Rey D. Pagtakhan

[Filipino Canadian Community, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, when bestowed upon its members community distinction is always a source of special pride to any ethnocultural group. The Filipino Canadian community claims this special pride, as two of its young women were recently honoured in Manitoba.

Last week Hygia dela Cruz received the Gerrie Hammond Memorial Award of Promise, the junior equivalent of the YWCA Women of Distinction Award. Last month Mary Joyce Cabigting received the Premier's Youth Volunteer Service Award. These awards assume greater meaning at a time when some Canadian youth have problems in society.

Both young women were honoured for their personal achievements and for their excellence in the service of others. They are role model citizens.

I am honoured to salute them. Please join me in wishing them continued success.

[Canadian Human Rights Act, May 8th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to speak in support of Bill C-33. Members of Parliament have an obligation to state the facts and clarify and dispel the myths that have existed in society. Only then can we ensure we are really giving valid information to our citizenry and thereby proper support to this bill.

The bill will prohibit discrimination, the essence and soul of this piece of legislation.

Let me start with the preamble of the bill. Let me restate:

Whereas the Government of Canada affirms the dignity and worth of all individuals and recognizes that they have the right to be free from discrimination in employment and the provision of goods and services, and that that right is based on respect for the rule of law and lawful conduct by all;

Who would disagree with the preamble? Show me a citizen.

The purpose of this act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an equal opportunity to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted.

The purpose is very clear. Let us convey that message to all citizens and we will have a fuller understanding of the bill and its importance.

It is important to underscore that the purpose of human rights legislation, as this amendment is to this piece of law, is to protect vulnerable groups, not to prey on them.

Recently there was an advertisement in the Globe and Mail which raised a couple of concerns, that Bill C-33 will give special status to homosexuals, that the bill could have a profound effect on Canadian society and would threaten the institution of marriage and family.

I respect their concerns, but they have been based on a misunderstanding of the bill itself and our laws and of the separation of the church and the state.

Bill C-33 will not give special status to anyone. No one could credibly argue federal and provincial human rights legislations now confers special status on Catholics or Protestants, on husbands or wives, or on those with disabilities. Although each of these is expressly covered by the existing statutes, it is obvious no such special status is conferred.

On the matter of the consequences of Bill C-33, we have to restate some of the fundamental principles. The Canadian Human Rights Act applies only to employment and the provision of goods and services coming under federal legislation. The Canadian Human Rights Act does not and cannot affect law on marriage. Ask any constitutional expert or any lawyer.

Even the Supreme Court of Canada has already decided in a recent case that family status does not include same sex relationships. Therefore we should not worry about that. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court came to the same conclusion that family status does not include same sex relationships.

With respect to the possible effects on benefits, Bill C-33 does not change law on benefits. Again, the Supreme Court of Canada has said unanimously that sexual orientation is a prohibited ground of discrimination under the equality provision, section 15 of the charter. However, the same court also held that such discrimination did not support the extension to same sex partners of the pension benefits which were the issue in that case.

The Canadian Human Rights Act and consequently the amendment now before the House have absolutely no application to marriage. The common law has always provided that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. The common law has equal force with any statute law.

With respect to a need for definition, over the years there has been considerable understanding by which tribunals and courts have looked at discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. They have developed an understanding of this term. They have interpreted it to mean homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality.

The Canadian Human Rights Act and therefore Bill C-33 do not apply to churches and religious organizations. The latter comes under provincial jurisdiction. Even if for the sake of argument the Canadian Human Rights Act were to apply, the Supreme Court of Canada has already held that it is reasonable and justifiable for a given religious school to require that the religious views of its instructors conform with the view of the church.

Moreover, we have to remember the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It overrides all other laws, whether federal or provincial. It has supremacy over the Canadian Human Rights Act. Nothing that could be done in the Canadian Human Rights Act could take primacy over the charter of rights and freedoms or affect the freedom of religion, expression or association guaranteed by the charter.

I state my full support for the bill. I hope that we all together clearly state to our Canadian citizenry the facts of the case, the governing Canadian constitution and its primacy over any piece of legislation things that are feared could happen will not happen. I suggest we all gather together and support the bill unanimously.

[Stanley Knowles Visiting Professorship, April 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, The University of Waterloo deserves congratulations for establishing the Stanley Knowles Visiting Professorship in Canadian Studies at St. Paul's college, a program that highlights the link between social justice issues and government policies.

This professorship is most appropriate because the life work of Stanley Knowles has been the epitome of individual freedom, democracy, justice and a sense of community and internationalism. It is timely because these issues continue to challenge the world community, including our diverse Canadian society.

Indeed I am honoured to be serving as the member of Parliament for Winnipeg North which includes part of his former riding. Mastering parliamentary procedures and placing people before partisanship, Mr. Knowles was a very strong voice of social justice in this House for decades. He is a living model for all parliamentarians.

Alone, it would be difficult to reach his heights. Together, we can succeed in advancing the cause.

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed sad that downsizing has to happen but it is an essential component of good governance.

It is indeed sad that some jobs have been lost, but at the same time we have the new economy. Therefore we have to adjust our country and our citizenry to that new economy. We must realize that when we have created over half a million jobs, and I hope the member would agree with me, that some who have been laid off in their previous jobs would have found new jobs among the new jobs created. This is the reality of our times.

In terms of specific projects, the summer student program is there for our youth and I would not like to belittle that, as the member may suggest, as only because the unemployment rate among our youth is among the highest compared to any other age groups. We have to focus on our youth.

It does not mean we have not focused as well on job creation for those beyond the youth age. Jobs have been created for them. We have the Team Canada spirit where the government in partnership with the private sector would create jobs. When we work co-operatively and in collaboration with each other we will create more jobs.

As I indicated during debate, of course the government is not happy that we have created only this much. We will continue to do more, but if we can work together we will achieve that goal.

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today on the 1996 budget which was tabled in Parliament March 6.

It reflects the priorities of the government. It ensures that the need to be more frugal will never come before the need to be more compassionate and fair. It strikes a delicate balance between fiscal reality and social responsibility.

The government has met its deficit reduction targets and is on its way to surpassing them without raising taxes. At the same time, it is protecting and preserving our valued social programs like medicare and pension programs for seniors.

These twin goals have been achieved through good governance. The response from the Canadian public has been positive. The day after the budget was delivered last month, newspapers across the country carried headlines expressing optimism and support.

In my home town, the Winnipeg Free Press gave the finance minister high marks for meeting his deficit projections. ``Too many finance ministers before him have promised honey and delivered vinegar''.

This achievement in fiscal responsibility and stability has contributed to Canada's strong economic performance and therefore job creation. Since 1993, when the Liberals took office, nearly 600,000 jobs have been created nationwide.

In addition, the merchandise trade surplus has increased and short term interest rates have decreased, decreasing the amount of mortgage payments which citizens have to pay. Inflation has fallen sharply. All of these have boosted investor confidence in Canada.

The deficit targets of 3 per cent of GDP for 1996-97 and 2 per cent for 1997-98 will be achieved. In 1997-98 the financial requirements of government will fall to $6 billion or about 0.7 per cent of GDP, making it the lowest since 1969 and the lowest of any central government in the G-7 countries.

All of these achievements will translate into job creation, which remains the number one priority of the government. I am pleased that we have created over half a million jobs since 1993. However, we know this is not enough and that is why our efforts of job creation remain our overwhelming commitment.

Budgeting is more than putting our fiscal house in order and more than deficit reduction. It is more than balancing our revenues and expenditures. Financial stewardship is only a tool to the primary purpose of government which is to serve citizens.

Canadians value our nation's social programs. We worry when we hear of hospital closures, cuts to education funding and reductions to social assistance for the less fortunate in society. Canadians wonder how universal medicare, access to post-secondary education and social assistance can be sustained given all the pressures on our system.

Therefore in order to ease the mind of citizens and to reaffirm the government's commitment to health, education and social assistance, the 1996 budget provides the stability and subsequent growth to its transfers to the provinces by legislating a new

five-year funding arrangement for the Canada health and social transfer program beginning in 1998-99.

Entitlements over this period will grow from $25.1 billion to approximately $27.4 billion. More important, there will be a new cash floor for transfers of at least $11.1 billion in all years thereafter. This will give the federal government the leverage to maintain our valued social programs.

For the province of Manitoba, where I come from, the major transfers in terms of the Canada health and social transfer and the equalization payments which later on will replace the established programs financing will exceed $2 billion in 1996-97 and are expected to total roughly $1,875 per person in 1995-96, about 48 per cent of the national average. We see there is a significant transfer of money from the federal government to the province of Manitoba.

Just for comparison, per capita Manitoba will be getting less than Newfoundland, P.E.I., Nova Scotia and New Brunswick but it will be getting more than Quebec, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and B.C.

That defines for us the character of our nation: those who have more share with those who have less. It also defines our Canadian identity.

Secure and growing funding for our transfer program will ensure the federal government's capacity to uphold the five principles of medicare: universality, portability, accessibility, non-private, public administration, and comprehensiveness; as well, the principle that no residency requirement can be imposed on social assistance recipients who move from one province to another.

These measures will enable the government to keep its deficit reduction targets while protecting the future of our social programs. This type of balanced approach tells us how the government is very fiscally realistic and at the same time very socially responsible.

Canada currently spends approximately 10 per cent of GDP on health care. Other nations spend more but do not provide universal access to their citizens. Indeed we are fortunate in Canada. We enjoy universal access. It is one of the most envied health care systems in the world. However, we realize we must do all we can to protect our system. We must ensure that each and every health care dollars is spent wisely.

To this end we would like to know in which new technologies and techniques to invest, which old ones to retain or abandon and how to organize health services to get the maximum benefit from available resources. This is our commitment. Because of this the budget has allocated health services research funds to the tune of $65 million.

As well, the budget has increased assistance to those in need with the new child support taxation measures to benefit our children, the future of our nation. We have not forgotten our seniors. We are committed to introducing a new seniors benefit program that will ensure sustainability by targeting those who need assistance most without affecting the benefits received by current seniors.

The government cannot do it alone. That is why the government has challenged the private sector. We know that a measure of success in any country is when citizens try their own initiatives and at the same time commit and challenge themselves in the service of the country.

Imagine a country that is number one in which to live, according to the United Nations. Imagine a country where interest rates have decreased over 300 bases points since early 1995, a country where deficit targets have consistently decreased from 6 per cent, to 5 per cent, to 3 per cent and to 2 per cent until the budget is balanced. Imagine a country where financial requirements will fall to $6 billion or .7 per cent of the GDP from $30 billion or 4.2 per cent in 1993-94, the lowest since 1969 and the lowest in any central government of the G-7 countries. Imagine when the drop in program spending has been dramatic, from 16.8 per cent to 12 per cent. That country is Canada and budget '96 reflects the soul of this country.

[Questions On The Order Paper, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Government Response To Petitions, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to petitions presented during the first session.

[Questions On The Order Paper, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Committees Of The House, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.

[Committees Of The House, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 10th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration and the associate membership of various committees. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the 10th report later this day.