Herb Dhaliwal

[Fisheries, September 20th, 1995]

If they would listen, I will give them some statistics.

The average value of the catch from 1990 to 1993 was $320,000 for an eight-week fishery. In 1995 the same fishers averaged more than $1 million in landings in the midshore crab fishery. For someone who is making $1 million in landings, a $16,000 fee is perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.

It is the Reform side of the House that is always talking about user fees.

[Fisheries, September 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the hon. member should know that fees have not been looked at since 1981. There has been no fee increase since 1981.

[Fisheries, September 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the

hon. member for his question. I want to tell him that the basic principle is that fees should reflect the benefits of privileged access to public resources managed at public expense.

The members of the Reform Party talk about the deficit, about increasing revenue, about reducing costs. Should a fisherman who makes $320,000 in the six week fishery not pay a fee for the use of a public resource?

I can assure the hon. member and all fishermen that this will be based on an equitable formula and we will ensure that there is an even share. Those fishermen who are getting large revenues from their income will have to pay the highest fees. It will be on an equitable and fair basis.

[Auditor General Act, September 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member for Fraser Valley East said, clean water is a very important asset. As we saw recently in the World Bank report, clean water is going to be a very important resource for the world.

I also acknowledge the gentleman who is swimming the Fraser River to raise awareness of having clean water. An important thing to remember is when a resource like water is polluted it is expensive to restore the resource and bring it back. It is much easier to prevent pollution from happening in the first place.

As parliamentary secretary it has been a great experience to learn about sustainability and how all resources are so interdependent. Our ecosystem is so sensitive to change, and we do not understand a lot of it. We do not understand what water temperature does to fish. We do not understand the interdependence of our whole ecosystem. We have a lot to learn. We have to do a better job for our future generations.

I will do everything I can to ensure that we have sustainable development and do not take away from future generations. To the best of my ability I will try to achieve that.

[Auditor General Act, September 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his statement and his question.

I assure him that as a government we would not be setting up such a commissioner without taking full responsibility and ensuring that the reports that are issued are taken very seriously and that the government respond to those reports.

I can say that there have been many occasions in the House when the auditor general has brought forward concerns. On many occasions I have seen the minister or the appropriate department respond very quickly and assure the auditor general that they take those matters very seriously. I have seen members on the opposite side stand and quote the auditor general. Obviously they also take it very seriously. I know all members take the issues very seriously and bring them forward.

There are a lot of examples that have shown that governments do respond, take action, and investigate to assure that anything the auditor general puts out, where it is possible and where it is felt to be advantageous, is responded to and dealt with in an effective manner. I can assure the member that this will be continued by the government whenever those reports are issued.

[Auditor General Act, September 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to talk about Bill C-83. This is a very important bill. I want to talk about this on behalf of my constituents in Vancouver South. To them this is a very important issue.

The environment is an issue which I have learned a lot about recently. I have probably learned more about the environment from my children. I have three young children who have made my wife and I learn more about the environment than we knew before. It is very important because our young people often lead in a lot of ways and we do not pay the attention we should to them. We can learn from our younger generations, as I have learned more about the environment.

I was interested to talk about the environment because as we have learned in history economic prosperity is closely linked to our respect for the environment. There are lots of examples in history of how when civilizations do not respect the environment they can destroy themselves. There are many examples in history of how societies deforest areas around them and sometimes continue to do that because of their need for fuel only to be left with erosion and then have problems in agriculture and in growing their food. Lo and behold they have taken a resource that was valuable to their society and destroyed it.

The legislation is in the red book. The Liberal government said the national environmental and economic agendas can no longer be separated, which means our future economic prosperity is very important. We want to preserve that economic prosperity. We want to grow and respect the environment.

That is why this is very important from the point of view that government action will be determined by a commissioner and the environmental factor will be considered when government decisions are being made. Bill C-83 demonstrates to Canadians the Liberal government is serious about the environment and sustainable development.

We often use the term sustainable development. It is a term used very wisely and widely. We should define sustainable development. For members in the House and for those watching, to me sustainable development is that our actions do not take away from future generations their standard of living or their quality of life. We in this generation must ensure our actions do not take away from future generations.

In a lot of ways we have already failed in that. We have taken away from future generations that which we have had. For example, we often hear the warning that children should not play outside during certain hours because of depletion of the ozone layer and the effect this can have on our children. I can remember as a child there was no such warning. We did not have to heed these warnings but our children do. We have already taken away from future generations in that by having a higher standard of living now future generations will be deprived of things like being able to play outside during the day at any time.

We have a long way to go but this is a start and sustainable development is all about ensuring we are not taking anything away from generations to come and we want to give them more. We want to make sure future generations have more than what we have today. I hope we can have that philosophy of giving them more. We are only the trustees of the resources we have to pass on to our children at the minimum in the same condition and hopefully in a better condition than how we received them.

I had an interesting experience when someone who often lectured about the environment put a time line on the board, a long line from the start of plant and animal life and stretched on to the time of mankind on earth. On this huge line there was a very tiny spot during which mankind has been on the.

Other animals have lived as long as 400 million years, but mankind between 1 million and 3 million years. If we collectively destroy our environment and destroy future generations, in respect of that time line we will barely be a footnote in the history of animal life on earth. That really opened my eyes to say we have been on the earth for such a short time and we have done so much damage already and we have lots of work to make sure we continue on that time line for a long time to come. We can only do it if we respect our environment.

Bill C-83 ensures federal government policies and operations are closely looked at in terms of the environment, as well as what effects it has on the economy. Canadians look to the federal government for leadership on sustainable development. By getting its house in order, by showing leadership the federal government can promote the shift to sustainable development throughout Canadian society. This is what Bill C-83 is all about.

The government's response to the committee's report focused on integrating the environment into federal decision making. The government has already followed up with a number of initiatives. To name a few, proclamation of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, actions to green government operations, the task force on economic instruments and disincentives to sound environmental practices and the initial follow up to the task force in the last federal budget.

Bill C-83 explicitly incorporates the environment and sustainable development in the Auditor General Act. This is very important because we do not want a commissioner without clout. We want a commissioner with clout and that is why I commend the Minister of the Environment who has brought this in under the Auditor General Act. It will give the auditor general the clear legal mandate to include environmental effects alongside the conventional considerations of the economy, effectiveness and efficiency among the considerations he uses to determine the observations he will bring to the attention of the House of Commons.

As I said earlier, Bill C-83 will also provide federal government leadership in making the shift to sustainable development. The amendments will proactively promote sustainable development across all federal departments by requiring ministers to table in the House sustainable development strategies that include their departments' objectives and plans of action to further sustainable development. Departments will be required to update these strategies every three years and ministers to table the updates in the House.

Bill C-83 will also authorize the auditor general to forward petitions from the public on environmental matters to the responsible ministers. The ministers will be required to respond within a specified time frame.

These amendments are significant in and of themselves. However the bill goes much further. Bill C-83 also creates a truly independent commissioner of the environment and sustainable development. The commissioner will be within the office of the auditor general. He or she will be appointed by the auditor general and will report directly to him as his right hand person in all his environmental and sustainable development related duties.

The committee had recommended a stand alone commissioner. However, the commissioner can operate effectively and efficiently in the office of the auditor general because the office of the auditor general is well respected. It has clout and it has solid existing expertise which can start implementing the amendments right away.

Moreover, it means environmental and sustainable development issues will be integrated with the economic considerations in that office just as they should be in a sustainable development world.

The commissioner will also assist the auditor general in addressing the environmental and sustainable development aspects of his general auditing work. The commissioner will monitor and report annually to the House on the government's progress toward sustainable development. The commissioner will review departments' sustainable development strategies and monitor the implementation of the action plan and the achievements of the objectives. The commissioner will be required by Bill C-83 to report annually to the House on anything related to environmental aspects of sustainable development he or she considers merits attention, including the extent to which action plans have been implemented and objectives met and on the number, subject matter and status of petitions received by ministers.

These amendments are historic and unprecedented. They have far reaching implications for the way the federal government does its business. They ensure that no matter who the auditor general happens to be, environment and sustainable development will have a high profile in the workforce. They will provide leadership on sustainable development by proactively promoting and operationalizing sustainable development within federal departments and across major economic sectors of our country. They will hold the government fully accountable to the public for its leadership and progress in making the shift to sustainable development.

As I look back over the past year or so I am gratified that the government has taken a red book commitment and engaged Parliament and Canadians in fulfilling it and in going beyond.

However, this is only the beginning of the road to making sustainable development a practical reality. Because of the bill, in the months and years ahead departments will be engaging stakeholders in the development and implementation of sustainable development strategies.

I know some members on the other side have said we should have gone further and that we did not go far enough. This is a very important start because it recognizes how important the environment is. It recognizes how important the environment is to future generations. It recognizes the importance of the environment to our future economic prosperity. It is no use enjoying tremendous economic prosperity now only to have it taken away from future generations.

We must ensure we protect for generations to come that we have a liveable environment, an environment with clean water, clean air, and that our decisions as a government fully take into consideration a development that is sustainable, a development that maintains a quality of life for future generations, a development that does not put hardship on any sector of society.

We have seen in some developing countries where when they do not respect the environment, when there is no clean water available, for example, sometimes the poor, the women have to pay a very heavy price when they have to go two miles to get it. Children die because they do not have clean water.

We have come a long way and I am sure my colleagues and the Minister of the Environment will continue to work on this. It is very important to me and to my constituency. In the west this is a very important issue and I am very thankful I had the opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents of Vancouver South.

[Parliamentary Basketball, June 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am compelled to report, although some of my colleagues wanted to keep this matter quiet, that on Tuesday evening at the Boys and Girls Club of Ottawa the MPs and pages clashed in their annual basketball game.

The Dhaliwal Dunkers, a multi-party team, were looking to extend the MP winning streak against the lowly pages. However, the pages, fighting like warrior poets of old, jumped out to an early lead and never looked back. Despite a comeback effort led by the member for Souris-Moose Mountain and his seven points, the pages hung on for a 40 to 35 victory.

Congratulations to the pages, who not only displayed superior skills and solid grasp of the fundamentals of the game, but also adhered to the principle of gender equality, as half of the team was made up of female pages.

The pages have once again proven that age and experience are no match for youth and robust health.

[Human Rights, June 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the first week of June marks remembrance for two of the darkest incidents in recent times. I am speaking of course of Operation Blue Star, the attack on the Golden Temple, one of the Sikhs' holiest shrines, and the Tiananmen Square massacre.

On June 3, 1984, the Indian army stormed the Golden Temple, injuring and killing hundreds and perhaps thousands in the process. The invasion of the Golden Temple was more than an assault on the shrine itself; it was an assault on the human rights of Indian people.

On June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square was the site of a brutal attack on students by the Chinese army. Television cameras around the world recorded the horror of students being shot and run down by tanks.

In China as in India, the attack on the students was not only a savage murder of innocent people but also a vicious attack on human rights and democracy.

As parliamentarians, I believe it is incumbent on us to raise the awareness of human rights abuses and to speak out forcefully against them wherever they may occur.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police, June 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to inform the House that the appeal challenging the wearing of turbans by Sikh RCMP officers has been summarily dismissed in the unanimous decision made by the Federal Court of Appeal in Calgary.

The measure of a strong and just society is its ability to weave our differences into the fabric of our national identity. The dismissal of this challenge has once again proven that Canada is a strong and just society.

These decisions reaffirm that the wearing of articles of faith by a Sikh police officer in no way impedes their ability to perform their duties with impartiality and fairness.

Let this decision be a wake up call for the Reform Party. Its opposition to Sikhs in the RCMP is out of line with the Canadian legal tradition and demonstrates an intolerance to cultural diversity. When will the Reform Party realize the 1930s are over? It is 1995 and the time has come for it to support the religious freedom of all Canadians.

[Business Development Bank Of Canada Act, May 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to contribute to the debate on sending Bill C-91 to committee before second reading.

Before that however I would like to address a couple of statements made by the hon. member from Edmonton who questioned the need of the FBD bank and indicated in his earlier remarks that when there are already banks out there servicing the community, do we need this?

I want to address those concerns because it is a fair question. The very existence of this bank shows that the present banking system does not meet the needs of small and medium sized businesses. If it did, we would not need it. The present banks do not service the financial requirements, sometimes the operating line, and other needs.

As a small business person I and the hon. member who was also in small business, know that there are a lot of good ideas out there that often do not get financing, that do not get the funds or the financial support from the community. For example, small businesses may start as one or two person operations and expand to become 100 and 200 person operations. As a government we always have to look into the long term. We have to ensure that we have a financial infrastructure to provide small business people with the opportunities to expand and to create new opportunities and employment.

As the hon. member knows, it is the small businesses that are creating the jobs right now. We want to make sure that the infrastructure is there for them to continue to do that. He will know that many times many good ideas get lost because they are not financed.

We can bury our heads in the sand and say: "Everything is fine. Everything is great out there. Every businessman, small or medium, will be able to get financing. They will be able to get the money when they need it for a very good idea that has great opportunities," but that is not the reality.

Reality is a need for an organization such as the FBDB to ensure the financing of those ideas that exist, that have a future, that have potential. The government understands there is tremendous opportunity not only in the short term but in the long term to create employment and to create a strong, dynamic, vibrant economy. That is what we have to do as a government.

We cannot stick our heads in the sand and say: "Everything is fine. We will leave it up to the big banks. We will leave it up to the financial institutions. They will take care of small business. They will do all the funding. They will fund the new opportunities in the new economies". That is not reality.

Innovation has always been the hallmark of the Federal Business Development Bank. The secret of a bank's success has been the close co-operation it has enjoyed with entrepreneurs across the country. The bank has been able to stay abreast of rapidly evolving markets and major trends such as the use of information technology. It has always sought ways to offer new services tailored to meet the increasing, complex needs of entrepreneurs.

For example, a year ago the FBDB introduced a $50 million financing program called working capital for growth. The hon. member knows that one of the problems small businesses have is getting working capital which is very important for their success and growth.

Hon. members will recall that last year, the economy was starting to gain momentum. For many businesses the new opportunities were not matched by sufficient cash flow after several years of a recession. They lacked sufficient cash to finance the opportunities that arose.

The FBDB created its working capital for growth loans that top up financing when conventional lending institutions that the hon. member said would be able to provide these do not offer sufficient lines of credit to support a company's growth.

In addition, FBDB business counsellors work with business owners to ensure that their growth plan is well managed. The maximum loan amount under this program is $100,000 and repayment schedules are flexible and tailored to individual needs.

Another example of innovation by the FBDB is the pilot program called patient capital where returns take a long time and where the return is not over a year or two years but a much longer time. It responds to the needs of companies that do not have the necessary financial resources to service debt during their development stages. This is a problem particularly for new companies in the knowledge based economy that may not have tangible assets to offer as security.

These knowledge based economies have incredible barriers to financing because they are difficult to assess. It is very difficult for many bank managers to look at anything but basic fixed, hard, tangible assets and assess the knowledge based assets, the engineering, design and all the software knowledge. It is so hard

to grasp the value of that and are very difficult to finance. They do not have tangible assets to offer as security and therefore financing is difficult.

The FBDB offers patient capital in quasi-equity forms of financing which provides firms with long term capital on flexible repayment terms. The repayment of patient capital can be postponed for up to three years until a company begins to generate revenues and a royalty on sales can be arranged.

The bank has been pilot testing this patient capital program in Kitchener-Waterloo in co-operation with the Royal Bank and Innovation Ontario. We hope that the test will prove successful so that the FDBD can begin to offer this service across the country. In this way the bank will help to close what the Minister of Industry has referred to as the flexibility gap, one of the four critical gaps that prevents small business from obtaining the financing they need.

The flexibility gap refers to the problems small businesses encounter when conventional lenders require a stream of payment over the term of the loan. This can be impractical, for example, for viable firms in the product development stages which are not yet generating a mature cash flow.

The FBDB has already demonstrated innovative solutions by providing quasi-equity financing approaches through long term loans with flexible repayment requirements. This is what Canada's small business communities need to obtain their capital requirements and the FBDB is leading the way.

The other four gaps that the minister described have also been addressed by the FBDB. Hon. members will recall that he spoke of the risk gap. Conventional financial institutions, to which the member would like to leave everything, are reluctant to set an interest rate for high risk, smaller term loans that would compensate them for increased risk. They tend to adopt self-imposed ceilings with respect to the rates that are charged.

This has advantages for companies that are able to secure financing. They will rarely pay more than the prime plus 2 per cent. But many companies will be willing to pay higher rates in acknowledgement of the increased risk the lender is taking.

A third structural weakness in the conventional financing requirements in Canada the minister has described as the size gap. I am sure many hon. members who have been involved in business know about this. It is a result of the overhead costs that a lender must incur in administering any loan, whether large or small. The administrative costs associated with loans are similar for the lender, whether it is a $50,000 loan or a $5 million loan. Comparing the profits that the lending institution can make by providing the two loans, there is no question that a conventional lending institution tends to serve its larger customers first.

In Canada today we can point to hundreds of examples of small customers who have grown to become big customers. The $50,000 loan of today may become the $5 million loan of tomorrow. The FBDB has been created precisely to respond to the needs of the smaller customer.

The fourth gap in lending institutions the minister has referred to is the knowledge gap. It is carefully interrelated to each of the other gaps but has a particular emphasis on what the lender understands about the nature of the new economy.

How does the lender take into account the assets that leave the building each night? I am referring to the human assets, the ingenuity, the creativity of engineers, the vision of the design teams, the basic entrepreneurial skills of the owners? In the knowledge economy these are perhaps the most valuable assets of all.

How can lenders assess the viability of new forms of enterprise? By what standards can they compare the economic performance of young companies in the newly emerging field of environmental technologies? For example, how can they measure the potential benefits and risks of a new software design?

Industries emerging in the new economy have trouble securing appropriate financing because they are knowledge based and may not possess assets that could be realized in the event of a default.

The team at the FBDB has made it its business to understand the needs of the new economy. Its clients have evolved with changes to Canada's industrial base. It is precisely because those gaps do exist under the present situation that we need the FBDB. That is why I am supporting this bill; to ensure small and medium size businesses that we have the infrastructure to fulfil their financial needs and create more jobs for Canadians and greater opportunity.