Lorne Nystrom

[Income Tax Act, February 12th, 1998]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-315, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (deductibility of expense of tools provided as a requirement of employment).

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to allow employees to deduct the cost of providing tools for their employment if they are required to do so by their employer as a condition of employment.

The deduction includes an allowance in respect to the capital cost of tools and rental, maintenance and insurance expenses. Regulations would set the appropriate depreciation rates applicable to the capital cost of various types of tools.

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

[Youth Employment, February 6th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister being forthright. I want to remind the House that the youth unemployment rate has gone from 15.7% two years ago to 16.5% today. In light of that figure, I think this is probably the most important negative crisis we have in Canada today in terms of the economy.

I want to ask the minister what new initiatives the government is going to take now to try to put young people back to work. Are we going to have new money coming into training, research and development and into education to counteract the cutbacks by the Minister of Finance a couple of years ago?

[Youth Employment, February 6th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Two years ago the minister's government announced a youth employment strategy. Despite that strategy, there are now 50,000 fewer young people working today than there were two years ago.

I would like to ask the minister why that strategy failed. Why are there 50,000 fewer people working today than were working two years ago despite that strategy which was announced at least three times, including in the budgets of 1996 and 1997?

[Bank Merger, February 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Finance.

What the government did was pepper spray the people, not listen to the people. Why is the minister supporting a committee of Liberal backbenchers studying this merger? We all know he is salivating to be prime minister of this country, but if he wants to be leader of the country can he explain why Liberal backbenchers can study the matter but Parliament and the Canadian people cannot? Explain that effect on democracy.

[Bank Merger, February 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The minister made a ridiculous statement saying the NDP is trying to hijack the process in terms of public hearings and bank mergers. How can he say that when the minister himself hijacked the process in December when he signed a WTO agreement allowing more foreign banks in this country?

Why did he sign off on that WTO agreement in December without proper consultation with the Parliament of Canada, the people of this country or a report from the task force on financial institution? How could he do that?

[Banks, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the task force has not had a specific mandate to look at this merger. I believe that this merger would be a first step toward the sellout of Canadian financial institutions. The one thing that keeps the institutions Canadian is that the banks now are limited. There is a proposition where shareholders can only hold about 10% of every chartered bank. I want to know if the minister will guarantee to the House today that he will not give away the 10% provision that prevents a complete surrender of Canadian banks to foreign owners.

[Banks, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

This afternoon in the House in response to questions on bank mergers, the minister played hide-and-seek behind his task force, which studied the financial sector.

Is he now prepared to ask the task force and a parliamentary committee as well to look specifically at the proposed merger between the Royal Bank of Canada and the Bank of Montreal right away before it becomes a fait accompli?

[Committees Of The House, December 11th, 1997]

Madam Speaker, judging by the atmosphere in the House, I wonder if we could have unanimous consent to allow this question and answer period to go on for another 20 or 30 minutes?

[Tribute To The Late Antonio Yanakis, December 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the New Democratic Party, I would like to extend our sympathies to the family of Antonio Yanakis, who passed away a few days ago.

Mr. Yanakis was first elected in 1965 and re-elected five times. I clearly recall that Mr. Yanakis was here when I was elected in 1968, because he had just been re-elected. He went on to be re-elected in 1972, 1974, 1979 and 1980. If I remember correctly, he was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour at the time. He was a fine politician, who represented his constituents very well for 15 years.

I would like, once again, to extend our condolences to his family.

[Banks, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, if low income people in this country are having trouble paying $8, or $9 or $12 service charges in a bank, can the minister please explain to us how they can afford a computer and how can they afford Internet fees of about $15 or $20 a month so they can shop around for lower bank service charges? How can they afford this if they cannot afford those services charges in the first place?

Could he please answer the question?