Lynn Myers

[The Budget, February 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is with a great deal of honour that I rise today to enter this historic budget debate. I do so on behalf of the residents of Waterloo—Wellington and indeed on behalf of all Canadians who recognize the tremendous work that the government has done to get our fiscal house in order, to provide tax relief and to ensure that our health care system is secured for the next generation.

I begin by outlining the strong fiscal outlook contained in the budget. It is no secret that budget '99 is an outstanding testament to the efforts and sacrifices of all Canadians to put Canada's fiscal house in order. The government is dedicated to advancing the living standards of Canadians through the creation of well paying jobs, a robust economy, equal opportunities for all and a safety net for those in need.

In 1998 Canada's economy flourished despite the uncertainty in overseas markets that has hit some parts of Canada, our western provinces particularly hard. Yet job creation in Canada outpaces the other G-7 countries. Employment growth remains strong. There were 453,000 jobs created in 1998 following the impressive gain of 368,000 jobs in 1997.

I point out that almost 40% of the new jobs created in the last 12 months were to Canada's youth who posted their strongest yearly employment growth in over 25 years. I also want to note that interest rates remain low and long term rates are nearly historically low.

It is important to note that Canada's economic success is due to sound economic and fiscal policies and the hard work and sacrifice of all Canadians. The budgetary deficit which stood at $42 billion in 1993-94 was eliminated in just four years. In fact, a surplus of $3.5 billion, the first surplus in 28 years, was recorded in 1997-98 and went to pay down the debt.

This year the government will begin balancing its books or better. For the first time since 1951-52 the government has been deficit free for two consecutive years. The government is committed to further balancing budgets in both 1999-2000 and in 2000-2001. This will be the third time since Confederation that the government will record balanced budgets for at least four consecutive years. That is truly historic and worthy of note.

The balanced books means an ability to invest more in health care. Reducing our debt is an investment in our future. Our goal is to put the debt to GDP ratio on a steady downward track. As we reduce our federal debt it means that more resources are available to strengthen health care, to provide tax relief, fight child poverty and invest in research and innovation.

In 1995-96 when the debt to GDP ratio was at its peak, 36 cents of every federal revenue dollar went to paying down the debt. Last year that was down to 27 cents. Again, it is truly remarkable. This is tremendous progress and underscores the government's commitment to debt reduction.

Canada's strong economy and bright prospects are clear evidence that strong economic fundamentals are helping us to prosper. Our record of maintaining sound economic and fiscal management has led to strong growth and a reduced debt burden which in turn has allowed the government to reinvest in priorities, especially health care.

I turn to our health care system. Canadians believe our health care system is a fundamental core value. Canada's publicly funded health care system is a pillar of our society and reflects the values shared by us all. I am pleased to see that preserving and building on our health care system's strength is a cornerstone of budget '99.

Over the next five years the provinces and the territories will receive, as everyone knows, an additional $11.5 billion for health care. This represents the largest single new investment our government has ever made. These new monies will help the provinces and the territories deal with Canadians' immediate concerns about health care, things like waiting lists, crowded emergency rooms, diagnostic services and other things. The government is committed to building a stronger health care system that reflects the changing needs of Canadians and provides timely access to high quality health care.

I take this opportunity to fully outline what this means. Of the $11.5 billion dedicated to health care, $11 billion will be provided through future increases in the Canada health and social transfer. Over the next three years provinces will receive an additional $6.5 billion. For this fiscal year, $3.5 billion will be allocated as an immediate one time injection into the CHST. Provinces and territories will be able to draw on these funds in the manner which best suits their needs and their health care systems.

The $2.5 billion increase to the CHST brings the total cash portion to $15 billion, making the health component of the CHST as high as it was before the spending restraint of the mid 1990s. Combined with the CHST tax transfers and others, federal support is expected to reach a new high by the year 2001-02. This is truly good news for Canadians wherever they live.

In addition, budget '99 invests close to $1.4 billion in improving information systems, providing health related research innovation, improving first nations and Inuit health services and preventing health problems. This will ensure that doctors, nurses, administrators and researchers have the most up to date knowledge, information, treatment and cures at their fingertips. It will also allow them to innovate and learn from each other in order to benefit all Canadians.

Health research helps prevent a wide range of diseases from polio to tuberculosis. A national task force representing the health research community has developed an innovative proposal to create the Canadian institute of health research. The institute would bring together the best researchers from across Canada in areas such as aging, arthritis, women's health, cancer and diseases of the heart.

Budget '99 sets aside $240 million over the next two years to support this proposal. While we lay the groundwork for the institute, increased funding will go to the existing federal agencies that support health research and to hospitals and universities to help create world class research facilities. That is truly important to note.

Medicare is not only good social policy, it is good short and long term economic policy. We will ensure that every health care dollar spent by the Government of Canada is used to the greatest possible extent to deliver those services.

Working with the provinces and the territories and all the stakeholders in this very important public policy area, the government then is investing in high quality and high calibre health care for all. This is something Canadians need, want, deserve and expect.

In addition to medical research the government is moving to strengthen other areas of research, innovation and knowledge. This is because we know it is very important to raise the standard of living for all Canadians. In today's fast paced world investing in Canadians' access to knowledge and innovation is crucial.

Budget '99 builds on previous efforts by investing more than $1.8 billion in innovation over the remainder of this fiscal year and the next three years. This investment will help prepare Canadians for the new economy and the new millennium.

Over the past five years our government has made important investments in support of knowledge and innovation and we will continue to do this. Budget '99 provides an additional $200 million for the Canada foundation for innovation's initial $800 million endowment which is now being used to support the acquisition and modernization of world class research infrastructure. An additional $150 million over three years will be invested in technology partnerships Canada starting in 1999 and 2000. This will help keep Canada at the forefront of technological innovation, open new market opportunities and support the creation and growth of high technology industries.

The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the National Research Council will also receive $121 million in funding for research and support for advanced studies over the remainder of this fiscal year and the next three years as well.

Networks of centres of excellence will also receive $90 million over three years to foster research partnerships among world class researchers in the private sector across Canada.

More than 100,000 young Canadians a year will benefit from summer employment, internships and job information through the youth employment strategy. The program has been made permanent and funding has been increased by 50% to $465 million over the next three years. An additional $110 million per year will be invested in a new Canada jobs fund to create sustainable long term jobs in regions most directly affected by high unemployment.

That is very important to note and taken all together these investments represent a balanced and comprehensive approach to advancing Canada's knowledge and innovation agenda. They will help businesses, organizations and individuals to put new ideas to work in job creating industries for the future. For Canadians this means a better standard of living and a better quality of life.

This positions Canada and all Canadians for the 21st century. This helps to secure the future for our children and our children's children. This truly represents an historic budget that we as a government and all Canadians can be proud of, knowing it positions our country to enjoy the prosperity that lies ahead in the future.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, February 15th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to debate this very important issue.

Certainly the residents of Waterloo—Wellington and indeed Canadians no matter where they live have a great interest in this matter.

The equalization program is an underlying value of what it means to be Canadian. It is a cornerstone of the country, one which people recognize and rely on in terms of what it means to be Canadian. It is a sense of sharing, caring and ensuring fairness across Canada.

Over time and through history the equalization program has indeed played a major role in Canada and it can be argued has played a major role in defining our federation. I suspect and Canadians know our federation is stronger as a result, our federation is better off as a result and our people have benefited as a result. As a result of that, Canada has gained tremendously and I think that is important to know.

I also want all members to know that it is important that we act today to deal with this matter. We have had a deadline to meet and as a result are using time allocation to ensure that we meet that deadline of March 31.

I am not surprised the Reform Party and the Bloc do not support the equalization program. It is not surprising because both parties, quite frankly, do not want to see the federation work. Rather, both are committed to seeing that Canada does not work. That is really a shame but it is the reality of what we have here not only in the House of Commons but in Canada.

The equalization program ensures that all provinces have the resources they need to do what Canadians, wherever they live, want in terms of reasonable and comparable services. This is done so that hopefully they do not have to resort to higher levels of taxation than in other provinces. While this does not always happen it certainly is a goal and a laudable one at that.

I should also point out that the equalization program is an unconditional federal payment. This enables provinces to use the equalization program as they see fit and as they wish. That too is an important point.

Seven provinces receive the equalization program: Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. They all qualify for this very important payment. That is something that bodes well for the country as a whole.

The proposed legislation, which is excellent I might point out, will renew the equalization program for a five year period, beginning April 1, 1999 to March 31, 2004. The basic structure of the equalization program will however remain as it, but the bill before us includes changes to ensure that it continues to measure the ability of provinces to raise revenues as accurately as possible.

These improvements will increase the cost of the program by an estimated $242 million. These changes too will be phased in over the five year period. As a result of extensive consultation, which I believe underscores the fact that our federation works, the bill will change the ceiling and the floor provisions to protect against greater fluctuation. This was done co-operatively and in a fashion and spirit in keeping with improving the federation for the benefit of all Canadians wherever they may live in this great country of ours.

The bill renews the provincial personal income tax revenue guarantee program for the same five year period I spoke about. This is a key and important provision. It protects those provinces participating in the tax collection agreements from any major revenue reductions that may be caused during the course of a year by changes in federal tax policy, as an example. This is worthy of our attention and clearly something in the best interest of the participating provinces.

Finally I want to outline that the budget tomorrow will provide new estimates of equalization. We all know that in the 1998 budget it was projected that equalization would amount to $8.5 billion in 1998-99. Official estimates showed an increase to $8.8 billion as released in October.

The federal government recognizes that the country we live in is continually changing. That is the reality of the Canadian community. It is also a fact that we must change if we are going to survive as a society. The federal government will continue to watch over the interests of all Canadians.

I want to simply say by way of conclusion that the legislation recognizes the importance of working co-operatively and in the best interest of all Canadians wherever they may live in Canada. It is legislation of great importance which underlies our commitment to making Canada work for all our citizens. It is worthy of support and I would certainly ask all members of the House to support it accordingly.

[Petitions, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to rise in the House today to present a petition signed by a number of Canadians.

These petitioners wish to draw to the attention of the House matters about which they are deeply concerned, namely that as grandparents and as a consequence of death, separation or divorce of their children, they are often denied access to their grandchildren by their guardians; that the relationship which exists between grandparents and grandchildren is a natural, fundamental one; and that the denial of access can constitute elder abuse and can have a serious detrimental and emotional impact on both the grandparents and the grandchildren.

The petitioners wish that legislation would be introduced which would in fact amend the Divorce Act to include a provision as proposed and provided for in Bill C-340 regarding the right of the parents of spouses, the grandparents, to access or to custody of their grandchildren.

[National Parole Board, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, addressing the distinctive needs and interests of aboriginal offenders has long been of vital importance to the Nation Parole Board.

Aboriginal people are widely overrepresented in federal corrections. While they represent 3% of Canada's total population, they account for nearly 15% of the incarcerated population. That proportion is even higher in the prairie provinces.

The disproportionate number of incarcerated aboriginal offenders presents significant challenges that can only be met with cross-cultural awareness, sensitivity, creativity and innovation. One of the most recent innovations introduced by the National Parole Board has been the use of native elders to assist at parole hearings.

Another innovation, which is still very much in the experimental stage, is the concept of releasing circles as an alternative to more traditional methods of assessing community support.

The 100th anniversary of conditional release in Canada and the 40th anniversary of the National Parole Board provide the House with a unique opportunity to recognize all their good work.

[Supply, February 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, of course we have had a long history of helping people and we will continue to do so. We will do so for aboriginals and for all Canadians.

It is interesting that a member from the Reform Party, which stands for opposing every initiative that our government has ever tried to put in place with respect to poverty, including child poverty, would stand in the House and make those kinds of statements.

When we came to the child tax benefit for example, the Reform Party voted against it. When it came to CAPC, the community action program for children, the Reform Party voted against it. When it came to—

[Supply, February 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member opposite for the question.

I reject out of hand her premise of failure. I reject out of hand her premise of our lacking compassion. On the contrary we have not failed. We do have in place a system of compassion to help Canadians wherever they may live in this great country of ours. We have built in the kinds of programs necessary to assist Canadians and to help them, not only people in poverty and especially our young people, but in all kinds of ways. We have done so through the transfer payment system and will continue to do so in a very meaningful way that underscores our government's commitment to this all important policy area.

[Supply, February 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

We on the government side have a tremendous record when it comes to issues of poverty, especially child poverty. The kinds of things that we have implemented over time and the kinds of things that we will be implementing over time are truly in the best interests of Canadians wherever they may live.

Canadians understand that what we as a government are doing is in the best interests of everyone. It is done so with compassion and tolerance, knowing that we need to pursue that and ensure that poverty as we know it is eradicated to the best extent possible.

[Supply, February 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to debate this very important motion.

The motion of the hon. member for Shefford states that the government should help to fight poverty in this country by encouraging self-sufficiency and self-reliance. These are excellent goals and underscore several programs and initiatives which we in the federal government have undertaken especially in partnership with the provincial and territorial governments to do precisely that.

The new national child benefit is one of the most obvious examples of this kind of movement. As hon. members know, this initiative came into effect last year following extensive discussions between the federal, provincial and territorial governments on how to most effectively address the issue of child poverty. Even though Canada is one of the most successful and socially advanced countries in the world, the very sad fact is that far too many children in our country still live in poverty.

Poverty is a numbing and degrading experience for anyone, but it is particularly difficult for children. It can mean a child is not only deprived of proper food, clothing and other essentials but also has long term health and social consequences that come up later in life.

In order to address this issue, as of July last year the federal government invested an additional $850 million per year in support of children under the national child benefit. By July 2000 the federal investment will be at least an additional $1.7 billion per year. That is over and above the roughly $5 billion annually the federal government already invests in families with children through the Canada child tax benefit.

As a result of this initiative, more than two million children are receiving higher federal payments each month to help ensure that they have adequate food, clothing and shelter. It will help provide for some of the necessities that children need for a healthy start in life.

What does this have to do with self-sufficiency and self-reliance? It has a great deal to do with it. The problem is that too many parents on social assistance cannot accept a low wage job without penalizing their children. They are often caught behind that infamous welfare wall, meaning that when they move off social assistance and into a job, they can actually end up with fewer benefits and services for their children than what they had received while on social assistance. That truly is a shame. They lose social assistance benefits, things like dental plans, transportation allowances, housing allowances and other supports which come to an end when they take that job.

The new program will help to lower the welfare wall with a higher Canada child tax benefit for all low income families whether they are in the workforce or not. That is an important change. This in turn means that provincial and territorial governments will be able to reduce the amount they pay to families on social assistance.

It is not simply a windfall for the provinces. As part of the deal, provincial and territorial governments have agreed that they will take the money they save and reinvest it in income support and services to help poor families; services such as provincial child benefits, child care support for working parents, basic skills training and other preventative services for children that reflect the needs of individual communities. As a result of the first phase of the national child benefit, most provinces already have these complementary programs in place.

The provinces will also be investing more as a result of the government's commitment to further increase the national child benefit supplement by an additional $850 million per year starting this July and next July. These complementary provincial services range from child benefit and employment supplements for low income recipients to child care tax credits to programs for optical care and prescription drugs for school age children and many other initiatives.

The end result is that more low income parents will be encouraged to get back into the workforce. More children will therefore benefit because of a higher household income.

The government does not suggest for a minute that this new program solves all the problems, not at all. What it does represent is a new beginning, a fresh start if you will, a chance to provide a more comprehensive way to meet the challenge of poverty in this country.

At the same time the government is working to ensure that it has better information on which to base policy decisions, something that is extremely important as our society and the economy undergo the increasingly rapid pace of change that has characterized the past number of decades.

The national longitudinal study of children and youth will be enhanced to provide more specific community based data that will greatly assist all governments in making policy choices that are better targeted and more effective.

The government believes that making an investment in our children and our young people is in our own long term best economic and social interests. Certainly it is. That is why the government has also implemented other measures, such as increasing the deductions for child care expenses, providing a family income supplement for roughly 200,000 low income parents receiving employment insurance benefits, enhancing the community action program for children and putting more emphasis on prenatal nutrition programs for children at risk.

That is also why the government has a number of programs to help Canadians find and keep jobs. The Canada jobs fund is helping to create jobs in high unemployment areas. The youth employment strategy is helping thousands of young Canadians with that all important transition from school to work. We also have a program called employment assistance for persons with disabilities to help those persons with disabilities join and stay in the workforce. The government has also introduced the Canada opportunities strategy that helps more Canadians, young and old, to gain access to a good education and to acquire the skills they need to get a good job.

The government has a clear strategy to fight poverty in this country. Many great initiatives are well under way and are directly addressing the concerns raised in this motion.

The strategy is to get as many people as possible into the workforce, or certainly back into the workforce so that they can earn a living and support themselves and their families. Since 1993 some 1.6 million new jobs have been created in this country. I believe that when the Minister of Finance presents his budget next week, Canadians will see that this government intends to continue to pursue the strategy of job creation and growth which we have done and which has invigorated our economy and helped give more and more Canadians the chance to be full participants in the economic and social life of this great country of ours.

No one should have any doubt that this government is serious about fighting poverty in this country, nor should anyone doubt that this government believes that the best way to do so is to encourage the self-sufficiency and self-reliance referred to in this motion. That is important to note and I think we on all sides of the House should do so.

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is an appropriate time for the House to discuss this motion regarding the issue of water exports.

I rise in support of the motion before the House today calling on the government to work in co-operation with the provinces to implement an immediate moratorium on the export bulk freshwater shipments and interbasin transfers and to implement legislation giving this moratorium greater force. I think that is very important.

Not only are Canadians very concerned about this vital resource, global demands for water are continually increasing and this trend is unlikely to stop in the near future. We must act now to ensure not only that domestic water resources are protected in times of future demand but that in times of plenty we maintain control of our water resources so as not to damage the ecosystems on which we all depend.

Several members have today mentioned the vital role which water plays in all our lives. This cannot be emphasized too much. We cannot live without water. That is obvious. It is a source of life not only for human beings but for plants and animals and the entirety of our complex ecosystems.

In many ways we are in a privileged position today with roughly 20% of the world's freshwater supplies falling within our borders. It would appear at first glance that we have little to worry about when it comes to protecting our water from commercialization by domestic and foreign investors. After all, since we have so much of it, it seems reasonable to suggest we might sell some of it off to increase our tax base or give it away to those in need.

Perhaps it appears too reasonable. In reality it is simply not that simple. With privilege comes responsibility. While we all understand in the most basic terms how water contributes to our daily lives, to agriculture and to industry, we do not understand the full extent to which water fuels each and every mechanism of life. If we abuse our privilege we may neglect our responsibility.

We have so much water in so many different forms, frozen, in marshlands and some of the world's largest lakes and underground. These different forms are interconnected but we do not fully appreciate how. We cannot afford then to permit actions, the consequences of which are uncertain. The cumulative impact of numerous withdrawals of water, whether for export or not, is a serious concern to all Canadians.

In a 1985 study the international joint commission repeatedly highlighted this issue in particular with respect to the Great Lakes. Individual export projects of apparently minor effect could create pressure to open the Great Lakes and other bodies of water to other commercial initiatives. To be certain the consequences are unpredictable.

We have a duty to protect our water. We have a duty to continue to develop advanced water management and conservation techniques, since the world's water resources are heading toward exhaustion and other countries are looking to Canada for leadership.

We can best fulfil our future role in this regard by taking actions now to protect our water for future generations. While there may be debate among members present on how best to prohibit future bulk water removal projects, whether for export or not, it is important that any public dialogue on this crucial issue be undertaken from a position of truthfulness.

How can I be clearer? Canada is not on the verge of opening the floodgates.

The first reason is grounded in simple economics. No removal of water in bulk export from Canada now occurs because at present the bulk export of water is not economically viable. Shipping by tanker, pipeline or other means is prohibitively expensive due to the high costs of shipping, infrastructure and the low present value of the product. Entrepreneurs continue to explore and propose export initiatives but the likelihood of a profitable venture is remote. For those few exceptions that do occur, none is undertaken for commercial purposes. They are limited to the sharing of treated water with a few neighbouring U.S. communities and a few instances of the trucking of small quantities and volumes of groundwater to the United States.

We do not expect a water export boom now or in the near future. Without the immediate threat of a water export boom or even a mild flow it is essential that we approach this very complex issue from a position of responsibility, bearing in mind that the global need for water could rise dramatically one day. We must take steps now to ensure the protection of the health of our environment for future generations. We must not be lured by the idea of quick votes or band-aid solutions.

The comprehensive approach that recognizes shared responsibilities for water management is exactly what is needed. We must work with our provincial and territorial partners and others to develop an all round strategy that gets it right the first time. We must ensure that in moving to stop bulk exports of water we do not mistakenly infringe upon existing uses of water, for example the case of the bottled water industry.

Value added products like bottled spring water are profitable exports. There is little evidence available to suggest that small scale removals can be justifiably prohibited on environmental grounds. Export trade in bottled water amounts to 240 million litres annually at a value of approximately $173 million.

A few moments ago I mentioned a second reason why Canadians should not be unduly alarmed by the threat of multinational corporations thirstily waiting to suck our lakes dry. Thanks in large part to the Canadian Constitution the provinces have embraced their responsibilities for water management. The federal government has responsibilities for boundary waters under the boundary waters treaty of 1909. Provinces have responsibility for water within their boundaries.

Through its consultations this past summer and fall, the federal government discussed with the provinces the growing network of policies, regulation and legislation in place or that soon will be implemented to prohibit the interbasin transfer and removal of water in bulk from within provincial boundaries. Six of ten provinces are pursuing or have formal legislation, regulations or policy dealing with exports or bulk removal from watersheds. For example, in western Canada British Columbia's water protection act prohibits the removal of water from the province except in containers of 20 litres or less in existing tanker truck shipments.

Alberta's 1996 water act amendment came into force with the promulgation of regulations on January 1, 1999. It prohibits the export of untreated water with special legislative approval. Manitoba opposes interbasin water transfers. Saskatchewan recently announced that it will continue to introduce legislation regarding the removal of water from its watersheds. Ontario has a new policy prohibiting the transfer of service water out of Ontario water basins, including the Great Lakes. It has recently announced its intention to implement regulations to give this policy greater force. Quebec is conducting a public review of provincial water policy at this time. Nova Scotia will soon release a water resource management strategy.

We have every reason to believe the provinces will address the issue of water export. We know that will happen in the very near future. These many legislative mechanisms are already in place or are in the works. It seems clear that the support of today's motion will extend well beyond the confines of this House which is important to note. I look forward to the results of today's vote so we can move forward quickly on this very important matter. There is much work to be done in this area and I look forward to it.

[Canadian Economy, February 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, last summer the leader of the Reform Party decided to use the unprecedented tactic of going overseas to deride the Canadian economy during a speech in Hong Kong to investors and business professionals.

He claimed that the Canadian dollar and the Canadian economy was facing a major economic crisis.

Fortunately the Reform leader's doomsday predictions have not come anywhere near to being realized. In fact our government's prudent approach in managing the economy has proven to be the right one.

Consider the evidence. The Canadian dollar has now regained its strength and unemployment is down to its lowest level in nearly nine years. Youth unemployment in 1998 saw a net increase of 143,000 jobs, the best result in 20 years. This is just a small part of the overall total of 1.5 million jobs created since our government took office in 1993.

I for one am glad the government did not listen to Reform's demands last summer to scrap the budget plan. I look forward to even more of the responsible fiscal management we have come to expect from our government in the upcoming budget.