Bev Desjarlais

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of the homeless.

Aboriginal people make up a large component of the homeless population in major cities. Many aboriginal people go to the cities to escape the terrible poverty conditions on reserves caused by Liberal government neglect. Now the government is abandoning aboriginal people off reserves by downloading the urban native housing program to the provinces. Social housing downloads lead to higher rents and homelessness.

Will the Liberal government reverse its disastrous download or will it betray urban aboriginal people like it has betrayed aboriginal people on reserves?

[Missing Children, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, today is National Missing Children's Day.

Four out of five missing children are runaways. Most are running away from abusive situations.

The Liberal government has abandoned these children. They have abandoned social housing and cut funding for youth drop-in centres and shelters for abused children. Programs like these identify and help troubled youth. Their loss leaves youth with nowhere to turn. It is no wonder so many are ending up on the streets. The lucky ones might end up begging for change or squeegeeing car windows. The unlucky ones fall victim to drugs or prostitution.

In 1989 the House unanimously approved an NDP motion calling on the federal government to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000. The Liberal government voted in favour of this motion while in opposition, but in government the Liberals have made the problem worse. Children are their helpless victims.

The RCMP is working hard to find missing children but it is up to the federal government to attack the problem at its source. It is time for a government that cares about children.

[Canadian Nurses, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, nurses recognize their part in creating and maintaining quality health care.

Nurses traditionally and even today are predominately female. As a result, they have had to fight for wages that truly reflect the value of the service they provide.

Nurses are not personal care hostesses, as Premier Ralph Klein suggested a few years ago. They are professionals, dedicated and committed to the well-being of human kind.

Nurses everywhere have been made to suffer as a result of government cuts to health care. They suffer from workload fatigue and are stressed from worry over how to deliver quality care with limited resources. They are denied job and economic security by the casualization of nursing positions. Is it any wonder we are facing a nursing shortage?

Governments and employers have a responsibility to foster environments and work conditions that promote a quality of life for nurses. That is a sure way of increasing entrants into nursing programs, of enticing nurses back into the profession, of recruiting nurses and, finally, of retaining nurses.

Let us begin to repair the damages by offering nurses decent wages and working conditions.

[Criminal Code, May 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to listen to the debate from all the different parties this evening. I have to admit it was one of those times when it seemed that there was a fair amount of thought and conscious effort made to consider the reasoning behind the motion put forth by my colleague from the Yukon. That often does not happen in the House. I am sure among ourselves we recognize that and I am sure Canadians recognize that.

From my perspective on this, it was interesting to note that this was one time when I heard the Reform member talk about a need to be reasonable in the approach to justice issues and not jump on one incident. Often that is not the case with the Reform Party. I was very conscious of the fact that there seemed to have been a little more in-depth feeling going into the remarks and consideration of the whole process of a justice bill or a justice motion.

As has been mentioned, it is very complicated. We do not always see the whole picture as we discuss things in parliament, and Canadians do not get the whole picture with each case when they hear what the media has to say about it. The sad reality of that is that Canadians have lost faith in the justice system. They have lost faith in the laws. They see situations such as the Klassen case and hear what has happened. There seems to be no reasoning behind how someone can get away with that kind of an act.

I listened to the hon. member from the Reform Party whose son was killed. I understand his passion. How can he not want to see change so that kind of incident will never happen again? And rightfully so. However, we need to be very conscience of all the ramifications.

What has happened is that there is no faith in the Canadian justice system. The delays with the justice department on a number of issues have resulted in that lack of faith when instances like the Klassen case come up. Too often it becomes the case that offenders get out of jail ahead of time or are released and then they kill someone. People are losing faith. When it takes time for a process to go through the justice department, the committees and everything else, it seems like these issues are always on the back burner.

Had my colleague not brought this issue up, how many of us would have had any thought or discussion about it? How many Canadians would even hear about it? It would sit in some committee or at some back door. It would get a little bit of advertising that there was going to be a hearing here or there, but it would never ever get discussed.

In spite of all the concerns that everybody has, it is extremely important that more emphasis be put on the issue. The defence of provocation has been used in situations which are unconscionable to accept. I was not going to mention the recent shootings but my colleague from Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—Eastern Shore mentioned it. It should not be perceived as being a crass portrayal.

When the Littleton shootings were first mentioned I was conscious and very aware of the fact that so many of the students from that school stated their caring for the victims but also for the two young people who had committed the crime. They stated their concern over the attack that had taken place, the name calling, the verbal things and that they were not a part of it. They were sorry they felt that way. What my colleague mentioned is true. Are we accepting that as a defence of provocation? It cannot be.

There are faults within the system which have to be addressed. I want to thank my colleague. I encourage the justice minister to ensure that more effort takes place and that there is speed in reviewing the defence and the whole issue. Canadians need to have faith in the justice system and the laws. We are failing to give them that with the way things are happening now.

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, May 11th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join the debate on Bill C-78.

The intent of this bill was to improve the financial management of the three major public sector pension plans as well as to make technical changes. I am convinced that if the intent of the bill was strictly to improve those pension plans, the government would have the undivided support of all members of this House rather than just its own.

The bill will affect the RCMP, the armed forces and federal public servants. It will also establish a new plan for Canada Post employees at a future time.

With this bill the government has failed to truly take part in improving the benefits for all persons involved. As far as the discussion on the surplus is concerned, the government will argue that the surplus is strictly its own. It has come to be acknowledged in Canada and in a good many countries that when workers and employers invest into plans for the workers, if there is a surplus it is a shared surplus. In private business within Canada that is the acceptable road to go.

The government has once again failed to truly support the workers who in many cases give their lives for this country. The government has failed to commit to the pay equity process over the last 14 or 15 years. There has been a lot of rhetoric about how it believes in pay equity and a whole spiel of things. The government comes out with wonderful sayings but when it gets down to the brass tacks of things, it does not come through.

Once again the government has said to public sector workers in Canada and to all the others who are affected that they really are not valued and the government is not going to put anything extra into that plan, even though women will retire from the public service with a wonderful pension plan of $9,600 a year. This does not seem to be the infrequent case. It affects too many members. Those persons will have no opportunity to have further benefits from that pension plan.

In reality this bill will increase premiums at some point but the government will still be responsible for deficits in the plan. The Government of Canada did not want to have this deficit hanging over its head. The government is using the deficit of the public service pension plan as a ploy to get the deficit down, get rid of the pension plan and have it looked after by another medium.

However, the government wants to use the surplus to offset the government deficit. Meanwhile it is using the money to offset the deficit saying there is a surplus within the government. The government has been playing a shell game with the book figure on the public service pension plan surplus.

Another area within this bill that certainly could have used an improvement was in regard to the board. My hon. colleague from the Bloc has just mentioned that it will not ensure representation by the workers or the members involved in the plan.

Certainly on the advisory board different groups will have an opportunity to be represented. The advisory board can make recommendations of names, but the minister does not necessarily have to accept those names. I have seen situations where names have been put forward and the minister says, “No, I do not want that person”. Another name goes forth and another name goes forth until the minister possibly will have the board that he or she so chooses.

Sadly in a good many situations what ends up happening and what has led to a lack of credibility and no longer a show of support for a number of good organizations, is there are political appointments. The minister may not end up on the board or maybe not his cousin right now, or a former minister but there is the opportunity for other political appointments from political parties, somebody's wife, a minister's wife ending up on the board. There is nothing to restrict those kinds of things from happening.

Those types of issues have made Canadians leery of politicians and the whole process. As a result we all suffer from the lack of credibility the Canadian public will show for government and for all politicians.

Another area that has been of concern, and I am glad we have put forth an amendment to address that issue, is that the funds will be invested through the normal investment process, the market. There is a real situation arising and the workers, or individual Canadians who are part of these plans, may see their dollars being invested in companies such as Imperial Tobacco.

We are fighting so hard to decrease the number of kids who are addicted to tobacco. We are fighting the dollars that go into the tobacco industry as best we can. This is not because we do not believe there can be some kind of an industry with tobacco products. It is because we do not believe companies should be selling the product as healthy and that it is okay to smoke. Suck it in, end up sick, die, and the health care system is going to pick up the tab. As we fight that in parliament, the pension dollars will be at risk of being invested in those same companies as they sell their products in countries that maybe will not succeed in putting in some of the laws and regulations that I hope we are able to do to protect our citizens and certainly our youth.

Tobacco is an issue but there are others, to say nothing of companies that make arms or land mines, for that matter. Is there some way we can ensure that no dollars within these pension funds are going to support companies that are producing land mines? We are fighting the battle to have land mines banned throughout the world. We cannot get the U.S. to come on board. Can we ensure that these pension dollars will not be invested in those companies?

Unless we can ensure that happens, I think we are failing Canadians and the people in these pension funds who do not want their pension dollars to go to those companies. That is a major issue.

Some people do not think that ethical funds can survive or have an extra dollar put in their pockets. I would suggest that the people who strongly support ethical funds, if it were a difference of a dollar or so, quite frankly if it were a difference of a whole lot of dollars, they would still stand behind the investment in ethical funds. They should be given the opportunity to ensure that dollars coming out of their pension plan can be invested in ethical funds. That is an absolute must within this bill.

The mutualization of funds is taking place in some companies. The investor I deal with actually was shocked when I asked what was going to happen with the dollars that we had in our funds and whether he was going to ensure that they were invested in ethical funds. The question had not come up. He was taxed with the process of finally having to check to see what exactly could be done.

I can say quite frankly, if it were my dollar, I would not want it being invested in tobacco companies, land mine companies, or any kind of company that is not doing what is best for people worldwide. If we want to talk about globalization, then let us show a real interest and support for globalization in expecting the same things for Canadians and people all over the world.

The government's move for closure on this bill is really disappointing. It is not allowing a thorough and proper debate on an issue that affects so many Canadians. It was brought about quickly, it was slammed through committee quickly. Closure having been brought in did not allow Canadians overall and those affected to hear about this. Some have heard but others are just realizing now that their pension dollars are going to be affected. The government needs a little slap on the wrist again for invoking closure and for not allowing proper debate on an issue so important to the people investing in these pension plans.

I would encourage all members of this House to support the amendments which will at least give this act some credibility.

[Developing Nations, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, human poverty is more than income poverty. It is the denial of choices and opportunities for living a tolerable life. The year 2000 is a call for jubilee, a chance for a new beginning for people in countries enslaved by debts they can never repay.

We do not expect people who go bankrupt to sacrifice the health and education of their children to continue paying their debts. Yet we jeopardize the survival of people in less developed countries by forcing them to pay back debts that have already been paid many times over. Since 1981 these countries have paid over $3 trillion U.S. in interest and principal payments. For every dollar they get in western aid they pay back $3 in debt servicing.

I have received hundreds of requests from my constituents in The Pas, Thompson, Pine Falls and Flin Flon who believe Canada should cancel the debts of the most impoverished developing countries. Let us mark the millennium by being a leader among the G-8 nations.

[National Housing Act, May 7th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, anyone who would suggest that homelessness does not go in line with housing is dreaming in Technicolor. Certainly there are situations where that may not be the key issue, but I can say without any doubt in my mind the reason that a number of first nations people leave their first nations to go into cities and elsewhere is the lack of proper housing in first nation communities.

If the government were truly committed to addressing the problem of homelessness, why is the minister responsible for homelessness not being given a budget? What is she supposed to do? Are we supposed to look out there on the street and say make it go away? It will not happen. The crisis will get much worse if there is not a serious effort to address the problem.

By downloading social housing and not supporting social housing programs we are increasing the crisis that much more. There will be that many more people on the streets.

[National Housing Act, May 7th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak to the third reading of Bill C-66, an act to amend the National Housing Act and the CMHC act.

As my hon. colleagues from Kamloops has mentioned, a more accurate and descriptive title for the bill would be an act to destroy the National Housing Act or an act to throw Canadians out on the street.

I have been disgusted with the Liberal government's duplicity. Homelessness is at a crisis in Canada. We have just come through one of the worst winters ever with homeless people freezing and dying on the street. The Liberal government's policies are responsible for this travesty. It has slashed transfer payments to the provinces. It has abandoned social housing and left overburdened provincial and municipal governments to pick up the pieces. It is a disgrace.

When Canadians walk the streets of their communities they see this crisis with their own eyes. The evidence is everywhere. All the Prime Minister has to do is walk down the street here in Ottawa, just a few metres from Parliament Hill, to see the evidence. There are homeless people pleading for help. It is the same in every city and town in Canada from Thompson to Toronto. The Liberal government is either so out of touch with what is going on out there and it does not see the problem or it just does not care.

There has been report after report on this issue: the Golden report, the report submitted to the Minister of Finance by the New Democratic Party's social policy critic, the member for Vancouver East.

The member for Vancouver East travelled from coast to coast, including to Thompson and South Indian Lake in my riding. She has met with people on the front lines of the crisis and people who work with the homeless and, unlike the Liberal government, actually cares about them as human beings. However, her report, like the Golden report, is sitting on a shelf somewhere in the finance minister's office collecting dust.

The Liberal government has done nothing, not a thing. Of course, the government says it cares, just like it said it cared about victims of hepatitis C and just like it said it would get rid of the GST.

The prime minister appointed the Minister of Labour as his minister responsible for homelessness. This minister would not even go before the committee studying the bill. According to the Liberals on the committee, housing and homelessness are not related. That is the typical Liberal government logic. It is like saying hospitals and health care do not go together.

This raises an interesting question about the Liberal government's attitude. Why do we even need a minister responsible for homelessness when there is already a minister responsible for housing? One would think that homelessness would be something that the minister of housing ought to be responsible for. After all, he is responsible for making sure Canadians have homes. There must be more Liberal government logic at work here.

The fact that the Liberal government has appointed a minister responsible for homelessness separate from the minister of housing should speak volumes. It says that the government sees homelessness as something that is always going to be there and therefore needs a minister to look after it. It clearly does not see homelessness as something the minister of housing can or should be doing anything about. Heavens, no.

Instead, the minister of housing brought us this bill to gut and privatize social housing. That is the Liberal government's idea of what the minister of housing is for. Apparently that minister's job is to create homelessness so that the minister for homelessness has some work to do. This bill is the last nail in the coffin of social housing in Canada.

I know that makes the Reform Party giddy with joy. The Reform Party even brought in amendments to try and get the bill to go further. It is just like the years 1993 to 1997 when it pushed the government to cut more, cut taxes and cut dollars going to health care and social assistance. What do we have now? We have a health care crisis. The Reform Party is now pushing to cut social housing even more just to make the crisis for homelessness even worse.

I do not know how members of the Liberal government can say they care about homelessness when they are doing the exact opposite of what they say. They have abandoned social housing in seven out of the ten provinces. It may be eight soon.

We all know the Liberal government has more or less finished a deal with the Conservatives in Ontario. It is just waiting to see whether or not the Conservatives get re-elected so it can dot the i 's and cross the t 's in that agreement. It will not make much difference if the Liberals or the Conservatives get elected in Ontario. When it comes to housing, they pretty much agree.

Howard Hampton of the Ontario NDP is the only party that is coming out in support of social housing in Ontario. Then there is Manitoba where the Liberal government has already downloaded social housing onto the province. The Filmon government has already begun phasing out all funding for social housing. Every cent for social housing will be gone if Mr. Filmon and the Manitoba Conservatives get a chance to finish what this Liberal government started.

The one shred of good news in all this has been the news that co-op housing will not be part of the download in Ontario. The Liberal government has spared the Ontario co-ops. Of course, this does not exactly warrant a lot of gratitude. That would be like being grateful to a mugger for leaving our pocket change but taking the rest of our money.

The Liberal government is still downloading non-profit social housing corporations and aboriginal housing corporations. In seven provinces that have already been downloaded, the Liberal government did not spare the co-ops. If the Liberals truly are a national party, they should prove it by reversing the downloading of co-ops in those other seven provinces. Better yet, they should not download any social housing at all. Housing is a national responsibility not a provincial one.

Bill C-66 takes the Liberal government's attack on social housing to new heights. The bill paves the way for the privatization of social housing. It opens the door wide for private for-profit corporations to be recognized as social housing providers by the CMHC. Of course, once we privatize social housing it is not social any more. As the name indicates, for-profit companies are in business to make money not provide a service. Social housing is a service not a business. It is a service to help put a roof over people's heads. Housing is not cheap and many low income people need subsidized housing or they would have no choice but to live on the streets. These people are not living in mansions. Many social housing units barely meet minimum standards, but at least they give people warm, dry places to sleep.

What does the bill do to the National Housing Act and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act? It guts them. It guts the acts that govern social housing in this country. It eliminates the minimum standards that were built into the old legislation for social housing to be clean, safe and affordable.

Logically, what is the Liberal government saying by eliminating these minimum standards? It is saying that it does not think the homes of Canadians should have to meet even the most minimal standards. It is saying that Canadians do not deserve even a minimal level of safety, cleanliness and affordability.

The only logical reason for the government to get rid of these standards is so that it does not have to live up to them. That is what it has done for years in most first nations communities throughout Canada. It is shocking and appalling that it is knowingly and willingly removing minimum standards from homes in Canada.

The Liberal government cannot say it did not know that was what it was doing. My New Democratic Party colleague from Bras d'Or—Cape Breton raised amendments at report stage to put these standards back into the bill but the Liberal government voted them down. How does the government try to justify this? The CMHC bureaucrats who wrote the legislation say they need flexibility. I am all in favour of flexibility but not flexibility without standards. Flexibility is good, but we cannot give bureaucrats and private social housing providers the flexibility to reduce cleanliness, safety and affordability of social housing below basic human standards. It is not right.

Speaking of not meeting basic human standards, let us talk about aboriginal housing. The housing conditions of first nations people in Canada, whether one is talking about remote first nations or urban ghettos, are a disgrace.

The minister of Indian affairs has been to a number of remote first nations. She has seen the conditions in my riding and in other northern communities. She has seen the pillows stuffed in the holes in the walls to keep out the winter cold. She has seen homes wrapped in plastic to keep them warm and homes without running water or toilets. She has seen all this, but the minister of Indian affairs has done nothing.

The Liberal government has done nothing about aboriginal housing but make a few token gestures. Small token gestures are all that the government has shown to its gathering strength policy.

Conditions on first nations are so bad that even the United Nations has condemned them. Now we are saying we should keep on going and do this throughout the rest of Canada instead of improving where we should be. Watching the decline of social housing since the Liberal government took power has been like watching one of the ancient Greek tragedies where everyone dies in the end. Every Canadian will lose because of what the Liberal government is doing with this bill.

Housing is part of the foundation of our economy. People cannot be expected to get training or to look for jobs and add to our economy if they are busy struggling to survive on the streets. By giving people a roof over their heads and a chance to make something of their lives, social housing provides a boost for our economy. It prevents people from falling through the cracks.

The bill will privatize social housing and it will raise rents, lower standards and put people on the streets. This bill will do more harm than good to our economy and our society. It is cruel. It is short-sighted. I do not know how the Liberal backbenchers over there can sleep at night. I hope some of them will show a shred of conscience and help us in the opposition to defeat the bill when we vote on it one last time.

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, May 7th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it has been announced that there will be severe cuts to the Halifax and Calgary operations of CBC Newsworld. Not only will this mean further job losses at the CBC, it runs contrary to the commitment made by the CBC to the CRTC and Canadians that there would be significant regional presence. These cuts will guarantee that the news will be increasingly central Canada based and biased.

Can the minister explain how Newsworld will remain reflective of all regions after these cuts in Atlantic Canada and the prairies?

[Westray Mine, May 7th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this Sunday, May 9, will mark the seventh year since the Westray Mine disaster. The 26 victims of this tragedy, their families and co-workers have yet to see justice served.

These 26 men were the victims of a corporation that put profit before workers' lives. Workplace safety and health must be the first priority. The government and the law have failed the Westray victims and their families. We must ensure that those responsible for workplace injuries and deaths are held accountable.

The New Democratic Party has put legislation before this House that will hold companies and their managers accountable for crimes like those at Westray. Unless there are laws to protect workers there will always be companies that put profits before safety. Crimes like this must never go unpunished again.

This Sunday, as we spend time with our families and enjoy Mother's Day, let us mark a moment of silence and prayer for the Westray miners and their families.