Deborah Grey

[The Economy, March 18th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, now we have seen productivity challenged in the flesh. This is just unbelievable.

The date of that speech was February 18 and it was using recent statistics. The place was the Empire Club in Toronto. The topic was Canada's falling standard of living. If it demanded a speech, there must be something to it.

He said that we were poorer than states like Mississippi. He said that we were $7,000 poorer for each Canadian or $28,000 for a family of four. That is a chunk of change. Does he stand by his speech, or have the finance minister and the Prime Minister—

[The Economy, March 18th, 1999]

Oh, to be so blessed with such complexity, Mr. Speaker. Let me quote from the Minister of Industry's speech last month. He said “Our per capita income would have been $7,000 a year higher. For a family of four, this is a $28,000 shortfall”.

I will give him a few seconds to find that part in his speech because I am sure he would like to refer to it. I believe the Minister of Industry was telling the truth in that report, and he knows it. Does the Prime Minister also think he was?

[The Economy, March 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the government can blow its horn as much as it likes, but the fact is that we still have huge high debts and high taxes. That is what is affecting our standard of living.

Marzolini's advice to the Prime Minister is usually secret but today it is public because the situation is so dreadful. We are poorer now than Mississippi. The Prime Minister knows it and the finance minister knows it, even though most Canadians do not know yet because they have tried to hide it. Does that embarrassing fact not make it just a little hard to stand up and brag about our standard of living?

[The Economy, March 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, Liberal pollster Michael Marzolini has explained the Prime Minister's strategy now on the falling standard of living. He said that only 10% of Canadians know how badly it is falling. The Liberals pretend everything is just great even though they know it is not.

Marzolini said: “A government could be punished if it allowed the opposition to capture on this issue”. Canadians have captured on this issue. Is the Prime Minister not simply denying the facts? He knows that an informed taxpayer is an angry taxpayer.

[The Senate, March 16th, 1999]

He is calling names right now because they voted against it.

I would like to ask the Prime Minister, when he hears a senator say, “I am doing my time”, does he really believe that that senator is busy in the chamber next door?

[The Senate, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, that was seven years ago this year. Number one the Charlottetown accord did not allow for direct Senate elections and he knows it. Number two, 60% of Canadians—

[The Senate, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, today convicted Senator Eric Berntson was sentenced to a year in jail for fraud. That is on top of Senator Michel Cogger convicted and sentenced for influence peddling. The Senate is so outdated that the Prime Minister cannot even fire these two.

I would like to ask the Prime Minister, what more evidence does he need for Senate reform and to make that place elected?

[Bill C-55, March 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in fact we are trying to stand up. This is about censorship and losing a lot of Canadian jobs. That is what it is all about.

Bill C-55 is dead and this minister knows it. Sure, it may pass the vote today, but it will never been enacted. The heritage minister can put it on her resume maybe, but that is about it.

Is it not true that Bill C-55, the split run, will never see the light of day in the long run?

[Bill C-55, March 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it is another day, another episode of the cabinet soap opera called Bill C-55, the split run.

The trade minister is worried about a trade war with the U.S. The heritage minister talks tough and is calling those Americans bullies using blackmail.

Bill C-55 is poor policy, period. Is that not the reason the heritage minister just tried to stare down the U.S. and she blinked first?

[Young Offenders Act, March 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have a degree in criminology and I do not think that putting ten and eleven year olds in jail is the answer. I agree with the minister.

These people need to be brought into the system. Ten and eleven year olds need to be brought into the system so they can be rehabilitated when we know that they are there. The child welfare system is not going to salvage these kids, and the minister knows it.

Again, the minister says that the member for Surrey North just does not understand, that we do not understand about ten and eleven year olds. How in the world does the minister think she has all the answers and that this is going to solve the problems of youth crime?