, but the little fisherman is hanging on by his fingernails. Will the "taxinator" trash the tax?

[Fisheries, November 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans is practising for a new job: minister of taxation. His new access fees will dramatically increase licence costs, in some cases from $30 a year to $9,000 a year.

Does the minister not understand that his new access fees pose a far greater threat to fishermen than Spanish trawlers? The Spanish will go away, but these taxes will be here forever.

[Quebec Referendum, November 1st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, during the past two years we have sat in this House with members of the Bloc Quebecois who have made no secret of their agenda. While we profoundly disagreed with it, I treated these members with respect, and I must add, they treated me with respect. Such is the nature of democracy.

I was absolutely shocked by Mr. Parizeau's comments on referendum night and those of Mr. Bouchard a few weeks ago. The leaders of the separatist movement should be more concerned with equality within and outside Quebec and not the ethnic origin of the voting public.

That Mr. Parizeau has now resigned does not alter what he said. Nowhere has he apologized for his remarks. He has resigned and that is good, but even his resignation is clouded in duplicity.

In the days ahead one hopes the vast majority of Quebecers will distance themselves from Parizeau's and Bouchard's narrow view of Quebec's position and-

[New Democratic Party Of British Columbia, October 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has always painted itself as the defender of the little guy, the downtrodden and the poor. It is time for a reality check.

Recent news stories in British Columbia reveal that British Columbia's New Democratic Party and a related fundraising group used a web of deceitful accounting and shady payoffs to rip off charities for years. NDP headquarters has been raided on the execution of search warrants alleging theft and fraud of more than one million dollars.

This scandal has serious implications for this House. Several former members are implicated in the diversion of charity funds. The question is how much money flowed from NCHS to finance federal NDP campaigns?

In a 1987 letter former NDP MP Dave Stupich claims that the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society contributed substantially to the New Democratic Party at the local, provincial and federal levels.

On behalf of the charities involved and all members of the House, I demand that the investigators broaden their scope past the B.C. border to include contributions made to federal-

[Regional Rates Of Pay, October 23rd, 1995]

More regulation, more government.