Dale Johnston

[Petitions, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the third petition is on the defence of marriage. The petitioners from Alberta are saying that they would like parliament to define the statute that a marriage can only be entered into between a single male and a single female.

[Petitions, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is quite a lengthy one. It has to do with child custody for divorced parents.

The petition states that no parent should ever lose custody of a child by legal process; no parent should be denied adequate parenting time; and no parent should be allowed to seriously obstruct a child's relationship with the other parent. In other words, this is about parental access to children in matrimonial breakups.

[Petitions, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present.

The first one is from PMU producers in my province. They urge the government to support and recognize the unique contribution PMU ranchers make to women's health care and to withdraw proposed regulations that would permit or encourage substitution of non-equivalent synthetic estrogen products for Premarin.

[Nav Canada, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to hear the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour say that she was willing to do everything possible to get an agreement between the air traffic controllers and Nav Canada.

I hope that also means there is a willingness to declare a moratorium on job action so that the parties will have plenty of time, maybe even a couple of months or so, to ratify this deal.

It is of the utmost importance that they have time to go through this deal and negotiate it and not have something imposed on them.

[Nav Canada, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, summer air travel in the country could come to a halt if the dispute between the air traffic controllers and Nav Canada does not come to a quick conclusion.

With both parties willing to negotiate, will the Minister of Labour allow them time to hammer out a deal and get it ratified?

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, May 13th, 1999]

My colleague from Elk Island informs me that this is the 52nd time that time allocation has been imposed on debate in the House.

I can recall a day when the rat pack sat on this side of House. The member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, who is now the government House leader, was one of the illustrious members of the rat pack. He used to go into absolute convulsions whenever the Conservatives moved time allocation or closure in the House. As a matter of fact, he used to say things like “Here comes the jackboots. Bring out the brown shirts. Here comes closure again”. Over and over the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell would say things like that whenever debate was restricted in the House.

He is the very person who reared up on his hind legs with much authority, to the chagrin of people on this side, and today moved time allocation with a noticeable smirk on his face. He was very much pleased that he could do whatever he could to make sure that democracy did not take place. He limits debate time and time again in the House.

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I was not planning on indulging in the debate today, but after the speech from my hon. friend I felt compelled to take part.

He talked about democracy and what this House is all about. I agree that presumably the House is all about democracy. However, this is now the 53rd or 54th time—

[Budget Implementation Act, 1999, May 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I note that the member across the way said that it is simply against government policy to borrow in order to reduce taxation.

I would like to ask my colleague if, in his opinion, this has ever been done before. Have Liberal governments in the past ever borrowed money? Or has the member for Calgary East heard that at least 35% of Canadians are forced to borrow money to pay their federal taxes? Has he heard those figures?

[Committees Of The House, April 29th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, when I go to schools and talk to children about the workings of parliament I tell them that very important work takes place in committees. I would like to be able to continue to tell them that. However, from what I have been hearing from my colleagues, committees are not always relevant. I believe the discussion today is about relevance.

Standing Order 109 states:

Within 150 days of the presentation of a report from a standing or special committee, the government shall, upon the request of the committee, table a comprehensive response thereto.

All too often what is deemed to be a comprehensive report turns out to be totally ignored or, as has been so eloquently expressed here, it is tossed in the dustbin. It speaks volumes to the relevance or irrelevance of the work of committees. I would like my colleague's comments on that.

[National Day Of Mourning, April 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, April 28 has been designated as the national day of mourning to recognize workers who have been injured on the job and to honour those who have lost their lives in work related accidents.

The importance of this day becomes clear when we learn that on average three workers are killed every day and hundreds of Canadians are injured on the job each year.

Despite new age technologies and an abundance of safety first warnings, there was a 50% increase in fatalities in the federal jurisdiction in 1997.

As we approach the new century, new challenges will arise and new diseases and workplace illnesses will emerge.

The unprecedented rise in workplace violence requires special vigilance. We cannot ignore the sufferings of our colleagues and we must learn to recognize the danger signals.

Let us use this national day of mourning as a wake-up call to identify and eliminate potential hazards. Workers help to make this country productive and we have a responsibility to ensure that workplace health and safety are a priority.