Jean Augustine

[The Budget, March 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Palliser for his question. I know his concerns are very much like my own, which are for our constituents and for employment opportunities for our constituents.

The whole issue of the free trade agreement is almost a two-way street. We benefit as much from that agreement as do our business people who have the opportunity to operate on the other side.

On the issue of foreign ownership, I will respond by saying that we live in a global village. The world is becoming much smaller as a result of new technologies. Our business people are able to move goods and services across borders which has created opportunities for us to be innovative. We cannot really close our doors or pull the drapes down, as I often say, and keep the lights out because there is just no way we can keep ourselves in a situation where we cannot respond to the free movement of goods and services and people.

As I have expressed, as a Canadian wanting to see us keep our sovereignty and not lose a whole number of things, including culture, et cetera, there is, at the same time, a recognition that we are living in a global village.

[The Budget, March 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in today's debate on budget 2000. I will be splitting my time with the member for Simcoe—Grey.

Let me begin by adding my words of congratulations to the hon. Minister of Finance for delivering a budget that charts a course to greater prosperity for Canada in this 21st century. Budget 2000 builds on the government's commitment to better the lives of all Canadians. This is why we are all here. This is why we are doing the work that we are doing.

I am encouraged to see that budget 2000 reflects the concerns of my constituents, the people of Etobicoke—Lakeshore, who were very much a part of the prebudget consultation process. During meetings held in my riding I heard my constituents, who come from the social agency groups, from community organizations, from small and medium size business groups, say to me that they want government action in three principal areas. They want us to give them some opportunity for tax relief. They want to see some reform to the tax system. They want more spending on social infrastructure and greater economic productivity for Canada.

I was happy to share with them after the budget was delivered that budget 2000 responded to their concerns. The budget is based on four key principles: sound financial management, tax relief, building an innovative economy and investing in skills and knowledge.

Today I will speak briefly to the initiatives in budget 2000 which echo those concerns of my constituents. I will begin with tax relief. The first priority in all the discussions that I held was a tax relief plan in budget 2000, a measure that Canadians have come to expect from the federal government. After many years of sacrifice in order to eliminate Canada's $42 billion deficit, my constituents are beginning to see more of the money they earn returned to them. I was pleased to see that.

My constituents were also pleased to know that budget 2000 introduced a tax reduction plan that will provide real and lasting tax relief for all Canadians to the tune of $58 billion. This five year tax plan is based on two key significant measures which brought changes to the federal tax system. First, the plan will restore full indexation. My constituents were concerned about indexation and bracket creep. Budget 2000 addresses these concerns. My constituents will see the benefits, especially those in the low and middle income bracket. They will see an end to automatic tax increases and an end to the erosion caused by inflation. They will see the results of budget 2000 in deindexation.

Second, the plan will reduce the middle income tax rate to 23% from 26% beginning with a 2% drop to 24% on July 1, 2000.

These changes are real and permanent. They will benefit families with children and low and middle income families in Etobicoke—Lakeshore. It is important to note that low and middle income Canadians in my riding will see their taxes fall by at least 18% and families with children will see their personal income taxes reduced by 21%. This reduction in taxes for families with children is symbolic of the direction in which the federal government is taking in its long term reinvestment in Canada's children.

In addition to the decrease in personal taxes for families and children, the government has made its third significant investment to the Canada child tax benefit. Those of us who sat on different caucus committees were asked to look at the situations of families and at the child tax benefit to see what we could do in that respect. We see an investment of $2.5 billion annually by the year 2004. The Canada child tax benefit will increase maximum benefits to $2,400 for the first child and $2,200 for subsequent children. This is not as high as we can go but it is a move in the right direction. It provides additional funding to support low and middle income families of $9 billion.

Other tax measures in budget 2000 that benefit my constituents are the registered pension plan and the registered retirement savings plan. We will see the elimination of the 5% surtax for middle income Canadians earning up to $85,000. There are several things within the tax relief measures that will benefit my constituents and I want them to know this.

A second area of priority to my constituents is the issue of productivity and the building of a strong and competitive economy. We are living in an urban area with access to the business sector and my constituents want to ensure that we are competitive and that our young people have an opportunity to prosper in the economy.

As Canadians living in a global economy with global challenges and rapid advancements in technology, we are compelled to take advantage of opportunities by developing our country's human capital.

It is the people and countries who excel in innovation, who develop and use new ideas and who use their skills and the tools they need, who will enjoy the brightest future. Canada must continue to invest in research and innovation and must continue to support our small businesses.

At a recent info fair in Etobicoke—Lakeshore we had over 1,000 people participating in workshops to see what can be done and what the federal government is doing to assist small business. I know that budget 2000 will help Canadian businesses to become more competitive internationally by making the tax system more conducive to investment, growth, job creation and innovation. The fair was quite a show and tell in terms of what the federal government has to offer in this regard.

Social infrastructure is another area that the budget has addressed quite strongly because we recognized that it was a high priority for the citizens of Etobicoke—Lakeshore and Canada. Health care and education are also high priorities for the federal government at this point in time.

I want to remind my colleagues also that budget 2000 has committed us to the improvement of the quality of life of Canadians and will support those things that we cherish and hold dear, like our health care system.

In summary, budget 2000 represents a balancing of tax relief and further investments in the areas of priorities to Canadians, such as health, innovation, skills and knowledge. The budget has responded to what we have heard from our constituents. For those of us who are committed to our constituents and committed to bringing their views back to the national level for a response, I think we were all pleased to be able to tell our citizens that their quality of life will continue to be unmatched in the 21st century.

I stand in support of budget 2000. I join with all my colleagues and all those who were pleased that this budget did respond to their concerns.

[Privilege, March 28th, 2000]

Yes, it was very heavy stuff and it was very threatening, because what we were discussing at the time were very sensitive matters. The member put a tape recorder on the table and threatened us that he would be taping whatever was said.

I wonder if my colleague remembers that occasion and the sense that we had across the way as we saw that tape recorder.

[Privilege, March 28th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague knows that I am a member of the committee. My colleague also knows that I have a recollection of what took place.

I am sitting here listening to the member in his defence talking about people who break the rules and people who have no respect for the democratic process.

I would like my colleague to comment on the day—and I speak for my privileges as a member of the committee—when he reached out and put on the table in front of him, in full view of the entire committee, a tape recorder and said that he was recording.

[World Tuberculosis Day, March 27th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, Friday, March 24 was World Tuberculosis Day. The World Health Organization has declared tuberculosis to be a global emergency.

Tuberculosis is killing more people today than ever before. It knows no borders and no one is immune from being afflicted with TB. One-third of the world's population, that is 2 billion people, is estimated to be infected by tuberculosis. The yearly deaths attributed to TB are 2 million. It is greatest among young women and individuals with AIDS, Canada's aboriginal community, the homeless and others who have come into contact with TB through various ways.

TB can be controlled and prevented with the use of Directly Observed Treatment.

I call upon all of us to work with our international partners in health to support the DOTS program and make the prevention of TB a high priority on the public health agenda.

[World Water Day, March 22nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, today is World Water Day.

In 1993 the United Nations declared March 22 as a special day for water, with the aim of sensitizing people to the declining quality and quantity of the world's water supply.

Water constitutes one of the very basic needs of human beings, yet in many parts of the world, especially in Asia, people do not have access to a clean and safe supply of water. Today over one billion people are without access to clean water and over three billion people are without sanitation facilities.

Though 9% of the world's renewable fresh water is found within Canada, our water supplies are vulnerable to global pollution and climate change.

Unsafe or scarce water results in food shortages and serious health problems, such as diarrhea, skin diseases and hepatitis.

I commend the Government of Canada for its efforts to improve access to safe water in communities across Canada and abroad through CIDA projects and the Canada-wide six year green infrastructure program.

[Mozambique, March 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, this evening in Room 253-D Centre Block a very special reception will take place to support flood relief efforts in Mozambique.

For several weeks now, floods in Mozambique have brought enormous suffering to its people. Mozambicans continue to be without adequate clean water, food and shelter despite assistance from Canada and the international community. The situation worsens by the day since many lives are threatened by the outbreak of diseases and the dislodgement of thousands of land mines. The floods have seriously jeopardized Mozambique's ability to feed its people.

I urge all my colleagues to attend the reception this evening and give their support to the flood victims in Mozambique. It is in Room 253-D Centre Block.

[Barakova Mine, March 16th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are concerned when disasters bring hardships to and take the lives of people in regions around the world. I rise today to draw the attention of the House to the Barakova mine disaster which took place last Saturday in the eastern region of the Republic of Ukraine.

The Barakova mine explosion was caused by methane gas mixed with coal. This horrific tragedy is said to be the nation's worst national industrial disaster since its independence in 1991. The disaster claimed the lives of 80 miners, hospitalized many and brought tremendous emotional suffering to families.

I join my constituents in the Ukrainian community and all Canadians in extending my deepest sympathy to the survivors and to the families of those who are now suffering as a result of this disaster.

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

Madam Speaker, what you have just heard and the debate by the member across the way does not deserve any continuation. I will join in the debate and say at the outset that Bill C-20 addresses the concerns of all Canadians.

For years the people in my riding of Etobicoke—Lakeshore and, I am sure, all across the country, have wrestled with the fundamental question of keeping our country together. They have wrestled with such questions as how will legislators deal with the possible secession of a Canadian province.

This bill gives answers to Canadians. This bill, rightfully named the clarity act, gives clarity to the question. Bill C-20 is squarely in line with the Supreme Court of Canada's opinion in the Quebec secession reference which states clearly that it is for the political actors to determine what constitutes a clear majority on a clear question.

With Bill C-20, the federal government is delivering on its responsibility to all Canadians, giving Canadians an opportunity to make an informed decision about the breakup of our country. The clarity act is about good governance and democracy, values that we cherish in our political system.

Madam Speaker, I want you to keep in mind those three words, good governance and democracy, as I proceed. What is happening here today in this debate does not speak to good governance and democracy as we hear from the members across the way; those values that we cherish in our political system, those values that are amplified in this clarity act which sets out principles and procedures under which the Government of Canada and the House of Commons must proceed if ever some day we are to decide on the clarity of the will to secede. It is a framework for the Government of Canada and it has the support of my constituents and Canadians across the country.

There was a recent poll done around December 9 to 17. It was a CROP poll conducted for the Centre for Research and Information on Canada. Some 58% of respondents agreed with the government's intention to clarify the conditions under which secession could be negotiated. It is democracy and good governance.

The numerous amendments by the Bloc Quebecois to the bill lack substance and are clearly an obstruction of the process. When we introduce amendments in the House we do so as members of parliament with the intention of improving the legislation and improving the ideas expressed.

Motions Nos. 1, 3, 6, 8, 10 and 12 as put forward by the Bloc do not have that intention. These motions propose removing the title of the bill, deleting the existing clauses in the preamble, gutting the bill and putting us back into a position whereby Canadians would not be able to get resolution to this thorny issue of national unity.

The Bloc motions proposing the deletion of the bill title is aimed solely at stalling the procedures in the House, during the committee hearings, and are not intended to improve the bill.

On February 15, appearing before the committee studying Bill 99 in the national assembly, the Bloc's intergovernmental affairs critic was already saying, and I quote:

The difficulty we have, is that the bill is so blatantly unacceptable that to propose substantive amendments does not seem to us to be in the order of the day. Proposing amendments to stall the passage of the bill...is something that is in the realm of possibility.

Those who say that they want democracy and that the bill is undemocratic would not at the outset let the process take its course.

My constituents want us to get clarity on the issue and to know that we can get over this difficult question that seems to come around almost in circles. They want us, as members of parliament, to do their bidding, to stand for a clear question and decisions so that however we move we will move with clarity.

The title of the bill speaks to that clarity. Any discussion from across the way that would somehow say that this is undemocratic does not really speak to the intent of the bill.

I have joined in the debate because I want to see clarity on the issue. I want my constituents to know that there are members on this side of the House who want to bring this question to a close, who want to see this legislation pass this House and who want to see us go forward into the 21st century with clarity so that whatever happens, all sides know exactly what the terms are.

I call on my colleagues and those of the opposition, the Bloc Quebecois especially who are opposing this, that they allow the democratic process to take place and let the will of Canadians be heard through this clarity act. I call on everyone of us to join in ensuring that the bill is passed.

[Foreign Affairs, March 13th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The floods in Mozambique have taken their horrific toll in recent weeks and now we have reports that heavy rains and mudslides have displaced land mines in what is already one of the most heavily land mined countries in the world.

What is Canada doing about this threat to the lives of so many distressed people?