Lost his last election, in 2004, with 33% of the vote.
Water March 22nd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, a recent report by the Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy has called into question the government's commitment to clean up the Great Lakes.
As today is world water day, can the Minister of the Environment tell the House what is being done to protect both the quality and quantity of Canada's water resources?
Family And Children Services March 11th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Family and Children Services of Leeds and Grenville located in my riding.
This organization has recently received its accreditation from the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Society. I am proud to say that it received 94% full compliance, the requirement set out by that association.
I commend all those involved and thank them for their tremendous efforts made on behalf of all children in their care.
Congratulations to the Family and Children Services on receiving this prestigious status and on its outstanding contributions to our community.
The Environment March 9th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.
There has been some criticism that the recent federal budget all but ignored environmental issues.
For the benefit of the House, could the minister respond to this rather misguided criticism?
Bruce Wylie March 5th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, following his historic radio addresses of the second world war, Winston Churchill often commented that he was never comfortable with the notion that he inspired his nation. He conceded that he might have been their voice, but the people provided the heart.
Throughout the ice storm of 1998 the people of Leeds—Grenville were updated, counselled and inspired through our local radio station CFJR, and in particular the voice of Leeds—Grenville, broadcaster Bruce Wylie.
Yesterday at the Canadian Music Week Media Awards, Bruce Wylie was awarded the Ontario Association of Broadcasters Broadcaster of the Year Award.
His work on behalf of our community makes him a legend in our area. Now the rest of Canada gets a glimpse of the valuable and professional manner in which he carries out his work.
True to form, Bruce and his tuxedo were delayed by the snow storm and he was not able to attend the presentation.
I sincerely want to congratulate Bruce, his wife Eileen, his sons Ben, Dan and Tom, as well as the staff and management of CFJR and the River, as the prestige of this award is a tribute to them all.
Supply March 4th, 1999
Madam Speaker, I want the hon. member to recognize that I think this is a very serious issue. He has expressed it very eloquently.
To characterize the anomaly, in the finance minister's words, when we have a tax system and we are implementing policy changes and regulation changes simultaneously, anomalies happen. To characterize this as discrimination are we also, with the progressivity of the income tax act, discriminating against people who have the skills and knowledge that the marketplace is going to pay more for? Is that following that argument to its logical conclusion?
I have a specific question. The Reform Party, rightly sometimes and wrongly other times, accuses us of not answering but I want to ask a very direct question.
I spent last week on a very informative tour of eastern Canada with the heritage committee. The reason I was not at home with my son is that the committees cannot travel when the House is sitting because the Reform Party will not sign the pairing sheet. So the rubber is hitting the road here, guys. If they were concerned about all families, not just their families, is the Reform Party willing to agree to sign the pairing sheet so that we can manage our job and spend more time with our families too?
The Budget March 3rd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I do not think my hon. colleague intended to, but he referred to the absence of a member from the House. I think he has been here long enough to know that is not appropriate.
The Budget March 3rd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I just want to ask the member a quick question. He talked about the need for sustainable incomes in farming. I think if the farm crisis shows us anything in this country, it is the value of supply management.
I am wondering if he would see this as an appropriate time to bring the hog producers under the supply management umbrella.
1999 Canada Winter Games March 2nd, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to provide an update at the midpoint of the Canada Winter Games taking place in Corner Brook and nearby communities in Newfoundland.
Following the first week of competition, local volunteers did a masterful job. Despite difficult weather conditions they arranged transportation for over 1,600 athletes, coaches and officials to leave Corner Brook while a similar number were arriving for the second week of action.
After week one, Ontario leads the medal standings and the race for the Canada Games flag. Manitoba leads British Columbia for the Centennial Cup which is awarded to the province showing the greatest improvement in its results from the previous Canada Winter Games.
These games are a celebration shaped by the vision of the host community and animated by the thrill of competition and the pride of athletes striving to achieve their personal best. The experience changes the lives of thousands of young athletes and the life of the host city and surrounding region.
I know that all hon. members and Canadians everywhere join me in congratulating the participants and organizers in Corner Brook on their outstanding efforts—
Transit Passes February 8th, 1999
Yes, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the chance to discuss the motion before us concerning the tax status of employer provided transit passes.
On the surface this initiative would seem destined to digress into what is an all too familiar confrontation, to which the previous speaker alluded, between the environment and the economy. Framed in those narrow terms I know how that story will end, but I honestly feel that this issue has the potential to encourage needed debate on a number of important issues. We have heard that already this morning in previous speeches.
The first issue debate around this point raises is the notion of costs. I have seen a number of reports both in Canada and the United States that outline the financial impacts of a whole variety of transit benefit programs. I was struck by what was not included in the cost benefit analysis. Things such as the health costs associated with increasingly poor air quality are not included in the calculation of whether this is a good or bad idea.
There are remedial costs associated with cleaning up the air. We will have to do it sooner or later and somebody will have to pay for it. There is lost productivity associated with traffic gridlock. One of the previous speakers used a calculation that 100 cars equal two buses. If we can put more people on buses then people will spend less time in traffic jams and more time engaged in the productive activities they are hired and paid to do. There are the costs associated with the construction and maintenance of the infrastructure needed to support the number of cars on the highways and bridges.
I am not saying for a minute that including these costs would cause the equation to lean in one direction or another, but I am saying they are rather conspicuous by their absence. The fact that some of these costs are difficult to quantify should not be rationale for ignoring them completely.
These types of costs transcend not only ministries in the federal government. They also transcend levels of government. It is important to remember there is only one taxpayer in the country. We are fooling ourselves if we think that over time the costs we are not calculating will simply go away. The Sydney Tar Ponds are a $2 billion shrine to that kind of nonsensical thinking. Sooner or later these costs have to be captured and have to be paid.
To make matters worse, we are not only passing these costs on to taxpayers that had no share in any benefits these initiatives might have realized, but we are in some cases passing these costs on to our children, our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren. Those kinds of debts and leaving that kind of legacy of debt are extremely hard to justify on any level.
The challenge we face is to meet our own needs without compromising the capacity of future generations to meet their needs. To that end I think government has a definite role in the identification, the calculation and the verification of the full costs and benefits of activities and in the development of policies that allocate these costs appropriately.
The impact on the natural and human resources of the nation need to be taken into account for any decisions we make. This motion also brings into question the fundamental concept of what is the role of the tax system. To put it bluntly this initiative goes against the grain. Not only would a tax exemption reduce tax revenues to the government, but increased mass transit ridership would also reduce gasoline sales, a commodity that is also a source of tax revenue. It does illustrate the role the tax system can play in encouraging certain behaviours.
Governments seem to spend a great deal of time and effort developing regulatory regimes and trying to reinforce corporate behaviours that run directly counter to what the tax system encourages them to do. Not only are command and control approaches expensive. They are all too often totally ineffective.
We need to look at fiscal policies that encourage sustainable behaviours. Spending in environmental areas should look and act like investments, not costs.
Ideally we need a tax system that places taxes on the things we want less of and exemptions for activities that result in the things we want more of. This motion is certainly attempting to do just that.
I congratulate the hon. member for bringing this motion to the House. I draw the attention of all members to the wording of the motion; that we consider this action is hardly radical. I would be the first to admit that this action is not without repercussions. The discussion which would result in a detailed examination of those factors would not only be a valuable exercise in and of itself, but it would also serve to send a very clear and positive message to Canadians that we not only understand but are prepared to address the challenges we face as we shift to support the core and non-partisan value of sustainability.
Ryan Hureljack October 30th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, it is very humbling for me to rise today and pay tribute a constituent of mine, Mr. Ryan Hureljack.
Last January Ryan became aware of how desperate many third world countries were for clean drinking water. Ryan used money from working odd jobs to pool an initial $70 for the cause. After meeting with officials from WaterCan, as well as the ambassador from Uganda, Ryan redoubled his fundraising efforts and at present has raised over $5,000 that when matched with CIDA funds now represents over $15,000 for water projects in Uganda.
Since the beginning of Ryan's quest he has received a real education on the needs of third world countries, specifically Uganda, saving money and the importance of determination and hard work. Ryan's school has now taken on the fundraising challenge in support of what they call Ryan's Well.
On November 20, national child day, Ryan will visit Parliament Hill to receive a You Made a Difference award for 1998 from the Our Kids Foundation.
I should mention that when Ryan began this project less than a year ago he was six years old. I think our country is in good hands because people like Ryan will be helping to shape our future.
Today I salute Ryan for his kind and caring contributions to his family, his school, his community, our country and for countries that are less fortunate than ours.