Ethel Blondin-Andrew

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her questions.

We are not in the practice of setting quotas or targets that we cannot meet. We put all our efforts into eliminating and trying to reduce unemployment. We have done that. We have gone from double digit to a single digit unemployment figure. That says something.

We have also created an opportunity for people by way of reducing and eliminating the deficit on top of trying to do what we can for poor people. We are not continually putting pressure back on the taxpayers of Canada. I think that speaks for itself.

We can talk about numbers but we cannot achieve anything if we do not put a concerted effort into something, which we have done consistently.

I encourage the hon. member to read the budget. It was an education budget. I do not know if she recalls but the media were calling the Minister of Finance the minister of education because of the budget he put before parliament. I encourage the member to look at all the granting systems and the millennium scholarship fund. Much debated they were, but they were necessary.

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am not a person who is usually against very much. What I am in favour of is what the government has consistently been doing. That is, throughout all the successive budgets since 1993 when we became government, there are two areas where we have not reduced funding, where we have built programs consistently. We have enforced and expanded programs dealing with children and youth.

I must say that I did not state that that was confusing. I said that it was broad sweeping, that it pulled in such issues as the multilateral agreement on investment and the globalization of markets affecting the government's ability to develop the country's economies in accordance with its priorities. These are all broad assumptions and are broad sweeping issues that do not directly relate to my mandate. My mandate deals with les enfants et la jeunesse. In that mode I wanted to talk about something that is relevant to my mandate, the elimination of child poverty.

We look at the throne speech and the budget, the programs instituted, the prenatal nutrition program, the community action plan for children. I do not know whether the member opposite has bothered but I have gone to the grassroots level, to the various communities not just in Liberal held ridings but to various places. I have seen the programs. They are excellent programs. I advise the member to visit them as well.

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to debate the hon. member's motion.

The hon. leader of the Bloc Quebecois has presented the House with a rather broad sweeping motion. I will direct my comments at the portion of the motion dealing with the elimination of child poverty which falls within my specific mandate.

While families have the primary responsibility to nurture their children, they are not alone in this critical undertaking. The healthy development of our children requires the attention and collaboration of parents with territorial and provincial governments and the private and voluntary sectors. The Government of Canada is most certainly prepared to do its part.

I assume the hon. member was in the House during last September's Speech from the Throne. If he was he would know that the Government of Canada is working with its provincial and territorial partners to build a comprehensive and effective national child benefit system. During the Speech from the Throne the hon. leader of the Bloc Quebecois would have heard the government reiterate its commitment to “ensure that all Canadian children have the best possible opportunity to develop their full potential”.

It should be noted that there is a real need to demonstrate this by one stark statistic. Eighty-five per cent of single parents are women and 65% of them live in poverty. Other groups are equally affected, such as aboriginal youth and disabled youth and children.

The throne speech went on to say that the government has already demonstrated its commitment to the well-being of our children in part by increasing our contribution to the Canada child tax benefit by $850 million during the course of this mandate. This was not hollow rhetoric.

It is unfortunate if some members find the budget to be something reprehensible. Most of the initiatives for human development are directed at children and families in need.

The government demonstrated its intent quite clearly in the budget by repeating its commitment to increase the child tax benefit by an additional $850 million. That is $850 million on top of the $850 million we committed to the Canada child tax benefit in the 1997 budget. This is already an increase in advance of what we had planned to do.

The government will live up to this commitment in a fiscally responsible manner. The $850 million committed in the 1997 budget will come into effect July 1 this year. Of the new funding, $425 million will be allocated in July 1999. The remaining $425 million will come into play in July 2000. That is a total Government of Canada commitment of $1.7 billion to try to help in part fight child poverty in Canada.

I say to the hon. member that this investment demonstrates quite clearly the government's commitment to do as much as it possibly can to move toward the elimination of child poverty in Canada. This in real terms is action. In the meantime, while we are working with our partners in planning these new strategies the government already has a number of programs in place to assist children and their families. I would like to bring a few of those programs to the attention of members.

The child care visions program was created in 1995. This national program for research on child care and development is administered by Human Resources Development Canada. The program supports research and evaluation projects to study current child care practices and delivery of services.

The 1997 budget increased resources by $100 million over the next three years for two existing community based programs that benefit children at risk. These are the community action program for children and the Canada prenatal nutrition program.

I am at the midpoint of a national tour on youth and children which will go to every province and both territories visiting and consulting with all stakeholders for children and youth. I have seen many, many wonderful programs, successful programs at the community level undertaken with the priorities as demonstrated by the people. Just yesterday I was in Quebec and Verdun visiting some stakeholders.

The community action program for children responds to the United Nations convention on the rights of the child and helps community groups address health and social needs of at risk children up to six years of age. This program will allow communities all across Canada to design projects most relevant to the needs of children in their communities. It provides a variety of services such as toy lending libraries, infant stimulation, parenting education and support, and integrated services through family resource and child development centres.

Through the development of the national children's agenda and such programs as Health Canada's prenatal nutrition program, we can also begin to address issues such as fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects.

It would be most advisable to undertake the appropriate steps to ensure that we have some kind of capacity in the name of a national advisory committee for that, as well as to undertake a number of strategically appointed pilot projects that would deal with not only identifying but relating these to issues that affect things such as young offenders.

In my capacity as Secretary of State for Children and Youth, I have begun discussions with street youth, street youth workers and health care professionals on possible approaches to the issues of street youth.

One issue which affects street youth is that because they lack an address, street youth cannot enter any kind of training program. They cannot enlist in any kind of government service or program. This is very important. A mechanism should be instituted by which street youth will be able to give information that is satisfactory to various learning institutions which will allow them to participate.

We also need to be concerned about the security of these youth. These young people are someone's children and they are our country's children. While not being able to resolve this overnight, we should be able to provide some security for them, some kind of clearing house mechanism where they can have the time to make decisions. Some of these young people actually have children as well. Security is a big issue.

The First Nations and Inuit child care initiative helps to bring the quality and quantity of child care services for aboriginal communities in line with child care services available to the general population. The Government of Canada is providing $72 million over three years to help create 4,300 new child care spaces and improve some 1,700 existing spaces. We also have committed $36 million annually to maintain the program.

To ensure that these programs and any others that may be developed are effective, it is necessary to gather up to date information on the social condition of Canadian children. To that end Statistics Canada and Human Resources Development Canada are currently engaged in the national longitudinal survey of children and youth. This is a long term study which revisits individuals every two years from birth to adulthood. It presents an integrated picture of their lives. The data we are gathering is assisting us in planning future programs.

Besides the initiatives I have mentioned, we are collaborating with our provincial and territorial partners in working toward establishing a national children's agenda. The agenda will be a broad comprehensive strategy to improve the well-being of Canada's children. The agenda's impetus will ensure that all Canadian children have the best possible opportunity to develop to their full potential as healthy, successful and contributing members of society.

As part of this national agenda we will expand our aboriginal head start program to on reserve children. We will measure the readiness of Canadian children to learn. We will establish centres of excellence for children's well-being. Federal, provincial and territorial governments will work together to fully develop the national children's agenda, one of the most significant social policy initiatives in 30 years.

There are many other programs I could speak to. Yesterday in Verdun I had the opportunity to visit the children and youth centre Toujours ensemble. It is a wonderful centre. I encourage members opposite to visit it. It demonstrates the excellent initiatives people undertake when they are adequately resourced by various levels of government.

[Children, April 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government is currently engaged in a number of efforts to give children in Canada a good start in life by early intervention programs and prevention programs.

Starting this summer in July we are contributing $850 million as a downpayment to low income families following with another $850 million. This will add up to $1.7 billion by the year 2000 in investments for children. We will also expand the head start programs. We are building a national children's agenda as well as a national child benefit with our provincial partners.

[Nunavut Act, April 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-39, an act to amend the Nunavut Act and Constitution Act, 1867. This is a critical piece of legislation that is necessary as we move toward the creation of Nunavut on April 1, 1999, which is less than a year from now, to complete the whole process of the division of the Northwest Territories. As the member of parliament for the Western Arctic, I am in full support of this bill.

There is a coming of age in the Northwest Territories as there has never been before. The political destiny of the north has been decided. We are going to divide the Northwest Territories and create the new territory of Nunavut with all the tools of a democratic society. This will include a governance structure. This would not be possible without the approval of this bill. We need this bill.

This is an exciting time in the north. It is a time of much progression. The north is very political. If people from any other part of Canada or the world go to the north they will speak to some of the most knowledgeable and well travelled people. We live in a microcosm of all the things that affect people from other parts of our country and from abroad. Northerners travel the world. Northerners are very political. They are very knowledgeable about the politics of the day nationally, internationally and territorially.

We are rife with activity. We have many resource based activities that affect both of the new territories which will emerge.

We have three of the biggest diamond mining companies in the world right at the back door of those people who will be responsible for running their own activities. We have Aber Resources and Rio Tinto. We also have the Broken Hill Proprietary, BHP, Monopros and DeBeers.

We are also being bombarded continually with the attempts of many groups to explore for other resources such as oil and gas.

We have in our midst a very friendly invasion of tourists who are captivated not only by the environment of the north but by the various aspects and phenomena of our environment such as the aurora borealis. We have captivated Japanese tourists and other people from around the world who come to the north.

Given the opportunities and tools and armed with the legislation we have here we believe that people of the north will be able to take full advantage of that potential. That is not to mention the collective leadership and wisdom, the corporate knowledge, the linguistic and cultural strength of peoples from both territories which will be reflected in the kind of leadership that leads those people once we have made the commitment to pass this legislation. All the work that has already been undertaken, all of the preparation, all of the visionary strategies, the far-reaching planning and the training must not be ignored.

It can be said that if you want to do the right thing in creating a democracy the principles of democracy are not necessarily predicated on price or cost. Sometimes democracy is costly. We would not have ten provinces and two territories if we did not endure cost. If that were not the case, Newfoundland, Manitoba and Saskatchewan would not be provinces today.

If we talk about self-sustaining entities of governance, some of those provinces would not be provinces today. Why apply one set of rules to them and another set of rules to the territories?

Bill C-39 is about making democracy work. Without this bill Nunavut would not have a fully elected territorial leadership from its beginning days. This legislation provides for the election of a legislative assembly before the territory officially comes into existence. That is very important. Without that amendment to the Nunavut Act a commissioner without a mandate from the people of Nunavut would govern the new Nunavut government. We cannot return, however briefly, to the early days of the Northwest Territories when governance was done from afar, in absentia, when the Northwest Territories was run from the south without having those people resident to really experience and be part of what needed to be done at the time. We now have an opportunity.

The people have been assigned their duties and they must be empowered to carry them out. As legislators we can agree that locally elected representatives must govern Nunavut from day one. Elections in the north are very difficult. Having firsthand experience in campaigning in the last three elections in the north, I know how difficult it is and how much lead time is required before an election. The sheer distance, the remoteness, not to mention the severe inclement weather and environmental experiences can create problems during an election. These are some of the things that are to be considered.

The cost of an election is also something that is quite prohibitive.

This bill also addresses other important issues to ensure democracy. Bill C-39 proposes amendments to guarantee representation of both Nunavut and the Northwest Territories in both the House of Commons and in the Senate of Canada.

As my colleague, the hon. member for Nunavut, would be happy to confirm, all Nunavutmiut, all northerners and all Canadians have a basic right to be represented in both institutions of parliament. This bill is necessary to ensure that both the hon. member for Nunavut's constituents and my constituents have this basic right.

This bill ensures that both Nunavut and the Northwest Territories will have their own representatives in both the Senate and the House of Commons, which is not unlike anywhere else in Canada.

This House and all Canadians listened with great interest to the debate of two days ago in this Chamber. Unfortunately the Leader of the Official Opposition was trying to use this legislation as a springboard to advance the Reform Party's cause for Senate reform. Senate Reform is something that we all think about, but I do believe that timing and appropriateness is everything in terms of politics. We have to know the right time to speak on the right issue. Unfortunately this type of grandstanding and manipulation is unacceptable. It does nothing to make gains on the issue that is being promoted.

The Leader of the Official Opposition is trying to steer the debate away from one of the most exciting and interesting events that is happening in our country. It will shape the history of Canada. I do not believe that was necessarily intentional. I hope with the appropriate understanding of the north itself that would change. I hope it was not intentional. Given the right information, anyone can become informed, make the right choices and have the appropriate sensitivity about such an exciting opportunity as this for the north.

Instead of highlighting the good work done by the parties involved in the creation of Canada's newest territory and celebrating the biggest event since Newfoundland joined Confederation, the Reform Party is trying to advance its own agenda on the backs of northerners. I regret having to say that because to attack on the basis of partisanship is not part of my personality and normally it is not part of my political dialogue. I like to deal with the issues.

I have a very different view of the chamber of second sober thought. Next year will be my 10th year in the House of Commons. When I was elected in 1988 there were many senators who had lives before they came here. Some had been members of parliament. Some were business people who were renowned and revered in their communities. They were my mentors and taught me many things. I think of Senator Allan MacEachen, bless his soul.

I sat on the Charest committee, the Beaudoin—Dobbie committee and worked on Meech Lake. Much of the basic fundamental understanding I gained on constitutional issues came from some of those senators who were there from the very beginning. They had the collective wisdom, experience, education and knowledge.

To paint that picture of all senators and of that chamber, to put it in disrepute, is unacceptable to me. I have no political motives in saying that, except perhaps to say that my experiences have been different.

Instead of highlighting the good work done by senators from all parties, it was as if they were trying to make their case by using a few extreme examples. There is no Utopia. There is no absolutely perfect system. Every system has its bugs.

The reality is that we have a bicameral system of governance. Northerners are entitled to be fully represented. In my opinion the two chambers are effective as they exist today. Perhaps some individuals, in both Houses, could be faulted at different times. After all, they are only human. But the present system is the one we chose. It is the one that has been upheld and it works. In my opinion it works well.

To be honest, this is a very non-partisan issue for me. I think about Conservative appointed members like Wilbert Keon who is renowned around the world for his work as a heart surgeon. Landon Pearson is extraordinary in her work on behalf of children internationally. She serves as an adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I have worked with Landon Pearson. I know her commitment, dedication and untiring efforts. Jack Austin comes from a business background. He is known throughout Asia for his work.

These people did not just land here with no experience and with nothing to offer. These people have something to offer.

We should be proud when we are elected or appointed. We should be proud of what we do.

I think of Senator Jacques Hébert and his tireless work on behalf of young people, specifically Katimavik.

Sister Peggy Butts is a nun from Atlantic Canada who was appointed to the Senate. It is an unusual and great opportunity.

I was given literature to read when I first came here as a young MP. One of the first pieces I was asked to read was done by Senator David Croll. It was an outstanding piece concerning poverty. Some of its elements are still as relevant today as they were when he first wrote it. It is very thought provoking, very sensitive and all encompassing. Have a look. These people have something to offer.

Senator Eugene Forsey was one of the great thinkers, the big dreamers. In my language a big dreamer is not someone foolish; a big dreamer is someone who has a vision, who understands more than their own vision or more than their own internal little world. They can see many things. He was one of those people.

Senator Serge Joyal was a former secretary of state. He had vision. He is the person who made the agreement with the Northwest Territories for the first Canada-NWT language agreement. Not only did he provide for French-language services or bilingual services, he gave the Northwest Territories the opportunity, with $16 million, to develop an aboriginal language component for its government in which unilingual jurors and unilingual members of their legislative assembly could serve.

These people have something to offer. It is not all bad. Who better represents the views of the people of Labrador than Bill Rompkey, a former member of parliament? I have heard him. I worked with him on the Constitution.

I could go on. These are just a few examples, but they are positive ones. These are people who work just as hard as any member of parliament. They are just as committed as any member of parliament.

This bill goes further than allowing for fair and equitable representation in the Nunavut legislative assembly and in parliament. It is necessary to enable the interim commissioner for Nunavut to enter into formal agreements and contracts that are essential to ensuring that the new government is functional from day one.

The scope of the agreements needed range from the supply of materials to the delivery of medical and educational services for Nunavut residents. This bill makes sure that the essential services and functions of a territorial government will be in place on April 1, 1999.

Without this legislation the interim commissioner and his officials would not be able to enter into these agreements. This means that those reciprocal agreements for health care could not be set up. The agreements allowing Nunavut youth the opportunity to attend southern post-secondary schools could not be negotiated without this legislation. That is why this legislation is so important to the people of Nunavut and to the whole of the territory.

This legislation also deals with the division of assets and liabilities between the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Nunavut.

The new territory will require new laws relevant to its own jurisdiction. The original Nunavut Act provides for an initial legislative base for the new territory by grandfathering the application of territorial laws currently in force in the Northwest Territories.

Bill C-39 clarifies how these laws will be applied to Nunavut by defining the practical results in a variety of situations. For example, the grandfathering of laws would normally mean that all bodies that have been created under Northwest Territories law would automatically exist in Nunavut.

However, there are a number of instances where the creation of parallel bodies will not be necessary. With this in mind, Bill C-39 will ensure that the duplicating effect does not include bodies which have no relation to Nunavut, such as municipal corporations in the other region, the Mackenzie Valley.

As well, the proposed amendments will allow some exceptions to the duplicating effect where it is agreed that a single body such as the Workers' Compensation Board can continue to serve both jurisdictions effectively. These are practical amendments that all Canadians have an interest in.

As the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development stated on Monday, Bill C-39 includes amendments that clarify the creation of a Nunavut court system similar to that of the Northwest Territories. The proposed amendments also ensure that cases pending before the courts at the date of division will be clearly sorted out between the Northwest Territories and the new Nunavut courts.

With as much work as there is to finish, we cannot forget the work that has already been accomplished in the creation of Nunavut. One of the most critical issues being addressed is the need to train Inuit for positions at all levels of the Nunavut public service.

In April 1996 the government announced a $39.8 million fund for human resources for Nunavut. More than 500 Inuit have been enrolled to receive training in the use of computers, in administrative skills and financial planning, all of the functions of a modern government. Many are also learning from their participation in building the new Nunavut government buildings and staff housing.

This not only shows how committed the federal government is in establishing the new Nunavut territory; it also shows how committed Nunavut residents are to their new territory by taking advantage of the opportunities to learn these new skills. These skills are very important to the success of the Nunavut territory.

There is a section which we have to become very aware of, that of Senate reform. I need to deal with the specific issue of Senate reform. On page 27 of Bill C-39 it states:

1. The member of the Senate who represents the Northwest Territories immediately before the day that section 3 of the Nunavut Act comes into force shall, on and after that day, continue as the member of the Senate who represents one of the following:

(a) Nunavut, if the member resides in the part of the Northwest Territories referred to in section 3 of that Act immediately before that day; or

(b) the Northwest Territories, in any other case.

This is legalese. My point is that the legislation is such that once the Nunavut Senate seat is approved, if the current sitting member in the Northwest Territories seat as it is now is from the east, he or she will slide over into the newly created Nunavut seat and a new senator from the west will be appointed.

I think it is a great opportunity. We have a great tradition in our country. We have created 10 provinces and two new territories. We are now dividing the Northwest Territories. We are going to empower those people, give them the tools, give them the support to do for themselves what we have not been able to do for them.

[Division No. 118, March 25th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to address the problem of fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects.

Fetal alcohol syndrome more commonly known as FAS is a medical diagnosis that refers to a set of alcohol disabilities associated with the use of alcohol during pregnancy. Fetal alcohol effects, FAE, is used to describe children with prenatal exposure to alcohol resulting in learning disabilities.

Although there are no statistics regarding the extent of FAS and FAE in Canada, it is estimated that one to three children in every 1,000 in the industrialized countries will be born with fetal alcohol syndrome.

I should qualify this statement by saying that work is being done in Canada. Specifically the work I am familiar with is being done in B.C. by a working group of professionals. Some of the notables in that professional group are Dr. Geoffrey Robinson, a former nurse by the name of Marilyn Van Bibber, originally from the Yukon Territories, and many others who are worthy of mention.

In the interest of time I have to say that no single group, organization, community, ministry or level of government can deal effectively with the problem on its own. Broad based efforts are required, given that everyone has a stake in addressing this complex issue.

I thank my colleagues, not just the member for Mississauga South but also the member for Moncton who shares a great deal of commitment and interest in this critical issue.

I would like to make a couple of suggestions. We need a national process. Perhaps a few suggestions are in order. There are many helpful recommendations in the standing committee report entitled “The Preventable National Tragedy”. We might incorporate those into—

[Health Care, March 10th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, FAS and FAE, fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects in some parts of Vancouver affect one out of every five children.

The costs attributed to FAS and FAE are in the billions of dollars for aftercare. Many correlations are made between FAS, FAE, young offenders and young people who are incarcerated.

The government in all of its programs has to take note of this problem and work on it. It cannot be just one department. I think the main players would be human resources development and Health Canada.

There are outstanding reports from previous governments which contain good recommendations. There are things which we can look at and actively pursue.

[The Budget, March 10th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I am really pleased that my hon. colleague has risen on this issue. It shows his commitment and concern and I would like to just let him know that we have had great opportunities in the last little while. His representatives at the provincial level as well as federal partners in terms of our minister and the Minister of Health are working on a national children's agenda.

It is unfortunate that we do have a child poverty issue but let me tell the member what is the basis of this. We have to empower and engage parents in order to deal with part of the problem. If the hon. colleague cared to be so informed we could provide him with an overview of some of the most successful programs we have that have made a difference in the lives of children. Those are the programs I saw this week when I travelled in my riding and they are prevalent, hundreds of them across the country. He should take the opportunity.

There are community action plans for children's programs and prenatal nutrition programs. There are headstart programs, there are First Nation Inuit child care programs. There are many other initiatives. The community action plan for children's programs, the centre of excellence for children and the $850 million that we talked about that kicks in in July will give more money to low income families.

We have also done a bit of debt relief for those low income families as well and we were not going to book until the next budget week but we have booked the additional, doubled that $850 million. This will accrue in savings on social assistance which should be able to be reinvested back to children. This is the agreement we have with our provinces.

Regarding the auditor general's report, I cannot speak for Indian affairs but I can speak for what human resources development does.

The agreements that we have struck are based on client to service. We will not prop up the industry of poverty. We will not prop up the industry of employment. What we are doing is giving the money directly to the people who are affected. The $200 million I spoke about earlier, that is the way we administer it. There is an element of risk. We know that but we have a strong accountability framework. We give them money directly so they can serve the clients. It does not go to a middle person or an middle organization. It goes directly into servicing the clients we have.

Our youth programs are like that. We put a very small percentage of our money into youth programs which results in complaints. We do not provide core funding. We believe the organizations wanting to engage have the ability to do so and have the infrastructure for that. We give them money that goes directly to the young people who are affected.

With Youth Service Canada many of our youth who participate end up with a completion bonus fee. If they finish the program, they get some money at the end to take a supportable wage subsidy, tuition paydown or another form of credit note for starting a small business.

[The Budget, March 10th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased that my hon. colleague asked this question. It gives me an opportunity to share some information with him that he or some of the young people he spoke about may not be aware of.

For three years, ending in 1999, we have invested $200 million for a labour market training program called the regional bilateral agreements which were done under national frameworks. All the labour market development programs have gone to the provinces or territories except in the case of First Nations, Inuit and Metis. We did framework agreements with them and then struck regional bilateral agreements so that money could flow to the people from those boards that are designated by those people who make those decisions. An amount of money has been out there and it is a lot of money.

I was involved with the negotiations in B.C. We cannot guarantee that every single individual who wants to be served at a certain level will be served because we have removed that responsibility from ourselves.

Post-secondary education is an issue that has, I believe, some crossover. There have been some sponsorships. In fact, the Metis from Ontario took some of this money and did a scholarship program with their partners so there was a lot of leveraging going on.

Further to that, we have just built what we call the aboriginal human resources development strategy. It will be funded to a higher amount, I believe, than the current arrangement. However, as soon as this one ends in 1999 another one kicks in for another five years. It does not quite meet what the royal commission wanted which was 10 years but we did not feel we could do that so we did it for an additional 5 years. There will be more money there than there was previously. It will be for training in labour market development. This is not necessarily post-secondary education but it does not necessarily exclude that either.

The national association of friendship centres get their core funding from heritage, so I cannot speak to that. Because the centres were not under the $200 million, we set aside a separate provision of $26 million under which the friendship centres benefited.

They were the beneficiaries. I cannot remember their exact amount but they are beneficiaries under the $26 million and I am not sure how they spend that money but that is entirely within their purview on setting their priorities and what they should do.

There is a cry about core funding but that is not something that I have the responsibility for or can speak to.

[The Budget, March 10th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, as the member of Parliament for Western Arctic, I am proud to stand here today as a northerner, a Canadian and a member of this government to speak to the budget debate.

First, I want to commend the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance for their leadership which has brought our nation to this turning point. Canadians can look to the millennium with hope and anticipation of still better things to come.

Unfortunately the whole debate that preceded this casts a long dark shadow over this debate. It is quite unfortunate that some members of this House feel they have a hierarchy that is higher than the ordinary Canadian, better than most members of Parliament, that they are in a preferred category of having the ideologies that speak better to all Canadians than other members.

This is unfortunate. No one is more godly than God, more Canadian than Canadians. When we are all sent here by Canadians to work with one another to co-operate and to share a great sense of duty to do what is right for the Canadian people, we should not be appealing to the dark sides of one another. We should not be appealing and speaking to each other's weaknesses. We should do something quite unusual. We should be helping one another to promote the ideals of Canadians. It is unfortunate that we have this kind of blatant arrogance and ignorance that seems to be predominating in this House.

Unfortunately this affects our work. It affects the kind of work that can happen in committees. It affects the kind of relationships we can build to do good things for Canadians.

Maybe after 10 years I see things a little differently. My primary role is not to self-aggrandize but to try to promote what Canadians want us to do. If I look at the budget I see something that is quite relevant to my mandate. My mandate is for children and youth. What I find in this budget is that we have done what no federal government in Canadian history has done. We have followed an economic policy and undertaken the kind of specific initiatives that are more in tune with the hopes and dreams of young Canadians and their families.

Speaking of young Canadians and on the issue of young, I had the privilege of working with Doug Young, the former minister of human resources development. Mr. Young is a very accomplished Canadian. Mr. Young is the minister who allowed the department to double the funding for youth summer employment. We went under minister Doug Young's leadership from $62 million a year to $120 million because he believed that young people across the country should have that privilege. I have no doubt in my mind that the former minister will create many jobs out there in what he does. Those were his parting words, I was doing that and now I am going out there to try to help people create jobs to help people. I believe that.

Let us look at youth unemployment. Unemployment is one of the most serious problems facing young Canadians. We are moving on many fronts to help young people to prepare to find and to keep jobs. Last year we introduced our youth employment strategy with a budget of $315 million. To encourage employment for young Canadians in this budget we offer an EI premium holiday to employers to hire persons between the ages of 18 and 24 in 1999 and 2000. This measure will pick up and expand the existing new hires program. It will make it more attractive for employers to hire young people.

The budget will also help youth at risk, particularly those who have not completed high school and have difficulty finding and keeping work. This is very important. It is important that we make an investment in the education of young people. It is important that we do early intervention.

Like many of my colleagues from all sides of the House, I spent last week in my constituency and in other parts of Canada. I evaluated what we are doing as a government in terms of policy and programs and services and how they affect the lives of children, youth and communities that work in early intervention programs.

I started in Inuvik, Northwest Territories. I visited a whole round of programs and services and ended with town halls where I heard people's concerns. There are some difficulties and challenges but good things are happening as well.

In Inuvik we visited a child care program and saw infants to preschool age children. They were working with their mothers in child development in a setting that was conducive to proper nurturing. We also visited a computer lab. Students who had had difficulties in pursuing education are all gainfully occupied in learning new skills, in working together and in getting themselves into the system. It is quite marvellous and we had a chance to experience that. We shared with parents and other people in the community their concerns about the future of their young people.

Then we travelled to another isolated community, Fort Simpson. We were able to see the benefits of what is happening with prenatal nutrition. There is a lot of talk about child poverty and rightfully so. We all have that commitment and dedication.

In Fort Simpson, Northwest Territories we saw a centre that is working with young people. We talked to people who are undertaking a youth service Canada project that speaks to community service. These are young people who have essentially failed in the regular system, the institutionalized form of education. These young people went out on the land. They worked, hunted and shared their kill with the community. They did community service. They cut a lot of wood for the elders who needed it cut. These are things that are really hard to institutionalize but need to be done. This is the kind of community service young people are undertaking but which is not recognized. We only hear about the bad things about young people.

There were 12 points in Fort Simpson at which programs and services were being undertaken in early childhood development. The open door society does wonderful work there. Government cannot go in and save communities. Communities that organize themselves are the ones that are able to do it. We can best accomplish what we need to accomplish by empowering them and assisting them.

Then we went to Hay River, Northwest Territories. We met with various groups. We checked some snares with the preschool and head start children from the reserve in Hay River. These young people have had many kinds of cultural experiences that are very good for their nurturing and development.

We went to a youth service Canada project. Young people with the Metis nation were working in various communities. One set up an elders visitors centre. Another did the layout for a magazine which talked about what young people were doing. Others carried on with other projects. Some of the young people were moving on to other experiences.

We visited a group of young people in another program. They were on the verge of dropping out but are now getting quite high marks because an investment was made and an instructor was hired. They are now prepared to reintegrate into their regular high school and they are going there with special skills. They are able to take life skills. They are able to have discussions about complicated and sensitive issues. They are also able to write their own resumes. These are basic functional skills which are needed to get into the workplace. They are all things that these young people experienced.

To round out the week I met with a hard working and dedicated group of professionals. They work on the whole issue of fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects. This is where we need to continue to work.

Previously the Stan Wilbee report was done in a standing committee of the House of Commons. We need to revisit some of the goals and recommendations in that report. Perhaps it might be advisable that we do a national survey of best practices of what is happening.

The group is guided by the leadership of Dr. Geoff Robinson. He is one of the foremost experts on FAS and FAE and works with other professionals in B.C. They do very good work. This has to be promoted.

Perhaps what is needed is a national committee or working group to dedicate itself to some broader issues related to FAS and FAE. We also need to work into the national children's agenda and the centres of excellence a cornerstone piece of research on FAS and FAE.

If people are wondering how fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects relate to their particular area of concern, look at the young offenders who are filling the juvenile delinquent centres. Many of them suffer from FAS and FAE. There is a direct correlation. It is very relevant to what we are trying to do in other areas.

We need to seriously look at an approach that is going to promote the work that is happening on this particular issue.

To end the week on Sunday, I joined Senator Landon Pearson and a young lady by the name of Cherry Kingsley at an international conference on the sexual exploitation of children.

Under the tutelage of Senator Landon Pearson and others, Miss Cherry Kingsley, who is a young aboriginal person originally from Alkali Lake has taken the leadership. She has taken charge of how to change the world into a safer place for her and her colleagues and to perhaps find a different path and if not, to at least have security for those persons who are affected by all of these things.

This was an international conference. There were people from Bolivia, Guatemala and representatives from the UN.

It is a very serious issue which all members should consider.

All this is to say, yes, there are many challenges we face but I also know there is much happening.

Most of what I have just said refers to youth at risk. This is a very important issue. In 1995 more than 160,000 Canadians between 22 and 24 years of age had not completed high school. They are at risk of repeated unemployment because the workplace continues to demand ever higher levels of education and skills they do not have.

There are many such programs. We have doubled money for the youth at risk program because we have experienced an 85% success rate with youth service Canada. Most participants have either found permanent employment or have gone back to school full time or part time. It is the reintegration of young people who were totally socially marginalized because they were not in the education loop or any other social milieu that would help them advance in society.

Everyone knows about the Canada millennium scholarships. There has been much talk about that. There are 100,000 students per year with scholarships averaging $3,000 a year. This will provide relief to graduates who are having trouble managing their student debt load. There are other measures which will make it easier for students and their families to finance higher education.

In the budget there is the opportunities strategy which equalizes access in another way. There is increased funding for SchoolNet and the community access program. There is also $205 million of increased funding to connect Canadians which will help young people, especially those in rural communities.

We talked about child poverty. One of the ways we thought we could augment our efforts was to invest $850 million in the national child tax benefit. That will happen in July. Furthermore we will invest another $425 million in July 1999 and another $425 million in July 2000.

These measures will mean cost savings in social assistance. Our big battle is how to reinvest that money with our provincial partners in youth programs.

Perhaps the whole area of FAS and FAE, fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects, is one of special need. Other special needs children are falling between the cracks in regular learning institutions. We need to give further consideration to that issue. Perhaps this would be an opportunity for us to integrate it into the national children's agenda which is currently being undertaken.

I would like to talk about the north a bit. I deal very much with child and youth issues and I would like to give some consideration to the area I come from. I would like to point out how the opportunities in the budget will affect northern Canadians.

At page 61 of the budget the government commits to working with territorial governments and other partners to develop a modern economic development strategy which will recognize the dynamics of the north and the need to establish more diversified economies. The government recognizes that the economies of Canada's territories are undergoing significant change.

Everyone knows that in April 1999 we will face the division of the territories into the western part and Nunavut. Northern governments must embrace diversification by pursuing all forms of sustainable development from traditional economic activities such as hunting, trapping, arts and crafts, and the development of other art forms to the new knowledge based industries and to Canada's first diamond industry.

As many know, the Northwest Territories are on the verge of becoming a major source of diamonds with the first production expected this October. Northerners are now exploring how to maximize northern participation in all aspects of the diamond industry. A secondary or a value added industry is very much on the minds of many northerners and very much the debate of the day in the north. Throughout the north, diversification, full participation and sustainable development are watch words for economic strategies which will bring us into the new century.

I look forward to working with my colleagues in cabinet and my colleagues in the north to make this commitment a reality which will have a real impact on northerners. Canada has an opportunity to map a blueprint for a more secure future for northerners from which all of Canada can benefit.

There are other measures in this budget which northerners will find beneficial, such as increases in funding for First Nations and Inuit health services. These are necessary to keep pace with population increases. We have committed to similar increases in transfer programs which will be administered by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

I must point out that the north has a very young and growing population compared with the rest of the country. These increases are absolutely essential in maintaining the progress we have made in the health of northern peoples.

All of the budget commitments demonstrate a balanced and compassionate approach by this government to our young people, to health care, to social services and to the economic well-being of Canadians from all regions while maintaining the kind of fiscal responsibility Canadians expect.

We could not have done it without Canadians. Canadians helped us carve this path and make the commitments we have made to children and youth. As the Secretary of State for Children and Youth, I feel we are on a very good path with our young people. We are fixated on early intervention, childhood development and parenting skills. These are the essentials for building healthy citizens in our society.

In terms of the Northwest Territories, we are undergoing a huge change. As of October we are essentially going to become the largest diamond producing centre in the western hemisphere but we need the resources and the infrastructure to help businesses take advantage of the opportunities there.

From our visits across the Northwest Territories, we know that the highest form of building on capacity is to empower people. We cannot do for people what people can do for themselves. Governments are facilitators and catalysts, not doers. It is the people in the community at the grassroots who will make the difference for themselves and their sense of self-determination.