Nelson Riis

[Petitions, June 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present a petition, pursuant to Standing Order 36, on behalf of a number of constituents from the communities of Logan Lake and Kamloops. The petitioners are concerned about the government's intentions to continue on with the multilateral agreement on investment, most commonly referred to as the MAI.

They point out all sorts of reasons why they oppose the MAI. They raise the question of who supports the MAI. They point out that it is in particular the international corporations that are promoting this. They are asking the government to back off and not proceed.

[Education, June 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in an effort to provide access for students to post-secondary education, recognizing the need to prepare for the knowledge based economy of the 21st century, the province of British Columbia has frozen tuition fees for the past three years. It is now concerned that students from other provinces will move into that province to take advantage of these more reasonable levels of tuition fees.

Will the government take leadership on this issue and bring together the ministers responsible for post-secondary education and attempt to standardize fee schedules across the country so that Canadians, no matter where they live, will be able to access post-secondary education?

[Petitions, June 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have a third petition which I wish to present to the House today.

The petitioners say that they have just filled out their tax returns and feel that the tax system is basically rotten. They want the government to undertake complete tax reform.

[Petitions, June 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition which I wish to present is signed by constituents who are deeply concerned with and indeed very troubled by the government's intention to change the retirement system even further. The petitioners are concerned about all of the rumours and speculation floating around about these draconian changes and simply ask that the government not proceed until full and complete public hearings are held so that seniors from across the country and others have a chance for full input into this decision.

[Petitions, June 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to present a petition, pursuant to Standing Order 36, which is signed by a group of constituents from British Columbia who are deeply troubled by the government's plans to continue with the MAI negotiations in October. They point out a vast number of reasons for which they think the MAI is not in the best interests of Canada and Canadian sovereignty.

The petitioners ask parliament to reject the current framework of the MAI negotiations and instruct the government to seek an entirely different agreement by which the world might achieve a rules based global economic regime for trading that protects workers, the environment and the ability of governments to act in the public interest.

[The Late Robert Lorne McCuish, June 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to represent the New Democratic caucus in remembering Lorne as a member of parliament and as an alderman in the city of Prince George.

I learned a great deal from Lorne McCuish. He was elected in 1979 and I was elected in 1980. He taught me a great deal about how a member of parliament ought to operate, particularly in the constituency. We shared a hallway. I spent many an evening with Lorne McCuish. We talked about politics and work in the House of Commons and in various committees.

He was from Prince George and I am from Kamloops which meant that we spent many a flight together flying across Canada. I can recall countless evenings in Vancouver. In those days we were required to stay over because there were no same day flight connections to our respective communities from Ottawa.

As others have indicated, I remember Lorne as a very humourous individual. He always wanted to play a joke. The first time I saw him play a joke was when we were flying from Ottawa to Vancouver. I asked him how he avoided getting into conversations with people he did not want to talk to. Sometimes you sit beside a person who for whatever reason you would just as soon forget having a conversation with. He told me a secret. I do not know if he ever did it but I thought it was very funny. He said that I should take 10 inches of cord with me and when I decided I did not want to talk to somebody I should hang it out of my mouth. He said that nobody would ever talk to a person with a cord hanging out of his mouth and I suspect he was probably right. He would say things like that continuously. He was a man of great humour.

I was talking with him one day about doing constituency work. As others have indicated, he would take one week out of six and go back to his constituency, a very vast area. He held what he called availability sessions for people to come out and meet Lorne. He was a very approachable individual. He asked me to come along and join him for one of these visits, which I did. We got in a little trout fishing at the same time.

I remember walking with Lorne down the streets of Vanderhoof and Fort St. James. He knew every single person by name. If he did not know them he would sort of mumble and they would think he knew their names. I thought that was a rather ingenious approach.

He was very popular and popular for an interesting reason. He was prepared to say no to people if he could not help them. He did not pretend he could help them. Nor did he slough it off. Delegations would come from our part of central British Columbia. To be fair I would try to be kind of nice to those folks but he would just say “No, we cannot help you. We are not able to do anything. We are not even particularly interested in trying to help you with that problem because we do not believe in it”. I had not met anybody like that. It was very refreshing. It demonstrated that you do not always have to agree with people for them to respect you or for them to vote for you.

I can think of a great number of things I learned from Lorne McCuish. On top of that he was a very genuine, nice person. He often spoke of his family very warmly. I know he wanted to spend more time with his family. When he decided not to seek re-election it was because he had decided it was appropriate to spend time with his family and he actually meant it. A lot of people just say that. In the Lorne McCuish style he meant that he wanted to spend more time with his children, his wife and his young grandchildren.

On behalf of the New Democratic caucus, I extend sincere condolences to Lorne's family, in particular his wife, his children and his four grandchildren. We remember him fondly. He added a great deal of humanity to this place and I know his constituents loved him.

[Budget Implementation Act, 1998, May 27th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I want to say from the very start that I am so bloody mad I could spit at the moment. If we are very quiet we can hear the jackboots of the Liberals trampling over the democratic rights of the citizens of this country. We can hear them in the hallways. A dark fascist cloud hangs over this institution today as the Liberal government has brought in closure on this bill and the representatives of 30% of the voters of Canada will not be heard. They will be muzzled. The 30% of the people who voted Conservative and the 30% of the people who voted New Democrat will not be heard on this multibillion dollar budget bill. We say that is wrong. It is disgusting. It is anti-democratic. It is simply wrong and it is unparliamentary.

That is not where it ends. This is the final stage of an anti-democratic sweep by the government.

After the legislation was introduced, after post-budget considerations that were essentially ignored, we heard 88 representatives who came before the finance committee with a whole set of very positive recommendations for change. There were 88 interventions. Amendments were brought forward. Did government members listen to a single one of those 88 interveners who proposed changes? Not a single period was changed. Not a comma was changed in the legislation. It makes a mockery of the system. It is a slap in the face to all of those witnesses who appeared before the committee. I say that is wrong and undemocratic.

I have to be careful because I could get worked up. I have a whole speech that I am supposed to read on behalf of my caucus. The Conservatives had a representative who wanted to make a speech today, but we are unable to do that. We are not allowed to. There is something wrong with a system which says that 30% of the electorate is simply cut out of a discussion on this budget legislation. It is wrong and it is something the government has to change.

I thought the Tories were bad under Mulroney. We were up here day after day saying what a bunch of scumbags they were because they were introducing closure, introducing time allocation, cutting off democracy and making a mockery out of this place. The Liberals are actually worse. It is unbelievable.

I have a couple of comments about the legislation. To start with I want to talk about the millennium scholarship fund. Let us acknowledge that this millennium scholarship fund, at best, is going to help about 7% of students who need help today. As a matter of fact, it is a lot less than that. About 7% of college and university students may get assistance. Ninety-some per cent will never see the benefit of this.

Does the government take its commitment to education seriously by reinstating transfers to the provinces for education? No it does not. Does it take its position seriously by doing what every OECD country does by providing federal leadership on access to education? Does it do that? No, it does not. It brings in this little flashy millennium scholarship fund. I can see it now. All the cheques will be signed by the Prime Minister and sent out to all of the students as a good public relations gesture.

Yes, it will help a handful of people in need, but will it help provincial governments in terms of their tuition fees? No, it will not. Will it help the thousands and thousands of young people today who are indebted up to their eyeballs, the average debt load being $25,000? Will it help them? No it will not.

Then it refers to the employment insurance fund. We find out today that the employment insurance fund will have a surplus this year of about $16 billion or $17 billion. By the end of the year it will be about $19 billion. By next year there will be a surplus of about $25 billion.

That is stealing money out of the hands and pockets of employees and employers across this country. No wonder we have the deficit under control. Money has been taken out of the pockets of the hardest working people in the country. It is wrong.

The government says that it is going to provide an incentive to encourage employers to hire young people. That is going to help 1% of the hundreds of thousands of young people who are out of work today. One per cent may benefit from this initiative. That is hypocrisy. By saying that they are going to do something, that they are going to help 1%, is like taking a slap in the face for every unemployed young person. That is wrong.

I could go on. I have a whole speech I could give, and I have not even started yet, but I cannot because the government has brought in closure and says that certain MPs—

[Petitions, May 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my last petition is on another matter. The petitioners are from cities and communities throughout British Columbia. They are concerned about the state of the retirement system of Canada.

They point out that many seniors are living below the poverty line with the incomes they receive. They want the government to consider looking at the retirement system to ensure that every senior citizen has an adequate retirement pension.

[Petitions, May 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is on another matter. The petitioners are again from Kamloops. They are concerned about the ongoing GST situation.

They are suggesting that now the government is in a surplus situation it should start phasing out the GST. If there is one way to send a clear signal that the government is serious about providing some tax relief, a GST reduction would give immediate tax relief to virtually every Canadian from coast to coast to coast.

The petitioners are very excited by this prospect and hopeful the government will act.

[Petitions, May 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present. The first one I present pursuant to Standing Order 36 deals with the multilateral agreement on investment.

The petitioners are completely freaked out that the government will try to pull a sneaky one and reintroduce this agreement. They are very concerned.

They want it registered clearly that they are against the MAI completely and totally and never want any signature to be attached to that document from Canada.