Rey D. Pagtakhan

[Tobacco Products, February 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, there are those who use the tax on tobacco as an excuse to break the law, and there are those who invoke civil disobedience as an excuse to break the law.

When Henry Thoreau staged civil disobedience, it was to protest the American civil war.

When Mahatma Gandhi staged civil disobedience, it was to free the people of India from colonialism.

When Martin Luther King staged civil disobedience, it was to free the American blacks from racial discrimination.

However when smugglers deliberately violate the law for money and others invoke civil disobedience to protest our tax laws on cigarettes, it is pure greed.

We cannot surrender the supremacy of law to the lawless. We must apply the law of our land to every part and parcel of our country.

Decreasing taxes on tobacco will increase the consumption of cigarettes, causing disabilities, human suffering, a lifetime of addiction and premature death.

The present and future health of the newborn, children, teenagers and adults-all of us-are in the hands of a healthy government public health policy.

Let Parliament rally our citizens and remind them that those who break the law hurt their neighbours, their friends, their families and our nation.

[Multiculturalism, January 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to refute statements made by members of the Official Opposition who charge that so-called ethnic ghettos are the inevitable byproduct of Canada's multiculturalism policy.

In fact my constituents and I in Winnipeg North view the tremendous ethnic diversity of our neighbourhoods as one of their most endearing and exciting qualities.

The variety of cultures that come together on our streets and in our schools and offices enhance the character and quality of life for all residents.

The suggestion that the varied ethnic makeup of an area necessarily leads to any form of ghettoization is patently false.

The multiculturalism policy is there to help primarily non-English, non-French and non-aboriginal Canadians on an individual and community basis to play an important role in the development and cohesion of Canadian society.

Overall the policy is about the equal participation of all citizens irrespective of cultural backgrounds and thereby counteracting isolation and fostering national unity.

[Speech From The Throne, January 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to respond to the hon. member's questions for which I thank the hon. member.

Certainly my vision of Canada that I just articulated is the very vision that we as Liberals have developed as we travelled around the country. We would like a Canada that exists for all Canadians irrespective of geography, race, colour or origin. Whether Canadians have been born in this country or whether they come from across the seas or across the oceans, we are all equal and ought to receive the benefits of our nation and

federalism would respond to the needs of Canadians. For that we must have federal institutions.

Institutions do not mean only buildings. Institutions refer to programs that we have in this country. Let me mention national medicare. That is the type of institution I see and the Liberals see that will continue to respond to all Canadians irrespective of geography and with no user fees to make it very specific.

There is the question of how we can avoid overlapping. This government has already announced its plan to eliminate trade barriers that in a sense also allow for duplication. We have plans to eliminate duplication so that small and medium sized businesses can thrive and thrive prosperously.

[Speech From The Throne, January 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, first allow me to echo the sentiments of my colleagues who have risen before me in this House and congratulate you on your appointment.

This new government faces a great number of daunting tasks, not the least of which is how to give Canadians a reason to believe in the dedication, perseverance and sound ethical judgment of their elected leaders.

Each of us was sent to this House because our constituents believe that we are the men and women most firmly committed to their concerns, their needs and their demands. However, we are more than our individual selves and we are more than our collective individual voices. We were elected to represent in this Parliament the collective voice of our constituents reconciling their competing and at times conflicting visions with the others.

The aim of Canada's House of Commons is not to serve the selfish and parochial interests of any one person or province to the detriment of others. It is to advance the well-being and prosperity of the whole country and therefore of all Canadians.

We were elected on this side of the House to fulfil the Liberal vision which was clearly articulated in our election platform, the red book "Creating Opportunity".

Everyday in my riding of Winnipeg North I talk with honest, hard working people eager to put their faith in hard working and honest politicians. For five solid years, from 1988 when I was first elected until last fall's election, I had fear.

I had a fear that 1.6 million Canadians, the unemployed in this country would remain jobless. I had a fear that the poor, particularly children, would continue to depend on social assistance. I had a fear that the sick, the elderly and all Canadians for that matter would continue to face the consequence of a threatened medicare system and the uncertainty that goes with it. I had a fear that the minorities, be it due to race, colour or creed and the disabled would continue to face unfair treatment and discrimination in the workplace.

I had a fear that the infrastructure of cities and municipalities would continue to decay without help from the federal government. I had a fear that the safety and security of persons and property would continue to be in peril. I had a fear that honesty and integrity in government would never be restored. I had a fear that Canada would close its doors to immigrants.

Last but not least I had a fear that Canada my adopted country and home to some 27 million Canadians was on the brink of national collapse. However, I had always hoped that my fears would not come to pass.

Now I am certain that there is much hope for this great nation. I have hope because this government has already taken significant strides to enhance its integrity by rejecting many of the unessential privileges parliamentarians had exercised for so many years during their tenures as public servants.

I have hope because each political party represented in this House has already voiced its commitment to seeking consultation from the public on a wide range of issues of great national importance.

I have hope because the finance minister has already made good on this commitment by talking to people across the country in an effort to formulate a federal budget that is both sensible and sensitive. I am confident that the minister will continue in the short number of days remaining before budget day to consult with all Canadians from all walks of life.

We must never let ourselves forget that each time we make fiscal decisions here in Ottawa we may be affecting the wallets and pocketbooks and the day to day budgets of individual citizens in ridings like yours and mine.

I have hope because this government promptly cancelled the questionable deal that was to lead to the privatization of portions of Toronto's Pearson airport.

I have hope because this government does not believe in allowing its leader to jet around in a $53 million VIP aircraft or a Porsche while many Canadians scramble to make both ends meet.

I have hope because this government has already put its infrastructure program into motion.

The moves we have made in the short time that has elapsed since the Liberals came to government have given me great hope. However, what assures me that we are on the road to recovery are our plans for the immediate future. It is our policies, ideals and blueprints for the years to come.

I am assured because we are committed to helping and supporting small and medium sized businesses that will create long term jobs in the country. I am assured because our plan to get youth working again will be realistic because we will be creating the youth corps service and national apprenticeship program. I am assured because this is a government that understands the importance of investing in people.

All Canadians use their work to varying degrees to define who they are. When they are not working their self esteem suffers, their relationships suffer and their dignity suffers.

I am assured that our health care system is now to remain as universal and free for all. I am assured because the speech from the throne reaffirmed our commitment and the plan to have a national forum on health care is underway. In fact, the plan to establish a centre of excellence for women's health and a prenatal program across the country is underway.

It was not long ago that in a moment of great anger I stood up in this House on behalf of one of my constituents and questioned whether the previous government had any heart at all. Today I am proud to stand before you. I am assured that this is a government with plenty of heart.

We are speaking for the first time in a long time the language of those we represent. In short our ideals are backed by plausible and realistic means of implementation.

We are also keenly aware that it is self-defeating to focus only on any one issue before us. The issue of the economy, social policies and the environment and many more are all interrelated and interdependent.

Mr. Speaker, I know you share with me the desire to see this Parliament mark a turning point in our great nation's history. I began by indicating the daunting task we all know the government has to face.

I mentioned the fears that plagued me during my first five years as a member of this House. Given those fears how is it possible for me to feel the hope and assurance I now feel after just a short period of time in government?

I have seen what we have accomplished so far. I know that we will follow through on our promises and thereby resolve the fears of Canadians. Give them jobs, reform and stabilize our institutions and in the end control the deficit.

Citizens will continue to demonstrate the kind of support that sent 177 Liberals to this House in October 1993. I hope that the people of Winnipeg North and Canadians everywhere sense that great changes are afoot.

The next four years will reveal a new kind of government, a new kind of leadership and a new Canada that is united, strong and prosperous and working for all Canadians today and preparing Canada for the 21st century.

[Cruise Missile Testing, January 26th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I would like to pose a specific question to the member in light of what is the immediate challenge before us. He alluded to the agreement that exists for a 10-year period and in this agreement is stated a provision that it may be terminated upon 12 months' notice in writing by either party.

The question I would like to pose is this. Would the hon. member favour giving notice today, saying that yes, we will terminate it and in fact we would further request that any testing be held in abeyance until the Government of Canada has completed its full defence policy review by the end of this year. This is an approach that I favour.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, please allow me, on behalf of Winnipeg North, to echo the sentiments of those who have risen in this House and congratulated you on your appointment as Deputy Speaker, and also to the Prime Minister, the Right Hon. Jean Chrétien, and our fellow members.

I would also like to seize this opportunity to thank the constituents of Winnipeg North for their renewal of confidence in last fall's election. It is a testament to this new Liberal government's commitment to seek the input of its citizens on matters of foreign policy that we begin in the early life of this Parliament with a very public debate on peacekeeping.

At a time when citizens are increasingly concerned about domestic issues, it is pertinent to ask a fundamental question about our involvement in expensive and potentially dangerous peacekeeping missions abroad. Why are we there? Why indeed are we taking an interventionist approach to problems and conflicts which ostensibly lie thousands of miles away in places most Canadians have never even seen?

Why, with the magnitude of economic and social problems facing all Canadians, are we giving the issue of international peacekeeping even a cursory glance? Why, of course, is a valid question.

I propose to offer some very compelling answers. I would encourage fellow members on all sides of the House to share these answers with their constituents.

First, to those who would question what benefits our peacekeeping missions abroad hold for Canada, we must reinforce the idea that Canada is not an island. Rather, we hold a privileged position as a world leader in international diplomacy. We carry the torch of Lester B. Pearson's legacy, a legacy which poses no ultimatum but patience in the search for peace.

If we fail to settle conflicts and unrest abroad, those problems by extension become our own. Conflicts overseas could, if left unchecked over time, expand to engulf our own nation. Indeed, it is in our national interest to be involved in peacekeeping missions abroad. However, national self-interest alone represents only one aspect of the need for our continued involvement in peacekeeping.

I submit to my fellow members that there is a noble interest at stake here. Our humanitarian mission in the former Yugoslavia alone directly benefits 2,750,000 residents of that war torn nation who would have no other means of survival in the face of such appalling conditions. These invaluable relief efforts are best pursued by a team of nations, which is why a renewal of our participation in the United Nations forces in that part of the world and elsewhere is essential, to my mind.

Other nations may waver, but I believe Canada should continue to reassert its commitment to independent foreign policy. I am confident that this government will not waver.

Allow me to call to the attention of fellow members what I feel may be a vital omission in our peacekeeping policy. It is the failure to communicate to citizens the many benefits of these operations particularly at a time when domestic issues threaten to consume us. Successful efforts seldom make headlines the way disasters do. Perhaps that is why an Angus Reid poll released this week indicates that six in ten Canadians support a withdrawal of Canadian troops from Bosnia. I cannot help but wonder whether the figure would be different if citizens were given a different look at the humanitarian function our overseas troops are performing.

Recently we saw on TV and in the print media the photo of an empty wooden sled on a patch of blood-covered snow in Sarajevo, a symbol of the horror and futility of war. We witness by way of the media the slaughter of civilians in their homes, the massacre of women, the senseless killing of children in the playgrounds, the bombing of hospitals and photos of entire village populations deprived of food and clothing. When we witness these human indignities we agonize and our hearts are torn. When this happens these horrors of war assume immediate proximity.

In conclusion, peacekeeping missions are the ultimate challenge to our nation's soul and how we respond to this challenge will reflect our national conscience. The lives of these people in that part of the world are in our hands.

[The Late Hon. Steven Paproski, January 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a few words of deep sympathy and condolence to the family of Steve Paproski.

I first met him before I entered politics, in fact away back in the early eighties when there was a travelling parliamentary committee on the participation of visible minorities in Canada. Somehow he struck me as a person of collegiality and a fatherly person.

When I first came here in 1988 I approached him and he said: "Son, how are you?" I thought, being a rookie, that was the proper word to use, but until the last moment before the 34th Parliament ended he called me son. That depicted for me the type of caring person he was to everybody in the House.

I also recall he would tell us that members on the opposite side were not enemies but only adversaries and that this Chamber was all about active debate on issues of national dimension.

I would like to convey to his family my deepest sympathy and my condolences in the realization that in the great beyond Steve Paproski has earned his rightful place.