Jim Gouk

[Petitions, April 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have a number of petitions from constituents in the riding of Kootenay West-Revelstoke and the new area of West Kootenay-Okanagan.

The petitioners state that they are concerned about the sustainability of the Canada pension plan, that young people are forced to pay higher premiums for smaller pensions and that the recent $10 billion premium increase reduces take home pay. Since it cannot be sufficiently demonstrated that perpetually increasing CPP premiums while continually reducing benefits will salvage the CPP, your petitioners pray that Parliament enact legislation to wind down the CPP while protecting the pension of current seniors and that Canadians contribute to mandatory RRSPs of their own choosing.

[Le Courrier Of Saint-Hyacinthe, April 23rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, we are only days away from the expected election call. The Liberals claim they will run on their record so let us take a look at that record.

Bill C-33 provides the framework for further erosion of the definition of the family and yet more benefits for a special interest group.

Bill C-68 cracks down on millions of law-abiding citizens but does nothing to the criminals of this country. The preservation of section 745 of the Criminal Code allows monsters like Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo to apply for early release.

Over $250 million is being spent to cover up the Liberals' Pearson scandal without creating a single job, in spite of false Liberal claims. The CPP payroll tax has been hiked 73 per cent. Social programs have been cut $7 billion. We have had the largest tax revenue increase in Canadian history. Parliament has had one free vote since 1993.

Convicted criminals have a record. Clearly they should not be proud of their record. Neither should the Liberals.

[Banff National Park, April 22nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the route over the Banff area is the most commonly used VFR flight corridor between Alberta and B.C. The airstrip in Banff provides a very necessary emergency landing site for pilots caught unexpectedly in rapidly changing mountain weather.

The minister of heritage plans to close the airstrip as early as next month, allegedly to protect wildlife although the bit of information provided by government does not justify it.

Will the minister of heritage at least give the same level of consideration to people as wildlife and allow the Banff airstrip to remain, or offer some reasonable alternative such as moving it to the south side of the highway?

[Trail, B.C., April 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the city of Trail has a long history of contributing to the sports culture and the economy of this country. This small West Kootenay community has weathered good days and bad as Cominco, its primary employer, went through some difficult times.

Now nature has thrown a devastating flood at Trail and some other nearby communities. They need the help of this country to get back on their feet. A flood of this magnitude is disastrous for any community and more so for a town the size of Trail and the other surrounding communities.

The flood also claimed the life of Ken Plotnikoff Jr. while he toiled to help save the family business. I am sure that the entire House joins with me in offering condolences to the family and a pledge of financial support for Trail and its neighbours in their hour of need.

[Canada Marine Act, April 14th, 1997]

moved:

Motion No. 105

That Bill C-44 be amended by adding after line 7, on page 74, the following:

"131.2 Section 18 of the Act is renumbered as subsection 18(1) and is amended by adding the following:

(2) An authority shall take measures to permit masters and officers to obtain pilotage certificates, to perform pilotage duties on the ship on which they are a regular member of the complement.

131.3 The portion of the English version of subsection 22(1) of the Act after paragraph ( b ) is replaced by the following:

issue a licence or pilotage certificate to the applicant, but no pilotage certificate shall be issued to an applicant therefor unless the Authority is satisfied that the applicant has a degree of skill and local knowledge of the waters of the compulsory pilotage area comparable to that required of an applicant for a licence for that compulsory pilotage area."

Motion No. 106

That Bill C-44 be amended by adding after line 7, on page 74, the following:

131.4 Section 22 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1):

(1.1) Determination of whether an applicant for a pilotage certificate has comparable skill and knowledge to an applicant for a licence, may be made through a ship simulator testing program or other mutually agreeable practical testing method."

Motion No. 109

That Bill C-44 be amended by adding after line 11, on page 76, the following:

"136.4 Section 52 of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph ( a ):

(a.1) prescribing requirements for the approval of simulator training courses or other mutually agreable practical testing method for issuance of pilotage certificates;"

Motion No. 110

That Bill C-44, in Clause 137, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 76 with the following:

"area designations, ships or classes of ships subject to compulsory pilotage, dispute resolution mecha-"

[Canada Labour Code, April 9th, 1997]

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. After the Liberals asked for applied votes you went to the Bloc and to the Reform Party but you did not go to the NDP. I wonder if you would clarify its vote.

[Canada Labour Code, April 9th, 1997]

That is a real challenge, Mr. Speaker, a 20 second question.

I wonder if the hon. member would make a comment simply on the question of final offer selection arbitration as an alternate dispute settlement mechanism.

[Canada Labour Code, April 9th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As the hon. member who is now speaking was very diligent in asking questions earlier, I wonder if he would agree to yield the floor so that questions may be put to him before time runs out.

[Canada Labour Code, April 9th, 1997]

The cumulative total of all past governments.

[Canada Labour Code, April 9th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the hon. member for St. Albert.

Not only on this bill but on many bills he has been very concerned about and very watchful of waste in the House. I am sure he finds it as galling as I do when members on the other side, the Minister of Labour and others, have the audacity to come into the House and claim that Reform is responsible for holding up the back to work legislation during the national rail strike. They claimed we would not come in on a weekend to assist in getting the bill through.

As I mentioned before when I rose in response to our labour critic's statements, we tried to prevent it from ever happening. Once the back to work legislation finally came forward we supported it. We were anxious to move it through because a lot of people were being hurt by the strike: workers, farmers and all others.

Consideration of the back to work legislation in the House extended into the weekend. I understand it cost many tens of thousands of dollars an hour to operate the House, money that came out of the taxpayers' pocket. As if everybody else was not hurt badly enough, the taxpayers were dragged into it as well. It cost the government money which it does not seem to mind.

Reform was supportive. We were here supporting the legislation. The Bloc Quebecois was holding up the bill, denying it swift passage.

As the hon. member is very involved and our watchdog on government waste, does he have any comments on the unspeakable bad taste of the government that came into the House and suggested Reform was holding it up when we were doing everything we could to assist in the passage of something that should have been passed long before. The problem was with the government's buddies in the official opposition who were objecting to the legislation being passed.