Lost his last election, in 2004, with 10% of the vote.
The Environment March 12th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the government has time and time again proven that it cannot handle environmental issues.
In January the environment minister signed the Environmental Harmonization Act and three subagreements with the provinces. Will the minister today support that no single veto from the provinces will reduce federal powers to enforce CEPA regulations?
The Environment March 12th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the environment minister.
The minister has tabled a new Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Bill C-32. Even though there are problems enforcing the current act, does Environment Canada have sufficient resources to fulfil legal responsibilities and enforce regulations contained in the current CEPA?
Disabilities March 10th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, further to this issue, Mr. Bourassa has tried for years to be self-sufficient. He has been taking courses and working hard but his injuries keep preventing him from succeeding.
He is left with student debts and little hope. He is betrayed by this country and abandoned, a victim of bureaucratic loopholes and budget targets.
Will the minister responsible admit that his department is making a mistake and tell Mr. Bourassa today that he will not be a statistic and his claim will be accepted?
Disabilities March 10th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister received an international award for Canada's progress on disability issues. At the same time in Spiritwood, Saskatchewan, Mr. Maurice Bourassa, a man missing both his legs and an eye, was again denied disability benefits from the government.
Does the minister of human resources support the CPP decision that losing two legs and an eye does not meet severe prolonged criteria? What is his answer to Mr. Bourassa today?
The Environment February 23rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, the environment minister states that the harmonization accord signed last month will improve co-operation with the provinces and will increase Canada's environmental protection standards. Contrary to the minister's assurances, Canadians are witnessing a loss of environmental protection across the country. The federal cuts have continued beyond program review, including the protection of atmospheric sciences.
Will the environment minister explain to the citizens of Canada which departments will be stopping hazardous waste dumping in Ontario sewers?
Canada Labour Code February 20th, 1998
Madam Speaker, I hope there is foresight in the hon. member's comment and that his prophecy will some day come true.
The hon. member is talking about decision making. The decisions are made at the board tables of the rail transportation companies. They are made for profit margins and shareholder interests. However, the shareholders have lost sight. The shareholders are Canadians. We are the shareholders of the railroads.
Someone got their way. They lobbied the right person at some point in time and now the railways are private organizations.
Speaking of privatization, there was a recent decision made in Great Britain. The chief executive officer of Virgin Records, Mr. Branson, challenged an American interest that has operations of all the lotteries in Great Britain. But lotteries as we know them in Canada are state run and non-profit intensive. However one person took it to court and has stopped privatization of railroads and privatization of the subway departments in all the major cities.
That is what we have to look at in this country. Stop the privatization move. Let us look at the national vision and bring in the shareholders, Canadians, those people at their kitchen tables from southern and northern Saskatchewan, from Quebec, from Ontario, from B.C., from the Yukon. Make these people a part of the decision making process and the vision of this country.
Canada Labour Code February 20th, 1998
Madam Speaker, I guess the question rightfully should be placed with the parties from which she wants the answers. I cannot speak for the other parties of this House.
The grain transportation issues were raised especially with the grain producers in the west. The ports cater to the offshore markets. Farmers must have the ability to move their grain through the mountain passes. The operation of the railroads must be transparent to the producers which is something that has not been addressed. We quickly lay the blame of grain not being moved on labour disruptions, but the operation of the railroads is not transparent to the grain handlers and the producers.
The transparency of the operation of the railroads is compromised when amendments are made to the Canadian Transportation Act, such as those which have been brought forward in recent years. It is as if rail transportation is on one side and the producers and the people who use the railroads are on the other side.
We have lost our head. Somebody took time off and we have lost our head on this issue. There is no vision. There is no foresight. There is no thought. The railroads are selling off our Canadian interests when the rail beds are on Canadian property and title belongs to the Canadian nation.
Many capital investments have been made by CN and CP over the years for improvements and line extensions. Now they are selling it off to Omnitrax out of Denver and rail transportation out of Texas. What are we left with?
We realize now the detrimental effect which greenhouse gas emissions will have on our environment in the future. Rail transportation is the way to go because it is cheaper.
We were told in northern Saskatchewan to build a highway. It costs $180,000 to build a kilometre of highway. Why not build a kilometre of rail bed at $18,000? The rail bed is mechanized and is very efficient.
The people of northern Saskatchewan, northern Manitoba, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon eventually will have to negotiate with firms in Denver and Texas to get rail transportation into the far north.
We are losing our vision of the entire country for the benefit of industrial labour relations. The farmers feel alienated. They sit at their kitchen tables and talk about the issues of this nation. We have to bring those issues to the House of Commons because the vision of this country should be debated here.
Canada Labour Code February 20th, 1998
Madam Speaker, I would like to speak on Bill C-19, the Canada Labour Code bill, as amendments have been presented.
Our party reviewed the consultation that has taken place in this country with many stakeholders. This has certainly given us an opportunity to speak in favour of the amendments.
I would like to speak on some of the initiatives that the amendments are focusing on, an enlightening departure from some of the practices of the past in this country. One is successor rights improvements. In the province of Saskatchewan successor rights have been legislated provincially.
I would like to speak on the issue of grain transportation as well, a major industry and a major concern to the many producers in my province.
In recent years in grain transportation rail companies have been reviewing and downsizing their short line operations. They have abandoned rail lines and also have sold off to other interests.
My concern is that a lot of the reasoning CN and CP have been using is the labour relations, the collective agreements they are bound by.
When they transfer rail lines to other operations, to American interests or to other small operators, the first to be compromised are of course the collective agreements.
One of the many issues raised is the concern that grain exports have been compromised by labour disruption in some of the ports, labour disruption by the grain handlers and grain transportation.
A couple of winters ago there were major disruptions in grain transportation that had nothing to do with labour. This country has to revisit its transportation strategy. Labour has a major responsibility to make sure the job is done on a daily basis, that the quality of work is done, that the safety and the health of the workers are not compromised, that democratically they represent themselves at negotiation tables with employers.
The overall strategy of grain and rail transportation in this country has been compromised year by year. It is going to take leadership from this country. This kind of leadership might come with an industrial relations board where grievances can be brought to the table and addressed.
There are issues such as anti-scab and replacement workers. This is recognized in an amendment to the labour code now before us. It recognizes that employers cannot use scab workers to compromise union positions, or union busting as the hon. member mentioned. This is a major concern to the union leaders in this country.
The other issue labour leaders have raised is the whistleblower legislation. This is the ability of a worker to raise an issue with federal, provincial or local powers or the public at large concerning worker health and safety within the workplace.
We also have seen the file increase on environmental issues such as hazardous wastes which are being used by the manufacturing industry and the transportation industry which compromise our environment. This past week we heard evidence that hazardous wastes from offshore enter this country through our ports. This has been a major contributor to hazardous wastes in this country.
Environment Canada, through its cutbacks, reorganization and harmonization of its responsibilities with the provinces and other departments in recent years has confessed its inability to check all ports of entry for hazardous wastes.
The other issue is its ability to depend on intelligence by working with with customs officers, the RCMP and the provincial police in Quebec and Ontario. There is also the opportunity to work with the workers and the labour organizations in this country. They work the ports, the railroads, the manufacturing plants, the incineration plants where a lot of these hazardous wastes are located. There is a lot of underground illegal activities with hazardous wastes.
If we mobilized and protected our workers through whistleblower legislation we would have a much safer environment, a much safer community and more transparency from an industry which is expected to police itself. Sometimes in policing, when it comes down to an economic or financial decision, industries will put labour, safety and environment at the bottom of the list.
In grain transportation we are loosing miles and miles of rail transportation in light of our commitments to the environment in Kyoto, and to labour. The Crow rate was taken away from western grain producers. This issue is still a concern. The rate cap that was created for grain transportation will be up for review. The price of grain transportation will go right through the roof.
The issue is can the employers talk with labour? Can they talk with those in grain transportation? Is there any kind of leadership this country can create, aside from our running to southern railways, to address port access to international markets? Why can we not as Canadians keep our Canadian ports, keep our Canadian railroads, keep our Canadian labour standards and keep our Canadian labour industry in this country? Why can we not keep it truly Canadian Pacific or Canadian National?
That issue is very dear to the hearts of many grain producers. This is especially so in the northern part of our provinces. The industry and the producers are far away from their markets and have to transport their grain many miles. There are small family farm operations that cannot afford a semi-tractor trailer operation to take their grain to the nearest inland terminal.
In light of all of this and hindsight being 20:20, it is the relationship we have with labour and employers and the leadership of this country. This country has to provide leadership from coast to coast to coast.
The proposed amendments now in the Canada Labour Code, the industrial relations board that is being restructured, are a positive move. It represents interests on both sides. It provides opportunities for issues to be rectified regionally or locally and more expediently. The limited prohibition of replacement workers and scabs is being recognized. It is not wholehearted but at least it is in the right direction. Successor rights have been taken a step further. The preference for grain exports is also being recognized. I think western grain producers are being heard.
Overall when future amendments are being brought forward, I would like to see the issue of whistle blower legislation brought forward so that workers can have the protection to bring out the health and safety and environmental issues.
The Canadian Labour Congress has publicly made it known through the consultation process that these amendments are being supported by the labour community. However, in light of the concerns that hon. members from the Bloc Quebecois have raised, some of these issues are not taken far enough.
What our party is saying is that at least it is one step. It may not be a whole jump through the door but future amendments might be an evolution to seeing that which the hon. members from the Bloc are envisioning.
I thank the House for allowing me to speak on this most important issue. I welcome any questions.
Railways February 11th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, Canada's rail system continues to expand in the wrong direction. Yesterday CN purchased an American rail line. At the same time small branch lines serving rural Canada continue to be abandoned.
Ottawa has abandoned the small family farms which cannot afford to ship grains to market. Last week Saskatchewan lost the White Fox line which served communities and farmers between Choiceland and Meath Park. I hope they do not pull the rail lines out.
We demand an immediate review of the Canadian Transportation Act to prevent the continuing loss of vital rail service in Canada. We call for a national transportation strategy which will go forward into the next century, not backward into the last.
This plan should address the issues of grain shipments, environmental benefits, the deterioration of highways and affordable rail transportation throughout Canada.
By the time the Liberals wake up to the national nightmare there will be nothing left of our Canadian railroads.
Multilateral Agreement On Investment February 9th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, our nation's sovereignty is again being compromised by individual negotiators, acting on the whim and direction of ministers, who do not reflect the will and expectations of the people of this nation.
Liberal government representatives state that the multilateral agreement on investment, the MAI, will not affect sub-nationals, which is bureaucratic talk for provinces, territories and their jurisdictions.
The Minister for International Trade says this is true. In fact, he disputes international consensus which says the MAI will apply to Canadian provinces.
The minister supports a carve-out for financial institutions such as the banks from the MAI but not for the environment. Is foreign profit more important to this government than the protection of Canada's environment?
Canada's environment will be at risk if the MAI opens the doors for resource exploitation and it will be Canadians paying the piper, not the minister.
We challenge the Liberal government to a full public debate on the MAI to let Canadians decide how bad the MAI really is.