Larry McCormick

[Customs Act, October 31st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-102 represents the opinion and the majority belief of most of us that most Canadians are honest.

I cross the border. I live within 30 miles of border at Thousand Islands. My riding of Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington extends from the Thousand Islands to Algonquin Park. We have a steady flow of tourists back and forth. We have small businesses exporting and importing.

Whether I was driving back from the United States or whether, as in a previous life, I was importing, I could see the honest person with the small company was being confronted with too much paperwork. There was a real lack of support for the small business person who was being put behind the eight ball.

Certainly there is smuggling today. If a person wants to smuggle something he would target our area of the St. Lawrence River. I do not want to see us penalize the honest person. I do hope Bill C-102 will help eliminate some of this overburden of paperwork.

The large corporations in our part of eastern Ontario are expanding at a great rate. Bombardier is shipping $595 million worth of cars to Malaysia and other places around the world. Celanese just got an expansion. It has invested $191 million so it can export most of that. It is a polymer based product. Basically the polymer to make a shirt is the same product used to make a two-litre plastic pop bottle.

These companies have the resources, the income, the background and the experts to help with the trading nation philosophy we have. However, the small businesses do not always have all this information available. I certainly hope Bill C-102 will help in this respect.

We need to send the message as the bill progresses that we will ally with small businesses so they can access this neighbouring market.

Small businesses in my riding are getting the spinoff from these major orders. Almost $1 billion has been invested into our area this year. From that many small businesses can take the opportunity to reach into the United States, Mexico and to the fourth amigo down the road. Yet the atmosphere is not always there which says we care about small business. We all acknowledge small business is the engine of the economy. That is where our jobs will come from. How many people are not certain the government is really looking after small business?

This is a great opportunity for Bill C-102 and for us. It is my responsibility following this to show how this will help our small businesses.

I want to get the opinion of my colleague from Algoma that the mandate of Bill C-102 will help our small businesses and in what ways. I know he has studied this bill much more than I have.

[Endangered And Threatened Species Act, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to speak to Bill C-275.

I congratulate the hon. member for Davenport on this bill and also the Minister of the Environment and her parliamentary secretary for the work they are doing on this very important topic.

It is very important to take the initiatives of these people and work with them. We owe our children and our children's children our prompt attention to this very important endangered species Act.

This past year I attended two open houses at the Body Shop, one in Kingston, Ontario and one in Belleville, Ontario. This respectable company had a great display set up with everything from colouring contests to T-shirts and it encourages children to take part. It has done a great job of making people aware of endangered species around the world.

I am sure if we looked at the bottom line of the Body Shop stores across Canada and talked to the individual owners, we would find that their number one customers are the teenagers and the youth of today. Our daughter is one of those customers. I commend our youth. They understand the importance of our environment.

We are very fortunate that our children, including my daughter, Kayla Rebecca, have developed this great love for country, love for the environment and our wildlife. I realize that we do not have to go to the Body Shop to be reminded on their interest.

My colleague previously mentioned visiting schools. I also want to mention this. I was on a local school board a few years ago when we started up a community school and we now have a day care situated across the road from our home. I visit schools and day cares. Posters are plastered on the walls. It does not matter what topic is displayed, sports or the environment, we see birds and other species depicted on the posters for any topic. Our youth are very aware.

We all agree that the greatest asset of our country is our youth. We are very fortunate. They are very wise in their respect of the planet, our country, our lands and our waterways. Therefore, we owe our children attention to this now.

My riding of Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington extends from the Thousand Islands, which we are glad to share with my colleague for Kingston and the Islands. Then we circle around and go to the Bay of Quinte, the walleye capital of the world. That is where we had the live release tournament this year, the largest walleye tournament in North America with 7,000 to 8,000 fisherpeople, but they released all the fish and it made our children very happy.

I drive from my office in Napanee to Bancroft and on up to Algonquin Park. My riding touches quite a bit of Algonquin Park. Quite often I see wildlife. It is a real thrill.

The other day I was in Algonquin Park for the Art in the Park show. My wife and daughter were with me. We were driving along and a tour bus and cars were stopped. People were having the thrill of a lifetime because there was a bear in the bush. The bear was playing up for the public. The bear was standing there scratching on the trees and foraging a bit. It certainly reminds us of what we would lose and what we do lose any time we lose one species.

Someone else mentioned that when I went to school we did not pay all this attention to the environment. No, we did not but perhaps it was being introduced into our subconscious minds. One of the highlights in public school was arbour day, when we went out and planted trees. Over a few years we did plant a few thousand trees and made a small contribution. I am sure I have driven by some of those areas. The trees are tall now because that was a while ago. Trees are very important; they provide a natural habitat for birds.

When I went to school we did not have respect for the wetlands, I admit. Today our children are more curious and more in love with all of these endangered species.

What do we do? Where do we go from here? We have all heard that there is no national law to protect them. Some of the provinces have laws. I am glad to see that the federal government and Environment Canada are going to work with the provinces on this. They are going to work with different stakeholders, groups, provinces, territories, aboriginal groups and wildlife management boards.

We can learn a lot from the aboriginal groups, from the natives in our communities. Someone listening to me is going to say: "Yes, I heard about some natives that went out during the fish spawning season and speared a whole lot of fish". Yes, there are bad apples in every barrel, but I will tell you our native populations live in harmony with this country. There is much we can learn from them. They have always practised conservation.

When you tap any natural resource you leave some for seed. My uncle was a trapper many years ago, a colourful character. He made a lot of money some years trapping beaver. One day I was with him and I used an axe to cut through two and a half feet of ice on the river behind our home. He set the trap and took out a very nice beaver, but he said that was it. I went with him the next day and he said: "We will not set any more traps here. We have to leave some for the future".

I will conclude by saying I really appreciate the opportunity for me an other people to speak on this. I want to acknowledge that our youth will lead the way. They remind us every day and every weekend at home.

[Employment Equity Act, October 5th, 1995]

There are three here now.

[Employment Equity Act, October 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the motion put forward by the hon. member to amend clause 6.

Let me say at the outset that clause 6 was included in the bill to dispel certain myths about employment equity. One such myth is that employment equity means hiring unqualified people. According to this myth employment equity requires employers to lower their standards and change their job requirements to accommodate inferior candidates.

This notion is absolutely false. It is pure nonsense. It is the complete misunderstanding of what employment equity is about and it is extremely degrading to members of designated groups.

We have included clause 6 in the bill to make it perfectly clear to everyone, so there can be no mistake. However the change proposed by the hon. member is unacceptable. Although it adds nothing of substance to the bill, it creates a host of additional problems by including the new notion of best qualified.

The first problem is obvious. What does best qualified mean? How do we determine best? Best according to whose definition? I do not deny that sometimes it may be possible to establish a very sophisticated, completely objective method to determine a best candidate, but too often best simply ends up meaning someone just like me. In these situations best becomes another excuse to create barriers. We do not need more barriers.

Who was best? Is the candidate with the most university degrees always the best? Let us say we are talking about hiring a cook or a manual labourer. Book learning is not the main qualification for the job. Obviously skill is. Is the candidate with a master's degree in law better qualified than the high school graduate, even though the degree has nothing to do with the job at all? Or, have we created just another barrier? I repeat that we do not need more barriers.

The government stands firm about employment equity. It does not require any employer to hire unqualified individuals. However it asks employers to look actively for qualified applicants in places they might not have previously looked. It asks them to find qualified workers in designated groups that have been overlooked and consider them along with other qualified candidates. It asks them to eliminate barriers in these processes, but it does not dictate the outcome of the hiring and the promotion decision. It certainly never asks them to hire someone who is not qualified.

Sometimes certain employers go further. Sometimes a big hearted employer will find and train people who have not had a chance. They will see to it that these people become qualified. Let us make no mistake. These employers do not have to do it. The law does not require it. However they find it brings their companies unexpected benefits.

I will tell a story about one such employer. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, a crown corporation, recently instituted a special pilot program for four young people with intellectual disabilities. Three of the four have Down's syndrome. These four individuals were carefully trained for the company for temporary photocopying, filing and messenger jobs. They were always willing and co-operative. They were extremely proud of their new found independence and their success in this work. Their families were grateful that the responsibility for their children was being shared.

It is most interesting that although the four people required extra supervision they unexpectedly brought much happiness and compassion into the workplace. Though their lot in life was different they never complained. Their happiness and gratitude were contagious. They caused very beautiful qualities to blossom in their fellow workers who were touched and inspired by their innocence, simplicity and gratitude.

These four individuals brought a great deal of joy to the workplace. The project's participants, supervisors and workers received one of CMHC president's excellence awards in 1994. Though they may not have been the best qualified for the job according to traditional standards, they performed their job with enthusiasm and in doing it brought something special to the workplace. They made it a better workplace for everyone.

Sometimes the whole is more than just the sum of the parts. In looking for excellence we sometimes find it in the most unexpected places. We sometimes achieve it in the most unexpected ways. This is one lesson of employment equity. I would not want to tie in any way the hands of an employer who wants to undertake an innovative program such as the one at CMHC.

I frankly do not know what the full impact of including best qualified in this section might be. I fear, however, that it would ultimately constrain the efforts of employers who will look for best in new areas and for best in the sum total of the parts. For these reasons I cannot support the motion.

[Youth, October 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, here in Ontario the Harris government has slashed funds for job creation programs. Republicans in the U.S. have cut funding for their youth oriented Americorps.

Can the Secretary of State for Training and Youth tell Canadians specifically what action our government is taking to make sure our young people remain a priority of this government?

[The Underground Economy, September 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I address the House today on Motion No. 382 introduced by the member for Mississauga South. My hon. colleague has done a great deal of study on the underground economy and I acknowledge all the work he has put into this.

I have given this matter considerable thought because many of my constituents have been directly affected by the underground economy. They are people who operate legitimate businesses. They have told me how their businesses are being hurt by the so-called under the table entrepreneurs. They want the government to do something about the problem before it is too late. These so-called under the table entrepreneurs are not the entrepreneurs I grew up with and started businesses with.

The greater the activity in the underground economy, the less revenue there is available to governments. Underground economic activity creates unfair competition for honest businesses. Jobs are lost and honest taxpayers are forced to pay more than their fair share of taxes. For many individuals and businesses the underground economy has become a convenient way to avoid paying taxes, to not pay their fair share.

When these people take their financial transactions underground they are failing to meet their contribution in support of Canada's social and economic programs. These people do not pay for the services they use. Instead other Canadians are forced to pay more.

I ask all members, as well as all other Canadians, to consider the real cost of underground economic activity. The cost is large. I believe it is phenomenally large. It shows up in reduced essential services, taxes being higher than they should be, unfair competition, and a reduced standard of living for the honest taxpayer. If every Canadian paid their fair share everyone would pay less. We have heard this before and we have to think about it to realize how we can all gain in this situation.

How does the underground economy affect the competitiveness of legitimate businesses? Many groups have talked to us. A major group is the Canadian Home Builders' Association. It is very concerned. Home renovators who evade taxes have an unfair advantage over honest contractors. Many small legitimate businesses in my riding of Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington are being threatened by others operating underground.

Right from the start honest businesses are at a competitive disadvantage because they cannot offer a customer the same deal as offered by someone who will do the work but not collect the taxes. The end result is that the legitimate businesses face unfair competition and many jobs are lost.

My hon. colleague for Mississauga South has put forward new specific approaches in the motion to address the underground economy. He is offering a limited amnesty on interest and penalties when a taxpayer voluntarily comes forward in an effort to crack down by engaging more investigators on a contract or commission basis. People will hear that this message is for real and people will come forward.

This phase will continue as long as there is a favourable payback. We have to let the public know that when they patronize the supplier with a cash price without an invoice they are actually condoning fraud, and that by refusing to do business with those who do not give invoices they also help the business of honest taxpayers.

Turning to an input tax credit, this offer for GST to be paid on home renovations would be required in a very simple process. The taxpayer would submit the original invoice either as part of his or her tax return or by separate filing. The objective is to create a real paper trail. We all know about this area of abuse and it is time we recognized it.

A tax credit would be a good vehicle through which to educate the public on the crime and to discourage under the table action. A taxpayer would help to support honest businesses that are prepared to provide invoices.

Revenue Canada's voluntary disclosure policy allows individuals, partnerships, corporations, trusts, and non-profit, charitable or other organizations to come forward to correct any deficiencies in any reporting to the department. The policy operates on a simple premise: When a disclosure is made voluntarily before the department has started an audit or other enforcement action, no penalties or other sanctions such as a prosecution for tax evasion will be imposed.

The taxpayer will only have to pay the amount, either taxes or duties owing, plus interest. This is fair since the interest reflects the true value of the money and the fact that those who have not paid their taxes on time have had the use of these funds.

Revenue Canada under its voluntary disclosure policy generally takes a responsible approach to collections. Arrangements can be worked out so that taxes owing to government are paid in a manner which does not cause undue hardship for the taxpayer.

Persons can make a voluntary disclosure by contacting any Revenue Canada office directly or by having their accountants or lawyers do it for them. A disclosure will be considered voluntary as long as it is made before Revenue Canada has started an audit or other enforcement action.

In my experience we get what we pay for. When we go underground to provide services or when customers accept underground services, we can expect lower quality work and lower quality materials because those businesses do not have to comply and will not comply with industry regulations.

As well and most important, consumers do not get the protection and the guarantees they would otherwise have if they had an authorized purchase order and/or an invoice. When the customer goes underground as well he or she has no recourse and no protection.

A little over a year go an elderly woman in a village near my home was visited one day by three gentlemen in a pickup truck. They knocked on her door and said they knew that the winter had been severe. They wanted to check out her home in case they could do any little touch-up jobs for her and save her a lot of money. They spent half an hour wandering around her home in a village originally called Rogues Hollow, no pun intended.

They knocked on the door after they inspected the home and said: "The winter was very severe. There are a lot of problems with your back wall. Bricks are coming loose. Your chimney is ready to fall down. We have an estimate here for you; it is $6,200. If you pay us in cash, I have these professional men available who will do the work now. We can do the job for you today for $3,100". It is a true story. They did $300, $400, $500 or $600 worth work that morning and she paid them the $3,100.

She was sick the next day. She phoned me at home. What can I do? It was in cash. Do we have to get hurt time after time, especially seniors, to see that these are not business people but crooks?

Hon. members opposite spoke about the most hated tax in Canadian history and how it has added greatly to the underground economy. I agree that when the GST arrived on the scene the underground economy exploded. Small businesses such as the retail business my wife Rita and I operated face the burden of more paper jungles. Our ministers have told us that when they change the GST there will be less involvement, less paper and less work for small businesses. I eagerly await that and will gladly remind my ministers.

My colleagues opposite have spoken of the GST. Small businesses are finally being recognized by the government. The Liberal government recognizes that jobs will come from small businesses. Recently the Minister of Industry announced micro-loans of less than $5,000 for small businesses. They will make a great difference. We can encourage businesses to come out of the closet and become legal or legitimate businesses.

The motion before the House suggests the government educate the public and encourage its participation in addressing the problem. I agree that Canadians need to know the facts about the seriousness of the underground economy and what can be done to reduce it. I applaud the member for Mississauga South for his efforts to stimulate decision on the issue. I urge members of the House to carry the message back to their constituents and I will to mine. I urge members to talk with their constituents about the underground economy, its seriousness, and how it can be reduced.

I also agree that governments cannot solve the problem alone. We must all do our part and fulfil our responsibilities. I urge all members to support Motion No. 382.

[The Underground Economy, September 27th, 1995]

You will be surprised.

[Cultural Property Export And Import Act, September 25th, 1995]

I beg your pardon. No way.

[Canada Day, June 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, July 1 is a special time for all Canadians wherever they live to participate in festivities that bring us together in an expression of pride in Canada and in being Canadian.

This July 1 Canadians can also celebrate the 30th anniversary of our national flag. The flag represents our values, reflected in the way we treat each other and in the regard we have for our global neighbours.

Canadians value individualism and industry. We also work hard together to ensure the welfare of our fellow human beings. Our values are evident in the dedication, discipline, tenacity and humanitarianism of our peacekeepers abroad. We have been known to be a compassionate, tolerant and rather unflamboyant nation but we stand firm when fair play is at stake. These values have made our society safe and full of opportunity.

Our Canadian flag has earned the recognition, respect and admiration of many nations. I wish all Canadians a joyous Canada Day and invite them to be generous in spirit with family, friends and neighbours.

[Firearms Act, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to have it recorded that I voted in favour of Motion No. 158.