Svend Robinson

[Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act, October 8th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to participate in the report stage debate of Bill C-54. This gives members of the Canadian Parliament who speak on behalf of the people of Canada a clear opportunity to send a very strong message, a strong message to American politicians, to the American people. It is also a message of solidarity to the people of Cuba. I support the principle of this bill and I support the amendments which strengthen the bill.

It is important to look at the context of this legislation. It is very clear what is happening in the United States. A small group of powerful and influential legislators led by Senator Jesse Helms and Representative Dan Burton are pandering to what I have called the Miami mafia, the Mas Canosas, the Cuban-American Foundation. In doing so they are not only in breach of international law but they are promoting policies which I believe are profoundly immoral and repugnant in a civilized society.

This is an opportunity for the Parliament of Canada not only to condemn the Helms-Burton law, a law which is clearly in breach of international law with respect to the application of extraterritorial measures to foreign countries, but I think this Parliament should go further. This Parliament should also clearly and unequivocally condemn the longstanding American blockade of Cuba.

I am a member of the Canada-Cuba Parliamentary Friendship Association, an all-party grouping of members of this House and the other place. We have attempted to promote dialogue and

understanding between the people of Canada and the people of Cuba. The member for Bourassa and the member for Etobicoke-Lakeshore are active members of that group as well.

We had the opportunity to visit Cuba to meet with representatives of that government and to meet with President Fidel Castro. We also met with ordinary Cuban citizens. Earlier this year we hosted a visiting delegation from Cuba which was led by the minister of education, Luis Gomes.

It was very clear to all members of the parliamentary friendship group that the people of Cuba at this very difficult time are struggling against terrible odds. This blockade, this illegal, immoral blockade which has been condemned in ever increasing numbers at the United Nations, must be strongly condemned by our own government and by this Parliament.

The people of Cuba and the Government of Cuba are challenging the wave of right wing orthodoxy, the neo-conservative wave that has taken hold in too many parts of the world. What they are saying is that an economy should serve human needs, an economy should not just be there to serve the interests of the corporate elite to maximize profits. The Government of Cuba and the people of Cuba have had great success despite terrible odds when we look at the socioeconomic indicators: one of the lowest rates of infant mortality in Latin American, one of the highest rates of literacy. The rate of child poverty is far lower than anywhere else. This is despite the terrible difficulties faced by Cuba following the collapse of the former Soviet Union.

I would note that when one looks at the conditions in eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union with the advent of unbridled capitalism, when one looks at the corruption, at the growing gap between rich and poor, at the poverty among young people and seniors, I certainly understand why the people of Cuba and the Government of Cuba have said they reject that model, they believe in an economic model, a model of socialism based on Cuban needs and the unique aspirations and conditions of the people of Cuba. That is what really angers the American political establishment.

Yes, there are concerns about human rights in Cuba. The United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights has visited Cuba and has reported. Those concerns are real and I know they must be addressed. However, I suggest that the approach of the American government in lecturing the people of Cuba, lecturing the Government of Cuba on human rights violations is in fact steeped in hypocrisy.

This same government that lectures the people of Cuba on human rights violations of course was and is silent on massive human rights violations in other parts of the world, the genocidal policies of Indonesia in East Timor, massive human rights violations elsewhere in Latin America. Not only were the Americans silent on the death squads in El Salvador, the brutal bloodshed in Guatemala and the blood thirsty junta in Chile, but the CIA was actively involved in those countries. The Americans have no business lecturing other countries on human rights.

What about basic economic, social and cultural rights? Look at the growing gap between rich and poor, between powerful and powerless in the United States itself. What about democracy and free elections? Look what it costs to run as a candidate; millions and millions of dollars in that great bastion of democracy in the United States of America.

The tragic irony of the U.S. blockade is that it even hurts the American people. I visited a biomedical technology centre, and Cuba is one of the leading countries in the world on biomedical technology. It was pointed out to me that one of the drugs produced in Cuba for dealing with trauma, cardiac arrest and so on, which can save lives by taking precious moments off the response time, a drug called streptokinase, is not available to the people of the United States because of this blockade. It is madness.

I want to take this opportunity during this debate as well to pay tribute to the many Canadian individuals and organizations working in solidarity with the people of Cuba at this very difficult time, the groups helping to ship medical supplies, computers and other badly needed supplies.

There are various solidarity groups in the labour movement. Brigadista groups are travelling to Cuba and other groups are working closely with the people of Cuba at this time.

I want to encourage Canadian businesses to invest in Cuba. Congratulations to Sherritt Gordon which is standing up to this legislative thuggery by the United States Congress. It has recently convened a directors meeting in Havana.

I encourage Canadians to seriously consider spending their winter holiday in Cuba rather than in Florida. That would be a tangible expression of our support. It is a beautiful country.

I support this bill. I urge the people of Canada and the Government of Canada to support the people of Cuba by speaking out strongly against that repugnant piece of legislation.

[Petitions, October 8th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a second petition which was gathered by the United Senior Citizens of Ontario Inc. and which is supported by the New Democrat MPP for Windsor-Riverside, Dave Cooke. The petition is signed by residents of his constituency and elsewhere.

The petition notes that the safety of consumers, and senior citizens in particular, is at risk because brand name drug manufacturers are attempting to force generic drug manufacturers to market their equivalent products in a different size, shape and colour than the brand name medication. Any action which affects the look of generic drugs could endanger patient safety through improper use of medicines.

Therefore, the petitioners request that Parliament regulate the longstanding Canadian practice of marketing generic drugs in a size, shape and colour which is similar to that of its brand name equivalent.

[Petitions, October 8th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present two petitions today.

The first petition was prepared by the third quarter French students of Madam Cadorette's grade 10 class at Cowichan Secondary School who were inspired by young Craig Kielburger to gather signatures for the following petition. That children as young as four years old in the third world are forced into cruel bondage to work as labourers on sugar and coffee plantations and the garment industries requiring inexpensive, intensive manual labour.

For that reason the petitioners call on Parliament to voice formal objections to the United Nations and to enact legislation requiring all goods coming into Canada to be clearly labelled as not having used children under the age of 15 in their production.

[Youth Employment, October 1st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. It concerns the desperate job situation of young people in Canada with a real unemployment level of close to 20 per cent. Despite this the Liberal government has not even allocated, according to a briefing note, some $45 million of funds budgeted

for youth programs and still has not established a promised $20 million program to help youth repay their student loans.

When will this Liberal government finally show some leadership and come up with a solid strategy to attack youth unemployment in this country? How many more young people must be added to the unemployment rolls before this government finally takes action?

[City Of Burnaby, September 24th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, last Saturday in Ottawa the city of Burnaby was awarded the 1996 Communities in Bloom prize. This award recognizes the quality of Burnaby's green spaces, the diversity and originality of its landscaping, general tidiness, environmental awareness, heritage and the level of community involvement.

As well, Burnaby has demonstrated its concern for the future development of public areas through land acquisition dedicated to preservation, restoration and recreational activities.

I want to congratulate Burnaby residents as well as city staff, the Burnaby Beautification Committee and elected officials for this terrific national recognition.

This has been an exciting year for Burnaby. In fact, recently Burnaby's Simon Fraser University pipe band won an unprecedented second world championship at the world competition in Glasgow, Scotland.

Congratulations to the champions in beauty and in bagpiping.

[Canada Pension Plan, September 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. It concerns the attempt by the Liberal government to push through a package of cuts to the Canada pension plan benefits, including cuts to people with disabilities, by early October.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister listen to New Democrats, including the governments of British Columbia and Saskatchewan, who are calling on Liberals to back off, take the time to consult seriously, study more carefully the impact of their regressive proposals and look at progressive changes to the CPP instead of hitting the most vulnerable beneficiaries of the system?

[Goods And Services Tax, September 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

In 1992 and 1994 the Liberal Party and caucus promised to remove the GST from books and other reading material, recognizing the harsh impact of the tax on literacy, on students and on Canadian bookstores and publishing.

In view of the fact that the Liberal government is now actually raising taxes on reading in three Atlantic provinces through harmonization instead of removing the tax on reading across Canada as it promised, I ask the Prime Minister when will this Liberal promise to remove the GST on reading finally be honoured by this government?

[Supply, June 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, in the last couple of months I have raised two issues of particular concern to all British Columbians, namely, the failure of the Canada-U.S. salmon treaty and the disastrous DFO fleet reduction policy of the minister. In both of these areas federal Liberal policies are having a devastating impact on B.C. fisheries, particularly on coastal communities and on small owner operators.

Of course, the six B.C. Liberal MPs and 24 Reform MPs have been totally ineffective in standing up for B.C. interests.

It is appalling that while Liberals are taking drastic action on fleet reduction they are pathetically weak in standing up to the United States, especially Alaska, which has shown such contempt for the Canada-U.S. salmon treaty.

I would note that over the course of the last decade Canada's interception of salmon bound for U.S. spawning beds has fallen by 25 per cent, while U.S. interception of Canadian salmon has jumped by 50 per cent. The Government of Canada has totally failed to stand up to the United States and, in particular, to Alaska overfishing.

B.C. Premier Glen Clark has made it very clear that this will be at the top of his agenda for the first ministers' conference which will start tomorrow. I urge the Liberal government to accept the recommendations of the B.C. government for a fisheries renewal plan. Its primary goals would be the conservation of fish and the maximization of jobs in British Columbia from each fish caught. That is the kind of leadership we need in the B.C. fishery which Premier Clark is giving.

The recently announced fleet reduction policy is a disaster for the B.C. fishery. It ignores key recommendations of the federal round table and especially the recommendations of the 1991 Cruikshank commission which held extensive hearings in coastal communities.

The plan purports to strengthen conservation but there is nothing at all for habitat protection, for enhancement or for restoration. There is nothing for enforcement whatsoever and the plan has been condemned by all key environmental and conservation groups.

The stackable area licensing will have a devastating impact on small owner/operators in coastal communities like Sointula, Alert Bay, Ucluelet and Port Hardy. We have already seen the disastrous effect on the black cod and herring fishery. Dennis Brown of the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union has said that while small operators, especially gill netters, will be particularly hard hit, it will be the fish packing companies and well financed entrepreneurs who will scoop up the licences and take over the industry.

It will also hurt the suppliers, suppliers of small shipyards, marine suppliers, machine and repair shops, tackle and gear manufacturers and others. With as many as 5,000 jobs being lost there is absolutely no compensation whatsoever, no retraining, no adjustment program whatsoever. When we compare that with what has happened on the east coast it is a disgrace.

The buyback is totally inadequate. Fishers have already paid in some $65 million to the $80 million that was on the table. It should be well in excess of $200 million and the buybacks are a failure. Only half the target has been met and there are absolutely no criteria for bidding in this process. Approximately 90 per cent of coastal fishers voted for a fair voluntary buyback.

An unprecedented coalition has come together to oppose the government's plan, the DFO plan. That coalition has offered a very clear alternative. It wants a transparent inclusive process that would be implemented to devise a new plan to ensure a healthy fishery, a healthy industry and healthy communities.

I urge the government to adopt this plan, this coalition plan which has been supported by the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union, the Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council, the Canadian Labour Congress, Coastal Communities Network, Greenpeace, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Native Brotherhood of British Columbia, the Georgia Strait Alliance, the Pacific Trollers Association, IWA-Canada, the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation, the West Coast Sustainability Association and many others.

Yesterday Premier Clark was in the village of Sointula with a population of 900. That village will be absolutely devastated by the impact of the government's plan according to the Glen Robertson, the New Democrat MLA for that area. He said it is an arbitrary and capricious plan.

Other speakers said the same thing. The Mifflin plan will not save the salmon. It will simply take the catch away from coastal communities and give it to companies that can afford to stay in the industry.

I appeal to the government to finally listen to the people of British Columbia, listen to coastal communities, listen to owner/operators, stand up for the B.C. fishery, stand up for the proposal that has been made by Premier Glen Clark. Shelve the disastrous Mifflin plan and get tough in negotiating the Canada-U.S. salmon treaty.

[Petitions, June 19th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition which is signed by residents of my constituency of Burnaby-Kingsway. The petition was co-ordinated by Step by Step Enterprises of Kingsway and voices concern about the federal policy of mandatory supervision. It notes concern about high risk violent offenders and that the protection of our citizens must be the highest priority of Parliament and Canada's criminal justice system.

The petitioners urge that Parliament change the law to ensure high risk offenders are detained past the end of their sentence where protection of the public requires such action; that we extend BC's dangerous offender tracking system across the country, ensuring such offenders are monitored coast to coast; that we set longer sentences for criminal harassment or stalking. Finally, the petitioners urge that violent young offenders be tried in adult court.

[Health, June 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

Today a federal study was released showing that tobacco and alcohol use costs Canadians more than $17 billion every year. In light of these devastating costs and concerns about huge donations from the alcohol and tobacco lobby to the Liberal Party: $50,000 from Labatt's; $46,000 from Imasco, will the minister now commit to bringing in a long overdue bill on tobacco advertising? Will he finally take on the alcohol lobby and support the bill passed in principle earlier in this House on alcohol labelling directed at pregnant mothers?