Herb Dhaliwal

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member is concerned about direct answers he should talk to his leader. The last time I asked him a direct question about his party's stand on the turban issue with the RCMP, the leader of the Reform Party refused to answer. I am glad that some of the members have now brought this forward as an issue and they may deal with it at the next convention. If the member wants a direct answer he should start by talking to his leader so that he does give a direct answer when he is asked a question in the House.

In terms of corporations let me say that government is not a corporation. Some members of the Reform Party have to learn that you cannot try to compare a corporation with government. In government we are dealing with people. We are not dealing with the bottom line.

It used to be said that what is good for GM is good for this country. We have learned that sometimes what is good for corporations is not good for the general population. It is not good for Canadians. We are ensuring that we have a vision for the long term for our future generations, for our children, our grandchildren and their grandchildren. We do not look at just the bottom line. We look at our future to make sure that we have a quality of life we can be proud of and we can tell our future generations that we worked toward that. We cannot compare a corporation and government.

We are concerned with the debt. The first thing we said as a government was that we were going to deal with the deficit. We cannot deal with the debt unless we deal with the deficit. We have put forward a constructive program to deal with the deficit. The international community knows that when we say we are going to deal with it we are dealing with it.

Once we have dealt with the deficit the next step obviously is to deal with the debt. We will be dealing with it but we have to do it in a balanced, rational and a measured approach so that we ensure we are sensitive to the human dimension of cutting deficits and cutting budgets. The way we are doing it will be seen in history as the right way.

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak to the budget which was introduced by my hon. colleague, the Minister of Finance.

There has been much discussion both in the House and in the homes of Canadians since the budget was brought down in early March. The overwhelming consensus is that truly this is an outstanding budget. Editorials from St. John's to Vancouver have hailed it as a major step forward in the fight against the deficit and to protect social programs. I know the Reform members would not know much about social programs.

Let us look at the economic and fiscal framework in which the budget is presented. We should take a moment to recognize the achievements of this minister. First of all, his tenure in the finance portfolio has been marked by a measured, balanced and disciplined action.

Let me just repeat for some of my colleagues that this is a balanced and measured approach. I know some members would say that we have to cut and chop everything out of government. However, Canadians see that the position the government and the minister have taken to have a balanced approach. An approach where we deal with the deficit on a year by year basis is the right approach, instead of ignoring the problem which some of our members would like to do. Other members would like to slash and burn. As Liberals we know that is not the right way.

When the Liberals took office, the country's finances were in a disastrous state. There was no vision and no plan. Under the finance minister's stewardship, the government has worked with Canadians to craft a sound economic vision for the future.

The Liberals realize that the deficit, employment, economic growth, inflation and taxation are all interrelated. That is why we need a sound economic vision for the future of our country. That is why the budgets have been structured with an integrated economic framework.

Just two and a half years after the Liberals assumed office the outlook for Canada is much brighter. The results of the fiscal framework are the following.

For example, short term interest rates have fallen by three percentage points in the last year alone. Imagine how much money Canadians are saving. People who have mortgages, people who finance their automobiles are saving a lot because short term interest rates have dropped. Something which I did not think would happen has happened. Overnight, interest rates are now lower than those in the U.S. This is a sign that the markets have confidence in this government and its economic policies.

In the last 13 months 263,000 jobs have been created. Since 1993 some 600,000 jobs have been created in the Canadian economy. Inflation is the lowest it has been in 30 years, reflecting solid productivity growth and virtual absence of cost pressures.

Let us compare Canada to other countries. On an international basis relative to other G-7 countries, our finances appear to be on a sound footing. Our financial requirements, deficit to GDP, our rate of inflation and unit labour costs are all looking good when we compare them to the G-7 countries. Of course, we cannot rest on our laurels for there is still work to be done but these numbers are sure signs that progress is evident.

We have seen in the international community how much more confidence there is by looking at interest rates, by looking at the targets we have met. So far we have been able to meet and do better on every target. The international community has a tremendous amount of confidence in us for when we say we will deal with the deficit we do, not through words but by action.

This budget represents another important part of our coherent and integrated plan to modernize government and to put in place the fiscal ingredients for a prosperous Canadian economy.

The major thrust of the budget is the future. Specifically, it speaks to our future by restoring health to public finances, defining a more appropriate role for the federal government in today's economy and federation, and by taking direct action to secure social programs for the future. It is very important to emphasize that we are taking direct action to secure our social programs, laying out a plan to restore confidence in our public pension system.

As the finance minister indicated in his budget speech on March 6, this budget is about addressing problems before they arise. It is about managing ahead and continuing to put in place new building blocks for security and prosperity. This is important because as we know we are in an age where social and economic transformation is occurring at a frightening speed.

Looking at the budget we can recognize the change that is coming in our society, the roles that information and technology are playing. That is why we are investing in those areas. That is why we are investing in our young people who are getting involved in helping small businesses take advantage of the information technology.

In British Columbia young people are working with small businesses. We as a government along with the private sector have said that we need to make sure that small businesses take advantage of the existing technology. That is why we are trying to bring our youth and small business together on programs that will take advantage of the information technologies.

That is why Canadians have given this budget glowing reviews. It minimizes the uncertainty of our future by simultaneously creating economic opportunity and safeguarding our cherished social programs.

British Columbians are very satisfied with the budget. I want to take this opportunity to explain why this budget is a good one for British Columbia.

Many of the Reformers are very supportive of this budget, particularly on our success in dealing with the deficit. Reformers have to understand that this government will not gut our social programs like they would do, nor would we destroy our cultural industries like Reformers would do. We will continue to ensure that we have social programs and that we support our cultural industries as this budget does.

The reaction in my home province and in my riding has been overwhelmingly positive. That is why the Liberals are over 50 per cent in the polls in British Columbia and Reformers are down to 20 per cent or less in British Columbia. They only have one issue and that is the deficit and it is no longer an issue because we have broken the back of the deficit. They are looking for other issues all the time and are unable to find them.

There are three or four issues which are near and dear to the hearts of the citizens of my province and the people of my riding. We all know the figures by now so there is no need to reiterate them. Perhaps we should ask why our success in reducing the deficit is important. There is a link between deficits and our goal of jobs and growth. That is our ultimate goal, jobs and growth. We want to create an environment where the private sector can create those jobs and growth.

Pursuing a lower deficit helps to keep our inflation and our interest rates low. Low inflation helps to smooth the bumps of the boom and bust economic cycle. It also helps to keep interest rates low. Low interest rates in turn help to stimulate demand in interest sensitive industries, foster high levels of investment and keep Canada competitive relative to our global competitors.

We have started this process of fiscal recovery. By doing this we can eventually attack the debt, and we will attack the debt, which as we all know consumes more than one-third of federal revenues. For the first time in decades, British Columbians know that when the finance minister says he will balance the books there is real substance behind the promise.

This budget speaks volumes about the differences that exist between this government and other parties in the House. The Liberals are a true national party which effectively represents all Canada's regions and people across the political spectrum.

Members of the Reform Party say theirs is a national party but we have not seen that. In every byelection the Reform Party has

not been able to prove it is a national party. It has been a disaster. In not one of the byelections was the Reform Party able to make any substantial effort or win any seats. Reformers have a long way to go to prove it.

The Liberals are a true national party which effectively represent all of Canada's regions and people across the political spectrum. We do this by providing government that is open, honest, forthright and rational. We recognize there is a fundamental need to change the way government works. We have not retreated from the task of bringing Canada into the 21st century. Instead we have enthusiastically embraced this challenge by recognizing that difficult decisions must be made.

In making these decisions we have found the balance between retrenchment and social justice. We have shown Canadians and indeed people around the world that it is possible to protect the social safety net while restoring integrity to our nation's finances.

[The Gakhal Family, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today in memory of the nine members of the Gakhal family of Vernon, British Columbia whose lives were taken in the brutal and senseless massacre on April 5.

As a young and energetic couple filled with hopes and dreams, Mr. and Mrs. Gakhal came to Canada in 1970 with their two eldest daughters. They had lived in Vernon for over 20 years. The Gakhals

were contributing members of society and active participants in community life.

This Canadian family was well liked and respected. On Saturday more than 2,000 people attended their funeral service to pay their last respects.

Like many other Canadian families, the Gakhals worked hard to create a good and comfortable life for their family. Karnail and Darshan Gakhal were loving and devoted parents. They dedicated themselves to raising their six beautiful children. They taught their children appreciation of values, principles and the importance of contributing to their community. The Gakhals were close and loving.

Today I ask all my colleagues to stand in a moment of silence in memory of the Gakhal family, the second worst tragedy in Canadian history.

[Reform Party, March 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday a member of the Reform Party stood up during question period and launched yet another hapless smear campaign. As usual, in his attack on the Minister of Finance, the member from the Reform Party used no facts and had no hard evidence. In fact all he had was cheap innuendo.

Canadians hope in vain that the Reform Party will find a new tactic or change its style. These lame and baseless tactics are getting very old and very tired, and they are totally irresponsible.

During the 1993 election campaign the Reform Party promised Canadians better. The Reform Party promised it would raise the level of debate, it would not sink to childish, pathetic name calling and it would not depend on mud-slinging and innuendo. Mud-slinging has been the order of the day for the Reform Party.

Mr. Speaker, there is an old saying I am sure you know, that you never wrestle with pigs because you cannot win and all you do is get mud all over you.

[Cuba, March 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

On February 24 two American civilian planes were shot down by Cuban air force MIG jets. This unfortunate incident resulted in four deaths. The facts in this case have not been fully established, therefore it is essential that a credible international organization examine this matter.

On February 27 the UN Security Council passed a motion requesting the International Civil Aviation Organization to investigate this incident. As Canada enjoys friendly relations with both Cuba and the United States, our role can be one of mediation.

Will the minister commit himself to working with both governments to ensure that ICAO receives full co-operation and full disclosures of the facts from both Cuba and the United States and that both nations will comply with the recommendations made by ICAO on this issue?

[Ports, February 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Transport.

As the minister knows, serious concerns have been raised about security and law enforcement at our ports, specifically, the port of Vancouver under the new marine police.

Can the Minister of Transport assure British Columbians and all Canadians that the security of our ports will not be compromised?

[Finance, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure on behalf of my constituents to speak on the budget process.

Just after I was elected I went on a talk show in Vancouver. One of the first things the host asked me was whether I would deal with the budget deficit. He outlined how minister after minister had set targets to deal with the deficit and each time they had failed. I said we would deal with the deficit, that we are determined to deal with it, and that as time goes by we will meet the targets.

I congratulate the finance minister who has not only met the targets he set but has exceeded them. In the last fiscal year the target in terms of the deficit was $39.7 billion. The minister was $2.2 billion below the target he set.

The finance minister has done what many finance ministers in the past have failed to do. He has also done other things which the Liberal Party promised during the election.

For the first time in history a finance minister went to Canadians and consulted with them before introducing a budget to make sure Canadians had an input into the budgetary process to, ensure we were able to take the excellent ideas Canadians had, and the ideas economists had, to ensure their ideas also were reflected in the budget.

There is no doubt Canadians said they want us to deal with the deficit and the debt. During the election we said we would bring down the deficit to 3 per cent of GDP. So far we have that carried out. There is no doubt we will make sure we meet the targets set out in our election platform. We will be able to deliver on one of the fundamental promises of the Liberal Party, to bring the deficit down to 3 per cent of GDP.

We have a further vision which the Minister of Finance has articulated. We will bring the budget to a zero deficit. As we all know, in order to deal with the debt and the deficit problems we must deal with the deficit first. The way to deal with it is to bring it down to zero. That is our vision. Each two years the minister sets the targets to ensure we are working toward that goal.

One of the fundamental reasons it is so important is the targets we meet send a very loud and clear message to the international community. We will not set targets we cannot meet. We are realistic. There is a political will that once we set these targets down we will meet them.

In the international community that develops confidence in that what the government says, it is willing to do it. In creating confidence in the international community we will ensure the fundamentals which help us create jobs and growth will be there. Lower interest rates, which we have seen, and long term interest rates on mortgages have dropped because we have sent a very loud and clear message to the international community that we will work toward a zero deficit.

When the government set those targets it was very important to look at the principles on how we were to achieve our deficit targets. There is a whole variety of ways. Some of our colleagues on the

other side have given us their views. We have rejected their views when they said we should do it in three years and that we should bulldoze many government programs and that we destroy some of the infrastructure and some of our industries in the science and cultural areas.

We said no. We have to look at the core government, what we should be doing as a government, what we have to build on, what we have to expand. What provinces and the private sector can do we should let them do. They will be more efficient in providing the service. We have to look at what we as a government need to do. There is a role for government in many areas.

We had a comprehensive review from the bottom up. We looked at services government provides. We looked at what things we need for the future of the country and where we have to be strategic in strengthening our position as a government. Many things that may have been relevant in the past in today's economy, in this day and age, may not be relevant. We looked at boards. Many boards were eliminated. We realized we really did not need them.

This was a grassroots approach, from the bottom up, to evaluate all government services. We went to those people and asked where duplications were. Let us take the duplications out. Where can the municipalities provide the service better? In recreational harbours in the area of fisheries it does not make sense for us to manage those from Ottawa.

We are going to the local governments, to the provincial and the municipal governments. If they are not interested we will go to the private sector and say: "Do you want to manage these assets? You can do a much better job". It will create opportunities for small business people and opportunities to develop that asset more.

We have gone through a comprehensive review from the bottom up. At the same time we do not want to forget to restore the fundamentals and provide better core services to ensure that we improve on them.

We also want to look at the infrastructures that make us competitive. One of the reasons we are competitive is because we have strong infrastructures. We do not want to destroy those. We want to develop them. We want to make sure our telecommunication infrastructure is the best in the world. We cannot escape the global economy which is moving very quickly.

As a trading nation where one out of five jobs is created because of the trading, we have to be competitive to ensure that the total infrastructure, whether it is telecommunications, transportation or the information highway, is competitive and we are able to compete with the rest of the economy.

That is why we want to strengthen these areas. The Minister of Industry has done a tremendous amount of work in strengthening our position in the area of information technology. In the environmental industry, one of the great opportunities that exist around the world is in this industry. There is going to be a tremendous amount of opportunity there. Strategically as a country we must make sure we have the skills, the knowledge and the infrastructure to take advantage of the environmental industry.

The Prime Minister has taken a leadership role in the area of trade to ensure that Canadian businesses have the opportunity to take advantage of all the new opportunities that exist in the global economy by going to different countries. At the same time, we need to develop a trade infrastructure so that we develop an information system which tells our small and medium size businesses that there are certain opportunities that exist in all the different sectors we compete in.

In meeting with people from many other countries, they have told us that Canadian technology is some of the best in the world and that we can compete with anybody out there. However, we need to know the opportunities. We need to ensure that we build a system of information so that right at a computer they will be able to access all the tenders that are coming up and all the opportunities that exist in the rest of the world. That is the reason why we need to develop our trade infrastructure so that we will be giving opportunity to small and medium sized businesses.

What we have done in this government is fulfil the promises we made to Canadians by ensuring that we meet our deficit targets and that we have a vision for this country to bring the deficit to zero and to build a country where small and medium sized businesses will take the opportunities that exist in the global economy and that is the way we are going.

[Recognition Of Quebec As A Distinct Society, November 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to hear the hon. member say he supports minority rights. However, people should be judged not by what they say but by what they do.

The member's party has held a position which has now been proven to be against the charter of rights, which is not to allow turbanned Sikhs in the RCMP. His party stood against that group to say they should not be allowed in the RCMP. Recently in the courts it was ruled that to keep them out would be against the charter of rights.

I would like to ask the leader of the third party whether he would support that ruling in the courts and whether he supports turbanned Sikhs in the RCMP.

[Fisheries, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, these are the members of the Reform Party who after spending a weekend on the east coast were telling everybody the problems of the east coast. They do not have a clue about the problems of the east coast.

These are the same members who did not support TAGS. They wanted to cancel the whole TAGS program. I am very glad to see they have developed some understanding of the east coast problems by spending one weekend there.

I can assure the members that the training programs will continue. We will work closely with the Minister of Human Resources Development. There have to be some adjustments in the program. The green projects are continuing.

I hope the member will make another trip to the east coast so that he can see the training programs, so that he can see the green programs that continue to help with the disaster on the east coast.

[Fisheries, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the TAG program has a $1.9 billion budget. Because more people applied and were approved, there is a shortfall in some parts of the program.

The total budget of $1.9 billion will be respected. We will ensure that that we live within our means. Within those programs is a retirement program and a training program. We will work closely with my colleague the Minister of Human Resources Development to ensure that we stay within that budgetary program.

Some adjustments will have to be made. Those retirement programs will be part of the overall program to deal with TAGS and to deal with the issues on the east coast.