Andy Scott

[The environment, March 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, New Brunswick residents are ready to act on climate change. Fifty-nine per cent, nearly two-thirds of respondents to a recent poll, said that they would be likely to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle in the next two years.

The Government of Canada, as part of its commitment to achieving its emission reduction targets under the Kyoto protocol, is helping these and other Canadians by working with the auto industry to make vehicles 25% more fuel efficient by 2010.

Even if a new vehicle is not in the picture, there are lots of ways to reduce emissions from transportation: drive less, use public transit, walk or bike whenever possible, when driving do not idle. It takes more fuel to idle for 10 seconds than it does to stop and start a car. Always check the tire pressure.

There are simple actions to reduce emissions and help Canadians reach our Kyoto targets.

[Environment Canada, March 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I was extremely disappointed to hear the news that Environment Canada intends to move its forecast centre from Fredericton to Halifax. This will remove from the New Brunswick Weather Centre its primary function: providing weather forecasts and severe weather warnings for New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Îles-de-la-Madeleine.

In addition to providing that service, the New Brunswick Weather Centre provides 24 hour a day bilingual service, not only for New Brunswick but for the entire Atlantic region.

While I am pleased that the portion of the weather service that addresses environmental protection and conservation will remain in our province, I regret the extent of personnel change that the move from Fredericton will involve. I feel New Brunswickers are entitled to a more comprehensive service from within.

For those reasons I will continue to work with my colleagues, who represent the other eight offices affected, to convince the minister and Environment Canada to reconsider their position and keep the forecast centre in New Brunswick.

[CIS Hockey, March 21st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to congratulate the new Atlantic conference hockey champions, the University of New Brunswick Varsity Reds, on their dramatic 4-3 win over St. FX last weekend.

UNB has been playing extremely well of late which brings me to a matter of a friendly challenge that I have put to two of my colleagues. I have challenged the members for Edmonton West and Thunder Bay—Superior North that when UNB wins the University Cup this weekend in Fredericton, the member for Edmonton West will provide the Varsity Reds with a steak dinner and will come to Fredericton to serve it, and the member for Thunder Bay—Superior North will do the same but with a pickerel dinner. Should Alberta or Lakehead win I will provide them with a lobster dinner and go to Edmonton or Thunder Bay to serve it.

Mr. Speaker, in case you are concerned about the possible expense to me in providing lobster dinners to two entire hockey teams, do not worry about it. Go Varsity Reds.

[CIS Hockey, March 20th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to remind the House that the University of New Brunswick, Canada's oldest university, will be hosting the 2003 Canadian intercollegiate sport hockey championships this weekend in Fredericton. This is the first of two consecutive years in which UNB will host this prominent intercollegiate event, one of the biggest on the CIS calendar.

The tournament features the University of Alberta, York University, Université de Québec à Trois-Rivières, Lakehead University, St. Francis Xavier, and the host UNB Varsity Reds. The Varsity Reds are the Atlantic conference champions and are ranked third in the nation.

This event is made possible thanks in part to municipal, provincial and federal support, including $25,000 from the Government of Canada. I wish to express my thanks to the ministers of public works and sport.

I extend best wishes to the UNB Varsity Reds and wish good luck to all the teams in this event, which I am confident will be a national success and will leave a significant legacy of student scholarships.

[Canada Student Loans Program, March 18th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to speak to this important motion put forward by the member for Fundy--Royal. I wish to commend the member for his persistent efforts in this regard and at the very least for shining a light on the question of access to post-secondary education because this is critically important.

I cannot say that I would support the entire elimination of parental contribution and I have had this conversation before with my colleague indicating this. There is probably a place for that, but it certainly is not the way it works now. The reality is that expectations are far too high, loan limits are far too low, and there must be a process available to appeal decisions. There is probably not a member of Parliament in this place who could not cite 10 examples of where this does not bear up to close scrutiny.

I find myself somewhat surprised that I am speaking in favour of more loans because I never would have imagined that this would be the way to fix this problem. I have had this conversation with student constituents who also find it difficult to accept this themselves.

A recent survey was done which included UNB and Fredericton. It showed that a significant majority of students who had to leave school for financial reasons did not leave because of the fear of having a debt, but rather because they could not afford to live within the system that could not support them to that level. That is critically important.

The argument that we do not want to enrich the loan program to deal with this problem is slapped in the face by the reality that people who are not getting access to student loans are getting access to commercial loans. It is not as if not making loans available does not put students further in debt. That is the painful truth.

I agree with the two speakers that I heard tonight that ultimately the fundamental challenge to the national government is for it to restore significant core funding to universities. Now that we have divided on the health accord, the CHST, we have a more precise way to make that money available and to hold the provinces accountable. We really must explore the possibilities of doing that.

I must recognize the reference made by the member for Fundy--Royal to the secretary of state for post-secondary education as an important champion of this cause. I do not know how much harder the member for Peterborough could work on this.

The government has taken action and should be recognized as having taken action on R and D in terms of the granting agencies. I will put on the table that much of it was reduced and has been restored, and I accept that. I will say it before the member for Acadie--Bathurst tells me that. The reality is that investments have been made with the CFI, the chairs program, and the indirect cost program, but I am not suggesting it is enough. I pursue R and D investments all the time.

We have not kept up on the other side of the equation in terms of access. In a mature, civilized country like Canada individuals who are able to attend post-secondary education regardless of the type should be able to attend but they cannot right now. It is just not the case. It was the case when I went to college. I do not know of anybody that I knew who wanted to go but could not go. A rebate program was available as well as a bursary program. At that time, we were perhaps paying less than 20% of the cost of our education. Now, in some universities in Canada, it is upwards of 40%.

We have a challenge to put to the government. I once again wish to commend the member for Fundy--Royal for taking this approach. It is not exactly the approach that I would take, but it certainly highlights the need. We need to return the Canada student loan program to its roots which was a combination of a significant contribution to the cost of education for two reasons.

One reason is it is the right thing to do and it is fair for all young Canadians. Also, it will give the Canada the kind of critical mass of educated people that we need for a prosperous country. That is the responsibility of the national government for the future.

I want to make the point that it is both fairness and economics. For those for whom it is entirely economics, if we do not do this quickly, if we are not fair, the future will pass us by before we know what hit us.

[Peace Scarf, March 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the House that on Saturday, March 8, 2003, almost 300 people gathered at Wilmot United Church in Fredericton for the afternoon to demonstrate their commitment to peace and to bring this commitment to life by working together knitting this scarf.

Folks from the New Brunswick College of Craft and Design, the Fredericton multicultural community, CISV, OXFAM, Freedom and others spent the afternoon knitting and supporting each other during these critical and fearful times.

This scarf, which was presented to me, represents the diversity of people opposed to a war in Iraq, those who do not want to see Canada involved in a war in any way, shape or form.

I join with my friends in the belief that the act of war must be the final resort, only to be waged when there are absolutely no alternatives. We are not there.

[Fredericton Boys and Girls Club, February 25th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the Fredericton Boys and Girls Club which has been awarded a grant of $32,000 from the Royal Bank of Canada Foundation to support its after school program for 2002-03.

The RBC Financial Group partners with local charitable organizations focused on meeting a growing challenge in today's society: keeping kids safe and positively engaged after the school day is complete.

The Fredericton Boys and Girls Club after school program gives a real boost to the skills and knowledge that participants gain in a formal classroom, offering a wide variety of activities that address the full range of what a child needs to develop fully.

These programs are truly a third watch, bridging the gap between school and home, helping kids, strengthening our families, enriching our communities and helping to ensure the future health and prosperity of Canada.

[Nashwaaksis Middle School, February 19th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in the House to congratulate the Nashwaaksis Middle School on being named one of Canada's most innovative schools.

Last Friday Nashwaaksis Middle School celebrated its membership in the SchoolNet's network of innovative schools for the 2002-03 school year. Industry Canada will contribute $10,000 to the school for each year of membership to further its work with information and communications technology.

SchoolNet's network of innovative schools helps educators develop effective strategies for integrating technology into the curriculum by having schools like Nashwaaksis share their information and communication technology expertise with other schools.

I commend the students and the faculty of the school. Together they are charting new territory, creating new opportunities for young Canadians so that they can have the skills necessary to compete in today's knowledge based economy.

[Canada Elections Act, February 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would be opposed to that. Generally, the legislation speaks to the need to reassure Canadians that the political process is not affected by donations, and donations of that magnitude going to the centre would reflect badly on the process.

I am not suggesting for a moment that it is a legitimate concern. In my experience the reality is that the public tendering with the Government of Canada and provincial governments across the country is reasonably mature, but there is a perception, and from time to time we find new programs that are not yet attached to those systems which can find their way to activities that I do not think any of us would want. We need to do this to reassure Canadians.

[Canada Elections Act, February 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question. It is my understanding that in fact the corporate limit of $1,000 for one riding would include the entire corporation and its subsidiaries. If there is some corporate arrangement where company X owns something in my constituency which is unrelated to the national office, that might be different.

I am not certain and do not want to suggest that I know, but as far as my understanding of the legislation goes, it is very clear. A corporation, regardless of how big such as the Royal Bank of Canada, would make one donation of $1,000 somewhere. That is it. Frankly, it is the same treatment for unions.