Murray Calder

[International Trade, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that both the official opposition and the fourth party have a limited understanding of international trade.

The Leader of the Opposition says that he cannot think of a single example when the Prime Minister's foreign travel has produced results for Canadians. The leader of the fourth party said that the Prime Minister should stay in Canada. Both leaders fail to comprehend the importance of building critical international relationships for Canadian business.

Team Canada missions led by the Prime Minister have created valuable trade relations with many countries, leading to $24 billion in economic benefits for all sectors of Canadian business.

It is a fact that international trade leads to economic growth, jobs and prosperity in Canada.

[Poultry Industry, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, why did the chicken cross the road? It was to get to the food bank.

The chicken farmers of Canada are calling upon all members of parliament and senators, their families and their staff to enter the great Canadian chicken cook-off recipe contest.

For the winner we will ship 1,000 kilograms of Canadian chicken to the food bank, soup kitchen or charity of choice. That is enough chicken to make over 3,000 meals for Canadians in constituencies the real winners.

The information on the contest has been sent to all MPs' and senators' offices. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to your recipe.

[British Columbia, March 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, along the same line there has been plenty of rhetoric from the Reform Party about B.C. Let us look at some of the facts.

In 1998-99 transfers to British Columbia by the federal government will exceed $3.3 billion. This will account for 16% of B.C.'s estimated revenues. That works out to $825 per person.

The lowest interest rates in years means that B.C. has saved $340 million over the last three years. By increasing the cash floor component to the Canada health and social transfer, B.C. will get an additional $920 million over six years. On the infrastructure program, $277 million for B.C.

British Columbia needs more Liberal MPs, people who understand local issues, people—

[Petitions, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition from members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, in particular Local 577, and other residents in my riding of Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey.

The petitioners request that parliament restore the rights of free collective bargaining for all postal workers.

[International Women's Week, March 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my compliments to the Reform member across the way.

As an MP from a rural riding I have seen firsthand the outstanding contributions that women make to rural communities. My wife Brenda and I have farmed together for many years. We are partners in everything we do. In fact she is now the full time farmer.

Twenty-six per cent of Canadian farms are operated by women and these women make a valuable contribution to the fabric of Canadian agriculture.

The farm women's movement during the past 30-odd years has focused on roles, responsibilities and the rights of farm women as equal partners. They have addressed important issues such as land ownership, training, rural restructuring, environmental, health and safety issues.

Farm women play an important role in fostering a broad public understanding about the needs of and potential for Canadian agriculture.

I take the occasion presented by International Women's Week to thank farm women and their leaders for their contribution to our agricultural sector.

[Petitions, February 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition from the residents of Mount Forest, Dundalk and Shelburne, Ontario. The petitioners request that Parliament raise the tax exemption on allowances for volunteer firefighters from $500 to $1,000.

[Volunteer Firefighters, February 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, volunteer firefighters provide a vital and essential service to Canadians. In most communities across Canada they are the only firefighting resource. In Ontario alone there are 17,000 volunteer firefighters in 566 departments. These volunteers save Ontario taxpayers more than $1.4 billion a year.

Fire departments are now finding it increasingly difficult to find volunteers who meet their high standards and who are willing to donate many hours of their time.

To recognize the importance of the volunteer firefighters, I call on the Minister of Finance to raise the tax exemption on their allowances from $500 to $1,000.

Every day in Canada volunteer firefighters donate their time, talent and energy for the good of their communities. Every day they risk their lives to protect their fellow citizens.

[Canadian Wheat Board Act, February 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak on behalf of Bill C-4.

The amendments contained in Bill C-4 are based on nearly three years of extensive consultation and discussion with western grain farmers to determine what kind of grain marketing organization they want. Western Canadian grain farmers have asked to retain the Canadian Wheat Board but they also want a more democratic, accountable and responsive Canadian Wheat Board, one that is truly in their hands, allowing them to shape the Canadian Wheat Board to meet their needs.

That is what the proposed changes in Bill C-4 actually provide for. The proposed changes in Bill C-4 would put more power into the hands of producers than they have ever had before throughout the Canadian Wheat Board's 63 year history.

The proposed changes would modernize the governance of the CWB. They would improve the accountability to the producers and through the creation of a producer elected majority board of directors and, most important, the marketing changes proposed in Bill C-4 are enabling. They would give the farmers the tools and the power necessary to shape the CWB's marketing structure to fit their present and their future needs.

I would like to address some of the questions that have been raised to clear up some of the misconceptions that have arisen around Bill C-4 and its proposed amendments to the CWB act.

Some farmers have asked if they would have more control under the new system of CWB governance. The answer is yes. The 15 member board of directors would be comprised of 10 producer elected directors and 5 federal appointees. In essence the farmer elected directors would enjoy a two to one majority on this board. Directors would have effective control of the strategic direction of the new CWB and would be able to reflect the views and the needs of farmers in future operational and marketing decisions.

These elected directors would not be subject to dismissal by the Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board. Only those who elected them would be able to accomplish this through a subsequent election.

Under Bill C-4 all directors would be entitled to complete disclosure of all CWB facts and figures, bar none. That is transparency. They would be able to examine the prices at which grain is sold and the premiums achieved and all the operating costs and whether the CWB is operating effectively. With their full knowledge of the CWB and its global competition the directors would be in the best position to assess what information should be made public and what for commercial reasons should remain confidential.

So why is the board of directors not 100% producer elected? That was another question asked. Under the proposed legislation the government would continue to maintain a substantial financial commitment to the CWB. The government would continue to guarantee the CWB's initial payments, its borrowing and its credit sales made under the credit grain sales program.

This represents a strong case for the government's having a role in appointing some of the members of the board of directors. In addition, the CWB has the public policy responsibilities. For example, the CWB is charged with issuing all wheat and barley export licences for all of Canada, not just the prairies.

I have heard the question why is the CWB not legally obliged to get the best price for farmers' grain. The CWB does seek to obtain the best prices possible. In fact, it is a matter of policy.

However, making this the corporation's legal objective would be difficult because the CWB seeks to obtain the best price for producers jointly through pool accounts. It is not always possible to show, after the fact, if higher returns could have been realized for individual producers because a different set of marketing decisions may have been made. Therefore, to make the CWB legally responsible to achieve the best price for individual farmers would result in countless legal challenges being made to the board's marketing decisions. It would sort of be like dealing with it by 20:20 hindsight.

Looking to the future, the board of directors would be responsible for ensuring that the sales programs would be well managed and that the CWB operated in the best interests of the producers. This would be preferable to taking a legalistic approach.

Why does the CWB need to establish a contingency fund? What would this money be used for? These are more questions which have been asked.

A contingency fund would be developed in order for the CWB to make adjustments to the initial payments during the crop year on its own authority, without the delays involved in getting government approval, to provide for potential losses in cash trading operations and to provide for an early pool cash-out.

The contingency fund would provide the CWB with the ability to adjust the initial payments and to get money into the farmers' hands more quickly. I am a farmer. I know how important that last statement is.

Given the history of adjusted initial payments the related risk would be minimal. It would be less than the related benefits to farmers. It would be up to the board of directors, with its two-thirds producer elected majority, to determine if, when and how the contingency fund should be created. How it is set up will be the responsibility of the board.

Why can the Auditor General of Canada not examine the CWB's books? The CWB currently retains an independent firm of chartered accountants to audit its operations. Through its pool accounts the CWB is managing farmers' money, not government appropriations. Therefore it has always made sense that a private sector auditor, rather than the auditor general, audit the CWB's books.

Under Bill C-4 the CWB would cease to be an agent of Her Majesty and a crown corporation. It would become a mixed enterprise. This would reduce even further the justification for involving the office of the auditor general.

Finally, some of the private sector users of financial reports take comfort in the fact that private sector auditors, unlike the auditor general, are liable under the law for negligence and other professional misconduct.

The proposed changes in Bill C-4 are balance and fair. The government realizes that the changes contained in Bill C-4 cannot hope to satisfy all parties. I think we have all heard that in the House today in what has been a polarized debate among representatives of the western grain producers.

The government, nonetheless, feels that the proposed changes to the CWB would equip farmers with the tools and the power to shape the CWB as they see fit so that it can meet the needs of the farmers of today and the farmers of the future.

[Rural Canada, February 6th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

To be competitive in the next century, rural Canada needs a state of the art communication system with which to converse with the world.

What is the minister doing to help rural Canadians communicate on the information highway by the year 2000?

[Supply, February 5th, 1998]

First, when we came to office, we set about putting our fiscal house in order. We did this because we knew that it was the essential foundation for lower interest rates and higher economic growth. That means jobs. That is exactly what we have achieved. We knew that without a fiscal turnaround we would never be in a position to pursue broader tax reduction.

In his first budget in February 1994, the Minister of Finance shared with Canadians this government's vision for the future and firmly stated how we would get there.

The Minister of Finance declared that we are pursuing a balanced approach to fundamental reform to create jobs, to continue to care for those in need and to get the deficit down. We have done that.

Our sound judgement, our balanced approach and prudent planning have secured important gains for Canadians, and it would be the furthest thing from the truth to suppose that this government would risk all that we have achieved together.

Let us look briefly at the achievements. As I said earlier, this government realized in 1993 that the key to a prosperous future for Canadians was getting Canada's books in order. Our prudent and balanced deficit control plan, centred on cutting government spending, has met its targets. In fact, we have exceeded them.

It is worth repeating the fundamental facts of our stewardship because it is our proven ability to keep our promises that should reassure Canadians that we will continue to keep them today and in the years ahead.

In 1993-94 the federal deficit stood at $42.5 billion, or about 6% of our economy. We said that we would bring that down to 3% of GDP within three years. This is a benchmark that is used in Europe and is centred in the Maastricht treaty, and that we would not stop until the budget was balanced. We exceeded our own target on the timeframe of balancing the budget.

By last year, fiscal 1996-97, the final deficit figure was down to $8.9 billion. That is 1.1% of GDP. That is $20 billion lower than the previous year for the biggest year over year improvement in our history. At $8.9 billion, it is the smallest federal deficit in 20 years.

In fact, we are now internally borrowing the money that we need. We are not borrowing internationally. There no more outside of the country credit leak, and it represent a resounding decline from some $33 billion since we came to office. I think that is a very good record.

Contributing to this success have been the unprecedented spending restraint measures introduced in our budgets. Also contributing to our deficit success is the new expenditure management system that the government has put in place, a system on one hand that affords departments greater flexibility in budgeting while on the other hand forces tradeoffs and reins in spending.

Last year program spending, that is all government spending except interest payments on the debt, fell by more than $7 billion to just under $105 billion. This means that between 1993 and 1994 and the last fiscal year, total program spending has been reduced by $15.2 billion, and our deficit progress has delivered real and rewarding results for Canada.

Let us take a look at interest rates. About three years ago short term interest rates in Canada were almost 2.5 percentage points higher than those in the United States. By last fall, they were almost two points lower than what was in the United States.

This is not an abstract achievement. It has meant, for instance, that a homeowner taking out or renewing a $100,000 mortgage for 25 years has saved $3,300 a year. A consumer, for instance, taking out a $10,000 car loan has saved $320 a year. It gets better. Savings on a $25,000 small business loan, the engine of our economy in this country, over 10 years would total $7,500. That is a definite advantage for small business.

Figures like that clearly illustrate the real benefits that this government's sound judgment and balanced and prudent management has secured for Canadians. That means lower deficits and lower interest rates.

We all know interest rates will be affected by many factors such as domestic conditions which can change and many global influences which are beyond the control of even the largest economies. We have seen this very clearly recently as Canada has been buffeted by what everybody refers to as the Asian currency flu.

Imagine what would have happened to this country back in 1991, 1992 or even 1993 when we were running a $42.5 billion deficit in this country with interest rates in double digits. It would have killed us as a country. However, through prudent management we got our country on line and within safe measures before something like that happened. It saved our bacon.

However, because our underlying economic fundamentals are now strong, as I have said before, we are in much better shape to meet this type of development than we were just a few years ago. That is why, despite the fact that our interest rates have increased, they are still below U.S. rates. That clearly shows that we have the right economic policies to weather the storm and to ensure that continued strong growth and job creation prevail.

Job creation is indeed another vital area in which we have made significant progress since coming to office. Between 1989 and 1993 some members in this House may recall that employment had dropped by over 100,000 jobs. Since this government has come to power, employment is up now by 1.1 million jobs. These are all in the private sector. Nearly nine out of ten of these jobs are full time.

Last December, for instance, employment increased by 62,000 jobs, contributing to a total employment growth of 363,000 jobs in 1997 as a whole. At 8.6%, December's unemployment rate, that is at the lowest level since September 1990.

The very real results of our second sound and balanced judgment in these three areas, the deficit, the interest rates and employment, are quite clear and, as far as I am concerned, very impressive.

There is more good news. The real GDP, the measure of economic growth, has risen by 4.1% in the third quarter of 1997. While the month to month figures can fluctuate, the growth has continued on average in the fourth quarter. In other words, it is an upward march. As a result, the consensus of the private sector forecast is that Canada's economy will continue to expand into 1998 and beyond.

Here is the type of evidence that backs up this outlook. Do not take my word here. Manufacturing shipments remain on an upward trend with the average growth for October and November running at about 5% and above on the third quarter. When the hon. member for Wild Rose asks about the dollar, that is one of the reasons. Because of that dollar our exports are very competitive. Merchandise exports increased by 1.5% in November and reached a record high.

Business investments have surged by some 25% over the past year and remain at a record high. Housing starts were up by 16% in 1997. Vehicle sales were up by 17.8%. Since its 6.6% plunge in late 1989 and late 1993, real disposable income has stabilized. Consumer confidence which declined by 6.9% between 1989 and 1993 has surged by 18% over the past year alone as the recovery has fully taken hold in the domestic economy. Consumer confidence has reached its highest level in eight years.

These are all very significant achievements but the real issue is what lies ahead. That is what we are talking about here today. According to the member for Medicine Hat what lies ahead is a 180 degree about face. He wants Canadians to believe that what lies ahead is a government prepared to abandon a course of balanced and sound prudent management that has brought Canadians the rewards that I have just described.

He wants Canadians to believe the government that is about to take this nation to a balanced budget in 1998-1999 is also a government that will take this nation back into the dark ages of overspending and deficit financing. That is absolutely wrong. This will not happen. We are not the party that changes its economic principles and political focus just for the sake of votes.

In the 1997 election I was the only one who stood at an all candidates debate and said if you want a tax cut vote for those guys, do not vote for me, and I am back. As the prime minister has said, we will never again allow the financial health of our country to get out of control. As the finance minister declared last October, responsible financial management is not a fad or a phase. It is a permanent feature of a successful society. These statements are the statements of the government that is going to take this nation into the next millennium financially healthy and strong.