Andy Scott

[Canada Elections Act, February 17th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to build on what my colleague from Windsor said, which was the fact that the Alliance Party would accrue quite a bit of money in this new regime. I want to make one point very clear.

Given the fact that we have always had public contribution by virtue of the tax credit on $100, $200 and $300 donations that essentially means that the Alliance Party is prepared to take public funds on the basis of its ability to raise money but not on its ability to get votes. That is very revealing.

I do support Bill C-24. One of the elements that has not been discussed too much is the accounting, the reporting around nominations, leaderships and so on. These things are long overdue and I am pleased we will be raising the bar in terms of keeping Canadians abreast of what is happening and where party finances come from and where they go.

I have always supported some kind of limit on corporations, including bans, because I do believe, although I do not think there is any truth in it, that Canadians link donations with work for the government and so on. In my case, if someone in my constituency were to give me a $3,000 donation and that person received a contract at CFB Gagetown it would all be honest and legitimate. Donations are encouraged by the system and contracts are heavily scrutinized by the crown construction agency, nevertheless a story would appear in the paper indicating that somebody gave me $3,000 and received a contract for it. It would be unfair to the vendor, unfair to national defence and, frankly, it would be unfair to me. We need to take this problem seriously. However, we do not want to replace corporate donations with stacked individual donations. That is a concern and it should be looked at.

I do support the bill but I believe the individual donation level is perhaps a little high. The corporation limits might be broadened to two or three ridings instead of just one but I do not feel all that strongly about that. I support the limits. I also support the ban on corporation donations to the centre and I support public funding of political parties as being democratic.

When the Prime Minister spoke on this issue earlier he said that there could be some unintended consequences. I would like to speak to a couple of them.

First, in Atlantic Canada most associations are federal and provincial at the same time. Unfortunately, in my province there is limiting legislation, and it is $6,000 individual and corporate. That means that the Liberal Party of New Brunswick could get a $6,000 donation and the Liberal Party of Canada could not take that. That means that eventually there would be a great deal of pressure to divide parties. From an operational point of view, that would be bad for the process, bad for my region and bad for those areas where there is no critical mass if we had to divide simply by virtue of the fact that the province could receive money that the feds could not receive. That would taint the money to some extent. That is an important feature. New Brunswick has this legislation. I was executive director of the Liberal Party at the time we negotiated it the other way. It is something we have to look it. We can fix it but it will take some work and it needs to be brought to the attention of the House.

I also think we need more time than the six months identified in the legislation in order to do this right. We are trying to make a transition from political parties that are supported by companies or unions to one that is fundamentally supported by individuals. That is the intent of the legislation. That will take some time and I am not sure six months is long enough. In our experience in New Brunswick, the transition was made over a couple of years.

I also believe that the provisions in the bill for nominations perhaps are too high. It is 50% of the allowable amount in an election and it should be 25% at a maximum.

I also would like to see the legislation speak to the question of third party advertising as has been mentioned.

To respond to the issue of public funds, which has been brought up by many members, I would like the House to know that in the province of New Brunswick we have received public funds since 1977-78. In fact, at its height we received $2.18 a vote, much more than the $1.50 proposed in the legislation. It is not unprecedented. We have had the rebates that were mentioned earlier and tax credits on donations in the past.

When Mr. Hatfield left office in New Brunswick in 1987, all of the pundits across the political spectrum, all of the editorialists, and all of the people observing the political process, when asked what was the most important thing Mr. Hatfield did for the province of New Brunswick, they all turned to political process financing with public funds.

At the end of the day this is a very important exercise in democracy and over time the taxpayers of Canada will come to see it that way, just as they have in my province of New Brunswick.

I would like to thank the government for introducing this important and overdue legislation. I would also like to thank those people in other parties who would find a way to support this. It is important for the country and the political process.

[Vehicle Scrappage Program, February 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, Environment Canada is happy to contribute to the New Brunswick Lung Association's Fredericton vehicle scrappage program. The contribution will ensure that this program and others like it in Canada will continue to be a success.

Poor air quality continues to impact on the health of Canadians. On-road vehicles, especially older vehicles, are significant contributors to this problem. While the Government of Canada's recently finalized stringent regulations for new on-road vehicles and fuels will go far in reducing harmful emissions which cause smog, there is still much work to be done to reduce these emissions from the transportation sector.

We must continue to work to improve air quality for Canadians everywhere. Vehicle scrappage programs play an important role in reducing emissions that contribute to smog and climate change.

[Winterfest New Brunswick, February 4th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to inform the House that the second annual Winterfest New Brunswick festival will take place this coming weekend, February 8 and 9, in Oromocto.

Winterfest is a non-profit community based organization of volunteers dedicated to the success of a non-commercial winter festival.

Winterfest was born of the vision of winter fun embodied by our national capital's Winterlude. New Brunswick's winter festival offers free of charge, fun filled and safe outdoor winter activities to people of all ages.

Winterfest New Brunswick is an ambitious concept that requires the dedication of many volunteers and strong partnerships. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Winterfest executive director John Antworth, the Department of National Defence and everyone who volunteers their time and energy to make Winterfest such a timely and unique event.

[Royal Victorian Order, November 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today to pay tribute to a distinguished recipient of the Royal Victorian Order, Fredericton's Anne Reynolds.

Ms. Reynolds, the Queen's visit coordinator in the province, was presented with the order during a private audience with the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh when they visited Fredericton as part of Her Majesty's Jubilee visit.

It is customary for visit coordinators to be presented with a signed photograph of the royals whom they are hosting. However the Queen had something additional for Anne Reynolds in mind, presenting her with the Royal Victorian Order, which the Queen may give to those who have served the monarchy in a personal way.

As a former colleague at Intergovernmental Affairs with the province of New Brunswick, I can appreciate all the dedication and hard work that went in to ensuring that Her Majesty's visit to Fredericton was a success, and I fully concur with the Queen's judgment. Congratulations to Anne Reynolds on receiving this honour.

[University of New Brunswick, November 25th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the new president of the University of New Brunswick, Dr. John McLaughlin, for his current campaign to increase access to post-secondary education in New Brunswick, to advance UNB's profile as a research and teaching institution, and to improve the economic and cultural development of our province generally.

The future economy of Atlantic Canada will be determined by investment in post-secondary education and research and development. It is essential that parliamentarians, educators, students and community leaders work together to ensure that our region benefits from this kind of investment on par with the rest of Canada.

The last federal budget included a $200 million one time indirect costs and research investment. It is imperative that this investment is made permanent and that the emphasis on capacity building in small and medium sized universities be maintained.

These kinds of investments are absolutely critical, not only to our universities but to our entire region. I salute Dr. McLaughlin for the energy that he is bringing to this vital issue.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I will say that my affection for the CBC is commensurate with how well it has treated me.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the member for Wild Rose, I could not disagree with him more on foreign aid and Canada's responsibilities. I recognize it is a difference of opinion but I believe that we are a prosperous country and I believe that much of our good fortune has been good fortune. That compels us to be citizens of the world and recognize that we have obligations to people who are less fortunate.

On the question of farm aid, I think my colleague had it whispered in my ear that we had not done enough. He also mentioned also $5 billion. Therefore the reference to nothing is somewhat lacking in credibility when we talk about those kinds of numbers. It may not be enough but I do not think we can refer to it as zero.

As for whether certain things having to do with the Wheat Board constitute criminality or not, notwithstanding the hon. member's reference to my former vocation, I do not think I ever had to deal with those issues and I do not feel particularly equipped to deal with this.

However I recognize the member's opinion, but I really believe as Canadians that we do not do near enough internationally in terms of our privileged position on this planet and I do not think I could have my mind changed on that.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 9th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Oak Ridges. Since I am likely to get carried away, I am sure Madam Speaker will bring my attention to the limits so that I do not deny time to my colleague.

I would like to acknowledge and commend the government on a number of things that have been identified in the throne speech, I do not intend the list to be exhaustive, and I would like to touch in particular on some that are very important to me. I also will, at the end, want to bring the attention of the government to the limitations in the throne speech and some of the things that I would like the government to consider between now and next February, when I assume we will see a budget.

First, in the area of R and D and learning and innovation, I welcome the increase in funding for the granting agencies, although I would bring attention to the fact that there is a need for more research in the social sciences. The social scientists have lagged behind the NSERC and the Medical Research Council, now the CIHR, in the past. I would like to see that remedied as the government attends to reacting to that part of the throne speech before February.

I welcome the reference to literacy. I support the proposal of the National Science Centres Association to establish a federal program for science centres so that we can encourage kids to be more interested academically at an early age. We have a science centre in Fredericton that is a very useful tool in the community and is deserving of federal support.

I would like to highlight an issue that is very important to me, and that is access to post-secondary education. There is reference to learning, as I said, in the throne speech, but I would like to the money in scholarship program enhanced. Right now it deals with approximately 10% of students. It simply does not do enough to ensure that young people who have the credentials to go to post-secondary education can do that on an equity level. At the same time it will deny the nation of some of the best minds on the prosperity level. The universities should have a share in the debate around the CHST, which I will speak to around health care in moment.

There is a reference in the throne speech to the indirect cost program that was introduced in the last budget. It is very important to small and medium sized universities across the country. It deals with the fact that most of our programs require matching funds and not all institutions or regions are allowed to do that.

Health care is mentioned, and I welcome that. The increased long term funding to the provinces on health care, first ministers meetings and reforming the system are all important. They have had a number of forums in my constituency on the subject. However I think the federal government has to command of the provinces in return for that certain things.

I would like to see support at both levels of government for a third party audit of some kind so that we can get away from the finger pointing and the backing and forthing on the politics of this and allow the Canadian public to be represented by an impartial third party who can say that the feds are or are not doing enough or the provinces are or not doing enough.

I welcome the commitment on aboriginal issues. We need to work up a new, more respectful relationship with the first nations and the aboriginal peoples of Canada. In the meantime, while we do that, we have to recognize there are serious social problems across the country for our first nations.

I also welcome the reference to the importance of environmental issues. I will be supporting the ratification of Kyoto. I welcome the reference to cleaning up some of the heavily polluted sites in Canada.

I see my colleague from Sydney paying particular attention to this item. I congratulate him for everything he has done, in terms of the cleaning up the city tar ponds.

On the infrastructure program, I like the idea that the infrastructure program will be longer term and more predictable. I would urge the government to include both universities and heritage and cultural sites as part of that.

On the question of Canada's place in the world, I welcome the doubling of development funds by 2010, half of which would go to Africa.

I welcome the international and defence policy review, but this leads me to the weaknesses in the throne speech, as I see them.

I do not think that we can afford to wait until that review is over before we increase the national defence budget. I have a large military base in my constituency. I deal with the men and women who represent this country well.

We all stand up here all the time to talk about that. It is time for us all to recognize it in terms of an increase in the budget. The largest impact is on the men and women who represent us. They are being deployed too often because the size of national defence is shrinking. The reality is that we are not giving back as much as they are giving us and it is time that changed.

I support my colleague, the chair of the defence committee, for all the work he has done and all the interventions he has made.

I would like to see us do more for Canadians with disabilities.The disability tax credit is the subject of considerable discussion around this place right now. The government has to rethink its position on that review and it has to do it immediately. Not only that, but the disability tax credit should be refundable. The idea that one has to have earned income to be eligible for a credit that is supposed to recognize the cost of dealing with a disability means that the people who are at the lowest end socially and economically, those who do not earn an income or a taxable income, do not have access to a credit that is supposed to be for people who have to deal with a disability. That is quite unfortunate and it needs to be remedied. I suppose, given the debate taking place around the disability tax credit, this is as good a time as any to remedy that problem.

I would also like to see more support for the CBC. Right now, as the globe is shrinking, we being pressured from around the world in the context of other influences in terms of how we see ourselves. I like that. It is important that we see ourselves as citizens of the planet and international people, but at the same time I want to hear about us. I want to see about us. I want to know about all parts of the country. As those pressures increase, I think we have to do more from within to ensure that we understand each other as Canadians. I would like to condition my support for an increase however in a more sensitive treatment of the regions by CBC television in particular. My position on that is well known.

I would also like to see more commitment to regional economic development. There is a lot of reference in the throne speech to the fact that one of its intentions in terms of the Canada we want is to deal with the gaps that exist in Canada between those who are prosperous and those who are not. Some of that has to do with aboriginal Canadians versus the rest of Canada. Some of that has to do with Canadians with disabilities. I mentioned that. A lot of it has to do with ensuring that everybody has access to the education that their capacities and capabilities warrant, and I speak to that. However it also has to do with where we live. I will give an example by going back to the indirect cost program at universities to illustrate this example.

We have a good program in the Canadian Foundation for Innovation. It is very important to universities in Canada. It is very important to R and D in Canada. However it will only go as far as 40% of the research project. If one lives in Alberta, as does my friend from Wild Rose does, the reality is that it is much easier for that province and the private sector to come up with the 60% that allows the University of Alberta, for example, to access the Canadian Foundation for Innovation as compared to the province of New Brunswick in terms of the private sector and the capacity of the provincial government, to be fair.

I do not want to see us get rid of matching funds programs. They are important for the country. However, if knowledge is the future of the economic development in this country and innovation, and I believe it is, we need to put programs in place to ensure people will have access to those programs and opportunities regardless of where they live, or where they choose to go to university or where they do their research. That will require more investment in regional economic development kinds of initiatives. It is not stuff that goes back 20 and 30 years. It is research. It is pure. It will mean that we will take our place in Canada. I would very much like to see the national government do more on that front.

[Literacy, October 7th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today to congratulate the National Adult Literacy Database, NALD, for earning the International Reading Association prize conferred by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO.

NALD is a national, New Brunswick-based, not-for-profit organization that provides non-profit literacy organizations in Canada with free website design and maintenance resources.

NALD's executive director, Fredericton's own Charles Ramsey, accepted the award last week at a best practices national workshop on literacy. NALD is the first Internet site to receive such an award from UNESCO.

I ask members to please join me in congratulating NALD for this prestigious recognition of its world-class production quality, content and service to the literacy community of Canada.

[Official Languages, June 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the announcement regarding the new official languages legislation that was adopted by New Brunswick.

The new legislation is based on the original act that was introduced by former Premier Louis Robichaud, after New Brunswick became the only officially bilingual province in Canada, in 1969.

I am most pleased with this initiative from New Brunswick's legislature, which was supported by all of the parties, and I am confident that this new official languages act will help ensure that the linguistic rights and privileges accorded all New Brunswickers by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are respected.