Lost his last election, in 2006, with 24% of the vote.
Petitions March 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I also have a petition signed by 299 people from all across Saskatchewan. They are protesting Bill C-91 which basically increased the price of drugs in Canada by reducing the availability of generic brands. They are calling upon the government to repeal Bill C-91 and to look to the interests of Canadians and their health care in order to ensure that drugs are a more reasonable price.
Petitions March 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour, pursuant to Standing Order 36, to present a petition signed by about 100 residents of Saskatoon protesting the closure of the National Film Board office in Saskatoon. That would leave Saskatchewan along with Newfoundland as the only provinces in Canada without a National Film Board presence, another nail in the coffin of our national institutions across this country.
Social Programs March 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
The minister will of course know that the reform of Canada's social programs is under way at breakneck speed. Canadians have recently told the minister by a margin of three to one that they believe his main aim is to reduce social program expenditures. They must have read the budget.
With poverty on the increase and bearing in mind the enormous social and economic cost to Canadians as a result of this poverty, what does he say to the 275,000 Canadian families who live more than $10,000 below the poverty line who fear his reforms will take them even further below the poverty line?
Excise Act February 22nd, 1994
Mr. Speaker, cigarettes are the only product that when used as directed kill.
Is the member in favour of cigarettes being included under the hazardous products act?
Social Policy Reform February 14th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, in his presentation to the House of Commons standing committee last week the Minister of Human Resources Development was asked what happened to the notorious but unreleased Tory white paper on social policy reform. He responded that when he took over the department the cupboard was bare.
I think many Canadians will find that hard to swallow, given that it was the federal government that changed on October 25 and not the civil service.
The minister should be clear to Canadians that he and his colleagues when in opposition vigorously opposed the Tory proposals, but now in government he and his party appear to be supporting those very same proposals.
The minister should make the Tory white paper public so everyone can ascertain whether the minister's social policy reform proposals are something new or just rehashed Tory policies uttered out of Liberal mouths.
Social Security System January 31st, 1994
Madam Speaker, on January 25 I asked the Minister of Human Resources Development a question that goes to the core of his government's commitment to job creation.
I asked him about the setbacks that the job creation strategies had received as a result of four major government policies in particular, which will serve to do nothing but cost Canada jobs: the accession to NAFTA; the increase in UI premiums for employees and employers; replacing John Crow at the Bank of Canada with someone with the same frame of mind, with a mad obsession about inflation; and chopping $300 million from the UI training fund. We have also seen the Minister of Finance going across the country focusing mostly on listening to people who argue for cutting expenditures rather than arguing for any real commitment to jobs.
The only way in which Canada will create jobs is to have an holistic approach to it in which trade, fiscal and monetary policies all ensure that job creation is the number one goal.
Today we are talking about social programs. It is clearly useful to have active social programs whereby people who do not have jobs receive training, help with literacy, and so on.
The minister would know, and indeed the government would know, that the research on active social programs in terms of solving the job crisis shows that we can only expect very modest gains in employment from that because the main problem is that we simply do not have jobs for people, no matter whether they are trained or not.
The minister gave a rather odd response to my question. He said that we need to give real incentive to millions of Canadians to find a job and give real dignity to their lives. Canadians do not lack dignity and they do not lack initiative; they lack jobs and hope.
It is odd and perhaps it is as clear here as in anything else, why the government is not focusing on job creation. I think we have five policy debates of a general nature, ensuring that all members of Parliament can communicate their views to the government on specific matters of policy. Today we had a debate about social policy, but we have had no debate, and we apparently will have no debate, about job creation. If that is the number one goal of the government, I presume that is where we would focus.
We have heard much too, in particular from the Reform Party, about the importance of the private sector creating jobs. No one would doubt that most jobs are in the private sector, that most jobs will be created in particular in small and medium-sized business.
We have had governments that have been particularly favourable to business over the last years in Canada, in particular in my province of Saskatchewan where businesses were given practically everything they wanted. Social programs were slashed; we ended up with a bigger deficit, with more unemployment and with more misery.
Those policies will not work, not because we do not want them to work, but they will not work because the private sector is not in the business of creating jobs. The private sector is in the business of creating profits. If there is a conflict between job creation and profit, they of course will choose profit, as it is their objective.
So we have a conflict here between a government, representing the people of Canada, that needs to create jobs and the private sector, which will if they can make profit without creating jobs. If they need employees in order to create profit, of course they will hire them, but if they can do without those people, they will. Indeed, any CEO's report across the country that anybody wishes to read will argue with pride that the reason for their improved profit picture is because they have in fact cut their work force.
I ask the government to focus on job creation as its number one objective. That is the only way that we will reduce the deficit in Canada. We can do it two ways. When people make money, they buy the things they need. They provide their own services. They do not have to rely upon government programs to do that. It is not dignity and it is not initiative these Canadians lack; it is jobs.
Social Security System January 31st, 1994
Madam Speaker, let me thank the minister for her statements and her emphasis on job creation and developing hope, especially for Canada's young.
Let me stress as she did the importance of job creation in our economy and let me ask her a question which flows primarily from the difference between words and action.
If we look at the research, we will now see that while an active social program policy is important in terms of training Canadians to be better equipped to take on the jobs that might be there, we also know that this active social program approach will in the main create just more skilled unemployed people, unless we do something on the job creation side. Nothing that we do on the social program side will do anything to create jobs for those people.
The minister will remember in the Red Book these words: "The Conservatives' single-minded fight against inflation resulted in a deep recession, three years without growth, declining incomes, sky-rocketing unemployment, a crisis in international payments and the highest combined set of government deficits in our history." The minister, along with others in the government, has said, "Judge us by our red book".
The minister will know that her government has appointed to the Bank of Canada a John Crow think-alike, Gordon Thiessen. This particular comment that I read was targeted for Mr. Crow. I think the statement in the Red Book is right. Appointing Mr. Thiessen, I think the minister will agree, will make it almost impossible to create jobs on anything like the scale needed to get those 3 million or 4 million Canadians back to work.
I wonder if the minister would like to comment on whether the Red Book was right or appointing Mr. Thiessen was right.
Social Security January 31st, 1994
Mr. Speaker, today in the House of Commons the minister of human resources outlined his government's strategy to modernize and restructure Canada's system of social security between now and September.
It is an ambitious plan. While I commend the minister on his efforts I hope this process will be sufficient for the amount and extent of overhaul promised.
I hope too that this very open and important phase of consultations with the Canadian public will not be rendered obsolete before they even get off the ground when his colleague, the Minister of Finance, tables his budget in February.
I remind the minister that at the end of the process millions of Canadians will be holding the minister to his promise to renew and revitalize rather than slash and trash Canada's social safety net.
New Democrats, particularly those from my home province of Saskatchewan, have an interest in this review as they were instrumental in developing Canada's social programs in the first place.
The foundation of compassion and caring on which these social programs were built took decades to cement. We cannot allow it to be ripped apart on the altar of deficit reduction.
Social Security System January 31st, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member, for whom I hold considerable respect, for her speech. She pointed out the plight of the young, the unemployed and the aboriginal peoples in particular.
I note that she talked about the need for fundamental change, the need to take risks. She pointed out that leaving things in the status quo simply will not do. I could not agree more.
She also talked about the long-term goal of making the economy more productive. She surely would agree, though, that appointing Gordon Thiessen to the Bank of Canada, following on the principles of John Crow, with a mad obsession with inflation, signing on to NAFTA, increases to UI premiums and reductions to the UI training fund, let alone proposed suggestions for cuts to cigarette taxes, can only harm the youth, can only harm their employment opportunities and their health opportunities.
I wonder how she fits those policy directions, which are clearly not fundamental change in any meaningful, good direction, with her suggestions that we do indeed need fundamental change.
Social Security System January 31st, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I will try not to play politics here and ask a serious question of the member who spoke for the Reform Party. He and his party have constantly argued that we should cut social spending and do so in the interests of those who are receiving the social programs.
I wonder if I could ask him two questions. How does he explain the fact the cuts under the last government merely increased the demand on both unemployment insurance and social assistance across the country? There were major efforts over the last five years to cut social spending, to cut moneys going to the provinces. All that happened was the number of UI recipients went up. The cost of running the program went up as did social assistance.
Second, what notice is he and his party prepared to take of those groups who represent the poor, the recipients of social programs in moulding the new social programs that we rightfully need in Canada?