Svend Robinson

[Medicare, March 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister for International Trade.

The United States trade representative, Mickey Kantor, has issued a very dangerous interpretation of annex 2 of NAFTA's impact on Canadians not for profit health providers.

In light of the fact that Kantor's position would throw open our medicare system to U.S. corporate health care giants, I want to ask the Minister for International Trade, if he will now join with B.C. health minister Andrew Petter and other provinces in clearly repudiating this U.S. position? Will he stand up for Canada's medicare system?

[Cuba, March 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, recently the group Pastors for Peace attempted to transport humanitarian aid, namely medical supplies, computers and modems from Canada to Cuba via the United States. The computers were for a humanitarian Cuban medical project, INFOMED.

Last month these goods were seized by U.S. law enforcement personnel using totally unacceptable force under a U.S. law banning trading with the enemy. Five members of Pastors for Peace have been fasting for life since February 21, including Canadian Brian Rohatyn to protest this outrageous U.S. thuggery.

I call on our foreign minister to end his silence and demand the release of these Canadian donated medical supplies, to strongly condemn the illegal and immoral U.S. blockade of Cuba and the illegal Helms-Burton Bill.

The people of Canada must stand in solidarity with the people of Cuba at this very difficult time.

[Broadcasting Act, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I welcome the opportunity to give unanimous consent to the member to clarify the government's position with respect to Mickey Kantor's very narrow interpretation.

[Broadcasting Act, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, March 31, a profoundly important deadline for Canada's medicare system, is approaching.

Earlier this month I asked a question of the Minister of Health concerning the impact of NAFTA on Canada's medicare system. I asked the minister to show some leadership with respect to some very serious differences in interpretation of NAFTA and its impact on the medicare system in Canada.

It was on March 13, the day I asked the question, that a legal opinion was made public by Dr. Brian Schwartz, a respected lawyer. He indicated that there are serious ambiguities in annex II of the NAFTA agreement. He went on to note in his legal opinion that there are a number of grey areas that exist in the health care sector, and that U.S. providers and their federal government will be exerting political and economic pressure on Canada and the provinces to open up markets.

He went on to point out that United States trade representative Mickey Kantor has issued an interpretation of annex II of the NAFTA agreement that is very alarming because it opens wide a tax on Canada's medicare system. Mickey Kantor said that if social services are supplied by a private firm on a profit or not for profit basis, chapter 11 and chapter 12 apply.

In other words, what he is saying is that the United States considers Canadian not for profit health providers subject to the full force of NAFTA's investment and services rule. That means they are wide open to big American for profit corporations to move in on those sectors.

Much of Canada's health care system is delivered through the non-profit sector. A large majority of our health delivery takes place in the private sector through non-profit agencies such as hospitals, labs, nursing homes, community clinics, regional health boards and so on.

If our government and if the Minister of Health do not stand up for Canadian medicare and do not reject this interpretation by the United States trade representative vigorously, it is clear we will open up the Canadian medicare system to U.S. corporate health care giants. We know the power of these giants. They have taken on Bill Clinton on health care reform.

I support the B.C. minister of health, Andrew Petter, who has shown leadership on this issue. I urge the Government of Canada to show the same kind of leadership and to stand up and say we will protect the Canadian medicare system against this kind of narrow interpretation of the United States trade representative.

[Broadcasting Act, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief.

I want to take this opportunity on behalf of my colleagues in the New Democratic Party to indicate our support for the bill that has been proposed by the member for Sarnia-Lambton.

As the member of Parliament for Burnaby-Kingsway, I recall the tremendous sense of outrage and the anger of my constituents at the time that Rogers Cable proposed the negative option billing. There were many calls and letters. I spoke out at the time against that option and urged the government to move forward with strong and effective legislation. Therefore, I am pleased to see that this bill is now before the House.

I also want to note that the New Democratic government of British Columbia has also shown national leadership on the issue. I know that members of the House and those watching would want to know that the B.C. New Democratic government has shown leadership and has moved on this front at the provincial level under consumer legislation to ban negative option billing in the province of British Columbia.

However, this is a matter that falls within federal jurisdiction under broadcast regulations. I welcome the opportunity to support the legislation and I hope members of the House will pass this bill.

[Pacific Salmon Treaty, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. It concerns the very serious Pacific salmon treaty impasse. Salmon is of vital importance to the B.C. economy.

Will the minister make public the report of the mediator that was rejected by Alaska and the United States? Will he push for binding arbitration of this dispute? Should this fail, will the minister stand up for Canada and take tough measures from rigorous customs inspections of U.S. vessels up to a transit fee as suggested by Premier Glen Clark? Will he stand up for Canada?

[Canada Health And Social Transfer, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, on April 1 the Canada health and social transfer will be implemented gutting national standards in the Canada assistance plan and slashing billions of dollars from health care, post-secondary education and social assistance and services.

This week Jean Swanson, president of the National Anti-Poverty Organization and Guy Caron, chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students, have launched in Ottawa a National Fast for Fairness co-ordinated by the Action Canada Network.

Their fast, joined and supported by people across Canada, including churches, universities, food banks and union locals, draws attention to the CHST and the devastating impact it will have on people's lives, our economy and our vision of Canada.

New Democrats join our voices in calling for national programs with national standards and adequate funding and in supporting the alternative federal budget.

Finally, we pay tribute to Jean Swanson and Guy Caron for their personal leadership on this profoundly important issue.

[Petitions, March 20th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I have a second petition that is signed by residents of Manitoba and British Columbia which notes that the charter of rights and freedoms guarantees that everyone has the right to protection against discrimination and that the Government of Canada has recognized that this includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The petitioners therefore call on Parliament to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

[Petitions, March 20th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I have here a petition signed by people in Quebec who call upon Parliament to amend the Criminal Code to ensure the right of all Canadians to die with dignity by allowing people with terminal or irreversible and debilitating illnesses the right to the assistance of a physician in ending their lives at a time of their choice, subject to strict safeguards to prevent abuse, and to ensure that the decision is free, informed, competent and voluntary.

[Human Rights, March 20th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, gay, lesbian and bisexual people in Canada are getting very tired of waiting for equal rights, not special rights. They are told that this government is saying that our rights are not a priority any longer.

Is it clearly the commitment of the Prime Minister that a bill will be introduced and passed in this Parliament before the next election? This would keep the promise the Prime Minister made in writing in July 1993 which I quote: "The Liberal Party of Canada is firmly committed to banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation". Is that clearly the commitment of this Prime Minister in this Parliament?