Lost his last election, in 2000, with 34% of the vote.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation May 5th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, local newscasts are the lifeline of many rural communities in Canada. They are the one source of information that links many of our smaller communities together.
With unity being a primary concern within this country, can the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell us why she is willing to allow the CBC to sacrifice rural newscasts for the benefit of urban Toronto?
National Defence May 5th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, why is the Minister of National Defence not doing more to help our brave gulf war veterans who are suffering from an assortment of very debilitating illnesses associated with their military service in the Persian Gulf?
These brave soldiers fought for our country and now they must fight for themselves. Why is the military not doing everything in its power to determine what is causing their terrible symptoms? Is it because the military has known all along what is causing the sickness?
Sue Riordan fought to save her husband despite meeting up with indifference from our military. It is only after the death of Terry Riordan and the subsequent discovery that he had unusually high levels of depleted uranium in his bones that our military took an interest.
We now learn that the Royal Military College did a study on depleted uranium which showed the harmful effects it has on the human body. It begs the question: Was the lack of interest in Terry Riordan's illness caused by the fact the military already suspected the cause of his sickness?
National Defence May 4th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps missing the point. We know that the Sea Kings have a good maintenance regime and the ground crews are at the top of their profession, but that is no longer enough.
Take for instance the Iroquois helo detachment commander's report of March 1999 which indicates 35.5% of all missions were cancelled due to aircraft problems.
Will the minister go to the Prime Minister and tell him to make a decision or face tragedy?
National Defence May 4th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, as everyone in the House knows, the Minister of National Defence steadfastly refuses to return memorial stained glass windows to the old St. George's Church in Cornwallis because the church is no longer consecrated.
Despite the fact that the church has now been transformed into a new naval museum, the minister continues to ignore the pleas of our veterans who themselves struggled and bought these windows to commemorate the naval personnel who lost their lives during the Battle of the Atlantic.
On May 21 the Royal Canadian Naval Association meets in Cornwallis. Many of these individuals made donations for these memorial windows. When will the minister return these windows to their rightful place?
Oath Of Allegiance To The Flag Of Canada Act May 3rd, 2000
Madam Speaker, I wish to thank my colleagues for allowing me to say a few words on this subject.
I am pleased to participate in the debate over the possible establishment of an oath of allegiance to the flag of Canada.
I congratulate my hon. colleague from Guelph—Wellington for having introduced this private member's bill. It is a credit to her that she has persisted in her attempts to instil a greater sense of patriotism within this country by drawing attention to the significance of the Canadian flag and the symbolism it represents. I do not think enough Canadians, or at least enough young Canadians, recognize or appreciate the significance of the Canadian flag. It has been stated repeatedly through a number of studies that Canadians do not know enough about their own history. We must ask ourselves why this is the case.
At first glance we immediately point the finger at our educational system. Our education system is not focusing enough attention on teaching our young people about their own history. As a result they fail to develop proper appreciation for the struggles of their ancestors. Our education system must certainly bear some of the responsibility. However I think the problem goes much further than that.
For whatever reason, we Canadians do not believe in beating our own drum. Unlike our neighbours to the south who never miss an opportunity for self-promotion, we Canadians are much more reserved in displaying our own patriotism.
Sadly, most Canadians might find it easier to identify great names in American history than our very own Canadian heroes.
And yet, we do have a number of heroes in Canada. Our Canadian history is full of great people who gave a part of lives to build the best country in the world.
We have a proud history of very distinguished Canadians whose exploits not only helped change the face of this country but also had a positive influence on the history of the world.
We could begin with our fathers of confederation who shared a vision for a strong and united country, a country that could compete not only with our southern neighbours but also with the rest of the world. Their legacy continues today as Canadians take on a leading role in developing new partnerships with other foreign countries which ultimately help strengthen our competitive edge here at home.
There are perhaps no other events in our history that help define us as a country than our participation in the first world war. Canada came of age as the exploits of our brave soldiers drew the respect, admiration and appreciation of all peoples throughout the world.
Our victory at Vimy Ridge to this day continues to instil pride in all Canadians. Against unbelievable odds, our brave Canadian soldiers confronted the forces of evil in a battle that would forever change the course of the first world war.
Too many of our young people know nothing about the exploits of our Canadian soldiers during the first and the second world wars. I believe the federal government is to be blamed for such ignorance. It is a pity our veterans are only recognized once a year on Remembrance Day. Thanks to their suffering, today we can enjoy this symbol of our freedom, our very own Canadian flag which freely flaps in the wind.
It was only 35 years ago that our government adopted the Canadian flag as we know it today. It is here, in the city of Ottawa, in 1965, that the maple leaf was seen flying atop the parliament buildings for the first time.
Our Canadian flag is a symbol of a strong and compassionate society. It represents the struggle of millions of Canadians throughout our history who have devoted their lives toward making this a better country. It is more than just a flag; it is a reflection of who we are and what we stand for as a people and as a country.
The Canadian flag is one of the most recognized and appreciated symbols in the world. Our citizens can go anywhere throughout the world wearing the Canadian insignia and be recognized and greeted warmly by their hosts. We can do that because we have distinguished ourselves throughout the world as a peaceful and humane society. People throughout the world recognize Canada's flag as a symbol of a kind and gentle society where human rights are respected.
I think it is important that as a country we begin focusing greater attention on recognizing the many achievements of our great Canadians.
Last year from May 19 to June 19 the Dominion Institute and the Council for Canadian Unity conducted a survey asking Canadians to identify our top Canadian heroes. Among those selected were our fathers of confederation; our first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald; the architect of Canadian medicare, Mr. Tommy Douglas; World War I flying ace Mr. Billy Bishop; Laura Secord, who was credited with saving the British and Canadian forces at the battle of Beaver Dams during the war of 1812; and Nellie McClung, one of the famous five women who fought to have women recognized as persons under the law.
I have mentioned but a few of the many Canadian heroes who have influenced the growth of our great nation. The list goes on: Sir Frederick Banting, Dr. Norman Bethune, Lester B. Pearson, Tecumseh, Alexander Graham Bell and many others. The point I am trying to make is that our flag represents the tremendous accomplishments of all those Canadians.
Swearing allegiance to the Canadian flag is more than simply a case of symbolism; it is a patriotic gesture in recognition of a great country and of the great Canadians who have had the courage to stand for what they believe in.
Somewhere along the line we Canadians have lost the sense of patriotism. I think it is time we worked together to bring it back.
I remember as a young student standing at attention every morning at my desk to sing the national anthem. Today when I have the opportunity to sing the national anthem in the House of Commons it reminds me of those days as a little boy in class and the same patriotism flows through me. We are missing that and it should be brought back.
The attempt by the member for Guelph—Wellington to instil a sense of patriotism in all Canadians should be commended. Supporting an act to establish an oath of allegiance to the flag of Canada will go a long way toward promoting Canadian values.
Having said that, it is important that Canadians have an opportunity to voice their opinions as to the proper wording of this oath so that the oath itself is representative of all Canadians from coast to coast.
I support Bill C-451 and I am pleased I had this opportunity to speak to it.
Petitions May 3rd, 2000
The third petition, Mr. Speaker, is signed by a number of my constituents who are opposed to child pornography.
Petitions May 3rd, 2000
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I would like to present three petitions. Two petitions affirm the opposite sex definition of marriage in legislation and ensure that marriage is recognized as a unique institution.
International Circumpolar Community April 11th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, my colleague for Richmond—Arthabaska has already spoken to Motion M-237, introduced by the hon. member for Churchill River. However, I would like to add a few more points.
A lot of things can be said in reference to the bill, but indeed the cornerstone of the bill is where does the north start? Does it matter that the border is placed at the 55th parallel or the 60th parallel? And what are the consequences of this change? What is the purpose of it? What are we trying to accomplish here?
It is true that we do not think enough of the north and I think this is a shame as the north is full of natural resources. We are all aware that our Canadian economy is primarily based on the export of natural resources. Indeed, we should pay better attention to the northern people as well.
I believe that my colleague from Churchill River has attempted to catch our attention through this motion, and for that I congratulate him.
A question that I think we should ask is will modifying the circumpolar boundary have such significance or is there not another way to increase the strength of the people from the north? Of course, by setting the border at the 55th parallel we would increase the political weight of the north within Canada as we would be including more people.
In order to deal with such a motion, we have to study the impact of the changes within Canada. For instance, what will happen to the provinces? How will they react to this? What about certain governmental departments like natural resources, Indian affairs and others?
Certain provinces, then, might have to comply with new obligations because of this change. If part of the territory of certain provinces were to become part of the Canadian north, this would have an inevitable impact on the provinces. But are they in a position to respond to that impact?
It would be important for the provinces to be consulted on this matter, because their boundaries will be affected if the parallel change is made.
Even though the purpose of the motion presented by my colleague from Churchill River is good, the Progressive Conservative Party could not support the motion because of the way it is presented. We feel that a great number of elements are missing and that it could create more damage than good if the motion were passed as it is now.
The Canadian north is one of our best kept secrets. It is true that measures should be taken in order to develop its tremendous potential and that we should collaborate with the people who live there, but the PC Party just does not believe that changing the boundary will achieve that. Maybe it would give the people of the north more political weight inside Canada, but still, I do not think this is the real solution to developing the north.
High technology is often referred to in connection with the world economy. We have only to look at the investments here in this region, in Silicon Valley North, and in other regions of Canada in the areas of pharmaceuticals, telecommunications and high tech.
These are fields that are in rapid expansion, and they represent a real economic force. The north, however, is going to take on more and more importance as well.
Indeed, let us not forget that even though high tech is the future, Canada's economy still relies primarily on its natural resources and that most of them are located within the north. Instead of changing the boundary, should we not focus on developing northern Canada? The PC party believes that if efforts are being carefully directed, the Canadian economy could even grow stronger through proper development of our natural resources in the north and high tech in the south.
Our party supports betters development and a stronger economy for all regions of Canada, including the north.
Atlantic Fisheries April 10th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, when the federal government announced in 1995 that it would be withdrawing from the ownership and operation of regional and local ports, we were all quite leery of the ramifications such a decision would have on local stakeholders.
The transfer of these wharves to private for profit interests has left our fishing industry at the mercy of these companies, which are in a position to substantially increase berthing fees, knowing full well that many fishermen have few options but to tie their vessels at their locations.
In Atlantic Canada some berthing fees have more than doubled since private companies took over. For instance, last year a boat owner at the Digby wharf paid $1,056 in berthing fees. This year the owner is being charged $2,336 for the same service.
The minister might suggest that they move to another wharf; however, let me remind him that a number of wharves in Atlantic Canada were seriously damaged in a January 21 storm and his government has thus far failed to provide any meaningful emergency assistance to help repair them.
The new national marine policy was supposed to ensure affordable, effective and safe marine transportation services. I think the fishing industry would—
Motions For Papers April 5th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Could I ask the parliamentary secretary to make inquiries concerning Motion No. M-34, which asks for correspondence with the provinces concerning the clarity bill. Surely the government would want to make this correspondence public.