Jim Peterson

[Supply, September 30th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to address the House today.

Concerning this motion by the official opposition, it strikes me as a little bit hypocritical. We are being accused of not having consulted Canadians adequately before announcing our program to share the expenditures for programs, tax cuts and debt reduction.

At the same time, the hon. member for Medicine Hat tells us that they plan to cut taxes.

They say we have not consulted, but without consulting they have presented tax cuts which they feel are so important. They have called for monstrous tax cuts in personal income tax, in business income tax, and in terms of getting rid of the increase in Canada pension plan premiums. They cannot have it both ways. Either they are to go out and consult in some undefined process which they have not outlined before us, or they are to allow us to set programs.

No party in the history of Canada has consulted more extensively with Canadians. Perhaps the greatest process of consultation in a democratic nation is putting a platform before the electorate. This is exactly what we did before the last election when Canadians spoke strongly and decisively.

Perhaps the Reform Party wants some type of electoral reform so that election results do not really count, so that the expressed will of Canadians during a federal election is not what really matters.

Not only did we go through a federal election where this was a key part of our platform, but it is this House that opened up the budget making process. It will begin this fall with an economic statement by the Minister of Finance laying out where we are and some of the available options. It will then be a task of the finance committee, of which the member for Medicine Hat was a very distinguished member and will be again I trust. The committee will go right across the country and will consult with Canadians from every sector and every walk of life on their budget priorities.

This process of consultation could not be one of which I am more proud because it is open. It has taken the budget making process out of the back rooms and into the public fora and into Parliament and has put it into the hands of members of Parliament. Surely he does not condemn that.

The member has set forth his priorities without consultation as he seems to say we have done. He wants to get rid of business subsidies. No program has been cut more than our subsidies to business. It was because—

[Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act, September 25th, 1997]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-2, an act to establish the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Armenian Genocide, April 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to stand with those the world over to remember the Armenian genocide on this its 82nd anniversary.

The world community recognizes that 1.5 million Armenians were massacred in 1915 yet it has not recognized this massacre as a genocide. The United Nations defines genocide as the direct physical destruction of another racial or national group.

We might well ask when will justice based on historical truth prevail.

Succeeding generations of Armenians the world over have not and never shall rest content until justice is served, nor shall any person of goodwill.

[Petitions, April 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from residents of the Burlington area. On behalf of the member for Burlington, I wish to present this petition asking that the pensions of senior citizens be protected.

[Petitions, April 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions. The first petition is from residents of North York which was presented to the Minister for International Trade. Because the minister cannot table these petitions, he has asked me to do so on his behalf. Many of these residents are also from Willowdale.

The petitioners ask that tax dollars be allowed to be earmarked for non-military purposes.

[Committee Of The House, April 23rd, 1997]

It is not true. Both the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and the Standing Committee on Finance have held public hearings on this issue. Tax experts who had conducted an extensive review of this case told us that our public officials were fair and had the right to give what is called an advanced tax ruling. According to these experts, who hail from the private sector and work in this complicated and difficult area, our employees had the right to act as they did.

But despite all of this, I want to point out that, after being made aware of the situation, the government reacted very quickly. It agreed with the proposals made by the Standing Committee on Finance to create in Canada one of the toughest tax systems where immigration is concerned.

We have heard a lot of lies in this House and everywhere else about family trusts. Let my give you an example of a lie I heard today. Someone said that it was the Liberal government under Pierre Elliott Trudeau, in 1970, that came up with the idea of family trusts. That is not true. Family trusts have existed since the 17th century. They have always existed to help families, farmers, people-

[Committee Of The House, April 23rd, 1997]

Madam Speaker, I would like to put a question to the hon. member. The Bloc Quebecois has decried throughout Canada what they call the family trust scandal.

[Taxation, April 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Members of all parties in the House recognize that Canada's volunteer and charitable sectors welcome and are delighted with the enhanced tax incentives brought forward by the finance minister to assist charitable giving.

At the same time we recognize that in the last ways and means motion there were some unintended adverse consequences.

Could the minister assure the House that the government will undertake and is undertaking consultations with the charitable sector to ensure that the unintended or adverse consequences will not come about?

[Committees Of The House, April 16th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour on behalf of the finance committee to table our 12th report dealing with Bill C-93.

As I have in the past, I thank all members of all parties for their wonderful co-operation.

[An Act Amend An Act To Incorporate The Bishop Of The Arctic Of The Church Of England In Canada, April 14th, 1997]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my seconder, the member for Kitchener, the member for Frontenac, the member for Prince George-Peace River and all members of the House for their co-operation in ensuring the speedy and necessary passage of Bill S-15.

I also wish to commend the hon. Senator Michael Meighen for the work he did in the other House on this bill.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed.)