Peter Mancini

[Supply, November 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the Conservative supply day motion. It is an interesting motion which begins as follows: “That this House regrets the failure of the government to recognize the importance of Canada's food industries”. There are several parts to it, all of which bear commenting upon.

First, the motion states that the government has failed to provide leadership, a long term vision and workable solutions for Canada's fishery and agricultural sectors. Second, it states that the government did not adequately prepare for the decision of the supreme court in the Marshall case which acknowledged the fishing, hunting and gathering rights of Canada's aboriginal people. Third, it states what is perhaps most all encompassing and to which I will direct most of my comments, that the government has failed to address the serious problem of Canada's agricultural producers who are suffering from increased subsidized competition, rising input costs, natural and economic disasters and an inadequate long term national safety net, the result of which has contributed greatly to increased financial and mental stresses on family farms and fishing communities.

It is a welcome motion and I compliment my colleagues in the Conservative Party. Although sometimes we have our differences, on this motion it is interesting to see that there is some commonality and concern for the farming and fishing communities. The motion goes beyond that because the mover of the motion spoke about the natural resources industries. He talked about the mining industry, the forestry industry and rural communities.

Those are things about which all of us are concerned, in particular those of us who come from rural communities. Because of the crisis in the agricultural industry, my colleague from Palliser attempted to introduce on October 12 an emergency debate in the House to deal with the family farm and the crisis it was facing. He wrote to the Speaker requesting permission to have an emergency debate on the issue.

There is a crisis in the farming industry. There is a crisis in the fishing industry and there is a crisis in our rural communities that is simply not being addressed.

I ended my comments yesterday in the debate on the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act by talking about the four carved figures in the lobby of the House of Commons, the four faces which represent the people who built this nation, one of which is a farmer. Today in the prairies farmers are facing the worst crisis since the 1930s. We have said it over and over.

Why are they facing the crisis? Some of it is beyond our control, such as the natural weather conditions. It is certainly not because of a lack of industry. My grandfather was a farmer in Cape Breton. He used to say that even if a farmer intended to loaf the day away, he would get up in time to have an early start because that is the way farmers are. They get up early, they work hard and they plan their day because they have respect for their work. The carved face of the farmer in the lobby of the House of Commons is a testament to the importance that government once attributed to those who farmed in this country, in particular in the prairie provinces, but also in my part of the country, Cape Breton. There was a thriving farming community there not very long ago. My grandfather was a farmer a generation and a half ago.

Today farmers are suffering because of a lack of vision. The Conservative Party is right. For every dollar of wheat sold, the Canadian farmer now receives just 9 cents in subsidies, while American farmers receive 38 cents in subsidies and European farmers receive even more. They collect 56 cents in subsidies. Given that absolutely unlevel playing field, is it any wonder that the family farm is in crisis in this country?

Because of that crisis the premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba came to Ottawa to seek help. Part of what this country is all about is an understanding that as one region in the country faces hard times the other regions of the country assist. It is a community. There is a sense that there is an interdependence, sometimes from the east to the west, sometimes from the west to the east. We give to each other when we can and how we can, like a family. Sadly, the two premiers from the western provinces returned to their provinces saying that they had gone to Ottawa, to the national government, their partner, to seek help and they were told to go home.

Premier Romanow said “We are the voice of moderation. We are the people who come to the government with an understanding of what it is like to have to make tough decisions”. He talked about national unity. Sometimes the government forgets that national unity is tied to many factors. When people in one region or community in the country feel that the national government really does not give a hoot about their problem, it does not bode well for participation in a civil society, which is what we need if we are to enhance and move forward on the issue of national unity. That is why Premier Romanow made those remarks and that is why I echo them today.

In light of the debate we had yesterday, the federal government, centred in Ottawa, has turned its back on the mining communities in Cape Breton. That will not bode well when the federal government comes looking for support for national unity on the east coast.

When the farmers in the west and the east, who once had vibrant, thriving industries, look to the federal government for support and the support is not there, they have to question, when the federal government comes looking for support, whether that support will be there.

In moving his motion the Conservative member from Manitoba talked about life in rural communities. I touched on that a bit yesterday when I spoke about who we are as Cape Bretoners. I do not think there is anything particularly unique about our communities in the sense that we understand and help each other. I believe that is shared by the farmers on the prairies. Those of us who have had to struggle against the forces of nature understand that there is a greater force, and the only way communities survive is to link together and work together shoulder to shoulder. Farmers understand that.

The problem is that when natural disasters and forces that are overwhelming are compounded by a lack of vision on the part of government, it leaves us in an even worse situation. As much as the communities try to come together, policies that divide them will do just that.

Much of the decision making is centred in urban centres, in Toronto or Ottawa, where the importance and the contributions of the rural communities are forgotten. I spent last week, when we were in our ridings during constituency week, travelling the rural parts of my riding. I spent time with farmers. Sadly, I spent a lot of time driving by abandoned farms that were once thriving farms in Cape Breton. I was fortunate enough to have supper in the home of the Peters who have a farm in Margaree. They talked about the kind of farming they were doing and how their neighbour was struggling and looking for help because of the dry weather, but there was no help coming from the government.

I also spent time in the fishing communities. Fishing is addressed in this motion. I congratulate the native leaders and the non-native leaders in my part of the country who have managed, despite the bungling of the federal government, to come to some kind of agreement, or at least a moratorium, where they can work things out.

In June of last year my colleagues from the NDP caucus who represent ridings in Nova Scotia held a press conference. We warned the government at that point that there was going to be a crisis in the fishing industry if the government did not begin to react.

We had the government in court with the native community, which had, prior to that, reached out and said “Let's negotiate”. It is not as if it did not know there was going to be a decision. I used to practise law. One thing I always did when I went to court was I prepared for a win and prepared for a loss. In this case, we see that the government did not prepare adequately at all.

I congratulate the member who introduced the motion. I also thank the Speaker for being indulgent in giving me a little extra time.

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her comments. I think she made some interesting and excellent points.

She talked about the number of job losses and the spinoff job losses. It is important to bear in context that when she talks about 6,000 job losses they are in a population of 100,000 people in the industrialized area and the impact is enormous.

She talked about the impact on other governments. The reality is that the federal government is downloading those costs on to the province of Nova Scotia. Once unemployment runs out and once the people employed in those industries look to social assistance, it is the province of Nova Scotia which will have to foot the bill. That province is already reeling from a huge deficit.

She has made some interesting points. I also want to add that I think she has a unique perspective on Cape Breton and certainly on its culture. Members know she is a playwright, but one of her great plays is Glace Bay Miners' Museum in which she captured some of the cultural aspects of Cape Breton. I do not know whether she wants to share those thoughts with us on creating characters that were so determined and resourceful and I think accurately reflected the people of Cape Breton.

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his comments and observations.

There are some opportunities. I do not want him to get the idea that at any point in time we are not exploring them. One he will know about, which I have discussed with him, is the creation of a centre of excellence for environmental studies at the University College of Cape Breton for mediation of the tar ponds, which is the number one environmental disaster in this country. We look to the government for some leadership in that regard.

I mention that because he talked about Ottawa, the downsizing of the civil service and how they had to respond to that. It is interesting that we stand in the House of Commons with 301 members, all of whom stay somewhere in the city overnight. I contrast that with the day that I made a presentation to the government's economic panel. The Department of Human Resources Development was pulling out of Cape Breton civil servants who worked with unemployed Cape Bretoners, centralizing them on the mainland. I have voiced case after case. It has tried to pull coast guard employees from Cape Breton and centralize them on the mainland.

That is not the thrust of my question. He also talked about community economic development. We have some of the best minds in community economic development in this country, such as Father Greg MacLeod, Rankin MacSween and people involved in New Dawn Enterprises.

Since he has been so critical of the NDP, my question to him as a member of the Liberal government is, why was not a single member involved in community economic development appointed to the economic panel to look at economic development in Cape Breton? Rather, we had an ex-Liberal senator, another well known Liberal school teacher—I know because he is my wife's first cousin—the president of ACOA and the president of the ECBC who will funnel through the money. Why was there not a single person involved in community economic development appointed to that panel by his government?

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I almost expected the hon. member to break into song. I feel like I am watching a Broadway production called Happy Miners .

He made a point. He should know that I have presented to the economic panel some 50 pages of where I think the government could economically diversify the economy of Cape Breton. That includes many things from renewable energy production, to expansion of the University College of Cape Breton, to a national shipbuilding policy which the federal Liberal government has rejected over and over but which is a natural fit for Cape Breton.

There are many ideas that the government can implement if it has the will. Given the statistics the hon. member has quoted, I think he needs a bit of a reality check regarding the Cape Breton he sees with rose coloured glasses. He is talking about all the jobs that are being created. The reality is that the mayor of the Cape Breton regional municipality sees a decline of $25 million in tax revenue over the next five years and has said as recently as three weeks ago that the municipality may have to simply declare itself no longer an entity and fall under provincial auspices because Devco and Sysco are being cut by the federal and provincial governments.

The member talked about the University College of Cape Breton. The president of that university acknowledges that the reality is we need some kind of massive response to the number of children of miners who cannot afford tuition as a result of this package and who will not be able to further their education at that very worthwhile institution.

That is just a dose of sobering reality for the member's cheery response. We are prepared to diversify economically. We need some help and assistance in that, but let us get real.

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

What is it?

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is a long question and much to cover. Let me start by saying that nobody in Cape Breton is saying that the coal industry has to go on for ever and ever. The reality, however, is that we were told on January 11 there would be a shutdown of the industry. We were told that there would be community consultation in that regard. Sixteen days later a package was presented with no consultation, with no discussion. It simply was done as is.

As to the member's comments about talented Cape Bretoners, he mentioned some of our singers and songwriters. I suggest he read a new best seller called No Great Mischief , written by Alistair MacLeod from the coal mining town of Dunvegan.

The title is an interesting one. It comes from General Wolfe who, when he used the Highlanders in the battle on the Plains of Abraham, said “Send the Highlanders over first; it is no great mischief if they fall”. I think Cape Bretoners have felt for a long time that the attitude of the government is to send them over the wall first; it is no great mischief if we fall.

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to respond to this because I think the member's history needs a little correcting.

There is something the member failed to mention. He talked about a 20 year timetable and the 30 years it took to phase out the coal industry, which was the original intent, but the reality is that was the intent and the government began to take steps in that direction.

What happened in the 1970s was that there was a determination made in 1974 and again in 1978 to expand the coal mines because it was necessary for the betterment of the country. This government, which is now phasing out the coal industry, did make an original plan in the late sixties to phase out coal, but then it came into my community and into my schools saying that there was a 25, 35 or 45 year career path in the coal mining industry. Young people believed their government members who said, “Come to work for us and you will have a job for life”. That is the covenant that was made. That is the bargain that was struck.

When it comes to talking about history, let us not forget the handshake that was extended to the young men of Cape Breton who were told that Canada needs their coal and that they would have a job there forever.

The member is right that the original intent was to phase out the coal mine, but for him to say that it took 30-some years, there is a little interruption there and that is when a promise was made. It was the generation of today's miners' fathers who were told in the sixties that the coal mines would be phased out, but it was the next generation who was promised something different and they were promised that by Liberal governments.

I take the member at his word. I think he is proud to represent Lester Pearson's former riding, but I suggest he reread some of the speeches of his predecessor to see what he would have done in this situation.

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, there is shame in the House today. There should be shame and I think there is shame on the part of some government backbenchers, perhaps even on the part of some cabinet ministers of the Liberal government.

There ought to be shame first of all because a fraud has been perpetrated on the people of Cape Breton. The government says that in January of this year it came to a decision to disengage itself from the mining industry in Cape Breton.

When my colleague from Bras d'Or introduced into the House of Commons a cabinet document dated 1995, there were howls and protests by the government. The government said, “We weren't planning to divest ourselves of a role in Cape Breton in 1995. That was just a study document”.

I live in Cape Breton. I remember in February 1995 the current Minister of Finance giving an interview in Halifax. Oddly enough he was asked a question on economic recovery in Canada. Canada was going through a recession. His words to the interviewer were, “I think we will find our way out of this economic recession in Canada and Canada will prosper, but for Cape Breton I don't see that prosperity”.

At that time those of us in Cape Breton wondered why the Minister of Finance might make such a comment. Later on that year, when faced with miners who wanted to open Donkin mine, who wanted some kind of assurance from the government as to a plan for Devco, the former member of parliament for Cape Breton—East Richmond said, “There are no rabbits in the hat, boys. I can't do anything for you”.

I was a citizen at that time; I was not a member of parliament. We wondered why that minister who represented Cape Breton did not have an answer. Now we know. We know because the then Minister of Natural Resources was talking of privatization in 1995. I submit that the Minister of Finance knew in February 1995 that there was not going to be a coal industry in Cape Breton. I think the then Minister of Health knew in 1995 that there was not going to be a coal industry in Cape Breton.

The only people who did not know were the Cape Bretoners. Even though they had a Liberal member of parliament at the cabinet table, even though a Liberal member of parliament represented my riding, even though a Liberal member of parliament represented what was then Highlands—Canso, the only people who were not told to get ready for economic adjustments were Cape Bretoners. There has been a fraud and the shame is justified.

There is another reason for shame. The Liberals are abandoning not only the miners and the people of Cape Breton with Bill C-11, but they are abandoning their own history. They are abandoning their own legacy.

Devco was the child of Lester Pearson. It was conceived and drafted by a Liberal government composed of people like Allan MacEachen, Romeo LeBlanc and Liberals who back then said that they saw a role for government in compassionate help for regions of the country outside the Ottawa valley.

There is a statue behind the west block of Prime Minister Lester Pearson. If his spirit is in the House today, it weeps at the hypocrisy of the government. Let me read some words. These are not my own words. These are the words of Lester Pearson:

The federal government realizes that the Cape Breton coal problem is essentially a social one. It is because of its awareness of, and concern for, the well-being of individuals and their communities that the federal government is prepared to assist, on a massive scale, the transition of the areas from dependence on a declining natural resource to a sound economic base.

It was to be on a massive scale because government understood the role and the history that Cape Breton miners have played in building this country. He went on, and I shame members further:

The Government of Canada and the government of Nova Scotia believe that a rigid adherence to a fixed timetable to reduce the level of coal production might involve unnecessary hardship on the dependent communities.

Rigid adherence to a fixed timetable. What do we have from the Prime Minister's Liberal government? An announcement in January that come hell or high water the coal mines will close in December 2000, a fixed agenda regardless of what it does to the communities. That is hardly in the spirit of Lester Pearson. Let me continue to shame the members:

Consequently, the rationalization of the mines will be related to the success in the introduction of new industries. The crown corporation will be instructed to give full consideration to the needs of orderly adjustment, including the implementation of a generous early retirement plan for the miners as recommended by Dr. Donald.

A generous early retirement plan for the miners. They are the people I went to school with. Today, at 42, 43 or 45, some with one eye because of an accident in the mine, some with one shoulder a little lower than the other because of a roof fall-in, some missing a finger, they are told they will get a severance package taxable by the Government of Canada and they should retrain. That is hardly in the spirit of Lester Pearson. Shame on the Liberals for that.

The contrast is so dramatic. If people in this country who used to vote Liberal wonder whether they can find a home in this right-wing government, that should tell them. If anyone thinks that the Prime Minister's shuffling of a few cabinet ministers and talking about a children's agenda is a pretence to the return of the Liberals of old, they are right. It is a pretence. Bill C-11 which will cause undue hardship to the miners in Cape Breton is a testament to the fact that the Liberal Party lost whatever soul it had under Lester Pearson. The present Prime Minister, who was brought into politics by Prime Minister Pearson, should be ashamed.

There is another aspect. I credit Allan MacEachen as he thought he could enshrine some sense of responsibility on the part of the government. Section 17 of the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act was passed in the House of Commons. That put the words of Lester Pearson into law. It reads in part:

(4) Before closing or substantially reducing the production of coal from any coal mine operated by it, the corporation shall ensure that

(b) all reasonable measures have been adopted by the corporation, either alone or in conjunction with the Government of Canada or of Nova Scotia...to reduce as far as possible any unemployment or economic hardship that can be expected to result—

What happened to the Liberal Party that it would take that section out of the new proposed legislation? What happened was a fundamental shift in ideology. There was a fundamental shift in thinking. The Liberal Party no longer believes there is a role for the government in communities like Cape Breton.

Shame hangs on the House and it hangs on the Liberal Party. My only hope and I think the hope of Cape Bretoners is that some backbenchers who still adhere to what was once a Liberal philosophy will muster the courage of the miners and stand up against their government when it comes time to vote on this bill.

Let us talk about the people who are affected by this. I have talked a little about the men who for the most part are courageous. They have been talked about in debate here. They are the draegermen who went down into the Westray mine to recover the bodies of dead miners, risking their own lives.

We are a people, a distinct people. We are a people with our own history, our own culture and, in some ways—if one talks to my mother-in-law or my mother—we are a people of our own language. We have preserved the Gaelic culture and the Gaelic language. We are a people who, because we were fishermen, farmers and miners, were never dependent on the government but understood the interdependence of communities one on the other. That culture today is under attack by the Liberal government with this bill.

I was delayed in the airport the other night and wandered through the bookstore. I saw many books on self-help: how we need to reach out to each other; how we need to understand each other; and how we need to be affectionate with each other. It made me think of the miners who live in the communities that I represent. When I go door to door, these people tell me “I do not want much, I want to be able to keep my home here”. Their homes are not $250,000 homes in Toronto. They are $30,000 to $40,000 homes in New Waterford, Glace Bay, Reserve Mines or Sydney Mines. They want to stay in those homes because four blocks away is a mother who is getting older and needs to be looked after. Three blocks down in the other direction are brothers who go underground with them, protect them and look after them. Their kids can go to school and stop at any house and find a relative or a friend.

The self-help books say that this is the kind of community we have to build. I say that we have it but the government is tearing it asunder. The government is saying to those men “move”.

The speaker who preceded me said “Oh, I know the people of Cape Breton are resilient, adaptable and can be trained”. Yes, we are. However, let me propose to the members of the House that tomorrow I will take away their privileges, tomorrow they will lose their seat, tomorrow whatever professional degrees or whatever work they did will not matter, they will go down in the coal mine and learn how to dig it. They should go ahead and adjust accordingly. They should move from Rosedale, from Toronto or from Calgary because that is what economic adjustment is all about. They should sell the house even though the market is depressed. That is what economic adjustment is all about. That is what the bill is all about.

The history of the coal mining communities in Cape Breton is a long one. It has been recited here over and over again. There seems to be some kind of thought that there was government dependence. We heard the figure of $1.6 billion that has been spent in Cape Breton on Devco. The miners in Cape Breton worked for private companies until the 1960s and then began to work under the crown corporation. Inasmuch as the government spent $1.6 billion, it took back $6 billion in taxes. That is not a bad return. It is not dependence, it is work.

What did we ask for in return? We asked for pensions. I do not think that is unfair. We asked for some readjustment. We asked for some economic development money.

The miners in Cape Breton have contributed to the building of the country from one coast to the other. They did not all just stay in Cape Breton and go underground. They went to Flin Flon, northern Ontario and Elliot Lake. Why did they go? It was because the companies knew they were the best damned miners in the business. They knew that if they needed someone who could do explosive work, Cape Breton miners would respond and would risk their lives, which some of them did, to build this country.

I began this address by referring to the statue of Lester Pearson behind the West Block. There are four other carvings that the members of the House of Commons should look at the next time they wander out into the lobby.

Above the ceiling in the lobby of the House of Commons, in the four corners which is a testament to their prominence, are four carved portraits: One is a farmer because the farmers were recognized as having helped build the country; one is a fisherman, and we all know what happened on the east and west coasts to the fishermen who helped build the country; one is a woodcutter, a carpenter who helped construct and build the country; and, in a place of honour under the Prime Minister's office, is the face of a miner because there was a time when miners mattered to the government. There was a time when it was recognized that those people contributed.

Today we stand in the people's House, in the House of commoners, and debate how to make them adjust in the new economy.

Shame on the government. Shame on the policy. The shame will follow it. The government will take its place beside the Dominion Steel and Coal Company which called in the army to shoot the miners when they tried to strike for a decent wage. The government will place its name alongside those companies that exploited and then put out of work the Cape Breton miners.

We will survive as we always have. However, I do not think the Liberal government should come knocking on the door of Cape Breton. It might be strange to see the Prime Minister who is now out of the country. It is interesting that since the whole package was announced, we have never seen the Prime Minister visit Cape Breton except maybe for a game of golf. When he did that he did not do it in the industrial heartland. It would interesting to see the Liberals come to Cape Breton and speak to the miners eye to eye and tell them that they have to adjust to the new economic forces because this is the new Liberal Party.

It is a shame on the House, a shame on the memories of Liberal cabinet ministers for whom Devco represented an ideology and a shame for the people in my riding.

[Devco, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources said today that he did not want to raise expectations, but he said that funding allotted for the economic adjustment in Cape Breton as a result of the government's abandonment of Devco is under reassessment, finally acknowledging that the original package is not adequate.

Will he commit today to a new funding package, a fair funding package for the people and the miners of Cape Breton?

[Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the comments of my colleague from Nova Scotia. There has long been an affinity between my part of Nova Scotia and his, particularly in the coal mining industry. I was heartened to hear him talk about the decentralization that was done by the former Conservative government when industries were closed down in other areas. I hope that is something this government will consider.

I was happy to hear the hon. member talk about health considerations. Those watching this debate and reading Hansard should know that many miners' families who rely on the drug plan that is currently operated through their employment have no idea whether their prescription drugs and their health needs will be met as of December.

This was not clear to me. The hon. member was critical of the package that is being offered. Is it the position of the Conservative Party that there should be an enhanced package for miners in Cape Breton?