House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was colleagues.

Last in Parliament May 2004, as Liberal MP for Ottawa Centre (Ontario)

Won his last election, in 2000, with 40% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Bankruptcy Act June 9th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I thought when the hon. member raised his question we answered it fairly well.

In his presentation he was trying to question the commitment of the government in protecting the interest of Canadians. I want to bring to his attention that the Minister for International Trade criss-crossed the planet probably four times, reaching out and trying to promote the interests of Canadian business and Canadian companies in order to promote trade internationally.

This minister as well as this government are not afraid to stand up and protect the interests of the industry. I would like to bring to his attention a few articles, one in the Globe and Mail with the headline stating: MacLaren blasts U.S. on trade''. Another one in <em>Le Devoir</em> says:MacLaren lance un avertissement aux Américains''. The Financial Post says: MacLaren lashes out at the U.S. on trade''.MacLaren blasts U.S. on trade'', says the Toronto Star . ``U.S. risks trade shell, MacLaren warns'' is in the Gazette . The list goes on and on.

This government is not lying dead. It is the opposite. We are proactive. We understand that there are problems. The hon. member must understand. When you have trade between Canada and the United States in excess of $270 billion surely you are going to see difficulties in certain aspects of trading with your largest trading partner in the world.

If the member is suggesting we should declare war on the United States, I would suggest to the hon. member that those days have gone by. The answer for all of this is through the international forum, the World Trade Organization, which is going to take place in 1995, through GATT which is now functioning and through the NAFTA agreement which we have in place.

Only through dialogue can we resolve some of those disputes which I might suggest do not account for more than 3 per cent of the total.

As for 301, I want to tell the hon. member that the United States never named Canada under Super 301. They have taken measures against Canada under section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act. The current disputes with the United States are covered by the NAFTA dispute settlement mechanism and the general agreement. Canada will make full use of these agreements to protect its interests.

I just want to say to the hon. member that when Minister MacLaren appeared before the House of Commons Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, he said that it is not right for the Americans to use bilateral instruments which could indirectly affect other countries. We continue to defend the interests of Canadians and of industries.

Results Canada June 9th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, malnutrition affects one in three children in the developing world. Clean water is not available to over 1.2 billion people and basic education and primary health care is considered an inaccessible luxury to many in the world today.

Results Canada is an organization devoted to creating the political will for the sustainable end to hunger and poverty. Basic human needs such as literacy, immunization and clean water should be available to every person on earth.

Results Canada encourages the promotion of economic self-reliance. Through the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh small loans are issued to the most destitute rural people and over half have managed to get themselves out of poverty.

The success of this program has led to the establishment of the Grameen Trust, a fund set aside for the development of similar loan programs in third world countries.

To all of the staff and volunteers at Results Canada, I commend you for a job well done.

Young Offenders Act June 6th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House and address the issue of urea formaldehyde foam insulation and in particular its effect on market value of homes insulated with UFFI.

As my hon. colleague pointed out, during the 1970s many homes were insulated with UFFI. Let me assure everyone that no Canadian whose home has been insulated with UFFI has been denied mortgage insurance from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. In fact during the past few years homes insulated with UFFI have been trading on a regular basis.

I would also like to point out that for the past year a UFFI declaration has not been required for the purpose of obtaining mortgage insurance under the National Housing Act. Through mortgage insurance CMHC provides Canadians with equal access to mortgage financing anywhere in Canada.

I would further like to add that the fact that CMHC is providing mortgage insurance on homes that have contained UFFI even though remedial action has been taken has helped to minimize any negative perceptions.

As my hon. colleague may know, the six UFFI cases determined by all of the parties involved to be representative of all the issues at stake are still before the Court of Appeal of Quebec. An appeal date of September 11, 1995 has tentatively been scheduled. I would further point out that in their factum the plaintiffs have removed all their claims related to health.

My apologies for my voice, Mr. Speaker. I had my tonsils out.

Young Offenders Act June 6th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I thought the Prime Minister answered the question very well when he said to the hon. member in reply: "I do not think NAFTA has a lot to say about the way we should control that type of problem in Canada". He went on to say: "Sometimes we hear things in committee we do not agree with. Evidently the hon. member did not share that view, and I do not either".

The member should have been satisfied by the Prime Minister's answer. However, I will try and elaborate on it.

First I would state that possible proposals for plain packaging requirements for cigarettes are still under review by the committee. The government awaits the report of the committee with great interest. The committee recommendations would be studied by the government with careful attention to Canada's obligation under NAFTA and under other treaties such as the GATT.

However NAFTA contains provisions allowing exceptions to trade mark rights. NAFTA also includes provisions that recognizes Canada's right to adopt or maintain sanitary measures and standard related measures for the protection of human health. As well, the government will ensure that any measure it chooses to adopt will not only achieve our goal of protecting the health of

Canadians but will also be consistent with our international obligations.

I hope this additional information will be satisfactory to the member.

Canada Student Financial Assistance Act May 24th, 1994

Madam Speaker, several Opposition members have raised an issue which I consider a rather interesting one: jurisdiction over education. They said that education is a matter of provincial jurisdiction. Our government agrees with that, but I would like to set the record straight.

In the bill as tabled by the minister, there is a provision under which the provinces are not obliged to participate in the program. As you know, Quebec and the Northwest Territories have already said they do not want to participate. I would appreciate if the hon. member would tell me whether he is satisfied with the bill proposed by the government as far as jurisdiction is concerned, and I want to stress that this bill recognizes the right of the provinces and territories to do what is referred to as opting out.

Canada Student Financial Assistance Act May 24th, 1994

Madam Speaker, I would recommend that the hon. member read the bill, because it does deal with the issue of access to education for young Canadians. Ultimately, the purpose of the bill is to facilitate access to the education system for young Canadians. This is not a bill to resolve all social and economic problems in Canada, but I can tell you that it is a very progressive step toward resolving the present economic crisis in Canada. This is a most progressive proposal. All my hon. colleague has to do is ask university students in his area; they will tell him that Canadian students are living under the poverty line.

I have spoken with several students and I was myself a student. I remember how many times a week we had hot-dogs and macaroni. I am not saying that it is not good food, but the point is that students live under the poverty line.

I think of all those dropping out these days. A great many students are quitting school because they cannot afford the costs involved. This bill will help them by providing them access to education.

If my hon. colleague does a little research, he will find that at the university level, nearly 50 per cent of students do not complete their degree because, unfortunately, they have to work to support themselves. That is why what the minister is proposing is very important for Canadian students. I hope I have answered the hon. member's question.

Canada Student Financial Assistance Act May 24th, 1994

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development. He has introduced an extremely progressive bill, one that is very important for young Canadians because, Madam Speaker, as you know this bill will rejuvenate legislation which was left untouched by the former Conservative government for ten years.

One of the most important provisions of this bill is the proposed increase in student assistance of 57 per cent per year. Students across Canada, whether they live in Quebec, Alberta or another province, will be able to benefit from a 57 per cent increase in financial assistance.

As for the question raised earlier by my colleague from the Bloc Quebecois concerning provincial deductions, I would point out to him that this bill gives provincial governments the choice of opting out. As my hon. colleague knows, the province of Quebec and the Northwest Territories have already exercised their right to opt out of the existing legislation. The federal government reimburses the equivalent of $72 million to them.

Therefore, as far as the question of provincial jurisdiction is concerned, the argument really does not wash.

We have to move away from jurisdictional bickering and focus on the whole issue before us. The proposal by the minister calls for an increase in grants and student loans. We have to commend the minister for coming forward with the proposal and for amending an act which has not been touched for over 10 years. It goes back 20 or 25 years. It is an archaic act that does not reflect the reality of today.

My colleague questioned why the federal government was trying to infringe on provincial jurisdiction. My answer is quite frank. In Canada there are over 300,000 people between the ages of 15 and 24 who are unemployed. These figures do not include people who have given up looking for work. They live in the Atlantic provinces, Quebec and elsewhere across the country. We have reason to be concerned.

Also across Canada on an annual basis in excess of 100,000 students are dropping out. We have reason to be concerned. It does not matter which province or territory we come from. Over 33 per cent of our youth are dropping out before they finish high school. We have reason to be concerned. It does not matter which province or which territory we come from.

In excess of 38 per cent of Canadians are considered to be functionally illiterate or have difficulty reading or writing. We have reason to be concerned. It does not matter which territory or which province we come from, especially when the cost of illiteracy is in excess of $10 billion to the economy as a whole. I would suggest colleagues on both sides of the House should be very concerned about it.

The minister is to be commended when he proposes amendments to the act and comes forward with tangible propositions to deal with a situation of national proportion, a situation which I personally call a national crisis.

My colleague from St. Boniface worked very hard along with other colleagues on this side of the House to reform the act, to make a tangible proposition so that we would have an act to reflect the reality of the nineties. My colleagues and the minister must be commended for consulting people from all walks of life, special interest groups, educational institutions and so on, to bring forward an act to reflect the realities of the nineties. They must be commended.

If there are complaints about certain aspects of the act let us put them on the table in the form of amendments. It is the responsibility of government to look at those amendments and to deal with them in a positive and fair way.

I cannot for the life of me give up on the issue of education in Canada. If we look at the needs of the nation, at the way we are going, at the international situation and at the national situation, we cannot help but say we must do something now. Sixty-five per cent of all jobs in the 1990s and beyond the year 2000 will require at least a grade 13 education if not more.

We can look at the figures to find out that between the ages of 15 and 24 years only 9.8 per cent of our youth actually have university degrees. If we look at the same figures between the ages of 15 and 24 years only 17.7 per cent of them have high school diplomas. This is a national crisis that needs a national plan or a national strategy.

The Minister of Human Resources Development must be commended for beginning the dialogue. Ultimately we should have national norms or national standards across Canada for education with the provinces having the right to opt out if they so choose. The minister has proposed a provision for provinces to opt out. That is fine. There is nothing wrong with that provided they fulfil the commitment to quality education. Education is already under the jurisdiction of provincial governments. There is no need to be nervous about the issue.

The federal government is not trying to grab more responsibilities from provincial governments. It is the opposite. We are saying and putting in writing that education is a provincial responsibility. We want to work with the provinces. We want to enter into dialogue with the provinces to progress with the agenda, not block the wheels of the car that so far has not been moving as fast as we would like it to move.

There should be national standards across Canada provided by the provinces in the core subjects of mathematics, grammar and the sciences. There should be a national strategy for the training, recruitment and retention of well qualified and motivated teachers at all levels of education: primary, secondary and university.

Also educators should have regular professional development programs made available to them to be kept informed of new training methods, technology and developments in the subjects they teach, in particular the core subjects we spoke about. There should be closer links among the different elements of the educational system, industry and employers, the co-operative programs the minister included in his proposal and spoke about over and over again.

A colleague in the opposition mentioned that many people in the province of Quebec did not have as much access to education as they should have had. I agree with him totally. It is a shame that we still have disparity in terms of access to education and the educational system as a whole across the land. For example, in Newfoundland we find the illiteracy rate is rampant at 40 per cent to 45 per cent. That is a national shame that must be addressed. In Quebec the figure improves a bit but is still not at an acceptable standard. Ontario and the western provinces show

more improvement in terms of the illiteracy level, but it is still not satisfactory. Everybody should be working together.

Nowadays when you finish high school in British Columbia do you think you can transfer your credits to a high school in Ottawa, in Quebec or in Newfoundland?-no. They do not recognize them. There are no norms, no standards, nothing. The educational system is in chaos.

Madam Speaker, I see you signalling me. I hope somebody will ask me a question. A long-winded debate is raging about jurisdiction when the debate should be about responsibility of the different levels of government to deliver a quality service. The minister is to be commended.

The Late Marwan Harb May 11th, 1994

Mr. Speaker, the tragic loss of Marwan Harb has hit us as an arrow in our hearts. A young Canadian was robbed of the chance to live. He was robbed of the chance to enjoy life.

On behalf of Marwan's family, I wish to thank my colleagues for their support. We appreciate the sympathy expressed by the community. The support we have received from Marwan's school friends, his teachers and the school officials has been comforting.

As Marwan joins other victims, I can hear the call on us to stop the tragedies. I can hear the call on us to protect the innocent of our society from becoming victims. I hope we will. I know we can.

Marwan, we will truly miss you.

Crown Liability And Proceedings Act April 22nd, 1994

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today to participate in the third reading debate on this bill, an act to amend the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act.

This legislation ensures that trade sanctions cannot be taken against Canada under the North American free trade agreement on environmental co-operation or the North American agreement on labour co-operation.

Bill C-4 is the only legislative measure necessary for Canada to fulfil our obligations under these agreements.

These agreements improve the NAFTA provisions on the environment and labour. They guarantee that our objective to increase trade is not achieved at the expense of our environment and our workers.

If adopted, this legislation would guarantee that trade sanctions cannot be taken against Canada in connection with environmental or labour matters covered by NAFTA.

Thanks to this bill, any potential fines made against Canada by a panel will be enforced by our own domestic courts.

If Canada, the United States or Mexico fail to enforce their environmental and labour laws, the agreements contain an effective dispute settlement mechanism. It allows for the establishment of a panel to investigate and make a determination.

If a panel determines a country has demonstrated a persistent pattern of failure to enforce its law, it may require the offending country to adopt an action plan to correct the problems. If the country fails to do so, the panel could also impose a fine or what the agreement terms a monetary enforcement assessment.

The legislation before us today will permit the Federal Court of Canada to enforce any panel determination which may be made against Canada if, and only if we persistently fail to effectively enforce our environmental and labour laws. Of course that is not something we expect to ever happen.

If a dispute settlement panel levies fines against the United States or Mexico for failure to correct their enforcement problems, those countries will face a suspension of NAFTA benefit or trade sanctions equivalent to the size of the unpaid penalty.

Canada views such trade sanctions would constitute barriers of the very kind that the NAFTA was designed to eliminate.

These agreements protect Canada's environmental and labour interests in relation to the North American free trade agreement. They effectively strengthen and expand important commitments made by Canada, the United States and Mexico.

We are committed to helping to promote environmentally sustainable growth and to promoting workers' rights throughout North America.

Through the North American agreement on environmental co-operation we have created a commission to effect close and ongoing co-operation. For example, on March 23 the Minister of the Environment participated in the inaugural meeting of the commission in Vancouver with her counterparts from the United States and Mexico.

The ministers at that time approved a process to establish the commission and the co-operative work program for the first year. They agreed that the commission's activities will be conducted in an open and transparent manner.

The environment ministers from Canada, the United States and Mexico will oversee the work of the commission to ensure it meets its goals; to promote sustainable development, to develop and enforce environmental regulations and to resolve disputes if laws are not upheld.

The commission will promote a work plan based on areas of priority. They include limits on specific pollutants, assessments of projects with transboundary implications and reciprocal court access. As well, the commission will work with the free trade commission to achieve the environmental goals of the NAFTA agreement.

Steady progress has been made on the establishment of the labour commission formed under the North American agreement on labour co-operation. Also on March 21 in Washington the Minister of Human Resources Development met with his American and Mexican counterparts to establish the co-operative work plan of the labour commission.

The ministers discussed how they intend to achieve the objectives of the labour agreement and reviewed a number of practical measures related to the establishment of the commission's organizational structure. At that time they reiterated their commitment to work together on a program of trilateral co-operative activities.

The labour commission will give effect to the promise in the preamble to the North American free trade agreement to "improve conditions and living standards" and as well "to protect, enhance and enforce basic workers' rights". The agreement, founded on close and ongoing co-operation among the three countries, ensures that laws governing health and safety, child labour and minimum wage standards are upheld.

They go well beyond co-operation. They commit each country to the domestic enforcement of domestic environmental and labour laws. This means that no country may use lax enforcement of its laws to gain an unfair arrangement or trade advantage.

I can report that negotiations to work out federal-provincial arrangements on implementing the environment and labour agreements in Canada are proceeding on a co-operative and constructive footing.

These agreements are designed to protect the environment and workers' rights, important issues for the provinces. Canada will submit to its NAFTA partners a list of provinces participating in the agreement when negotiations with the provinces have been completed.

It is my firm belief that the North American free trade agreement has been considerably strengthened and improved as a result of the precedent setting side agreement. The government is satisfied that the NAFTA will advance Canadian trade policy objectives.

As well the agreement will provide a valuable incentive for Canadian producers, exporters and investors to look beyond their traditional backyards to Mexico and the rest of Latin America as well as to the markets of Europe and Asia.

The agreement as strengthened and improved illustrates that international trade agreements can be multifaceted and more attuned to the realities of the 1990s.

It is in Canada's best interests to proceed with the passage of this bill. Not only will it protect Canada's international trade interest but also our environmental goals and the rights of our workers.

Canada-Hungary Income Tax Convention Act, 1994 April 21st, 1994

Madam Speaker, the purpose of Bill S-2 is to implement reciprocal tax treaties-or conventions-between Canada and Hungary, Nigeria, Argentina and Zimbabwe that will eliminate double taxation on income tax. As well, this bill implements a protocol to revise the current tax convention between Canada and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

I would first like to comment on the desirability and the role of tax treaties. A tax treaty between countries is an important tool to provide the benefits of certainty and stability regarding

tax regimes-benefits that concretely promote and facilitate international trade and investment.

Such certainty and stability is achieved because such treaties enshrine the basis, as well as the rate, of applicable taxes. This means that a treaty rate of tax cannot be increased unless the treaty itself is modified or terminated.

In fact, termination is a rare event, while revision of such treaties is a lengthy process requiring the concurrence of both governments. And in either case, taxpayers will normally receive considerable advance notice of the impending changes.

Another benefit of such tax treaties is that they also reduce annoyance in the operation of the national tax systems involved in several ways. First, they eliminate the necessity of paying tax on business profits in the source country if there is no permanent establishment in that country. As well, they provide a mechanism to settle problems encountered by taxpayers.

More importantly, tax treaties eliminate or alleviate double taxation in instances where international transactions are involved that may give rise to the same income being taxed by more than one country.

Let me expand on how this works. For the purpose of eliminating double taxation, the tax treaties establish two categories of rules. Firstly, in the case of a number of specified items of income, an exclusive right to tax is conferred on only one of the contracting states. In this way, the other contracting country accepts that it cannot tax this income, and double taxation is thus absolutely avoided.

Secondly, for other items of income, the right to tax is not an exclusive one. These provisions confer on the source country (or situs) a full or limited right to tax. In turn, under the treaty, the country of residence of the taxpayer must allow relief for the tax paid in the other country. Ultimately, this again ensures there is no double taxation.

I should remind this House that the treaties enacted by this bill are the latest within a long-standing process. The major reform of Canada's income tax legislation in 1971 required Canada to expand its network of double taxation conventions (tax treaties) with other countries. Since that time negotiations for the conclusion of new treaties or the revision of existing ones have been entered into with almost 75 countries.

In this bill, the four tax conventions under review follow the general pattern of the conventions previously approved by Parliament. The number of Canadian tax treaties in force now stands at 52. I would now like to briefly highlight if I may, the main elements of these new tax treaties covered by this bill. I will deal with the Protocol to the Netherlands Convention at the end of my remarks.

These treaties provide generaly that dividends may be taxed in the source country at a maximum rate of 15 per cent.

However, in the case of company dividends, the rate is often reduced if the company receiving the dividends holds an equity interest in the company paying the dividends.

Such a reduced rate has been set at 10 per cent for the countries covered here (execpt for Nigeria, where it will be 12.5 per cent).

Regarding interest paid by a resident of one country to that of another country, the rates set out in this bill are 10 per cent in the case of Hungary, 12.5 per cent for Argentina and Nigeria; and 15 per cent in the case of Zimbabwe.

There are, however, a number of exceptions. Interest paid on a bond or similar obligation of the national government, a political subdivision or local authority will be exempt from tax in the country in which it arises.

Also, these treaties (except that with Zimbabwe) contain a provision that will allow interest paid on loans or credits extended, guaranteed or insured by certain state entities (in Canada, for example, by the Export Development Corporation-EDC) to be taxable only in the country where the recipient of the interest payment resides.

These treaties also address the taxation of royalty payments. They provide for a general rate of source taxation of 10 per cent in the case of Hungary and Zimbabwe, 12.5 per cent in the case of Nigeria, and from 3 to 15 per cent in the case of Argentina, depending on the nature of the royalty.

Copyright royalties are exempt under the treaty with Hungary.

There are also a number of other matters dealt with in these tax treaties, such as capital gains. The treaty provisions dealing with capital gains reflect the standard Canadian position enabling the source country to tax profits from the sale of real estate, business assets and shares in real estate companies.

Second, non-discrimination. Under the conventions, discrimination on the basis of nationality is prohibited. This ensures nationals of one country equal treatment with nationals of the other country in the same circumstances. However, this does not prevent a country from providing fiscal incentives (for example, Canada's small business deduction) on the basis of the residence of the taxpayer.

Third, pensions. Canada has preserved its right to tax pensions paid to residents of the countries covered by this bill. In the cases of Argentina, Zimbabwe and Hungary, the maximum rate of tax applicable in the source country to periodic pension and annuity payments is 15 per cent. In the case of Nigeria, there

is no stated maximum rate of tax applicable to periodic pension payments.

Finally, war veterans pensions are generally exempt from tax under the four treaties.

Fourth, double taxation relief. The treaties provide that in Canada, double taxation of foreign source income of Canadian residents is alleviated by way of a foreign tax credit, in accordance with the limitations provided for in the Canadian legislation.

In addition, devidends received by a company resident in Canada from the exempt surplus of foreign affiliates resident in a treaty country are exempt from tax in Canada. Reciprocally, relief from double taxation is granted in the other treaty country in accordance with the method recognized by that country.

Let me turn now to a final undertaking enacted by this legislation. Bill S-2 will implement a protocol to the tax convention signed by Canada and the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1986. This protocal updates this existing treaty to take into consideration changes made to the respective laws and policies of the two countries.

For example, in Canada's 1992 federal budget, the government announced it was prepared, in tax treaty negotiations, to reciprocally reduce the withholding tax rate on direct dividends. This was seen as a valuable incentive to encourage direct international investment. And in the 1993 budget, the governement affirmed its desire to negotiate, on a bilateral basis, exemptions from withholding taxes on payments made for the use of computer software.

I am pleased to say that the Netherlands is the first country with which we have signed such an agreement.

Under this bill, in cases where a dividend recipient holds 25 per cent or more of the capital, or 10 per cent or more of the voting rights, of the dividend-paying corporation, the withholding tax will be reduced to 5 per cent from the current 10 per cent. This reduction will take place over a five-year period starting from 1993. As regards interest payments, the protocol reduces the rate to 10 per cent from the current 15 per cent.

As well, the agreement eliminates the withholding tax on royalties for computer software and on interest paid to pension funds.

To conclude, on balance, the terms of the four tax conventions and the protocol provide some equitable solutions to the various problems of double taxation existing between Canada and these countries. Each of these countries hopes to implement the bilateral convention as soon as possible. Consequently, I commend this bill to the House and urge its speedy passage.