Ovid Jackson

[Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion, May 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we realize that farmers in northern Alberta and British Columbia have experienced two wet seasons in a row and have suffered significant production and income loss.

We are also aware of the drought condition that impacted on parts of the maritimes and Ontario in 1997. However assistance under the standing federal-provincial disaster financial assistance arrangement does not apply to the situations cited by the hon. member because it does not cover income losses. It deals with reconstruction and does not provide assistance where insurance is available, particularly crop insurance.

The extension of DFAA assistance to Quebec part time farmers is based on the same rules and the same procedures that applied in previous major disasters such as the Edmonton tornado, the Saguenay floods and the Manitoba Red River flood. The magnitude of these disasters in terms of the broad economic impact were such that a comprehensive subsidiary agreement covering agriculture and industry were implemented.

We believe the existing combination of crop insurance, net income stabilization account, NISA, and companion programs has the best potential to provide the needed support for all Canadian producers in cases of drought and excessive field moisture.

[Supply, April 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I was in the House at the time and I said no. Maybe it was not loud enough, but I said no and shook my head. I was in the House at the time.

[Breakfast For Learning, April 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for the Canadian Living Foundation's Breakfast for Learning Program.

Research shows that children learn better on a full stomach. Their concentration skills and ability to retain information are stronger when they enter the classroom on a full stomach after having a good breakfast.

The Breakfast for Learning Program has been helping thousands of Canadian children. Since 1992, over 24 million meals have been served in many schools across this great country, including those in my riding of Bruce—Grey.

Even the best teachers cannot reach a child without the energy to learn. With a funding request now before the government I urge my colleagues in the House of Commons to support child nutrition programs like Breakfast for Learning. By sending our children into the classroom with full stomachs today we ensure the best possible head start for those who will steer Canada into the future.

[Labelling Of Toys, April 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak to Motion No. 85 in the name of the member for Acadie—Bathurst.

It is important that members have private motions such as this one when they and their constituents have major concerns. There is no question that it is important to get all the facts out.

I noted some very interesting comments from members of the Bloc and the member opposite who just spoke indicating that we have to be vigilant. We need ways and means of protecting not only our children but our society in general through Health Canada, through the kinds of processes we use, and by hearing information from our colleagues in other countries.

There is no question that potential hazards exist from polyvinyl chlorides or PVC plastic toys, but that is not the issue. The issue, as the member before me said, is whether it is really the type of toxin advocated by Greenpeace. Is it something we should pull from the shelves? We use stringent methods of testing in order to make sure this happens.

Health Canada has been involved with the particular testing of PVCs since the 1980s. The department has taken a leadership role over the last 12 years in assessing the implications of PVCs on the health of all Canadians.

The issue is of importance to me. I have two grandchildren, one just born the day before the election. She is 10 months old. She has about two or three teeth, Mr. Speaker, which are quite sharp when you put your hands in her mouth. As the member said, this additive is something that makes things pliable. We want to make sure that it is not toxic because when we listen to people like Dr. Fraser Mustard we know now that the outcome for young children is so important. We know that from the time the child is born the parents should not be involved in smoking and they should not be involved in alcohol or any dangerous drugs that will interfere with the child. The first three years are absolutely critical, we know that. We know how the brain grows in the first six years.

I have been paying particular attention to a CBC program called Grow Baby Grow and it is fascinating to see the outcome, when children are looked after properly. It makes for a much better nation, it makes for great citizens, it makes for people who will take our places when we retire and we know we will be in good hands. We need to protect our kids.

There is no question that I want to be vigilant, I want parents to be vigilant, but I also want to make sure that when these tests are done they are valid and that the science being used is not invalid and will create problems for the industry.

The issue of phthalates in children's products, especially the DEHP, has been investigated by Health Canada. It has been investigated by many foreign governments as well, including Sweden, New Zealand, England and the United States. Suffice it to say the decision on DINP will await the completion of the scientific investigation now under way by Health Canada. Preliminary results were expected this spring and we hope we will have them soon. Should investigations indicate there is a danger or a risk to children the department of course will not hesitate to pull these things off the shelf and make sure that a threat to our children does not exist.

We have to be consistent, we have to be responsible and we have to use a professional approach to the testing. The government's ongoing commitment to the health of all Canadians is extremely important. The government will listen to all the information we can get and we will be vigilant in making sure that our citizens are protected.

I thank the member for his intervention. I think it is important that we have the debate. I cannot support the bill because, as has been said by my colleague earlier on, we want to make sure that when we pull things and put restrictions on the industry it is valid and we are using scientific information.

[Petitions, April 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I would like to present a petition signed by 202 of my constituents in the riding of Bruce—Grey.

These petitioners hail from communities like Paisley, Durham, Wiarton and Shallow Lake. They outline their concerns regarding the multilateral agreement on investment. They ask that parliament impose a moratorium on the Canadian participation in the MAI negotiations until full public debate takes place in Canada.

[Hillcrest School Reunion, April 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my congratulations to Hillcrest School in my riding of Bruce—Grey which will be celebrating its 50th anniversary reunion this weekend in Owen Sound.

Since 1948 Hillcrest has provided primary and junior high school education in the Owen Sound area. It has grown from a building housing 150 primary students to a large junior high school of 700 students and a staff of 60.

Reunions are always full of memories. Returning staff and students will relive the thrill of the first day, remember obstacles they had to overcome and meet with friends. They will all get together to think about the dreams they had in the past and the future they will have together.

As both the present and past students assemble at Hillcrest this weekend to celebrate I offer them my best wishes and congratulations. I know that this weekend will be full of youthful memories, old friends and good times.

[Questions On The Order Paper, April 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the department has tried to respond in a timely fashion. I will make note of the hon. member's concerns and pass them on.

Sometimes when members ask questions the information takes a great deal of time because the data has to come from many sources and in some cases it dates back over a long period of time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Government Response To Petitions, April 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 84 petitions.

[Curling, March 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, last weekend the women's and men's junior curling teams took gold at the world junior championship held in Thunder Bay.

I am proud to congratulate the Canadian team and would like to make special mention of a member of the men's team from my riding of Bruce—Grey.

Andy Ormsby, the junior men's team second, is from Meaford, a great and beautiful small town on the wonderful shores of Georgian Bay.

Curling is one of the many sports where Canadians are showcasing their skills and dedication to excellence. As a former high school coach, it is wonderful to see another generation of Canadians come to the world stage as effective team players and skilled performers.

On behalf of all Canadians I want to congratulate our junior men's and women 's curling teams for a job well done.

[Reserve Force Act, March 23rd, 1998]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak on Bill C-232 presented by my colleague from Okanagan—Coquihalla, an act to facilitate participation in the reserve forces of Canada.

I fully support participation in the reserves. In fact, in my riding of Bruce—Grey we have the Grey and Simcoe Foresters and Lieutenant-Colonel Rutherford who went to Somalia. We know of the good work of citizen soldiers. They serve their country very well. It is actually quite a good program.

The Public Service of Canada already has regulations in place that facilitate the granting of leave to its employees for this reason. Military leave for employees in the federal government is subject to reserve forces training leave regulations under the National Defence Act and leave with pay and without pay policies of the Treasury Board.

Crown corporations operate under their own terms and conditions of employment. Many have included military leave provisions for their employees who are reservists.

I am also pleased to report that approximately 3,000 other employers in Canada have participated in the provisions for military leave on their terms and conditions of employment. In its current form the proposed Bill C-232 does not bring any new benefit to reservists and it does not meet Canadian forces operational requirements. I therefore have no choice but to oppose the bill.

I draw the attention of members to clause 2(1) of the proposed legislation as it actually reduces the current flexibility of the length of military leave and its compensation. First, this provision would be more restrictive than the current treasury board policy which does not limit military leave to a two month period and allows a choice of leave with or without pay to the discretion of the deputy minister.

In addition, the restriction of two months of leave would not meet some requirements on United Nations peacekeeping missions which are at least 10 months and could be in excess of 12 months for United Nations military observers.

Second, the provision does not address the issue of compensation. It only provides for an annual leave of absence for a period not exceeding two months. As I have pointed out, currently public service employees have the choice to request leave with pay or leave without pay for most reservist activities.

Third, this provision does not provide any flexibility to deputy ministers who currently may grant or deny military leave. At the time of a downsized public service it is essential that deputy ministers keep some flexibility in the operational requirements of their departments.

Notwithstanding, deputy ministers have been granting military leave in accordance with Treasury Board policies. Between April 1991 and March 1997 an average of 314 public service employees per year were granted military leave with pay and an average of 20 public service employees per year were granted leave without pay.

It must also be noted that since 1970 there has been no adjudicated complaint for not granting military leave in the public service. As well, during the gulf war deputy ministers supported granting a leave of absence without pay to employees wanting to serve in the Canadian Armed Forces whether voluntary or involuntary. These employees were guaranteed the protection of their employment status regardless of the length of the leave of absence.

I would like to address another point. Employees of the government and crown corporations are subject to different legislation and regulations. Therefore these latter employees cannot be treated in the same manner as is being proposed in clause 2(1). It is my view that clause 2(1) of the proposed legislation would place more restrictions on the participation of reservists. Furthermore it is my view that clause 2(2) would have an effect on the participation of the reservists and that private sector employers would view the legislation as unjustified interference by the federal government in their labour relations practices.

The Minister of National Defence already has the authority to enter into agreements with any employer. Therefore clause 2(2) would not provide any new authority that does not exist already. Moreover it would be impractical for the Minister of National Defence to enter into an agreement with an estimated 10,000 current employers of reservists.

The possibility of using legislation to mandate employer support for military leave and to provide job protection for reservists serving the Canadian forces has already been studied. It was found that such legislation could lead employers to discriminate against reservists in their hiring practices. As well, it would result in a significant financial burden for certain employers and would cause a general backlash on the part of some employer associations.

In closing, I reiterate my position. I fully support the participation in the reserve forces. I must oppose the bill because it would not promote participation and it would not make it easier for citizens of Canada who wish to participate in reservists activities.

On another note, I have been a member of the Grey and Simcoe Foresters in my riding of Bruce—Grey since 1968. I speak to the men and women who participated whether it was the ice storm we recently had in Ontario and Quebec or the floods out west. There is no doubt in mind that reservists are necessary and important. They have certain skills.

For instance, we could have a medical doctor who is maybe a professor emeritus of some university with specialist skills in case of a sudden chemical war. In situations where their services may be required there is no doubt in my mind that these men and women will volunteer their services. Canadians are well known for this. Dr. Bethune who went to school in the riding of Bruce—Grey participated in China with blood transfusions and his work helping people overseas is well noted.

I reiterate that I love the reservists. I think they play a great role. It is great that we can draft an engineer working for a firm to go overseas to rebuild a bridge that was damaged in a war torn place.

The Canadian example is great for the world. We export our democracy and our civil way of living. We would like the world to be like us because we are a great country.