Ken Boshcoff

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I have always been in favour of increased accountability, ever since my earliest days as a councillor, as a mayor and as a member of Parliament, so I have no problem with that.

My questions though were very straightforward. Will the government help the softwood industry now? The help was needed yesterday. Can we honour agreements that were made in good faith with other territories and provinces?

The member has asked me if I support a particular aspect of a government program. Just because I am in opposition I am not going to take a position that is contrary for its own sake. I have only had a chance to read it very briefly but there are a lot of very positive things and I will support them.

I am asking also for a bit of reason in terms of some of these things. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities is absolutely frantic to know what is going to happen to some of the infrastructure programs. The smaller municipalities in my riding are very desperate because they cannot finish their budgets for this coming term.

I do not think my questions were unreasonable in terms of asking the government to honour those commitments. Even if we just did two before Easter, perhaps we could save the forest products industry by Holy Thursday. With that announcement, the minister would make most of the country very happy. Perhaps we could also have a definitive response regarding municipalities and future funding. To his credit, the Prime Minister has actually put in writing that the GST rebate would not be removed, so full marks there. Just keep going, check off the other three or four and we will be doing well.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Speech from the Throne is a means of communication to tell Canadians what the government program is for the coming term. It should let us know what priority plans and programs the government has in store. It is a way of benchmarking election promises.

What is not in the speech makes people question where and when their personal concerns and issues will be addressed. By leaving out critical elements, the government leaves open to speculation as to what its real agenda may be.

When a minister of the Crown advises the House that the new government is not bound by any previous legal agreements such as those signed for child care, there will be legitimate concern about what else could be dismissed.

In that right I would like to ask the minister of culture to reinstate and restore full funding for the encounters with Canada program. This program is a valuable learning experience for young Canadians from sea to sea to sea.

Hopefully in the same manner the Minister of the Environment will see fit to restore the one tonne challenge and the climate action network which allowed individuals, groups and communities to actively involve themselves in environmental awareness initiatives.

I also trust that the Minister of Agriculture will honour the legacy fund as endorsed by the Canadian Cattlemen's Association which will help regain our export position for beef products.

As chair of the Liberal rural caucus, I have been advised that although CAIS has been beneficial in many situations, it needs thoughtful revamping rather than outright dismissal. Further, it is clear that a new and separate disaster relief program is a necessary component to accompany any such amended agriculture bill.

Conspicuous in its absence is any mention of support for tourism. When the Prime Minister rolled over to President Bush and abandoned the efforts of all those lobbying against an American imposed passport system, was he ignoring the billions of dollars to be lost in tourism? Will the budget address this?

For softwood lumber, based on the facts that all parties campaigned on platforms similar to the November Liberal plan and that $1.5 billion is booked and available for support, it is difficult to understand why the government will not free up this money immediately for those companies in such desperate need.

Weekly plant closures are occurring across the country and thousands of manufacturing jobs are being lost in my riding alone. Why will the government not help? Is it punishing the resource based communities of Canada? The question would be, why? If not, then why not use the available money today? These workers and communities cannot wait for George Bush to tell the Prime Minister when to speak up. The need is well beyond urgent.

The same situation applies to child care. In Ontario the agreement allowed the province to very generously upload child care services from municipalities, to the considerable relief of property taxpayers. With the cut and run policy of the new government, Ontario will not be able to open up a single new space. Tell that to the people who were hoping that this would have helped them break out of a cycle of dependency. In four years the burden of child care will return to municipalities, which will then have to raise property taxes to pay for these programs.

Further, the municipalities of my riding of Thunder Bay—Rainy River and indeed all of Canada, and Ontario especially, are awaiting the release of the infrastructure funding which was already in the budget. I am talking about phase two for those who may know those technical terms. In Ontario it is known as COMRIF. In mid-December, those who were eligible were supposed to receive notice of this federal assistance. Municipal budgets are being finalized across the country and still there is no word on this program and there was nothing in the throne speech. This is unconscionable. Four months of waiting makes it extraordinarily difficult for communities to put their budgets together.

Nationally the Canadian strategic infrastructure fund for larger cities is just about out of money. The throne speech forgot about these economic engines of national significance.

My question is very straightforward and it does not matter who answers. Will the Canadian strategic infrastructure fund be renewed, or has it been replaced by the borders initiative, for example? Whether it is the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister or the minister responsible for communities, I know that municipalities and communities all across Canada are waiting for a very clear and definitive answer.

Yesterday in the Senate the question was asked and no answer was forthcoming. This issue is foremost in the minds of Canadian municipalities as it will drastically alter major infrastructure renewal plans.

I am asking the government to please not set back support for municipalities. The annual Liberal GST rebate of $700 million and the gas tax rebate of $5 billion over five years were promised to be permanent. Will the government at least confirm to Canada's municipalities that these revenue sources will be honoured?

Also, for the people of my riding of Thunder Bay—Rainy River, I am asking if there are any plans for a buy Canada component in any federal funding assistance for public transportation infrastructure. Many members may be aware that the City of Ottawa recently awarded its light rail transit contract to China, taking all that technology, expertise and the possibility of developing it in our national capital away from our own country. This of course is very serious for my home community and my riding, but it also has implications for Ontario and indeed the entire country.

All of these things put together I believe are valid questions. Most of them actually have not been raised in this forum throughout the throne speech and I am pleased to have had the opportunity to do so. The goal in adopting a buy Canada program would be to ensure that public funds are used to support domestic market and suppliers, and young people who want to stay in smaller communities such as Thunder Bay.

Overall, when we think about what the throne speech means to Canadians, they look to it as a guideline, some form of saying that this is what the Conservatives said they were going to do and this is what they will do and in what timeframe.

When we examine all of these things, whether it be support for young people's programs, support for child care, support for a buy Canada program to develop transit technology to help people get to places quicker and cleaner, all of these things put together amount to concern about what is not in the budget.

What is of particular concern to Liberals is the fact that money is available for softwood lumber. It was booked. Everyone in this House agrees that the forest products companies are in dire straits. Please, if we could do one thing before Easter, it would be to free up this money and help those companies, those workers and those communities.

[Taxation, April 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the people of Canada are very clear about the issue of raising personal income tax. Their message is, “Don't”.

As part of its agenda, the government has plans to raise income taxes in spite of overwhelming opposition to this Conservative idea.

Organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce are urging the government to respect the needs of low and modest income earners. Why will the government not listen to the people? These are voices of rationality and intelligence.

Raising income taxes, as the Conservatives plan to do, will hurt Canadians rather than help them. I ask them to please stop, listen and act rationally.

[Robert Costall, April 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Private Robert Costall who was killed in combat in Afghanistan last week.

Private Costall was born in Thunder Bay and moved with his family to Gibsons Landing, British Columbia at the age of seven. At age 19 he returned to Thunder Bay to live with his grandmother. Shortly thereafter he visited the Canadian Forces recruiting office to offer himself for military service.

When Private Costall was called to serve Canada, he found himself in a foreign land of chaos and despair. His duty was to help the besieged people of Afghanistan in their quest to realize the comfort, safety and freedom that he himself had been blessed with.

He died in the grandest of causes for the simplest of things: the ability to live without fear and without desolation. He died to help the Afghani people to be able to live in peace.

For his courage and dedication, we offer our thanks. We pray, along with his wife, child and other family members, that he will rest in peace.

[Petitions, November 24th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from the residents of Thunder Bay—Rainy River calling upon Parliament to amend the Income Tax Act in order to permit a pension from a registered pension fund to be split between spouses.

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, my second petition concerns the Post Office. The petitioners are concerned about the closing of rural post offices in small towns.

I am submitting this petition, although I have on the record, and as a member of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, confirmation from the president of the post office that there is no closure and the moratorium as indicated by the minister still stands.

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to present two petitions. The first petition is from the Autism Society. I represented this society at a rally last week as the chair of the Subcommittee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

[Mining Industry, November 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome today representatives of the Canadian mining industry who are in Ottawa to participate in the annual Mining Day on the Hill.

Canada has long been recognized as a world leader in mining and mineral exploration. Recently the Prime Minister said, “Canada's energy and mineral endowment is one of our greatest comparative advantages”.

Mining provides high-paying skilled jobs across Canada and is a major economic engine in many rural and remote communities. Over the next decade the sector will face a labour shortage and estimates there will be 60,000 to 80,000 jobs to fill, and that is not including the oil sands sector. This challenge is an incredible opportunity.

We must enhance aboriginal participation in mining, further develop immigration policies to recruit foreign skilled workers, and continue to improve foreign credential recognition. Canadians stand to benefit. Our government must continue to work with the mining industry to ensure that opportunities are seized.

Happy Mining Day.

[First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act, November 18th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for a question that is 80% longer than the allowable time limit for an answer.

First, right off the bat I want to thank the member for his support in passing this bill as quickly as possible. It only confirms that we are on the right track.

Second, when we talk about the 11 first nations of Thunder Bay--Rainy River or the 640 first nations throughout the community, or whether it is the Métis or other groups, there is no government that has done more than the federal Liberal government over the past number of years. That has been recognized everywhere I go. First nations groups that I work with work in a spirit of cooperation and in a positive way, especially first nations women's associations that I have been involved with in my previous life as mayor and now as MP, understand that the guideline for this government is compassion and understanding and we have delivered on the financial component.

I do not know how much time is left. I know that the other speaker ran out the clock for me. I do have much more qualitative and detailed responses that I would be able to present, but I do know one thing in regard to passing this bill: the people of Fort William First Nation look forward to it as quickly as possible.

[First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act, November 18th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak today in support of this legislation. This initiative represents a true partnership between the Government of Canada and first nations.

This first nations-led initiative has been actively and aggressively promoted by five first nations, including Fort William First Nation, which is located adjacent to the city of Thunder Bay in the great riding of Thunder Bay--Rainy River. All of these communities have significant proposals for economic development on reserve and all of these first nations have passed band council resolutions in support of this initiative.

Fort William First Nation has several projects ready to roll once this legislation is passed. Large scale commercial and industrial development projects now being contemplated on reserve, like the Fort William energy project, require transparent, consistent and effective regulatory regimes. Addressing regulatory gaps on reserve will offer the stability and transparency necessary for those considering these major projects.

In the case of Fort McKay in Alberta, the community is pursuing a multi-billion dollar oil sands mine to be developed by Shell Canada Limited. This legislation is critical in allowing this project to move forward, create jobs and build prosperity on the reserve. As we know, the oil sands in general represent an enormous economic opportunity for all Canadians, including first nations like Fort McKay.

Billions of dollars of investment will be flowing into the oil sands in the next few years. For places like Fort McKay, and similarly for Fort William, this investment will create unprecedented job and revenue growth, along with vast improvements in the quality of life and social development on reserve.

These partnering first nations, including Fort William, are working with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to develop a comprehensive outreach and implementation strategy for this legislation.

In addition to the advocacy by first nations themselves, the Government of Canada has had discussions with provincial governments. This engagement process with provinces is important, because the Government of Canada will seek, in most cases, agreements under which provinces will administer and enforce these regulations.

Representatives of the oil and gas industry in particular have indicated support for eliminating the regulatory gap that acts as a significant barrier to economic development and investment on reserve.

Consideration of regulations under FNCIDA for a specific project would be triggered when a first nation like Fort William passes a band council resolution requesting regulations regulated to a specific on reserve development project.

Next, the Government of Canada would conduct an analysis prior to making a final decision on whether to proceed with the development of a regulation for the project. If the regulations are to proceed for the project, the Government of Canada would, in most cases, seek an agreement regarding the administration and enforcement of the regulation with the province and the first nation. That makes sense.

The regulations created for specific projects would be part of federal law and the provinces would be acting on behalf of the Government of Canada in administering and enforcing them, eliminating any questions of jurisdiction.

An essential requirement for economic development in any context is transparent, consistent and effective regulation. While it is true that over-regulating activity can discourage investment, it is also true that under-regulating or uncertainty about regulations can have the same effect.

We all know how many people have been discouraged because of this apparent quagmire. A regulatory gap creates uncertainty about process, time and costs associated with a project and can divert potential investors from reserves to other jurisdictions where an established regulatory framework exists.

FNCIDA will allow the Government of Canada to replicate provincial laws and regulations to apply to these projects on reserve. This will ensure that as first nations and companies move ahead with these major projects they are regulated in a fashion similar to similar projects off reserve. It gives the added benefit of stability for investors and developers as they deal with regulations that they already know and understand.

It is only through a true partnership that we can succeed. The people of Fort William and indeed all aboriginal people are looking forward to the successful passage of the bill.