Nelson Riis

[Unemployment, May 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, just days ago the government was celebrating six months in office and toasting its achievements in reducing unemployment. Well, the party is over. Cork up the champagne bottles; today's unemployment figures represent a growing hangover for this government.

Unemployment is up and the hardest hit are Canadian young people. This is before the job market is flooded with college and university students.

In spite of the election promise of jobs, the reality is that the job future looks bleak as Canadians wait for the Liberal government to deliver on its job creation promises. The Prime Minister said that job prospects were improving. Everyone wanted to believe him and hoped he was right but unfortunately he was not.

It is interesting to note that the bright light in the job creating area of Canada is in the province of Ontario, where the government has created an economic atmosphere which saw 49,000 jobs created in the past three months.

I urge the Prime Minister to get beyond Peter Pan economics, get real and take action on jobs now.

[National Solidarity Day For The Aboriginal Peoples Of Canada, April 29th, 1994]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-244, an act respecting a national solidarity day for the aboriginal peoples of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, considering that most Canadians consider it desirable that we have a day in recognition of Canada's original inhabitants and considering that Canadians earnestly seek an example of their commitment to honouring native cultures, this bill would set aside June 21 of each year to be called national solidarity day for the aboriginal peoples of Canada.

Just for certainty, Mr. Speaker, this day would not be a legal holiday nor would it be required to be kept or observed as such.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

[Revenue Canada, April 29th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as Canadians heard the news this morning they were shocked, astonished, and by the end of the day they will be enraged. The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada revealed that Revenue Canada is not serious about enforcing the Income Tax Act and other legislation.

They conducted a survey among the 4,000 employees who audit corporate income taxes for Revenue Canada and 75 per cent of the auditors surveyed believe that operations had been hindered by the level of politicization by the Liberal government. The auditors say that they get the word from the Liberal government to drop this file and move to another.

While Canadians are filing their individual tax returns, while small businesses are filing their tax returns and paying through the nose, we now find out from Revenue Canada that corporate Canada is once again getting off the hook from paying its fair share of taxes.

[National Sport Act, April 27th, 1994]

Point of order, Mr. Speaker. In the spirit of co-operation and good will that exists and in an effort to acknowledge the days of work that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage has put in to facilitate today, I wonder if I could seek unanimous consent of the House to acknowledge the parliamentary secretary as being one of the formal seconders of Bill C-212.

[National Sport Act, April 27th, 1994]

moved that Bill C-212, an act to recognize hockey as the national sport, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Broadview-Greenwood along with my colleague from Regina-Lumsden and many others who formally seconded this bill. I want to acknowledge my assistant, Bill Syrros, for all of the preparatory work he has done to make this a success today.

I will begin my short speech by quoting Bruce Kidd who said in the book Welcome Home by Stuart McLean: ``Hockey is the Canadian metaphor. The rink is a symbol of this country's vast stretches of water and wilderness, its extremes of climate, the player a symbol of our struggle to civilize such a land. Unsure as we are about who we are, we know at least this about ourselves: We are hockey players and we are hockey fans''.

Those words certainly ring very true these days considering what the national pastime is of Canadians from coast to coast to coast nightly.

I do not suppose there are many of us who do not recall that moment of excitement on a Saturday night when the Montreal Canadiens would take to the ice and that soft maritime chant would fill the room: "Good evening ladies and gentlemen and hockey fans from coast to coast. This is Danny Gallivan at the Forum in Montreal". Then Saturday night would be complete and life would be good.

Probably most of us in this House played hockey and skated even before we could tie our own skates. Many of us will remember those great moments when we first learned how to raise a puck, seeing that puck sailing through the air for the first time. Or maybe it was the first time we were able to complete a good slapshot and heard the sound of that puck bashing into the boards.

It is safe to say that hockey matters to all of us, in Quebec and the rest of Canada. It is part of our culture. It is key to the understanding of Canada. It is the perfect game on the perfect Canadian medium in the perfect Canadian season. We are a northern people and hockey is a northern sport. It is certainly fair to say it is much more than a game in our country.

There are few sportsmen in Canada today who on a wintery Saturday night are not seated waiting for those familiar words: "It's hockey night in Canada". The voice of the late Foster Hewitt was embedded in the minds of many Canadians from the inception of CBC radio and television. That voice united Canada from the Atlantic shores of Newfoundland to Vancouver Island and even northward to the Arctic missions.

It has been estimated that over 650,000 Canadians actually take part in some form of organized hockey.

To quote the late Foster Hewitt: "In our country while hockey is usually played for sheer enjoyment, its outdoor rinks and enclosed arenas are meeting places for youths of all origins where race, culture and creed are forgotten. Stewarts, Kellys, Smiths, Beliveaus, Delvecchios, Mahovlichs, the Ullmans and Howes combine for the glory of the team and in the process, Canada gains in unity and strength".

In this day, sport has become a means by which a nation attains international status and recognition. I believe that hockey is Canada's national game and is the main sports preoccupation of our young people.

It is ultimately woven in our Canadian self-image and our mythology. Paul Henderson set the tone for this image in 1972 with his dramatic goal over Russia. Indeed, hockey is more than a national game for its popularity has spread to at least 20 different countries.

It is time to recognize hockey for its impact on Canada. It is time to thank the volunteers and all the hockey teams in Canada for their contribution in a number of areas such as charity, education, competition and international co-operation.

It gives me a great deal of pleasure to congratulate Canada's championship women's hockey team for capturing its third consecutive world hockey championship in Lake Placid two weeks ago. It is no wonder that women's hockey is the fastest growing sport in Canada.

When we look at whether or not we should identify a certain sport as our national sport, it is important to look at the origin of the sport, its popularity in the country today, the reputation it has abroad and the value of a number of intangibles.

Many historians have tried to figure out where and when hockey was created in Canada. The cities of Halifax, Kingston and Montreal have all boasted that they are the true birthplace of hockey in Canada. I am sure more theories of hockey's birthplace will arise in the future.

I was interested to hear a comment last month by my hon. Liberal colleague representing the riding of Annapolis Valley-Hants who mentioned that his riding represents the birthplace of hockey.

One theory in support of Kingston mentions that an early historian by the name of Mr. Horsey wrote in his diary of 1847: "Most of the soldier boys were quite at home on skates. Shinny was their first delight where 50 or more players on each side would be in the game".

A committee appointed by the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association to determine the Canadian origin of hockey concluded: "The first hockey was played by the Royal Canadian Rifles, an imperial unit stationed in Halifax and Kingston in 1855. It is quite possible that English troops stationed in Kingston from 1783 to 1855 played hockey, as there was evidence in old papers, letters and legends".

In Montreal authorities emphatically declared their city is the original home of ice hockey. They felt that the first pure hockey game was played in Montreal at Victoria Skating Rink on March 3, 1875.

Perhaps the true cradle of hockey could have been Acropolis Hill in Greece, as there are remnants of a goal, men with hockey sticks in hand, a ball on the ground between curved blades, and an official about to give the starting signal.

Hockey remains the sport of first choice for the majority of Canadian households. It is already looked upon by Canadians as Canada's national sport. This has been proven in the past but most recently by the great outpouring of support and encouragement for Canada's gold medal national junior hockey team, five medals over the last seven years, and the silver medal efforts of our Olympic team in each of the last two Winter Olympic Games. In a recent newspaper article by the Ottawa Citizen it was mentioned that Canadian fans vastly outnumbered Americans as a sea of red aided the Canadian women's hockey team to a third consecutive world championship in Lake Placid, New York.

A national sport would promote national interest in times of national competition. Hockey is governed by a national organization and millions of fans follow it. National radio and television spend a great deal of money to broadcast hockey games. There is an organized hockey event in virtually every Canadian community, be it a large city or a humble village.

I received a letter of support for this motion from the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association. Its membership includes an active volunteer force in excess of 100,000 Canadians and upward of 500,000 on-ice participants.

Canada is recognized worldwide as the nation where the great sport originated. It is unquestionably looked upon as the foremost leader playing a vital role in the evolution of hockey worldwide. By the most recent estimates it extends now to not 20 but actually 51 countries that make up the membership of the International Ice Hockey Federation.

There is nothing more identifiably Canadian to the rest of the world than our game of hockey. Canadian Amateur Hockey Association teams at all levels of play compete regularly and successfully in international tournaments and championships around the world.

In each season the Canadian Hockey Association transfers almost 600 accomplished Canadian players to hockey-playing countries where they assist in the growth of this sport overseas in various emerging federations. All of these players are outstanding ambassadors for our country and our game. They help to sell Canada, its wholesome values and its healthy lifestyles.

In discussing hockey we can never forget the economic impact it has on Canada. A cursory glance indicates that tens of thousands of Canadians are employed directly or indirectly as a result of the game of hockey.

In 1992 Statistics Canada completed a family expenditure survey which concluded that Canadians spent approximately $400 million annually on hockey. This does not include club dues, ice time, travelling expenses or other numerous expenses relating to participation in hockey competition.

Again I cannot mention enough the appreciation for the millions of hours that volunteers contribute to ensure the success of tournaments and the education of youth in this sport.

Women's hockey is the fastest growing women's sport played in Canada today. In the past few years the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association has estimated the number of women participating in minor hockey at approximately 13,000 and that is being very modest. This has grown from the 6,000 recorded in the 1991-92 season. This upsurge has a lot to do with the success of officially sanctioned world championship events.

Women are actively challenging for positions on professional teams throughout Canada and the United States. The success of Canadian Manon Rhéaume, the first woman to play hockey in the National Hockey League, also has a lot to do with the surge of female participation in hockey.

Brampton, Ontario hosts a women's hockey tournament every year that attracts over 250 teams, including international teams from countries such as Russia and Finland.

I could go on about how hockey supports charity organizations of all sorts throughout our country. I could talk about the impact of the international Hockey Hall of Fame located in the great city of Toronto. I could talk about the impact hockey has on my hometown of Kamloops where we enthusiastically support the Kamloops Blazers. I wish them well in their competition with our friends from Saskatoon. I could go on but I want to step down to allow ample time for a number of members who have indicated an interest in participating in this debate.

I simply want to say the time has come and the timing is perfect. We are right in the middle of hockey enthusiasm and excitement in this country. It would be a great gesture of this Parliament to agree to declare hockey our national sport. I think Canadians would welcome and applaud that from coast to coast to coast.

[Foreign Affairs, April 21st, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I first want to thank the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of National Defence and the government for providing all members of Parliament with this opportunity of sharing our views to assist the government in making this difficult decision later tonight. I also want to thank the government for holding off on its cabinet decision until after it has heard input from members of Parliament.

On behalf of the New Democratic Party, we support this initiative. Our effort is to make the support unanimous on this very critical issue.

I wish to pay tribute to the extraordinary and outstanding effort of our peacekeeping troops who have been serving in the area. Their contribution to the safety and security of innocent people has been nothing short of extraordinary. All of our hearts, our thoughts, our prayers go out to not only them but of course to their families back home as well.

It is fair to say that none of the parties involved are totally free of criticism, some by a long shot. The time has come in terms of the Serbian issue that we simply cannot allow a war to perpetuate that literally all now want stopped. This is now calling upon extraordinary measures to stop the brutality, the savagery, the horror, the unbelievable level of suffering particularly for the innocent civilians in the region.

There have been tens of thousands killed in this conflict. Tens of thousands have fled the area as refugees. Thousands of women have been systematically raped as an instrument of war. We hear of ethnic cleansing, the concentration camps, the massacres, the destruction of holy buildings.

It has come to a point where we as Canadians can no longer stand passively by and say that this can continue. We have to stand up and be counted. With the United Nations now calling for support for air strikes, it is only right and proper we lend our support as a country to this initiative.

We must take whatever measures are necessary to ensure the safety of our troops in these areas. If the mandate changes and ground support is required to back up the air strikes in order to bring peace and a negotiated settlement eventually, then obviously the mandate for our troops has to be changed. It will be up to us to give them the equipment and support to allow them to do the job that must be done.

What turned the situation for us in the last few days was when we witnessed the television reports of the bombardment and shelling of homes, hospitals and churches which symbolized the ultimate in the savagery which has occurred in this region. For us now to stand passively by and allow this to continue is something none of us are prepared to tolerate any longer.

I applaud the government for its initiative. I appreciate that the government has solicited our views prior to cabinet making this very difficult decision. Let us only hope and pray we do not have to revisit this again in a few weeks when the situation may have even escalated beyond these unimaginable levels.

I am now going to allow my colleague from Regina to complete this time sequence.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 12th, 1994]

Different seats.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 12th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have a chance to participate once again in this important debate. Unfortunately we are being asked to debate legislation in what I think is a highly inappropriate fashion. The government has used time allocation before and has suggested that we needed to rush this matter through Parliament.

I have just spent two weeks in my constituency and I must admit that while people are upset about the proposals in our particular part of British Columbia, they did not feel the matter ought to be a priority of the nation. There was certainly no obvious call to rush legislation that would in a sense sabotage the process.

I speak particularly as a member of Parliament from British Columbia. Once again the people of British Columbia will be shortchanged. Once again we will be skewered. Because Liberal members did not presumably like the boundaries in their areas, British Columbia will be underrepresented in Parliament next time. It is a dynamic part of Canada. Its population is expanding daily as people come from other provinces seeking job opportunities.

Basically the government has decided B.C. will be underrepresented in the next Parliament of Canada by deep sixing this updating of the boundaries based on the 1991 census. This is highly undemocratic.

To take up on a point my hon. friend from the Bloc raised, these commissions are now going ahead. A number of people in Kamloops are asking whether they should make presentations to the commission. I respond by saying there is no point. The boundaries presumably will be changed again. The process has been set on the back burner for now. Who knows what the future will bring.

We have spent $4 million or $5 million so far on this process. Now we will be spending additional money holding hearings that are nonsensical, meaningless and illogical. There is no point. We are saying there is a public meeting being called on these boundaries where the public's input has no value.

I know periodically we do silly things, or at least things people perceive to be silly. However with something which is so obviously ridiculous I cannot imagine why these commissioners are soldiering on on a mission impossible but I suppose that is a decision they can make. I call upon them to acknowledge that regardless of where and how these public hearings will be conducted it will cost the taxpayers of Canada money.

Whether or not one agrees with what the Liberal government is doing, it is a reality. As my friend from the Reform Party indicated earlier the Liberals have the muscle in Parliament to do whatever they want anyway.

The Liberal government for whatever reason decided to shortchange British Columbia in the next election. It decided to intercept this arm's length and what should be a non-political, fair process by saying it is going to stop this dead in its tracks. If it has to upset the flow of Parliament it will do that. If it has to use time allocation or a form of closure to muzzle MPs from speaking on this, it will do that too. Unfortunately that is the reality. I hang my head in regret when I see my hon. friends opposite participating in such a way.

In terms of the amendment, the suggestion my hon. friend from the Reform Party has put forward that we reduce the time of waiting to one year makes some sense. It at least gives some hope that this process could be rescued in time for the next general election. I do not think it will. From what my hon. friend opposite has indicated I do not think it is going to get the support of the government, but it is a laudable amendment. It is one we should enthusiastically support.

Hopefully as the debate progresses today other members will see the value of trying to streamline this process so there will be at least some possibility of a more representative and democratic electoral system being in place prior to the next general election.

Knowing the government was bringing in time allocation and had rushed this bill through the committee process prior to the Easter recess, the premier of British Columbia asked me to represent British Columbians' point of view, if I had a chance to speak to this piece of legislation.

For years and years they have felt shortchanged with lack of representation, lack of clout at the cabinet table and wherever. Once again very clearly one of the fastest growing parts of Canada will be let down in terms of democratic and representative representation in the House of Commons after the next general election. Particularly, it will have an impact on the lower mainland of British Columbia and on some of the rapidly growing parts of central British Columbia where there has been tremendous population growth in the last decade and likely will continue in the next few years by all projections.

We support the amendments put forward by our friends in the Reform Party at this report stage process, particularly the one giving us some hope to streamline the operation.

It is sad to say with respect but with regret to my friends, to take a particular action which will adversely affect British Columbia and clearly result in one of the most dynamic and fastest growing parts of Canada being improperly represented in the House of Commons is something this party cannot support.

[Budget Implementation Act, 1994, April 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with much attention to my hon. friend and his very thoughtful presentation.

Many questions could be asked but I want to take advantage of the fact that he represents a Toronto constituency. As such he knows the special burdens someone from our large urban areas has to face.

I notice that when this bill was first introduced the President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure drew attention to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the tremendous contribution they make to our country, and their international reputation.

The freeze that was applied to the members of the RCMP along with others and the fact that no increments are allowed for two years place tremendous pressure on new constables as they leave the training facilities in Regina to go out and assume responsible positions around the country.

Their take home pay is about $1,800 a month. Even in Kamloops which is a lot smaller than Toronto I have had constables come to me with a breakdown of their monthly expenses. Living incredibly modestly they cannot live on $1,800 a month. That is in Kamloops. I can only imagine how much more of a problem that would be in a city like Toronto.

Would my hon. colleague consider taking back this kind of concern to the President of the Treasury Board. When one makes a freeze across a whole spectrum it might not have much of an effect on a public servant making $120,000 a year but it certainly will impact seriously on someone who brings home $1,800 a month and expects to raise a family on that.

Could I get some response from my friend. Will he raise with the President of the Treasury Board the plight that these new constables face in the RCMP when they are unable to have any increments when normally they would expect six increments-

[Budget Implementation Act, 1994, April 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the comments of my hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre in terms of the legislation before us.

I have a question for him dealing with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the problems faced by new constables. When they leave Regina, for the first three years of their service as new constables they receive six month pay increments to bring them up to a reasonable level of income. This legislation not only freezes the level of pay but freezes any increment initiative as well.

Young constables coming out of training are being asked to serve in cities like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. They simply cannot live on their stipend. It is impossible. These are bright, young, interested and aggressive young constables who want to serve their country at a time, I think we would all agree, when the need has never been greater and yet they cannot serve in at least some of these urban areas because of this freeze.

The hon. member will know that when the government changed the unemployment insurance program, which he referred to here, there was some acknowledgement that low income Canadians, particularly those with children, should receive some recognition for the changes in the economic plight that they face. Why would the government not do the same for these new constables?

I know that the commissioner has met with the government on this and has pleaded their case. Could my hon. friend shed some light on why the government at least to this point has not made any announcement that there will be some changes.