John Harvard

[Criminal Code, April 8th, 1997]

You were in favour of the amendment, Jake.

[Member For Beaver River, March 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have been a member of the House for almost nine years and seldom have I heard something as offensive as the comments by the member for Beaver River.

This Reform Party member referred to women candidates appointed by the Prime Minister as "poor girls". This member also likened these candidates to "girls at a grade eight sock hop" hoping "if I just stand here he will come and ask me to dance". This is insulting and offensive not only to women candidates but to every woman in Canada.

My colleague from Saskatoon-Humboldt has distinguished herself as an MP. Before her appointment as a candidate in 1993 she served her community as a lawyer, a business woman and mother, hardly a woman waiting for a date.

The member for Beaver River also wondered what would happen if all women MPs PMSed the same week. She might think that is funny, but the extremism so often exemplified by the Reform Party is no laughing matter.

[The Budget, March 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the hon. member for Gaspé and took note of the fact that he described the 1997 federal budget as a lazy man's budget. I am not exactly sure how he arrived at that description. Perhaps it is because our finance minister makes the job look easy, at least easy compared to the performance that we saw for so many years under the former Conservative government.

He also noted in his speech that the finance minister is ahead of the budget projections he laid down when the government assumed office in the fall of 1993. It is true that the finance minister is ahead of projections and he should be congratulated for that.

The hon. member pointed out that since the finance minister is ahead of his projections he should be giving something back to the Canadian people. I certainly agree with that and that is exactly what the finance minister did in the 1997 budget.

I remind the member for Gaspé, the House and all Canadian people that in the budget there was a $600 million child tax benefit, something that had not been there before. There was a reduction in the EI premiums. In addition small and medium size businesses in some cases will be able to forgo having to pay EI premiums at all if they hire additional employees.

There was $300 million for developing and researching new ways of delivering health care, something that the Canada Forum on Health proposed and recommended in its report. There was $800 million for the Canada foundation for innovation for universities and colleges. Those institutions have congratulated the government for that far sighted initiative.

There were $50 million for social housing initiatives in the budget. There was double the funding for youth employment initiatives. There were millions of more dollars for tourism. When we put it altogether we have lower interest rates.

I noted just today that the Boeing company which has a manufacturing plant in my riding announced an expansion of 400 jobs. Those kinds of things happen as a result of good fiscal management.

[Copyright Act, March 13th, 1997]

Madam Speaker, on account of the vote being held ahead of schedule, I missed the vote. Had I been here I would have voted with my party.

[Supply, March 10th, 1997]

Order. There are a bunch of animals in the House.

[Petitions, February 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to present a petition on behalf of dozens of my fellow Manitobans.

The petitioners bring to the attention of the House that legislation was passed in Canada which provided for equal pay for work of equal value and that the Canadian Human Rights Commission has concurred that the findings of an independent inquiry were reasonable and correct.

The petitioners urge the Government of Canada to act to have this legislation take effect immediately and that workers be reimbursed at the rate recommended.

[The Budget, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond further to the question raised by my colleague regarding the important negotiations between the federal government and the provinces concerning housing.

The federal government has offered to the provinces and territories the opportunity to take over the management of the existing federal social housing resources, with the exception of housing on Indian reserves, provided federal subsidies continue to be used for housing and are targeted to low income households.

These negotiations are aimed at simplifying the administration of social housing by eliminating overlap and duplication and providing clients with one stop shopping.

Let me assure my colleague that national principles and a rigorous accountability framework will govern the agreement and provinces will have to agree and respect those agreements. Once new social housing agreements are in place, any future cost savings that may be realized will be used for social housing purposes, either to assist in the management and/or renovation of the older existing social housing portfolio or to create new social housing programs.

The federal government is not withdrawing the financial support it provides to low income Canadians with housing needs. We will continue to meet our financial obligations related to the existing social housing portfolio currently at about $1.9 billion a year.

With regard to the protection of existing rights of people living in co-operative housing, let me further assure my colleague that since individual sponsors own and operate most of the federally assisted non-profit and co-operative housing, CMHC agreements with individual co-operatives will continue to be legally binding. I can assure my hon. colleague of that.

[The Budget, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening intently to the member for St. Albert. He made some rather negative comments about the Canada pension plan. I would invite the member to come to one of the several senior citizens homes in my riding and say the denigrating things that he has said about the Canada pension plan. I am wondering how long he would last in a senior citizens home.

Elderly men and women worked hard to build this country. They worked hard to support the Canada pension plan. They contributed a considerable amount of their own wealth to the Canada pension plan. The very last thing they want is for some government to abandon their hopes and the Canada pension plan.

The word from the senior citizens of this country to the government has been very clear: "We want you to secure the Canada pension plan. We want you to secure the future of the Canada pension plan. We dare you to destroy the Canada pension plan. We dare you to weaken the Canada pension plan".

Government members have listened to those people and we have responded. We have done exactly that. We have secured the future of the Canada pension plan. We have done that because Canadians have told us that we must show that we have a social conscience and that we have a collective responsibility to each other, which is totally unlike the Reform Party of Canada. That party believes in a kind of pernicious individualism; everybody for themselves; the law of the jungle, that we do not care for each other.

Those are not our values. They are not the values of Canadians. They are certainly not the values of the elderly citizens of this country. We support the Canada pension plan.

Of course the Reform Party neglects to say that the contributions to the CPP will be increased over a period of six years. The premiums have been increased because we want to secure the future of the CPP. That is exactly what we have done.

[Petitions, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure and honour to present a petition on behalf of dozens of Manitobans, some of whom are my constituents.

The petitioners want to bring to the attention of the House the substandard condition of our national highway system. They urge the Government of Canada to join the provincial governments to upgrade the highway system which would bring on, among other things, the following benefits: job creation, economic development, saving lives and avoiding injuries, lower vehicle operating costs and greater international competitiveness.

I am happy to give my support to this petition.

[Finance, December 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments and the contribution of the hon. member to the current debate.

The member raised reasonable questions about what our inflation rate should be. There has been debate in this country and elsewhere, in fact perhaps right around the world about what is the proper level of inflation. He says that the Bank of Canada aims at an inflation rate of somewhere between 1 per cent and 3 per cent. He thinks, and I suppose he is speaking for his party, that the target for the inflation rate should be somewhere between 2 per cent and 4 per cent. I accept that as a strong and legitimate point of view because there is a legitimate debate going on among economists as to what the inflation rate should be.

The main reason I wanted to take to my feet is I cannot overlook the fact that the hon. member represents a separatist party, the Bloc from Quebec. When he talks about low interest rates producing jobs in Canada, I wonder what the inflation rate or interest rates would be in an independent Quebec. Chances are that if Quebec were to declare its sovereignty or its independence, interest rates would go through the roof.

I also noticed in his speech the absence of any comment on the provincial economy. We know that the unemployment rate in the province of Quebec is very high, far above the national rate. The hon. member might want to reflect on that fact.

I think it is a given among economists and all observers that the Quebec economy is in such bad shape because of the separatist government in Quebec City. When there is a separatist government in Quebec City it shakes the confidence of business people. The hon. member and his party should reflect upon these facts and perhaps give serious consideration to a big change in their policies.