Elsie Wayne

[St. Patrick's Day, March 14th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, this Sunday, March 17 is St. Patrick's Day across this whole nation of ours and all of our Irish people will be celebrating. We need to thank the Irish people for what they have done to help build this country of ours. Now I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Commons to join me in paying respect to the Irish by singing:

When Irish eyes are smiling, Sure it's like a morning spring. In the lilt of Irish laughter, You can hear the angels sing. When Irish hearts are happy, All the world seems bright and gay. And when Irish eyes are smiling, Sure, they'll steal your heart away.

[Supply, March 14th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of my hon. colleague from Mississauga West that I met with Vice-president Cheney in the U.S. and we discussed the Jones act. He agreed with me that it was unfair and that we should do something about it. I ask my colleagues on the government side to please take it up with the Prime Minister and ask him to speak with Mr. Bush and straighten out the Jones act.

[Supply, March 14th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, the softwood lumber situation is a very serious one. I was glad to hear my colleague from Mississauga refer to New Brunswick because my city is the one that is closest to the U.S. border. The lumber industry of my province is in my city and the surrounding area . We ship into the United States. Americans love the lumber from our part of Canada. The U.S. industry wants our lumber. Yes, it is cheaper than if they had to buy it in their own country and it is the best that can be bought anywhere in Canada.

I have had a major concern since I have been here when it comes to what the U.S. did to our sugar industry. What happened to it? It is gone. I lost my sugar refinery. It was closed down because the Americans were to ship hundreds of thousands of tonnes of sugar containing products and said we could only ship 9,000 tonnes into the U.S. Also the Jones act protects their shipbuilding industry. They can bid on our contracts but we cannot bid on theirs.

It is very important because they think they are so powerful that they can take over Canada. They truly do. I agree it is not easy to go down there to negotiate. We have to take the strongest stands we can. Like our colleague from Mississauga said about the steel industry, my city is the one that ships the steel as well. I have Irving Steel in Saint John which ships into the U.S. as well.

When I came here in 1993 the population of Saint John was over 85,000 people and today it is 69,000. We have lost almost 20,000 people. It has never been like this in the history of Canada. Mine is the first city incorporated by royal charter.

I ask my hon. friend, and he is a friend of mine, what we can do. How can we turn it around? How do we all work together to make sure we keep our industry moving and put our people back to work?

[Supply, March 12th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comments and questions. I just want to say that when it comes to the budget that just came down for security, I was informed of some things and I will give you an example. We need more RCMP officers. As I have stated, my riding is a port city but there is also a port in Belledune in the centre of my province and another in the northern part of the province. We needed more RCMP officers because of the cutbacks over the years.

I want to ask the hon. member if he knows how many RCMP officers were hired with the money that was put back. Does he know how many officers the RCMP was able to hire? One. Does he know why? Because they have cut back on all the equipment that they needed to do their jobs. Everything was outdated, so they took the money that the government put in the budget for hiring more men in uniform for the RCMP and put it into equipment. We need a whole lot more.

When it comes to nuclear power plants, we have been informed that terrorists have a list of every city in Canada that has a plant and one of them is mine. President Bush, as I am sure the hon. member knows, just in the past month came out with a policy that said no airplanes will fly over any nuclear power plants in the U.S.A. and no ships will be allowed in the vicinity. Ships will not be allowed to sail by. I was asked what I thought about that kind of policy. I have to say I am really worried and concerned when we look at the nuclear power plant and the fishermen in my riding that are out there earning their living. If we say no ships can sail by, or the nuclear power plant is off to the side, then it will create a major problem for fishermen. Also, the largest and most modern privately owned oil refinery in Canada is in my riding and the largest oil tankers in the world come in. Ships would not be able to sail by. It is a very serious situation.

I sat down with the officers and the CEO at the nuclear power plant in Saint John to talk about security. I want to tell the hon. member it is very important that the government makes sure we get our port police back so that those coming in who are looking at the nuclear power plant cannot even get into the harbour. That is the number one issue. If we keep them out of Canada by not allowing them to enter in the first place then we will have safety and security. That will only happen by putting back our port police and putting more money into the RCMP, local police departments and all our security departments.

[Supply, March 12th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, prior to six months ago, whenever members would stand in the House to call on the government for increased security and better national defence, they were told that they were alarmists. That is what we were if we asked for anything for our defence. We were told in no uncertain terms that in the post-cold war world there was no need for the kinds of precautions we were advocating. How wrong they were.

Only six months ago we were shown in the cruellest fashion imaginable the cost of not being diligent. The hon. member who just spoke asked about our defence and whether or not it has the equipment it needs to do the job for security. I can tell the House that we do not have the tools. Our military does not have the tools to look after our harbours at both ends of the country and all across the nation.

The vice admiral has spoken out that he does not have supply ships and he needs them right away. We have been up in the House since 1993, at least I have, asking for replacement of the Sea King helicopters. What has happened to the Sea King helicopters? They are outdated. Some of the pilots have lost their lives. They cannot look after our harbours out there. In Newfoundland they cannot fly out to the 200 mile limit and look after the situation at that end of the country. We know that in B.C. they cannot look after the borders there either. This is a disgrace.

In 1999 I was told that CSIS came to the government and asked for an increase in its budget because it thought there were 350 terrorists in Canada. It needed to hire more people. What did the government do? The government cut its budget and did not give it a penny. What did the government do in the last budget? It turned around and gave CSIS money but not enough money.

I just had the representatives of the Canadian Police Association in my office. They said they and the RCMP need more money. They did not come in for themselves. They said that if Canadians are going to have safety and security in the country then the police must have the tools to do that job.

When I was mayor of Saint John, New Brunswick, I fought tooth and nail to save our port police. When I heard that the government was going to take out the port police I could not believe it was going to happen. Having been the mayor of a port city and now the representative of a port city, I know exactly what is needed for security.

Police departments, with the cuts they have had because of cuts in the transfer payments to the provinces which are then downloaded onto the municipalities, have had to make cuts. Instead of having men and women looking after the security of the ports, they have a drive-through once or twice a day. That is it for security.

Let me tell the House something. I want Madam Speaker and the rest of my colleagues in the House to know this. Port police must take seven courses. Everyone who becomes a port policeman must take and pass seven courses. Port police are trained in a different manner. I would not say that our local police are not trained, they are, but port police take different courses. They know what to look for when cargo is coming in. They know that there is a possibility that people may be hiding on some of those cargo ships. That was my major concern about our harbour.

Our port police are gone now. Our docks, wharves and waterfronts have become a favourite point of access for drug cartels, smuggling rings and illegal immigrants. There is no question that the minute the port police were gone there were more drugs in the community and in the whole area than ever before.

There was a time, only a century ago, when our ports were the places that people came to when they wanted to build Canada. Now they are used by those who would tear down what has been built. Local law enforcement, the RCMP and even the coast guard have been hit hard and cut back, even the coast guard, and they unable to divert enough resources to replace the first line of defence that was offered by our ports police.

Here we are with our ports police gone and we have severe problems. I am saying that we have to look at where we are going in the future. This is Canada and we should be seeing that our defence people have more money in their budgets. They need it. I say, give them the tools and they will look after us, give the coast guard the tools and money and it will look after us, and put our port police back at every port in Canada. I cannot imagine having a government in Canada that would take out the port police and not even monitor what happens afterward. The government took out the coast guard and did not even monitor what it did. We have people from Newfoundland, people from New Brunswick, people from Nova Scotia and people from B.C. who are saying “You've got to do something here. We have a problem”.

When one represents what I represent in my city, and when there is a nuclear power plant, then one has major concerns. We have been monitoring what has been happening even though the government has not. I can tell members that they just have to take a look at the number of people who have come in hidden on the cargo ships. Members just have to take a look at Quebec, which also has concerns. Quebec is worried, as are all our people across the nation.

What happens? The government does absolutely nothing. It did absolutely nothing. Did it put more money in? Did it put back the port police? Did it put more money into defence? Did it put more money into the coast guard? No.

When I had representatives from the national police association in to see me today, I was really proud of those men when they talked to me because their hearts are in this. They said they were not here just for funding for their own pockets. They said they were here because they are worried about their children and grandchildren, worried about their parents and worried about everyone because of this situation.

We only have to take a look at what happened on September 11, just six months ago. That has not gone away. I have to say that when we look at President Bush and see what is going on in the United States, because there will be more involvement in other countries as well, not just in Afghanistan. When it comes to our military, will we be able to send more troops? These men will be burnt out by the time they come back because of the cutbacks in our military and defence.

We need to take a look at what we are doing. I have children and grandchildren and I want to make sure that their future is here in Canada. I want to make sure they are safe and sound. Just this week I had a fax sent to me by a gentleman who is worried because two of his sons are on one of our frigates going to Afghanistan. There is a policy in the U.S.A. that two brothers cannot go out on a ship because if it is torpedoed the family may lose both sons. Why do we not look at a policy like that, separating the brothers so that one could go on one ship and the other on another ship?

These are concerns. These are the kinds of letters and calls I get every day in my office, steadily, because people know that right now we have problems in Canada like never before. They were never worried before. They did not worry that their two sons were in the navy together, but they are worried now and rightfully so. They should be, because it is not over. We have to find the terrorists and those people who come into our ports who should never, ever be on a cargo ship. We have a lot of work to do.

It is time now for the government to sit down, look in the mirror and ask itself what it has to do to correct this situation, what it has to do to make Canada the safest country in the world, which is what it always was and what we want it to be again. That will only happen when the government starts doing what is right: putting back our port police, putting the money back into defence and putting the money back into the coast guard. We will not give up until we get it.

[Terrorism, March 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, six months ago today the people of the world were left in shock and horror by the series of cowardly attacks on the great American cities of New York and Washington.

While the targets were found on American soil the victims of September 11 were the sons and daughters of many nations. That fact has already been recognized today in memorials on both sides of the Atlantic in Great Britain and in the United States.

If ever we begin to feel that the tragedy of September 11 was not an attack on Canada, if ever we begin to think that the war on terrorism is not Canada's fight, let us always remember that 25 innocent Canadian lives were taken from us.

Today we will pause and reflect each in our own way on the meaning of that day. We will think of all who died, both the fallen heroes and the innocent victims. We will pause in silence to renew our vigour, renew our courage and renew our resolve. Above all else, let us pause to renew our vow to fight this campaign against terrorism until it is won.

[Veterans Affairs, February 28th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the government intends to close the office of the Bureau of Pension Advocates in Calgary in March. The clients of this office include the military, the military veterans, the RCMP and their veterans, and their families. Veterans groups have not even been consulted.

In the case of the Calgary office, the size of the clientele is extremely large and it warrants and justifies continued service.

Could the Minister of Veterans Affairs advise the House how the closure of this office can be justified?

[Supply, February 28th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. leader of the NDP for the question. The UN has been critical of Canada recently. NATO has stated that we have not put enough money into our military budget for the job that it has to do.

Canada is known around the world as a country that reaches out to bring peace whenever there is a conflict. We have done that in Bosnia and around the world. We will continue to do that but we can only continue if we give our men and women the tools to do their job.

Last week one of our men in the military in Afghanistan sent a note home to ask if his parents would send him a box of food because he was hungry. I cannot believe we have done this.

I know the hon. member has heard about the Raging Grannies. I will appeal to them and if they can sew I will ask them to get other seniors who can sew across this nation and within 30 days we will have all 750 uniforms for our men over there. We will send our military personnel the uniforms they need and should have.

There was a report called “Caught in the Middle” produced by retired colonels, generals and admirals in Canada. They stated that our military was caught in the middle and it needed $1 billion more every year for the next five years to stabilize it. That amount is to stabilize it and then we need billions more on top of that. We do not want terrorists in Canada and we must ensure we have a military with the tools to look after itself.

[Supply, February 28th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I am grateful to my colleagues in the New Democratic Party for providing all of us in the House today with the opportunity to debate so many important issues. While I certainly could speak to many of the points raised in the NDP's 12 point plan to save Canada, I will limit my comments to the issue of peacekeeping and the eighth point as well.

The third point states:

Reaffirm Canada's international peacekeeping role and rehabilitate Canada's reputation as respected internationalists.

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Fraser Valley if he shows up, and if he does not, I will continue on.

Canada's reputation as an international peacekeeping nation is one we have earned through two generations of tireless and selfless work on behalf of the people of the world. Our accomplishments in the name of peace and freedom time and again have earned the respect and appreciation of countless nations and their citizens.

When an international conflict arises, Canada is the nation most often sought to help resolve disputes and restore order. That is a history and a heritage of which each and every one of us in Canada should be proud. It is not a luxury and it is not a laurel upon which we can rest. The government and the people of Canada must continuously prove themselves to be deserving of the trust, faith and hope of the world.

I have a personal fear, one which I believe is shared by colleagues in the NDP caucus, that due to ill-advised foreign policies and shortsighted spending cuts in the area of national defence, we are on the verge of losing our reputation as peacekeepers around the world.

I have said countless times in the House but it is worth repeating that our men and women in uniform are the best in the world. Their courage and their compassion are second to none. They have earned our support and respect. Therefore, when we criticize the government for its defence policy, we are not criticizing our Canadian armed forces personnel, even though that is often how the government portrays us.

The people of Canada must recognize that their government has led them astray. The people of Canada must recognize that the government has squandered too many precious opportunities to demonstrate those Canadian values and ethics that have made us the envy of all others.

One might have thought, one might have even expected, given the leading role played by the Liberal Party and its former leader Lester Pearson in the creation of the modern notion of peacekeeping, that the Liberal Party of Canada today would have done more to secure our legacy. Sadly, for reasons that are unclear to others and myself, the government has turned its back on the principles of peacekeeping. Those are the principles of Lester B. Pearson.

The NDP motion suggests that we should reaffirm Canada's peacekeeping role. I could not agree more.

In the past decade, despite the heroic efforts of our nation's best peacekeepers, our reputation as a peacekeeping nation has declined. That is not because our men and women in the field have stopped shedding their blood, sweat and tears. It is quite the contrary. The reason for this decline has been that our government has departed from those bedrock principles that have guided us so well.

Under the faulty belief that the cold war was over, the government made significant cuts to our military's budget that necessarily had the effect of reducing our ability to respond in an effective or immediate manner to troubles when and where they arose.

I do not claim to be an expert in foreign policy. In fact I am certain that my colleague from Cumberland--Colchester is far more experienced in such matters than I am. What I do know, and what is obvious to anyone willing to look at the cold hard facts, is that our nation has not used its credibility in its foreign affairs to maintain our reputation in peacekeeping.

At the present time our defence department's resources are so low and our people are stretched to the limit. When new situations develop and new requests are made we are forced to make massive adjustments to our troop allocations often at the expense of other programs and interests.

Our military planning should not be a game of musical chairs. Not only do we owe our own people a clear and unwavering commitment to peace and security we owe that commitment, by extension, to the people in those nations who are ravaged by the tyranny of war. That, my colleagues, is the Canadian tradition.

I have risen in this place many times to sing the praises of our military and our war veterans. I have spoken of the vigilance and diligence of our fighting forces irrespective of the missions they have been asked to undertake or to which far corner of the globe they have been dispatched.

It was the shocking and tragic events of September 11 that reinforced how truly vital their contribution is and how we must always be prepared. Now more than ever our unique abilities are needed. Now more than ever our men and women in uniform will be called upon to protect our freedom both here and abroad. We must be ready for that call and must provide our people with the tools they need to do their jobs. We cannot afford to wait.

I recognize that the Minister of National Defence has recently agreed that the time has come for us to review our country's defence policy. While I applaud and share this view it must be noted that this is a view that has been held by countless others, myself included, for a number of years. The minister has turned a blind eye to the troubles of our military, in part out of cabinet and caucus solidarity, and in part, because he is uncertain about where to take us. That is the problem. It is not that the government is suffering from a lack of will. It is a lack of vision that has paralyzed it.

The Liberals came to power faced with the towering duties and obligations that we have earned through a lifetime of global service and they simply did not know how to start addressing the many issues on our plate. They claimed that in the new post-cold war world Canada would not need to be as strong as it once was. We warned them that they were wrong. They claimed Canada's military could continue to be as effective with only a fraction of the resources at its disposal. We warned them they were wrong.

There are times when a person enjoys being vindicated and proven right, but I doubt that any of my colleagues on the opposition benches would say that they got any joy from being proven right when events showed us how wrong our government was.

The fight against the evils of the world is a never ending battle. There is no time for us to stop and take a breather. We do not have the luxury of taking a shift on the bench and letting others take our place. Any government or any minister who feels that we can let our guard down if even for an instant should take a long hard look at how our world has changed in the last six months. That is the problem.

Even the most forward thinking government policy can be derailed by sudden events and unpredicted circumstances. That is why we must always prepare for the worst, not for the best. That is why we must always have a robust military in place that is capable of handling any situation that we throw at them.

That means having airlift and sealift capability to transport our own people and equipment to where they are needed, not looking to President Bush to do it. That means having helicopters and aircraft that are younger than the pilots who fly them and not looking to President Bush to once again take over and meet our needs. That means giving our men and women in uniform the uniforms they need to have. We cannot cut corners.

We have been warned by our American friends through their ambassador and by our NATO allies through Lord Robertson that we are not doing enough. When we let ourselves coast, the nations of the world, the good, the bad and the indifferent, all take notice.

I for one am not satisfied with the status quo. I for one am not willing to stand idle as we let our reputation as a peacekeeping nation fade away into the pages of history. We have a duty. It is a duty that we must take seriously. It is a duty that we have earned with the blood and sweat of our nation's best. Let us never forget it. Let us never forget the lives that are at stake. I feel very strongly we must look after our military and it must be a priority.

[Cenotaphs, February 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from Fundy--Royal for his Motion No. 384, which reads:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should establish a fund to maintain local cenotaphs now in a state of abandonment or poor maintenance.

I do not think there is anyone in the House who does not agree that all our men and women who went overseas in the first and second world wars need to be honoured by having the cenotaphs and parks maintained.

As our veterans critic, I had the honour and the to go to Vimy and bring back the remains of the unknown soldier. At that time we looked at the Vimy monument. The previous Speaker of the House told me not to give up and to keep fighting because we needed to repair it as well. Canada needs to put some money into ensuring the Vimy monument is maintained. The monument displays all the names of the veterans whose bodies were not found.

When I looked at those names, I found a relative of mine. His name was on that Vimy monument. A lot of the Vimy monument was closed off however because of the need for upgrades. The Canadian government needs to put some money into it to ensure that it remains. Hundreds of thousands of people from our country and from other parts of the world visit that monument. It is like the monuments and cenotaphs about which we are talking. They are for our veterans who put their lives on the line for us all.

I think about the young pages who are in the House and I look at this magnificent structure that we have on the Hill. If it were not for the sacrifices of our veterans, we would not be here tonight. The pages would not be here. You, Mr. Speaker, and I would not be here. My hon. colleague would not be here. Our families would not be here. Think of what it would have been like if those men and women had not put their lives on the line for every one of us. We have over 6,000 cenotaphs across our nation because of the sacrifices made by them.

I had two brothers who went overseas in the second world war. I was five years old when they left and I will never forget it. We prayed every night that they would come home safe and sound. My family was one of those lucky families; my two brothers did come home. My mom, dad and the rest of the family were so proud and pleased.

My brothers were in Holland, Italy and Germany. They went through it all. They knew the sacrifices. They were there when some of their buddies were killed in the trenches. They saw it take place. How could we in this wonderful country of ours even think about not maintaining the cenotaphs for those who did not return.

A very special issue has been brought forward by my colleague from Fundy--Royal. The Americans never seem to have a problem paying tribute to their heroes. In Europe thousands of Canadian war graves have been meticulously maintained by local citizens and government. When I went over to Dieppe, France I could not believe how well the cemeteries were maintained.

There is no question about the money. They do not even talk about money. They talk about the sacrifices made by our people to give them their freedom as well. I have to say that they have never forgotten the supreme sacrifice paid by Canadians. Here at home we have a tendency sometimes to forget.

Our men and women in the military today cannot complain about anything. They do not come to Parliament Hill. They expect us in the House to speak for them. As my party's defence critic, I was very pleased to hear my colleague speak out tonight. I am very proud of what he has done because it was much needed.

I am not sure everyone knows that the Newfoundland Regiment was all but wiped out on July 1, 1916 during the first day of the Battle of the Somme. That cost them a generation of many young people.

I think you, Mr. Speaker, like myself and everyone else, know how proud we were of our young people in Salt Lake City, and how we all cheered to show our love and respect for them. We need to cheer for our veterans as well. All of those young people at the Olympics would be cheering as well.

I say to the House that it is all about showing respect and pride, respect for the contribution of our forefathers and pride in the contribution being made by our young men and women in today's world. Canadians have for too long been reluctant to wear our heart on our sleeve here.

How I wish Mr. Barclay, the dominion president of the Royal Canadian Legion who passed away recently, was still with us today to see what my colleague has brought forward. He would be very pleased and proud.

I know the new Minister of Veterans Affairs has already stated that he will be looking very positively at how he can put together a fund to maintain those cenotaphs that need that kind of maintenance and upgrading. We are here for all our people. I thank the hon. minister who is not with us tonight, but I pray that he will be successful.

I want to thank my hon. colleague for bringing the motion forward. I hope it will be successful. We would be able to sit here every day, not just on November 11, with a sense of pride and with love and respect for each and every person who put their life on the line for you, Mr. Speaker, for me and for all Canadians, knowing that we will look after their cenotaphs from coast to coast.