Ronald J. Duhamel

[The Budget, April 16th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I listened to what my colleague had to say. I will make a few comments and perhaps raise a few questions.

He indicated that his party did not advocate any perks. I have been told-I believe he has read the same documentation-that there are some members of his party who fly executive class. Perhaps he would like to comment on that.

At one time it was said that members of the Reform Party would not go to the parliamentary restaurant and some do not; some Liberals do not either. That is supposedly a perk yet he has said no perks.

It was not long ago that the leader of his party returned a used vehicle he was entitled to after which he received many photo ops. It was discovered shortly thereafter that on the side he was getting approximately $30,000 from his party in order to help buy his suits, shirts, ties and whatever else he needed. I am told he did not pay taxes on it either. It may have been for some other purpose, but it was over $30,000. I do not get it. I would not take it. I am surprised with his kind of rhetoric that he would have.

I have been told about something which I find to be a perk. During the election someone on a disability pension ran for political office. Well, I do not know if that is contradictory or not.

I recall during the MP pension debate there was some discussion which made all the national news. A very prominent Reform member indicated that the salaries of MPs should be doubled. If we add up the costs I can assure the House it would cost a lot more than what is in place right now. I know I am telling the truth because I can see their blood pressures rising. One member is about to fall out of his chair.

With respect to the budget that was touted before, I recall the Reform Party numbers did not add up. I looked through all the newspapers in Canada to see if one single, influential, credible person would say anything positive about that budget. I did not see one single line, not one single word.

If we look at the polls today, of course they change. They go up and down.

[National Unity, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, after more than three hours of debate, the rank and file of the Liberal Party of Canada in Quebec passed a very important resolution on national unity and cohesion.

This resolution reaffirms with great conviction and sensibility our government's main commitments on national unity. Among other things, federal Liberals in Quebec stated in clause 1.4 of the resolution that the Liberal Party of Canada supports enshrining in the Constitution the principles recognized in the December 1995 parliamentary resolution defining distinct society.

This shows once again the great synergy and ideological cohesion between the rank and file of the Liberal Party of Canada in Quebec and the Liberal government on issues as fundamental as Quebec's place within Canada.

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I have a few comments to make. I wonder how my colleague would define the words "dishonest" and "fraud". What does he think they mean? Is he prepared to make these kinds of accusations outside the House of Commons?

I only have one question for him. What does he think his cousins now in power in Quebec, his former leader, will cut when the time comes for a budget in his province? Does he think that the organizations that he mentioned earlier this morning and that were supposedly treated so badly by the Canadian government will be cut, yes or no?

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised my colleague has attacked the Deputy Prime Minister and minister of heritage, with her knowledge and vision of Canada, her commitment to this nation, her boundless energy, her tremendous creativity. I applaud her flag program. I cannot see the value in attacking it.

I am also disappointed the member would say the minister does not have a plan. The minister does have a plan. Either the hon. member does not understand the plan or he is simply quibbling about the fact it is not his plan and therefore he is unhappy.

I would ask my colleague to tell us what his plans are. He suggests he knows what he would do. Let us hear it.

[The Budget, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech of my colleague. I wanted to make two or three brief comments and ask a question.

After this budget was brought down, I looked carefully at the comments made by influential people within the country, that is, business people, men and women who work within the major unions and journalists. The great majority of them had positive comments to make. I am extremely surprised that my colleague was unable, unless I misunderstood him, to put greater emphasis on a number of things that are well accepted, well thought of and that are helping. I believe he mostly emphasized what he thought were the negative aspects.

Perhaps my colleague would be willing to respond to this. Why did he not mention any positive aspects in his speech, when we consider all the positive comments that were made?

[Tobacco Products, March 27th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, these petitioners make the following comments. They note that tobacco and its products are related to a number of illnesses, such as cancer, heart disease, strokes, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis.

They further note that they contain 4,000 chemical products that cause problems, 43 that cause cancer, and that perhaps 38,000 premature deaths can be attributed to cigarettes and the other products every year. They want it to be identified as a dangerous product.

[Francophonie Canadienne, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the Association canadienne d'éducation de langue française for the tremendous success of the Semaine nationale de la Francophonie. I would also like to congratulate two teachers at the École Lavallée, in my riding, for winning the Prix de la Francophonie canadienne in the education category.

Paul Sherwood and Dée-Anne Vermette developed and organized an activity entitled "Envolée FM 95" with students from their class. This musical show was presented in five Franco-Manitoban villages. Promoting and teaching French in a minority environment is a lot of work and a heavy responsibility. Mrs. Vermette, Mr. Sherwood and the students at the École Lavallée have been very successful in facing that challenge. In my opinion,

these enthusiastic teachers and students are excellent proof of the vitality of francophone communities in western Canada. We have not-poof!-disappeared.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 26th, 1996]

Is the court unbiased?

[Canada Transportation Act, March 26th, 1996]

I do not doubt it.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 26th, 1996]

That is it. I am writing my bills on the spot.