House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was reform.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Canadian Alliance MP for Cariboo—Chilcotin (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2000, with 60% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Supply March 14th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, in a brief answer to the member's question concerning whether I will ask the municipalities to assure that they will not accept the money, of course I will not do that.

The reason for that is we are going to be taking part in paying for this project whether we use the money or not. Regardless of whether we are philosophically ready to approve this type of thing, which we are not, we must take advantage of it because we are going to be paying for it anyway. We are going to be there with our tax money like everybody else.

Supply March 14th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, the problem of money needed to rebuild and renovate infrastructure within the municipalities is not a new one. Municipalities have been short of money for this type of work for a long time.

However, the difficulty at this time with borrowing money for these projects is that this is money that will be added to the deficit and the debt and will increase the burden upon this generation and future generations to deal with the real problem of our economy, the number one economic problem of our nation, overtaxation. Every level of government suffers from that disease.

Supply March 14th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, if an analogy can be used to describe this year's federal budget, I would suggest the analogy of a rusted out pickup truck patched with Bondo and painted the same colour as the red ink book.

The budget is a patch-up job that seems to do very little to control the source of Canada's deficit problem. New programs have been introduced that require even more borrowed money. Each program represents an attempt to avoid the real problem, which is the government's lack of will to deal with a nation crippling deficit.

The infrastructure program is a large part of this problem avoidance. Jobs, jobs, jobs, we heard hon. members opposite cry on the campaign trail last fall. The promise of permanent jobs in this program is an illusion. The jobs created will last just as long as government money flows into this infrastructure program but not much longer.

By the same token, these jobs will not only cause the federal debt to rise, they will force the other two levels of government to increase their debts as well. The finance minister takes credit for not raising the tax rate. The visible tax rate may not have been raised but the various arms of government through which taxes are collected have been extended. The same taxpayer must now pay for more federally directed programs through the broader reach of government.

The additional debt to be incurred by all levels of government involved in the infrastructure program will result in about a $500 million annual increase in the deficits. This federal program is demanding that the provincial and municipal levels of government adopt its policy of increasing deficit spending.

Some provincial governments like Newfoundland may not fully participate in this program because they are already too heavily in debt. Other provinces have reluctantly conceded to the program only because of the pressure they receive from the municipalities.

Even the municipalities are reluctant to participate because of the enormous additional expense. These extra costs go far beyond what they can reasonably add to their budgeted expenses. However, because of the extra federal cash available politically both the provinces and their municipalities must enter this federally contrived competition for more transfer dollars.

The problem of paying for this program remains whether the money is accepted or not. Whether we take the cash or not we have to pay the taxman because the money will be spent. The money will be borrowed to spend and the burden of paying interest on that will be borne by the taxpayer.

Some of the largest cities may view this program from a completely different perspective. For them this may be a windfall. The federal government has taken on the role of Santa Claus, granting to them any project within reason that they can dream up. Some projects likely to receive funding can hardly be considered infrastructure types.

One project likely to gain approval is the Quebec City convention centre. Many would question this as infrastructure. While some communities are in desperate need of infrastructure upgrading, others will be using these tax dollars for projects that are ridiculous for financially broke governments to even consider.

Can we expect more projects as we saw from the previous government like the Museum of Humour in Montreal which is a joke of a project, approved and funded by all three levels of government?

Even if we could afford to undertake the Liberal infrastructure program, it is still flawed. Municipalities have been provided only two years to approve and implement projects which must be completed within just three years.

Any projects currently in place are not eligible and I fear the least infrastructure-like projects will get priority in the rush for approval. As well, the haste to completion will result in a lower quality end product with likely cost overruns to be fully borne by the municipalities.

I am concerned that this infrastructure program will end up yielding the same results as the Ataratiri Housing Project in central Toronto which was reported in the press. The description of this municipal housing project has similarities to the infrastructure program. On this Toronto housing project $265 million was spent and not a single residence was ever built.

I would like some assurance from the former Mayor of Toronto, now the hon. minister responsible for the infrastructure program, that the mistakes made in this Toronto project will not be repeated again on a $6 billion scale.

This infrastructure program serves as a reward to many municipalities that have neglected adequate maintenance. Rewarding negligence is found in another program adopted by the budget, the residential rehabilitation assistance program, or the

RRAP. This program is designed to assist individuals who own residences that do not meet adequate living standards.

The RRAP provides forgivable grants and loans. Forgivable grants are loans converted into grants after five years ownership has passed since the work was completed. The forgivable grant portion of the program cost the Canadian taxpayer $53.7 million in 1993. Additional fully repayable loans worth $10 million were also granted. However, in 1993 almost $1.5 million worth of previous loans were in default.

The residential rehabilitation assistance program as I understand it is intended to raise the standard of housing for those people with low incomes. This in itself is a worthy cause. As worthy as this may be the main problem with this program is the same problem we have with the infrastructure program. The RRAP will take another $100 million of borrowed money to finance it and this borrowed money will be added to the national debt and then we and our children can pay interest on that also.

However, there are some other reasons why I resist the RRAP. They are based upon some knowledge of some of the abuses that have taken place in the past. Homes have been renovated and upgraded with the result being an increased sale value which made selling the house an attractive option that was taken advantage of.

Another aspect I resist is the arrangement to provide loans which are simply not being repaid as agreed.

In the budget other costly programs were introduced. The cost of scientists and engineers program will be $10 million annually. It is designed to help businesses hire new technical staff with government subsidies. A similar program is the youth services corps which also acts as subsidies to businesses hiring youths.

As admirable as these programs seem they put businesses which are able to participate in the program at a competitive advantage over those that do not quality. Lowering the cost of research and production for a business which normally is not competitive or viable could force other self-sustaining and competitive business out of the market. Both these programs have admirable motives but have potentially dangerous consequences that could place Canada at a disadvantage in world markets.

It is always a disappointment for a person who has worked hard to see his or her business grow and then see a competitor come in and receive government money that instantaneously makes them 10 times larger than their years of work have accomplished and the business becomes unviable because of the artificial competition.

These programs will have little overall effect on employment but will force us to maintain current or higher levels of deficit spending and will not permit any overall lowering of business taxes which is the greatest stimulus to increased employment. These programs have the potential of working against the goal they were designed to achieve.

The court challenges program was reintroduced in last month's budget. Canadian Heritage estimates show a steady increase in the money to be provided to the court challenges program. The amount allocated for the next fiscal year, 1994-95, will be almost double what was provided in the last full fiscal year before its cancellation in 1992.

We must also take into consideration that the $35,000 available per case represents only a small portion of the entire cost that each case represents in the entire judicial system. As well, there are a growing number of people who resent taxpayers' money being spent to argue for the rights that satisfy agendas more personal than national.

The goal of the court challenges program was introduced to help minority groups challenge the sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It would be reasonable to expect that after 14 years of the existence of this charter the number of cases should be tapering off, not increasing.

Supply March 14th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his comments. Many of them I can agree with. Some of them are points that I have difficulty accepting.

I am in full agreement with the statement that it is completely unacceptable that young people have no place to put their energies. However there is a moral imperative for the youth to have a meaningful place in our society. I agree with those statements wholeheartedly. I do have difficulty accepting a statement regarding short term views concerning the rights of youth and ascribing that to the Reform Party and to the position that we take.

We are watching from a view of history which we have watched through the 1970s when the Liberal Party was governing, through the 1980s when the Conservatives took charge. We are at a place now where we are economically unable to continue with those types of policies. To suggest that the Reform Party at this point comes with this resolution with no view of history does not make sense to me.

With the statements that the hon. member has made, how does he square those statements and his condemnation of the Reform Party with the history of the performance of the Liberals and the Conservative governments in the past? We are looking for a means to hold the economy together so there will be hope, there will be promise, there will be a meaningful future for our children.

As I see it, where the government intrudes, where the government takes control, where the government creates pigeon holes and expects people to fit into those pigeon holes, it has never worked. Therefore we are suggesting that it is time to put the initiative in the hands of grassroots men and women, to leave them with the financial resources to do the job that government has never been able to do and to have the government step back and leave private industry, individuals, the entrepreneurial spirit to do the work that has not been done before, to build the nation.

The Budget March 9th, 1994

I am very pleased to stand with my Reform colleagues and take part in this debate and speak on behalf of the riding of Cariboo-Chilcotin.

The Cariboo-Chilcotin constituency rises from the south of British Columbia to the high plateau of the central interior. Its approximately 103,000 square kilometres lie between the crest of the coast range mountains and Wells Gray Park.

Cariboo-Chilcotin has long had the reputation of being one of the last frontiers. What newcomers today call highway 97 is still remembered as the old Cariboo wagon road. This was the route that was first designed in the last century by the Royal Engineers to carry the wagons of the miners to the gold fields and the ranchers and their families who opened up the country for the people living there today.

Cariboo-Chilcotin is also home to the Chilcotin, Carrier and Shuswap aboriginal people. They are an integral part of the diverse cultural plurality found in this constituency today.

Every year communities throughout Cariboo-Chilcotin celebrate their heritage. The city of Quesnel has its Billy Barker days. Williams Lake holds the Williams Lake stampede. Lillooet has "Only in Lillooet" days. The town of Barkerville has been restored to how it used to be in the old gold rush days. I could go on but suffice it to say the entire riding remembers our pioneers and celebrates the way of life these pioneers left for us to continue.

Today the lumber industry has taken the economic lead. However the independent attitude, self-reliance and earthy

frankness which characterize relations among Cariboo-Chilcotin people still continue and may it always be so.

It gives me much satisfaction to reflect upon these people. Many people came to Cariboo-Chilcotin with nothing but the determination to get a job and get ahead. They are people who have prospered by their ingenuity, determination, shrewdness and hard work. Their independence and pride would not allow them to ask for special favours or special consideration.

What these pioneers really wanted was the opportunity to prove their ability to make a life for themselves and their families. Many people came with nothing and discovered the life they sought.

This is the Cariboo, this is the Chilcotin, this is my home.

However high taxes and intrusions of big government are not making it easy for people looking for lifestyles based on independence and self-reliance. Mind you high taxes are giving a new meaning to these words. People blessed with ingenuity find ways around the obstacles that politicians and bureaucrats devise. If this is so in the sultry cities, consider how ingenuity thrives in the fresh air of the Cariboo.

For example, a couple of weeks ago I was talking to a man who invests other people's money for them. From one small community in the constituency, population 10,000, he received in the month of January alone over $1 million of new money to convert to other currencies and invest in foreign countries. He went on to tell me that the rate of these receipts increased during the month of February. That is one investor in one small community.

People have some ingenuity. If the government is determined to wreck the economy of our country, people who understand what is happening will use their ingenuity to do what is necessary to protect themselves.

In 1993 Canadians bought a record $12.8 billion worth of foreign stocks and bonds. A growing number of Canadians are moving their assets out of Canada. Last year Canadians bought more foreign stock mutual funds than Canadian equity funds.

This export of money from Canada is a major problem. It is a problem caused by fear, fear that our economy will go the same way the economy of New Zealand went. We are seeing the early signs in Canada, signs that were present 10 years ago in New Zealand. We can soon suffer the same consequences. Ten years ago New Zealand's foreign debt was the equivalent of 44 per cent of the GDP and its annual deficit was the equivalent of 9 per cent of the GDP. Suddenly, very suddenly, the foreign markets refused to buy New Zealand bonds.

This shortage of revenue forced the devaluation of its currency by as much as 20 per cent as well as deep cuts in pensions, welfare and medicare. Accounts of wages being cut in half and a person's net worth being reduced by 80 per cent were commonplace.

People taking their money out of Canada are afraid that soon the same thing could happen here. Government mismanagement of our debt is the leading cause of the present high conversion of our currency. Canadians fear equivalent losses as experienced in Sweden and New Zealand when deficits hit crisis levels. Outflow of Canadian money is preventing the economic expansion we require for our nation to prosper.

We must take real steps to control the deficit, to assure the business community that Canada is a sound place to invest money.

People from Cariboo-Chilcotin, like Canadians from every part of the country, are using great ingenuity and creativity in the development of the underground economy. The sad part of this growing phenomenon is that so many people feel that nothing immoral is being done even though it is illegal. Some even consider this means of tax avoidance a positive political statement as well as a means of economic survival. The impact of the underground economy renders any economic growth meaningless to federal revenues.

During the 1980s a 1 per cent growth in GDP would result in a 1.2 per cent increase in tax revenues. Now that same increase yields only .4 per cent growth. This budget is another example of a government depending on optimism to solve its economic woes.

We have seen in the past the folly of a government depending on economic growth to increase revenues. This budget demonstrates that the government has not learned from past mistakes. With a half a trillion dollars debt Canada can no longer rely on optimism.

The underground economy is now estimated by Ernst & Young to be 15 per cent of the GDP or $100 billion annually. If this revenue could be taxed it would yield $40 billion in tax revenue, roughly the amount needed to eliminate our deficit.

Michael Manford, chief economist of Scotia McLeod Inc., estimates these numbers are even higher with an annual underground economy growth rate of 10 per cent to 12 per cent.

Canadians have expressed disappointment in the limited cuts made in this budget. The red book was part of a campaign based on a much lower deficit of only $35 billion. Canadians are demanding a balanced budget and the only means left to do this is by cutting government spending, not by increasing spending or by introducing new programs. The Government of Canada must show better judgment in the way tax dollars are spent.

Cariboo-Chilcotin is populated mainly by people who left or whose ancestors left other places to seek opportunities, be independent and prosper. Like those immigrating to Canada today many of us have ancestors who came seeking relief from

domineering and intrusive governments, governments which supplanted an agenda of serving the people with being served itself.

I speak with great pride of Cariboo-Chilcotin but these people are simply a microcosm of our great country. Since coming to Ottawa I hear people in the stores and on the streets saying the same thing as I hear them saying at home. Wherever I go I hear a common message given: "Get our taxes down. The taxes are killing us economically".

I do want to take this opportunity to applaud the Minister of Finance for some of the steps taken in the budget. For example, in the provisions made for small business he certainly has listened to some of their concerns. Indeed the fastest way to generate real economic activity is to lower taxes and give Canadians a reason to work. This is what was promised with the rollback in unemployment insurance premiums. We still need to target more areas of small business overtaxation and deal with those areas.

I also commend the government for its common sense in making the home buyers' program a permanent feature. Since being elected I have received more mail from my constituents regarding this issue than any other subject. Home ownership is at the top of most people's priority list and this government initiative will certainly help.

To get back to the issue of taxes, the most effective way to control the underground economy would be to offer a real decrease in taxes to all Canadians with the legislative promise of further decreases if participation in the underground economy drops and revenue goes up. As long as the underground economy continues to grow so will our deficit.

We do need some services. Canadians acknowledge this and want them. No one will deny this fact. We want all Canadians to have health care, housing, food and all that is necessary for all of us to live well. Canadians should have every opportunity to supply these needs for themselves. Assistance must be available to those who cannot provide these necessities for themselves. However, these essentials should be provided on a short term basis only to those temporarily facing misfortune and on a long term basis only to those who are permanently disabled.

To most Canadians it is not acceptable for the government to foster a way of life that stifles independence and self-reliance. Canadians must once again feel that their input into government decisions really counts. Often Canadians vote for the lesser of evils when they go to the polls. Hon. members opposite mistake this for an overwhelming mandate.

When people's concerns are ignored by the government they stop participating in society. Some have given up on the political process and stopped voting. Even worse are those who have given up on the economic process and send their money abroad or participate in the underground economy.

Canadians on the whole are not cheats and frauds, but right now they feel they are being forced to a survival mode under threat of losing their jobs, their homes and their way of life. They are tired of governments that ignore their concerns. When will the government realize that the people of Canada want less government interference and most of all want hard earned tax dollars spent wisely and frugally?

Although the budget has some commendable features, the current government must realize that further action has to be taken to bring Canada's financial affairs under control.

The Budget February 23rd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Mercier for her speech.

She made reference in the last sentence to Quebec sovereignty. Earlier this afternoon the first speaker for the Bloc spoke of Canadians and Quebecers. In referring to Canadians and Quebecers and to Quebec sovereignty, are the members of the Bloc Quebecois Party referring to Quebec separation from Canada?

The Budget February 21st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance and is inspired by Mr. Earl Christenson of Oshawa, Ontario.

Many Canadians are suspicious that senior bureaucrats and politicians favour eliminating the lifetime $100,000 capital gains exemption because they have already taken advantage of it.

Will the minister quell this public cynicism by committing to preserve this one-time $100,000 exemption.

Registered Retirement Savings Plan February 17th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Finance the many requests of my constituents to protect the present level of RRSP contributions. In the past, much of the workforce was employed by businesses with the means to provide pensions for their workers. Today, more and more people are employed by small companies or are self-employed and have no retirement pensions.

We must preserve RRSPs as an essential means of allowing individuals to provide for their retirements rather than becoming dependent on government safety nets. The limited benefit to be realized by reducing RRSP levels compared with the high cost of reducing personal retirement savings plans is not in the best interests of Canadians.

I urge the Minister of Finance not to include changes to the registered retirement savings plan in his forthcoming budget.

Winter Olympics February 16th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Cariboo-Chilcotin I would like to congratulate the athletes representing Canada at the winter Olympics at Lillehammer, Norway and wish them great success.

It is unfortunate, however, that a world class athlete from Quesnel, British Columbia, was not given the opportunity to participate in this prestigious sporting event because of a tough new qualification policy.

Tony Fiala has dedicated his whole life to preparing for competition. In the 1991-92 season he scored first overall in Canada and second overall in the North American biathlon. Canada's qualifications standards are not based on an overall record which would place him at the top but by a two occasion showing with a standard much higher than that required by most other countries fielding competitors.

Tony Fiala may not be winning any medals at Lillehammer, Norway, but to the people of Quesnel and throughout British Columbia, Tony Fiala is a winner all the way.

Petitions February 9th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise in the House to present a petition from the residents of Horsefly, British Columbia.

My constituents are firmly opposed to any reduction in postal service and postal personnel in rural communities as well as to the closure of rural post offices.

My constituents call upon Parliament to ensure that rural communities which have already been badly affected by the reductions will recover the complete postal services to which they are accustomed.