Lost his last election, in 2004, with 39% of the vote.
Petitions October 26th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have a petition that states that the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren is a natural and fundamental one and the denial of access can constitute abuse and can have a serious and detrimental emotional impact on both the grandparents and the grandchildren.
Agriculture October 26th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of agriculture.
Over the weekend I had a chance to talk with five farmers in my riding about low commodity prices. What I would like to know and what they would like to know, concerning the suffering it is causing in rural Canada today, is whether the minister is aware of it. What does he plan to do to address this problem?
National Co-Operatives October 21st, 1998
Mr. Speaker, last week was National Co-op Week.
In recognition of this event I invite members of the House and all Canadians to celebrate the contributions of the men and women who have chosen co-operative enterprise as their way of promoting the social and economic well-being of Canadian communities.
Some 10,000 Canadian co-operatives are a powerful social and economic force in Canada today.
Co-operatives have proven themselves to be a major job creator. In 1996 they employed more than 151,000 Canadians and generated a combined business volume of $36.3 billion.
I wish to congratulate all those in the co-operative movement for their considerable achievements over the past year and I invite all Canadians to join in the celebration of co-ops in Canada.
Supply October 5th, 1998
Madam Speaker, as my hon. colleague said, this is really a speech that we have to take with a grain of salt from what I have heard.
Reform's 1995 taxpayers' budget, which Reformers have cited so many times, called for $3 billion worth of cuts in transfers to the provinces for health, education and welfare. Their plan also called for a further $3.6 billion to cuts in other transfers, including equalization payments. On top of that, the $7.4 billion that the Reform wanted to slash from programs was funded directly by the federal government such as seniors pensions, employment insurance and an additional $1 billion worth of cuts to social security spending. That is $15 billion worth of cuts in social programs. I think the member is talking through his hat.
Supply October 5th, 1998
Madam Speaker, I listened to the hon. member across the way recite Reform dogma. I am wondering if he really understands what tax credits to the provinces mean because that was part of his speech.
We have watched the economy grow because we have the deficit down to a zero balance and we have the government budget under control. The rest of the countries in the world see that we are serious about fiscal restraint. We have had economic growth of 4% in the last few years and this year looks like it will be around 3%. That means to say that the provinces have got 4% more and 3% more. Interest rates are at a 30-year low which means the servicing on their debt is lower. Does the member really understand all this?
Canada Student Loans September 25th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver East regarding the Canada student loans program.
Let me begin by assuring the hon. member and the House that the government is always very much aware of the needs and problems of young Canadians pursuing post-secondary education. It is this very concern that prompted the government to enter into consultations with the public, the provinces and the territories on ways to improve the system of providing loans to Canadians students.
Indeed, last February's budget incorporated many of the recommendations of the report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, measures which ensure Canadians have access to post-secondary education.
The fact is that developments affecting the student loans program have rendered the motion under discussion largely irrelevant. Let me illustrate.
The motion calls first of all for the reversal of the privatization of the Canada student loans program. But the Canada student loans program has not been privatized.
Prior to 1995 the program provided financial assistance to students in the form of 100% government guaranteed loans from private sector lenders. Lenders financed and distributed the loans to students and were responsible for collection. There was little incentive for the lenders to police the loans, so the federal government ended up holding more than $1 billion in unpaid loans for which it had reimbursed the lenders under the guarantee provisions.
In 1995 new financing arrangements were introduced which enhanced lender accountability and improved client service. But these arrangements do not by any means constitute privatization. Governments, not the lenders, continue to determine student aid policy and the nature of the Canada student loans program.
Under the new risk-shared financing agreement, government payments against loan guarantees will decline from $382 million in 1996-97 to $67 million in 2000-2001. Abandoning these arrangements, which I assume is the intent of the hon. member's motion, would cost Canadian taxpayers a great deal of money. Government payments against loan guarantees would increase. We would lose the benefits of sharing the risk with the lenders and the government would have to pay penalties for breaking lender agreements before their expiry in the year 2000.
Next, the motion calls for the government to reject proposals for income contingent loan repayment. There is no difficulty here since the government has already rejected proposals for income contingent repayment. Students, lenders, the provinces, the territories, education organizations and groups made it clear that they do not consider income contingent repayment a viable option. The repayment schedule would be too long and accumulated interest payments would be too onerous.
Ontario is the only province that has shown any interest in income contingent repayment. But while the federal government worked closely with Ontario to analyse various models of such a system, the government has also respected the view of the remaining provinces, territories and stakeholders.
Lenders declined Ontario's invitation to implement a provincial income contingent repayment scheme for 1999. What the federal government has done, however, is incorporated income sensitivity into the new interest relief program and debt reduction measures announced in the federal budget.
The motion calls upon the government to implement a federal student grant program. Once again the Government of Canada has already done that. Canada study grants are available for the following students: high need part-time students; students with a permanent disability; female doctoral students in certain fields of study and, as announced in the recent budget, students with dependants who can demonstrate a financial need. Canada study grants, totalling $145 million, will be available in 1998-99.
In addition, the $2.5 billion Canadian millennium scholarship fund will provide an average of $3,000 each year, to a maximum of $15,000, to more than 100,000 low and middle income students for the next 10 years.
That leaves us with the consideration of the motion's last recommendation, accessibility as a new standard for post-secondary education.
On this point I should emphasize that accessibility has been a fundamental principle of the Canada student loans program since its inception in 1964. Indeed, the government's ongoing commitment to the principle of accessibility was clearly demonstrated in the 1998 budget. A key element of that budget was the Canadian opportunities strategy which will help ensure that Canadians continue to have affordable access to post-secondary education.
The federal government is working toward harmonization of Canada student loans with provincial student loans. Accessibility is one of the key principles of a harmonized student loan regime.
Since the federal government's interest in post-secondary education is shared with the provinces and the territories, the government carries out continuous consultations with student groups, educators, lenders, provincial governments and the territories. Further developments in financing and ensuring accessibility to post-secondary education will involve all of these groups, as they have in the past.
The Government of Canada is pursuing a course that is in the best interests of students across the country. They are our future. Considered in the light of the work that has already been done, we must conclude that the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver East is irrelevant.
Agriculture September 25th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, during the summer the minister of agriculture conducted a rural dialogue. Workbooks were sent to thousands of Canadians and 33 workshops were held across the country.
Could the parliamentary secretary assure the House that the dedication of the rural residents who participated in the rural dialogue was not a waste of their time but will pay real dividends for their communities?
Supply September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure of sitting on the standing committee on agriculture with the member for Brandon—Souris. There are a few things we have disagreed on there.
The member knows me as an active farmer living in rural Canada. I am also a gun owner. I have black powder at home, shotguns, a 44-40, a .303 and a .22. I can go on. They are all properly stored and I have no problem with registration.
Some of the speakers on the other side have said that if we register these long guns in a very short period of time police officers are going to come into our homes and confiscate our firearms.
We have had registration of handguns since 1934. When the member for Brandon—Souris was mayor did he instruct his police force to go into homes of residents in that city and confiscate their handguns because he knew where they were, where they were registered? I think not.
I would like the member to think about this and comment on it. Registration is $10 for ten long guns or a thousand because it is not just restricted to ten. We tried to make this as economical as possible. In my opinion this is the cheapest insurance policy we are ever going to get. If someone stole my shotgun and they happened to be out in Manitoba and they were pulled over they would be asked about the ownership. Under the new law they will have to produce registration and ownership. I would get my shotgun back.
Gun Control September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the gun lobby assembled on Parliament Hill today will hear from an American, John Lott, who professes that if more people had guns, there would be less crime.
After the tragic and senseless school shootings in Arkansas, Lott wrote that fewer people would have been killed or injured if the teachers had been armed. The same John Lott told an Alberta radio audience that the homicide rate for white Americans is comparable to that for white Canadians.
I want John Lott and his American gun lobby friends to know that dividing people by race is not how we do things here in Canada. It did not work for the Reform Party during the election and it will not work for the gun lobby now.
Our government is committed to gun control that protects all Canadians. That is the Canadian way.
Reform Party Of Canada June 2nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party will be kicking off its united alternative campaign to attract new members with meetings this Wednesday and Thursday. But these meetings will be people who are already members of another party, Bloc Quebecois MPs.
The Leader of the Opposition would do well to remember what happened the last time we had a party leader who was so desperate to win government that he formed an unholy alliance with a group of Quebec separatists. The man was Brian Mulroney and his gift to Canada was none other than Lucien Bouchard.
The Reform Party should remember that western Canadians thanked Mr. Mulroney for that gift by voting out of office every single one of his Progressive Conservatives in the west.
Unless Reformers change their strategy, maybe they will get the same treatment.