Mac Harb

[Petitions, November 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by many constituents across the country who are asking that parliament amend the Divorce Act to include the provision, as supported in Bill C-340, regarding the rights of grandparents to access or to custody of the children.

[United Nations Convention On The Rights Of The Child, November 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in 1989 Canada co-chaired and signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Article one of the convention states: “For the purpose of the present convention, a child means every human being below the age of 18 years, unless, under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier”. While most of our commitments have been fulfilled, this article has not.

Today, however, I have great news. The Minister of Transport has committed to introducing new legislation regarding the Canada Shipping Act which will ensure that the definitions of child and infant are interpreted consistently with the definition of child proposed in article one of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

This new act will accomplish the objectives of my private member's bill, Bill C-333, an act to amend the Canada Shipping Act.

I would like to congratulate and thank the Minister of Transport for his outstanding initiative, foresight and leadership and for his commitment to the children of Canada.

[Protection Of Privacy (Social Insurance Numbers) Act, November 25th, 1998]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-456, an act to protect personal privacy by restricting the use of social insurance numbers.

Mr. Speaker, nowadays every time a person applies to rent an apartment, to open a bank account or just about anything, the first question they are asked is “What is your social insurance number?”

There are millions and millions of unused social insurance numbers that are floating around the country. In fact, the auditor general reported recently about the alarming number of social insurance numbers that are floating around.

Not only is it immoral, but it is unfair for anyone to request the social insurance number of another person, unless they are required by law to do so.

I want to make sure it becomes illegal. To that extent, this bill would make it illegal for anyone to ask for a social insurance number unless it is required by law to ask for that number. As a result, we will be able to solve the problem. One person should not be able to require another person to give their social insurance number unless the request is specifically required by law or unless the person making the request advises the other person in writing that it is not necessary to comply with the request and that there will not be a penalty for failing to do so.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[National Child Day, November 20th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, today is National Child Day, a day to recognize children and their accomplishments.

Shortly I will have the honour to recognize the accomplishments of 7 year old Ryan Hreljac of Kempville.

Ryan, with the help of his brothers Jordan and Keegan, worked tirelessly to get clean water wells for people in a village in Uganda, Africa. For his efforts Ryan will receive a You Made a Difference Award.

Here in Ottawa the student volunteer program of the Queensway-Carleton Hospital will also receive an award for the work of the 200 grade 10 students who donated over 10,000 hours annually to the hospital.

Mr. Marc Croteau, the mayor of the city of Aylmer, will also receive an award in recognition of his efforts to build respect and confidence among the general population and youth of Aylmer, Quebec.

On behalf of my colleagues I would like to say congratulations to Janis Machin and Bernie Muzeen of Our Kids. I would also like to say congratulations to all individuals involved in improving the lives of others, especially our children. For those who are celebrating their birthday today, happy birthday.

[Charitable Contributions, November 16th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank members for giving me the opportunity to speak to this motion. I know that my colleague opposite had six minutes remaining, but since he is not here I will take the opportunity.

I want to commend the hon. the member for Fraser Valley for introducing this motion, which suggests that the government bring in legislation to make the tax deduction for contributions to charitable organizations no less than the tax deduction for contributions to political parties.

On the surface, if one were to look at this motion they would say it is great. For myself, as someone who represents a constituency that is urban in nature, I have thousands of organizations and community groups who on a daily basis are doing good work in the community. I do not want to name these organizations, but I can tell members that they range from hospitals to educational institutions to children's organizations to health and social service organizations to housing groups and so on.

These men, women, young boys and girls are out in their community on a daily basis, reaching out, trying to help those who are in need of help. Frankly, if we want to address the issue of charities and charitable work, it is these individuals and organizations that we have to acknowledge with regard to the well-being of our society and our community.

These individuals volunteer because they want to do good. These people contribute thousands of hours on an annual basis. They contribute their time and energy, not because they want to be rewarded, not because they want to be recognized, but because they want to do something good for the community. These individuals volunteer because it makes them feel that much better about themselves and about the society in which they live, and they feel good about supporting and helping others.

At no time have I ever heard an individual tell me that he or she was not going to support an organization or a cause because there were no financial incentives. These people volunteer because they want to. They do it because they know that they live in a compassionate and caring community.

I want to pay tribute to the parliamentary secretary for finance for speaking on this issue. He clearly stated to the House that what we require in this society is a balance.

We have a system which treats political contributions differently than charitable contributions. I will tell members how.

If I was to give $100 to a political organization, then at the end of the year I would be able to claim a tax credit of $75. However, if I was to give a charitable organization $100, at the end of the year I would only be able to claim $30.

On the surface anyone would say that is unfair and that we have to correct this situation. But that is not the whole issue.

The vast majority of Canadians give more than $300 a year, especially those who give to charities. As a result, the government has recognized the need to provide incentives to those who want to give to charities. Therefore, the government created a balance. It created a sliding scale. Those who contribute $250 or more to charities will get more of a tax rebate or more of a tax credit. For those who give to political organizations the government has created a sliding scale that decreases in terms of a tax credit.

In a sense it is not fair for us to judge the system on the first $10, $20 or $30 that my colleague was talking about. This is not what all of these men and women are giving to charities.

What they are giving to charities over a period of a whole year, which in most cases is over $250, is where we see the beauty of our tax treatment and the beauty of our system when it comes to recognizing those who are giving to charities.

It becomes clear at $1,150. Say, for example, that an individual Canadian is giving $1,160 to a charity and is giving $1,160 to a political party. He will get more credit for his contribution to the charity than to the political organization. If somebody gives a charitable organization $2,000 he will get a lot more in tax credits than if he was to give that $2,000 to a political party. If he gave $1,180, for the additional $30 he will get no tax credit. If he gave $2,000 he will get no tax credit for the additional $850.

To that extent the tax system is fair when one looks at the outer end, at those amounts above $250 or $300.

If we were to make large contributions like many organizations and individual Canadians do, for example to a hospital or to a university, if $10,000 or $20,000 was given, a tax credit of up to 75% would apply. However, if $10,000 or $20,000 was given to a political party there would not be a tax credit.

We have to look at the whole spectrum rather than simply looking at one small piece of the pie. If we were to look at the whole spectrum I would say we have gone a long way in trying to address the inequity in the system.

The government, since taking office, has introduced a number of initiatives and I would like to list only three. First, the government adopted measures that will lower the threshold for eligibility for the 29% tax credit to $200 from $250. Second, it adopted measures that will raise the annual income limit for the use of charitable donations to most charities from 20% to 75%. Third, it has reduced the income inclusion rate for capital gains arising from donations of appreciated publicly traded securities to 37.5%.

I would say that the measures which have been taken by the government are fair. Are they the best things we can do for charities? No. We can do a lot more. Are we doing more for charities? Yes. Should we do more for charities? Yes. There are over 80,000 charitable organizations across the land. Collectively their voluntary contribution in terms of manpower, in terms of men and women contributing through charities, is in excess of $12 billion a year. These are the issues that need to be addressed if we want to look at the fairness of the system and at the equity of the system.

The motion as proposed by my colleague would not solve the problem at all. It would be a complicating factor rather than solve the problem. What we have before us is a balancing act.

[Criminal Code, November 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, without going into too much detail, I heard the member say that we should not be introducing laws which would require using our resources for their enforcement. Is he suggesting that we should cancel all the laws that we have in place now governing, for example, hunting or driving licences? All of that requires enforcement.

I would suggest that we should not be trivializing the matter to the point where if something needs enforcement then we should not do it. Rather we should say there is a need in the community to take action on behalf of the community. We should do what is right rather than what may or may not require more resources. What are my colleague thoughts in this regard?

[Petitions, November 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by many constituents in Ontario. They are requesting that parliament amend the Divorce Act to include the provision supported in Bill C-340 regarding the right of spouses and grandparents regarding access to or custody of their children.

[Unicef, October 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the staff and volunteers of UNICEF.

On Halloween night this coming Saturday, over two million children volunteers will be carrying the UNICEF box while trick-or-treating. Instead of asking for candy they will be collecting coins.

Empowered to help other children around the world, our kids are taking action. The money they collect will help ensure that children in poor countries are immunized, registered at birth, will eat nutritious food and will learn to read.

Since 1980 the increase in basic immunization coverage has saved the lives of more than 20 million children.

Programs supported by UNICEF and other partners have helped more than 900 million people gain access to safe drinking water.

I am appealing to the traditional Canadian generosity. It does not matter how small the amount. Every bit helps. On Halloween night this coming Saturday, when people see a volunteer child of UNICEF, drop a coin. It will help to save the life of a needy child. We can make a difference.

[Military Missions Beyond Canadian Boundaries, October 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great regret that an opposition member, with very good intentions, has proposed a motion to this House that is extremely counterproductive, redundant and does not serve the debate, democracy or the country as a whole. It does not serve the country that our armed forces personnel go to. It does not serve humanity. It does not serve any purpose.

On October 7 of this year the House had a debate. Members on all sides had a chance to speak out on behalf of their constituents and on behalf of Canadians. A motion was put before parliament that would allow the House of Commons to give guidance to the government in dealing with a crisis.

At that time the government clearly stated its intention to work in co-operation with the international community, in conjunction with the United Nations, our friends and allies, in order to put a stop to the tragedy in the Balkans.

It is high time that we put partisanship behind us and worked collectively, not only as a parliament, not only as a community and as a nation, but as a world. We live in one world. It is a global village. It is a small world.

If any of us had flown as far above the earth as Bondar did and looked down, we would not have been able to see a border. We would not have been able to see the colour of people or know their religion. We would not have been able to see a town or a city. We would only have seen the world as one unit.

What we have to do as a parliament, as a community and as a country is to promote the kind of feeling that we are all one. We live in one small environment, in one small global community.

We have to put a stop to the horrible things that are taking place around the world. We have to be proactive and vigilant. We have to seek venues, such as the United Nations community and other venues, to establish a mechanism so that we can begin to resolve international disputes and problems through dialogue and discussion rather than resorting to violence, attacks and torture.

The world cannot take it any more. Our resources are evaporating at an incredible rate. One of the most expensive resources on this planet is the human resource and we must protect it. We have done damage to our environment. We have burned forests all over the place. We have eliminated fish stocks from different parts of the ocean. We have created toxic waste all over the place.

Now we have wars all over the place because of borders and other things that may have happened 500, 1,000 or 5,000 years ago.

None of us owns any part of this world. This world belongs to all of us collectively. We are the trustees of this world, as my colleague would say. We have a responsibility collectively to work in harmony to improve the relationship that exists between people.

This government has been a very proactive government.

I would say that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has set an example by getting this country to take the lead on the land mines issue, on the engagement process, trying to engage the other side and trying to enter into dialogue with the other side.

The previous minister of foreign affairs as well as the Department of Foreign Affairs and every officer who works in it have been very proactive in trying to encourage the United Nations to establish a United Nations peace service mechanism, a peace force in order to resolve disputes around the world. We have been very proactive.

I say to my colleagues in opposition, including those in the New Democratic Party, that they should be on board with what this government is doing. They should be supporting what the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Foreign Affairs are trying to do on behalf of all us as public servants to get this country to be proactive.

We are trusted. We are a middle power. We do not have any colonial interests anywhere. We are not interested in annexing territories. We are a peaceful nation. There is confidence in our nation. There is confidence in our people.

We have to use that confidence around the globe in order to promote peace, prosperity and the resolution of problems through the mechanism we have spoken about, dialogue. Let us work together in unity. Let us not use it for a political purpose.

I have been here for almost ten years. It hurts me to see a motion like this trivializing the difficult times of the people in that part of the world who need us. Those on both sides need us. They need us to go in there and create an environment of engagement in that part of the world. The motion says that, in the opinion of this House, the government should seek majority support, through an official vote in the House of Commons, prior to committing a significant contingent of Canadian military personnel to an active military mission beyond the boundaries of Canada.

We are already in that part of the world. We have been in different parts of the world for over 40 years now. We have people who have been engaged pretty well in the vast majority of peacekeeping forces that exist in the different parts of the world.

There is nothing new here. Parliament has consistently been engaged in debate. Parliament has consistently debated issues affecting Canada's presence around the world, the peacekeeping presence around the world, the United Nations presence around the world.

Having a motion like this now is extremely counterproductive and not serving the democratic process the way it should be.

In light of what is taking place at this moment, if I were my colleague I would withdraw this motion and do the honourable thing and endorse what this government and this nation have been doing for the past 50 years or so.

To that extent, what we have to do as a House is say we have not only four walls and the floor and the ceiling but we have a nation. We have to take care of the business of the nation.

When we know the government has already made decisions on issues like this, when we know the government has international obligations, when we know the government has a role to play on the international scene as a member of the United Nations, as a member of NATO and as a member of the international community, we should say collectively that the government is doing the right thing. We should endorse what it is doing.

At the same time, as individual members of parliament we must continue to call on our friends everywhere, in our constituencies and around the globe, to pull aside the valance and come together as one people to start dialogue. This is the only way we can come to a conclusion so that we have a better community, a better nation and a better globe.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you very much because you have been a model here and in your constituency. Many members of the armed forces live there. You know firsthand the importance of supporting our armed forces.

I take offence that members of the opposition sometimes try to undermine the credibility of one of the finest police forces, one of the finest armies and some of the finest personnel around the globe. We have to support them. We have to do everything we can to ensure that they can continue to do their duty, not only in this country but around the world.

[Commonwealth Jewish Council And Trust Award, October 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to this year's recipient of the Commonwealth Jewish Council and Trust Award.

He is one of the finest public servants this country has ever known. For over 30 years before and after his election to parliament he has consistently been a champion of justice, an advocate of fairness, a visionary and a compassionate friend of the people.

The Commonwealth Jewish Council and Trust Award is given to those who have gone beyond the call of duty to help their fellow human beings and whose contribution has been truly outstanding.

Other Canadians who have received the awards are Judge Maxwell Cohen and Mrs. Dorothy Reitman.

I join all my colleagues and all Canadians in congratulating our Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. member for Windsor West, on this latest addition to his many achievements.