Dianne Brushett

[Customs Act, October 31st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it was in 1972 that I was a co-founder of a company called Dominion Biologicals in Truro, Nova Scotia. We vowed to put our money where our mouth was. It was not a lot of money, but it was almost everything we had at the time. We wanted to build a scientific company because so many of our young people had to leave Atlantic Canada in order to find jobs, particularly in science or research.

We were noble in the cause, rather naive, and decided we would take everything we could after some experiences working for giant companies abroad to build this company in Atlantic Canada and to speed up the 25-year process. The company became very successful and went on to be publicly traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

We did a lot of research and Canada Customs played a key role in our manufacturing business. We used biological products. We would immunize animals and humans for an immune response reaction and then we would plasmapheres and bleed those humans and animals and this would be our source of raw material.

I do not want to go into every scientific detail of hybridoma production and monoclonal antibody production. This took a lot more research. Canada Customs was always a vital component of our business because we would purchase raw material, human plasma of high antibody content specificity, from countries abroad through the World Health Organization and the United States.

That raw material had to be tested as safe and processed on very tight timelines. As well, in the manufacturing process there are large numbers of people involved and the processing is very time consuming, filtration, refrigeration, sterilization; protocols of world health standards and the National Institute of Health Standards of Bethesda, Maryland. Everything is on a very tight schedule because cultures must be produced and searched for contamination.

A product must come through from Canada Customs in a time frame assigned by the manufacturer because we would have a time line by which to export the product to the Austrian or German Red Cross, to world health organizations or to sell the product to hospitals in Canada. Our products were all marketed to hospitals or Red Cross health centres for in vitro diagnostic testing.

In my previous life I spent a lot of time dealing with Canada customs and tariffs, a lot of time processing paperwork and knowing the tariff item number so that a product could come in. At the same time a relationship of trust is built. They know the products being imported and to what company they are going. A one on one relationship is established. This bill will do nothing but enhance those relationships. It will be a tremendous asset.

They know you are a bona fide manufacturer. They know your integrity, reliability and honesty in the workplace. They know you have a place of business where people work and that you pay your fair share of taxes and your books and records can be inspected at any time.

When they know their clientele and the transactions of goods and what they are and what they are being used for, the bill enhances that relationship. It speeds up the relationship and allows the manufacturer to get on with the process as quickly as possible so that the goods can go out the door for sale either domestically or in foreign countries.

That is part of the credibility, the stability of being a manufacturer in Canada. It is part of selling goods. Manufacturers need to be accountable and reliable and able to be competitive in the global marketplace with a quality product that meets the time line because it is no good if there has been a disaster and it is two days late.

It is critical to have these relationships with Canada Customs and with legitimate manufacturers in Canada. It is a vital component to have efficient regulations through which goods can move as quickly a possible, particularly the goods of which I speak because they are perishable. A small bottle of serum going to the Red Cross in Canada or to Europe might be worth $50,000. It is breakable and perishable if exposed to high temperatures or extreme cooling.

The whole process of efficiency in high technology is key to doing business in Canada. I can speak firsthand of this from the Atlantic where we are a little more remote from some of the high tech centres. It can do nothing but enhance business here at home and maintain jobs particularly in the manufacturing sector. That is where the value added jobs are.

It is very easy to call yourself an importer and have a fax machine in a small cubby hole in the wall somewhere. When you input something it goes through your fax machine and goes offshore somewhere or wherever, but it does not do much to add value to jobs here in Canada. That is an easy thing to do. We see more of this all the time as the global trading community becomes smaller. People are moving things but simply with a fax machine, a telephone and maybe a warehouse.

There are manufacturers, with hundreds of people coming to work in the morning, that know the value of using Canada customs and tariffs. I can speak strongly of another manufacturer in my hometown of Truro, Stanfield's woolen mills. It employs 800 people. It is a true manufacturer. It brings in sheep's wool. The wool is carded. It is then woven into yarn on spinning wheels. From the yarn it is then woven into fabric. The fabric is then cut and designed according to whether it is a t-shirt, a piece of underwear,

whatever piece of garment it might be. It then goes in for stitching and sewing, into piecework.

To watch the women work on the sewing machines at Stanfield's I believe they could compete with any women in the world in the garment sector. It does my heart good to watch our manufacturing people, to see the jobs created. These are value added jobs and the goods are sold in Canada and exported.

Everyone in the House knows how our exports have risen during this past year. It is a sign we are doing the right thing. This legislation is part of that progressive activity. It is progressive legislation for this government. To see Her Majesty's loyal opposition this morning announce it would support it after four very difficult weeks in the country and to hear the third party say it would support this legislation can do nothing but enhance jobs at home. I am proud to be part of the legislation.

[Customs Act, October 31st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to address Bill C-102, a government bill, and to have Her Majesty's loyal opposition stand before the House to support the bill and to have the Reform Party also stand before the House to support the bill. After four very difficult weeks it is a great day for Canada to bring in a piece of legislation which the major parties and the Government of Canada can support wholeheartedly.

Bill C-102 will amend the Customs Act and the Customs Tariff. It is a bill of language and a bill of clarity; it clearly defines, enhances and streamlines the duty deferral program.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce made interventions in committee that perhaps if we did not bring the bill in on a time line acceptable to business more generally some companies would lose or forfeit the duty they may have paid to Revenue Canada because they could not reclaim on time. We have made adjustments so that this would not be a problem for business.

These changes are designed to help improve the competitive position of Canadian industry and Canadian business. The amendments will allow regions of the country to be more effective in marketing their programs and their products in a competitive manner which allows Canada to attract investment and to keep business at home.

The aim and the strength of the bill lie in its clarification of legislative provisions to make the tariff framework more clear and

to eliminate confusion and ambiguity for Canadian companies, importing companies and travellers.

The bill also prescribes the terms and conditions on which licences for the operation of sufferance warehouses or duty free shops may be issued to include the provision of security which may be required in the operation of these warehouses or shops. It includes the duration of licences and the fees or the manner of determining the fees, if any are to be paid, and for which licences. It is a very specific and clear bill.

The bill also clearly defines the circumstances by which licences for the operation of sufferance warehouses or duty free shops may be issued, in which way they may be amended or suspended, renewed, cancelled or reinstated; the process of accountability.

Bill C-102 also seeks to provide standards for the operation and maintenance of these facilities, sufferance warehouses or duty free shops, and in particular the manner in which the receipt of goods in these warehouses is acknowledged, the circumstances by which and the extent to which goods may be manipulated, altered, unpacked, changed or combined with other goods to make a new product while in the confinement of sufferance warehouses or duty free shops, in a clearly given constituency. The definition of these confinements is also clearly prescribed by these legislative enactments.

This bill and these amendments clearly spell out what are considered designated goods. This clarifies the language and establishes standards for the operation and maintenance of the sufferance warehouses or duty free shops.

Under this bill the framework is laid in which the importer operates his place of business and the respect and manner wherein he maintains his records of operation, his records of imported goods, so that he may be able to make them available to an inspection officer at any given time and answer truthfully to questions in respect of such importations.

The sufferance warehouses and duty free shops are places where imported goods arrive. The manner in which the receipt of these goods is acknowledged, the circumstances and the extent to which these goods may be changed or altered, as I have indicated, is clearly prescribed and defined in this legislation.

These changes should improve efficiency. These changes should reduce the costs of doing business in Canada. These changes allow business, in a very accountable way, to carry on in a very honest and accountable fashion and reduce the red tape for those people who are legitimate business and manufacturing companies here in Canada.

There is one point that was of great contention in the finance committee. That was a point my colleague talked about for a moment, an evaluation provision. Under proposed section 48 of clause 18, the value for duty is a transaction value of the goods if the goods are sold for export to Canada. The transaction value of goods shall be determined by ascertaining the price paid or payable for the goods when the goods are sold for export to Canada. We have changed that. The proposed amendment to subsections 45(1) and 48(1) are that we define the purchaser in Canada. The value for duty of goods is the transaction value of those goods if the goods are sold for export to Canada to a purchaser in Canada. Those are the key words, "a purchaser in Canada", and the price paid or payable for those goods can be determined. This is not a change in the process of doing business here. It is simply a clarification.

I will give an example so that members understand more clearly what our Canada customs officials have been practising for the last decade. If, for example, a foreign manufacturer makes a product valued at $80, that is the price leaving the foreign country. That product may go through several middlemen and maybe there are transaction values added through this process. When the product finally arrives to the Canadian purchaser, its value may be $100. Therefore, which is the value for tariff, the $80 at the foreign country doorstep where it left the foreign country, or the $100 when it arrives at the Canadian doorstep? This amendment clarifies very clearly that the value provision in this amendment is the $100 value, or the value to the purchaser in Canada.

I took a moment to make that clarification because this is not a new change. This is simply a clarification to the existing regulations and the current practices that govern importation of goods in Canada today. It is the practice that has been going on for 10 years. The clearly defined value for duty is the value that has been assigned. I repeat: this value has been used by Canada customs and tariff officials when assigning value for duty for the past decade. All we are doing today in this amendment within this bill is to allow every importer in Canada to know clearly the rules, to allow the value of goods as indicated on the invoice to the purchaser in Canada to be sure that he understands this value to which tariffs and duties will be assigned.

There will be arguments as there were arguments in the debates in committee that the value for duty should be in fact the $80 value that was assigned at the foreign country at the time of export, before the transactions of the middlemen intervened. However, we felt as a committee that the value when it arrives on the Canadian doorstep is the value when all transactions have been incurred.

Presentations were made to our committee by both the Canadian Importers Association and the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants in opposition to this bill, and more specifically to this very section, "purchaser in Canada". They said this is a residency requirement, this is new. We argued that it was not new, that it was simply clarification, identifying the purchaser in Canada, and that it had been the practice of Customs and Tariffs Canada for the past

decade; it was simply clarification and we were in compliance, not confrontation, with our world trading partners.

I elaborate on that point because it was very important and a great point of clarification. It sends a message to our businesses in Canada, our manufacturing businesses, where we have value added jobs, that here at home we will do our utmost to protect those jobs through good legislation that is acceptable to our global trading partners.

The bill introduces tariff reductions on a broad range of goods used as input into Canadian manufacturing operations, thereby bringing our input tariffs more in line with those of the United States. It does reduce tariffs on many finished goods that are required and requested by Canadian producers.

Part of our red book commitment was to reduce government red tape and streamline government operations so that business in Canada could be more efficient and we could provide manufacturing jobs in a more competitive global economy. That is what Bill C-102 does.

Bill C-102 allows Canadian travellers to bring back to Canada after their absences abroad goods of increased value. This will bring Canadian travellers' exemptions into line with those of our major trading partners and for administrative purposes ease border congestion. We know the majority of those travellers are honest, law-abiding citizens. This bill allows that to occur with more ease and allows us to spend greater time on those who are involved in criminal offences and criminal activities.

This is a positive step forward for Canadian legislation. It is a positive step forward for our Canada-U.S. agreements and our shared border commitments to ensure that activities between these two peaceful countries occur with ease and with the greatest efficiency for both countries.

Other amendments to the customs tariff or the Customs Act contained in this bill are aimed at clarifying the intent of certain legislation or involve changes to make the tariff framework clearer and more predictable for Canadian companies and the importing community. Those are very important words, "more predictable", when one is in business.

I had the experience of being in a manufacturing biological business for some 25 years. I was a co-founder in Nova Scotia of a scientific company, a tremendous challenge of a high tech biological company in a part of the country that is known for its hewers of wood and drawers of water. It was a challenge indeed, but we established that company and were able to provide scientific jobs for young Canadians in Atlantic Canada.

I know the value of predictability and stability in regulations on importation of goods into a manufacturing process. It is all part of maintaining jobs, maintaining accountability to employees, and maintaining a stable marketplace and economy for all Canadians.

These amendments will afford protection to our manufacturing jobs and enhance the capacity to which we can export, which is what Canada is so well known for. These amendments clean up the wording of the act so that importers in Canada, those who own businesses, and Canadians who are travellers will understand and appreciate the regulations more clearly. The clarification and wording are clearly conforming with our trading partners, not confronting them, as some might suggest.

These are progressive amendments. In an accountable and trustworthy business trading partnership they enhance Canada's credibility in competitive global trade. I am very pleased to hear this morning that all parties of this House will support this legislation.

I am eager. I am very pleased to be on the finance committee and to have heard the arguments on both sides to bring this into the House and let our business community in Canada know that we are progressive.

We are listening. We are reducing the red tape. We are trying to streamline so that business can be competitive, so that we can ensure those Canadian jobs in all regions and make Canada the number one place economically that we are forecast to be in the next couple of years.

[Small Business Loans Act, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we all know that small businesses exist throughout Canada, both in rural and urban centres.

In Atlantic Canada, small business is the backbone of the economy. It sustains the economy. The majority of small businesses, whether they are in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick or Quebec, is owned by local people employing young people and older people. The businesses have been there a long time, are part of the community and are sustainable.

My question is for the hon. member from Parry Sound-Muskoka. From his experience in the lending side of financial institutions and his experience with the Small Business Loans Act, could he elaborate on the value of small business to the Canadian economy to ensure the money stays in Canada for Canadians and provides a sustainable economy that supports our future?

[Petitions, October 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I present a petition today with 26 names. The petition arises from proposals coming before the Department of National Defence to change the tendering process. Its signators believe the process we have now is fair and equitable and serves all moving vans appropriately.

The petitioners call on Parliament to resolve the situation and to veto any proposed change to the present tendering process of the Department of National Defence and to support the present system of tendering moving processes for all military personnel.

[Hiv-Aids, October 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, today I wear this red ribbon in remembrance of those who have died of AIDS and for the approximately 16,000 Canadians who have been diagnosed with the HIV-AIDS virus.

The AIDS virus has most seriously affected the homosexual community. However the virus does not discriminate on the basis of gender or sexual orientation as many women and children have died of the virus in addition to the thousands of men.

While our views may vary one thing is very clear. Those who suffer from AIDS are human beings. They deserve our support and compassion.

I applaud Canadian researchers for their relentless search for a cure. While progress is being made every effort must be made through education and lifestyle change to stop the deadly transmission of the disease.

As we take time this week to support AIDS awareness and education programs, I encourage every member of the House to inform themselves about the disease so as to eradicate prejudice and homophobia and treat those suffering with AIDS with the dignity and compassion they so rightly deserve.

[Cultural Property Export And Import Act, September 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I did enjoy the address of the hon. member for Simcoe Centre on Bill C-93.

I will give a brief review of one of the small historical museums in my riding. It is run entirely by volunteers. The artefacts and historical objects are donated through projects such as this. Two years ago that small historical museum had to sell off some of those artefacts in order to pay its operating expenses. This is the Colchester historical society museum.

When the hon. member for Simcoe Centre talks about the fairness of the bill and the cost of maintaining art, culture and objects of historical significance in Canada, is it not better and of more value to Canadians to give these artefacts through a tax credit than for the taxpayers to have to use tax dollars to purchase art of value and historical artefacts that maintain the integrity of the history of Canada?

[Auditor General Act, September 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House to speak on Bill C-83. It has been over a year since the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development took on the task of examining the government's commitment to establish an environmental equivalent of the auditor general. This was a key commitment of the Liberal red book in the 1993 election campaign and it is a commitment to Canadians. It is an idea which has been discussed and debated for many years and a request of the public.

One message which came through loud and clear from the stakeholders was the message that there is a real need in Canada for leadership in making the shift to sustainable development. For more than a decade we have been exploring the concept, examining the implications and considering the measures it requires. Now is the time to move words into action. That will take bold and decisive leadership. That is the leadership which we are seeing in Bill C-83.

Another message was that, above all, the leadership must come from the federal government. This is the largest business in Canada and what it does has an immense influence throughout our society. That is true not only of federal policies, programs and regulations affecting various sectors, but also of the way in which the Government of Canada operates. The federal government must be held publicly accountable for its progress in making the shift to sustainable development and to sustainable policies. These are not only sustainable policies which are fiscally responsible and economically responsible, but, specifically, environmentally responsible.

At the same time the government must look back and assess whether existing initiatives create barriers to the achievement of sustainable development. The government must consider how to achieve existing policy goals in a way that promotes sustainable development. We must build the cost of the environment into the cost of doing business in Canada today.

I know that in preparing its report the committee paid careful attention to the stakeholders' messages. The office of the auditor general has much clout and that is why in preparing these amendments the bill has put into the Auditor General Act. We are creating a commissioner who is part of and the responsibility of the auditor general's department. It is independent from government. The reason is because the auditor general's department has high respect among the public of Canada. It has solid expertise which can be put to use at once. It has the framework and the structure in place that may be held responsible to the public. For all of these reasons it can greatly enhance the auditing of the government's environmental performance.

In addition, by giving this department specific environmental responsibilities we can ensure that the issues of the environment and issues of sustainable development will be integrated solidly and directly into economic considerations. This kind of integration is what sustainable development is all about. The office of the commissioner will provide leadership. It will put Canada in the forefront in making the shift to sustainable development.

First, the amendments create a commissioner of the environment and sustainable development. This official will report directly to and work closely with the Auditor General of Canada on matters relating to the environment and sustainable development.

One priority is for the work to carry on. No matter what happens to the position of auditor general there would be continuity. The position of the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development would be ensured. By doing this we are guaranteeing

that it becomes a post created for a commissioner who will serve the sustainability of the environment for Canada.

There are other amendments in the bill which do provide for more leadership in making the shift to this sustainable development policy. They require that federal government departments, that is every department of the Government of Canada, prepare and table results oriented sustainable development strategies within two years. That is, they must set goals and spell out the action by which they will achieve those goals.

These strategies will promote the shift to sustainable development policy at the program level and also in other ways the departments operate their buildings and facilities. This is a means of control, a watchdog, over all departments in the Government of Canada.

The departmental strategies will be developed in an open, transparent manner with the involvement of external stakeholders such as the national round table on environment and economy. We will involve the environmentalists, the public sector, the private sector and all citizens of the country so that they have an opportunity to be heard to express their views on what the country should be doing to maintain a sustainable environment, sustainable economic development.

They will also establish benchmarks against which to measure the government's performance. These will enable the commissioner and the auditor general to do their job effectively and independently.

What is more, every three years each department must update its sustainable development strategy and the minister responsible must table this update in the Parliament of Canada. This makes sure that the strategies are continually updated, continually responsible to new technologies and new developments which occur throughout the country.

Public accountability has come up this morning. The amendments provide for enhanced public accountability by the government in making the shift to sustainable development. The commissioner must submit a yearly report to this House on matters relating to the environmental aspects of sustainable development whatever the commissioner considers appropriate. By that amendment I believe he has the freedom to look at any issues in any department of this government and to make assessments to report on those if he deems it appropriate in his opinion.

The report will focus on the environmental performance of all federal departments. In other words, the extent to which the department has implemented its plan of action it will be held accountable and the extent to which the department has achieved its sustainable development objectives it will be held accountable.

Further, the report will present the number, the subject and the status of petitions received by ministers on environmental matters. Let me refer to the bill. In this context the public has the opportunity to present a petition; that is any citizen of this country might present a petition, if he takes the time to get citizens' signatures.

The petition would be received by the commissioner. It would be forwarded to the minister responsible for that specific department. The recipient minister would then be required to acknowledge in the House receipt of that petition within 15 days and to respond to the petition within four months. The four-month period might be extended by the minister if the petitioner and the auditor general were notified that it would be impossible to respond within the four months.

This puts the petition on a time line. It holds the commissioner, the minister and the department responsible to the citizen who has presented the petition. That is accountability on behalf of the government in the introduction of Bill C-83.

The task of appointing the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development will be the responsibility of the auditor general. This arrangement will give the commissioner the needed and utmost independence from the Government of Canada. This again gives him credibility and accountability to carry out his duties responsibly.

The third message of stakeholders was the need to assess new and existing government initiatives for their consistency with sustainable development. The government has already acted in this area. Keeping track of its performance will be the responsibility of the auditor general and the commissioner.

Last November the task force on economic instruments and disincentives to sound environmental practices submitted its report. It contained recommendations to the ministers of finance and environment. These advised on how to review existing policies, to check whether they contained barriers to the promotion of sustainable development. This reviews some of our policies and legislation that might be outdated, that might be antiquated and will inhibit or maybe even prohibit the advancement of sustainable development in a sustainable economy. They also advised on how to prevent the unnecessary creation of barriers in the future.

As promised in the budget, the ministers will respond to the task force within the coming months. Once again this holds the government accountable to sustainable fiscal policy, to sustainable economy and to sustainable environment for the people of Canada.

As I mentioned, in preparing their sustainable development strategies, federal departments must act in an open, honest accountable way. They must involve the citizens of Canada and the stakeholders, the environmentalists.

In their part III estimates which will come out annually departments will again be required to report their progress toward sustainable development. They must provide information on the number, the type and the status of environmental assessments which they are conducting.

There are additional actions that will integrate the environment into decision making. The third component of the government response is a commitment to additional steps we will take to integrate the environment into all decision making in all departments of the government.

I spoke of the task force to identify barriers and disincentives to sound environmental practices. The government followed up on its short term recommendations in the last budget. We are in the process of preparing a formal response to the task force report, including its longer term recommendations. The response will set out how the government plans to move forward on implementing economic instruments and on identifying barriers and disincentives to these practices in the existing government policies. The commissioner will play a very important role in holding this government and all future governments publicly accountable with ongoing efforts in this area.

These measures along with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will do much to integrate environmental considerations, environmental evaluations into virtually every federal government decision.

So many things are happening in Atlantic Canada in development, whether they are large pulp mills, lumbering industries, the transport of chemicals and products, that are detrimental to our environment should there be difficulties and accidents. We talked about the Irving Whale this morning.

The legislation will be a tremendous asset. Citizens will have the opportunity to bring a petition forward to a commissioner, to a minister of the department to assess, to evaluate, to judge objectively what is economically feasible, what is environmentally sustainable and what will serve the country for the long haul.

The government has taken a strong stand in Parliament on no quick fix solutions, a strong stand that we will be part of long term sustainability. This is part of our policy and philosophy. In each and everything we do, we will build for the next generation.

The Brundtland report "In Our Common Future" uses technical terms describing what is meant by sustainability. I studied that in doing some university work at the masters level. The kind of responsibility we have to a global society today is to act in a responsible way particularly here as legislators over and above the citizen's responsibility.

We are caretakers of this environment, of this earth only for a short time. We have a grave responsibility during that period to act responsibly. We should take only from the environment and the economy what we need to meet our needs today so that we do not build our economy on greed but on need. In that way we leave something for those in the next generation so that they too might take a living from the environment, from all the wonderful great natural resources we have been so fortunate to have had bestowed on this great Canada.

In conclusion, the amendments to this auditor general act are part of the broader effort I have just described. They are a fundamental and crucial part of what the philosophy of the Government of Canada is today. It will radically change the way in which the federal government does its business, in which the federal departments do their business.

This will be a major step forward, making sustainable development a reality to this country. It will be a major step forward in the eyes of the world. Canada will be viewed as a progressive nation that is caring, looking to the economy and to the environment and that one must be integrated into the other.

[Elizabeth Bishop, June 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, on June 10 I had the distinct pleasure to attend the outstanding day of celebration for our home made poet, Elizabeth Bishop.

We celebrated the life and work of Pulitzer prize winning poet Bishop in Great Village, Nova Scotia. Bishop was born in New England in 1911 and spent her early childhood in Great Village with her grandparents. Her experiences as a child in rural Nova Scotia influenced, in fact dominated, her prose and poetry with the theme that all people are home made.

Elizabeth Bishop died in 1979. However, her literary works grow and are ever more popular. She is classified in the top five modern poets and is taught in virtually every department of modern literature in universities throughout the world.

The Elizabeth Bishop Society is a rapidly growing international association with memorabilia in Nova Scotia and at Vassar College, Bishop's alma mater.

Today in the Parliament of Canada I salute the Elizabeth Bishop Society of Nova Scotia and the organizers in Great Village for recognizing her literary works.

[Public Service Of Canada, June 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this week we paid tribute to the tremendous contribution of the federal Public Service of Canada. With all the pain associated with downsizing where many employees are deemed surplus and unnecessary, it is critical during this difficult period that we dispel the many stereotypes that exist about our public service.

It is also critical particularly at this time that we offer support to those public servants and their families who have been affected. We are at a crossroads in our history where the role and direction of government is being scrutinized.

Canada is a great nation that is making great strides to remain competitive in an ever changing global marketplace. Canada's public service is known as one of the best in the world. All Canadians benefit from the many services they deliver which makes Canada the number one country in which to live.

Today I salute the many public servants in my riding of Cumberland-Colchester. I thank them for their dedicated quality service and their commitment to finding better ways to improve Canada.

[Members Of Parliament Retiringallowances Act, June 8th, 1995]

Double dipping.