Dave Chatters

[Athabasca River, June 4th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, last year the government discontinued the marking and dredging of the Athabasca River from Fort McMurray to Fort Chipewyan. This is a service that has been provided for as long as anybody in the area can remember.

As a result, the federal and provincial governments had to spend $1 million on an emergency airlift of supplies to Fort Chipewyan last spring. Right now the barges are aground, making the likelihood of another emergency airlift of crucial supplies, such as food and fuel, very possible.

My question is for the Minister of Transport. This historic trade route is a lifeline for the people of Fort Chipewyan. Why is the government abandoning the people of Fort Chipewyan?

[Taxation, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the Prime Minister that the Reform Party is never short on questions, but the government always seems short on answers.

If government bureaucrats in the departments are saying there is a gas tax and Maurice Strong, an advisor to the Secretary General of the United Nations and a passing acquaintance of the Prime Minister, is saying that a gas tax is inevitable, if not today then tomorrow, why would Canadians believe the government when it says there will be no gas tax?

[Taxation, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Justice was quoted as saying that she had no idea why anyone would think Ottawa is considering a fuel tax hike. However, at the same time last week provincial transport ministers were informed by a senior federal government official from the Department of Transport that a gas tax is a possibility.

Canadians would like to know who is speaking for the government, the minister or the bureaucrats? Will there or will there not be a gas tax?

[Gasoline Prices, April 29th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, gas prices are getting a lot of attention these days.

The truth is Canadians enjoy some of the lowest gas prices in the world. Without government taxes, gas is as cheap as it was 20 years ago. The only thing that has changed dramatically is the amount Canadians are being taxed at the pumps. The government is the real villain in gas pricing with over 50% of the price of a litre of gasoline going to government taxes, yet virtually none of that money is returned to my province for road infrastructure programs.

When I go into a grocery store or a restaurant I see the before tax price of the product. Why can gas retailers not do the same for their customers? Why do retailers not advertise their gasoline prices on a before tax basis so Canadians can plainly see how much of their gas dollar is going into the government's tax tank? Why are gas retailers willing to take the heat for government taxation?

Canadians need tax cuts now so they can get more distance for their dollar.

[The Liberal Party, March 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberals are talking the talk but will not walk the walk.

We all remember that when it came time to help the victims of hep C, the Liberals claimed to care and had widespread backbench support for compassionate assistance to victims. Yet when it came time to turn words into action, all the Liberals bent to the whip and voted against helping all Canadians suffering from this terrible disease.

More recently, when dealing with the child porn issue, many Liberals signed a letter to the Prime Minister stating their support for the use of the notwithstanding clause. However, we all saw which notwithstanding clause they chose to use, the one that states “Notwithstanding what Canadians think, we're only going to do what we're told”.

On March 16 a petition with the names of 50 Liberal members was presented at a press conference. This petition stated their objection to the government's support of a nuclear reactor in Romania. There is just one thing: not one Liberal had the courage to show up at the press conference.

Are these Liberals really principled people or simply sheep?

[Motions For Papers, March 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I would like Motion No. P-59 to be called.

That an Order of the House do issue for copies of all documents, reports, minutes of meetings, notes, memos and correspondence regarding the storage of nuclear waste in Canada.

[Questions Passed As Orders For Returns, March 10th, 1999]

What plans does the government of Canada have for the future development and promotion of the following alternative sources of energy: ( a ) wind power; ( b ) geothermal; ( c ) solar; ( d ) co-generation; and ( e ) ethanol?

Return tabled.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, March 9th, 1999]

How did Alberta become a have province?

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, March 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I am a little confused about some of the comments the member is making. The proposal is that as the resources of Atlantic Canada are developed, in order to become a have province they should not only keep the royalties from those resource projects but also the transfer payments as a have not province. As an Albertan I would like to know if that thinking would also apply to Alberta, that we could keep the royalties from our natural resources and also receive transfer payments.

They do not seem to work together, in my opinion. I would like the hon. member's comment on that.

[Mining, February 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Tulsequah Chief mine project in northern British Columbia underwent an extensive federal-provincial environmental review process and was approved.

Now the actions of Alaskan Governor Tony Knowles and a handful of environmental extremists are placing the mine in jeopardy.

The heritage minister is willing to stand up for the Canadian magazine industry even if it starts a trade war. Why will the foreign affairs minister not stand up for the Canadian mining industry?