House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was made.

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

Won his last election, in 2000, with 51% of the vote.

Statements in the House

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have that question because if the hon. member does not understand it probably a lot of Canadians have not understood as well that the way we declare our deficits is a very cautious method. In other words, we take into account all the accrued liabilities from pensions which are not due in the current year. That means we accrue debts that actually do not require us to outlay cash.

What I said is that over the last two years our market debt, in other words what we have actually gone to the markets and actually borrowed from the bankers of the world, has been reduced by $20 billion. That is not small change in my books.

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing as unreformed as a New Democrat from outside Ontario where they never had to face the prospects of governing.

What underlies that question is a complete inability to do the arithmetic which drove the country to the point of bankruptcy in 1993, led by the province of Ontario where the New Democrats for five years spent their way into oblivion.

We have created the conditions by creating jobs, by seeing job creation expand and by seeing people go back to work. There are more people working in Canada today than at any time in our entire history.

What the NDP needs to understand and what the member needs to understand is that once we get to the basic problem of creating prosperity in society, problems that are solved by getting people to work, by increasing our productivity, by being competitive, by contributing to the factors that make the quality of life here the best in the world, we get to the source of the problems that he wants to talk about. We cannot solve one without dealing with the other.

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to hear the errors of statement coming from the member for Medicine Hat.

Number one, of course I spoke about taxes. Perhaps he missed that point of my speech. I said that they were higher than in the United States. If taxes are the only issue with respect to productivity, perhaps the hon. member for Medicine Hat can explain why, with higher tax rates, countries like France and Germany have achieved higher levels of productivity growth. Goodness, that is hard to understand.

Second, what I do not understand about Reformers is that we hear them every day saying they want more spending on health care, more spending on crime control, more spending on defence. They have a bigger list of more spending items than you can shake a stick at.

At the same time, somehow or other they think we will pay down the debt and lower taxes as well. I understand why they need to start a new party. The arithmetic in their old party just does not add up.

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, clearly, the hon. member is ignoring the fact that we created over one and a half million jobs since we were elected in 1993.

She is also ignoring, and this is part of the Bloc Quebecois' philosophy, the creation of wealth. She is ignoring the challenges of productivity. She thinks we can find solutions to the problems by handing money around everywhere.

We must find the solution to creating wealth here in Canada. This is how we intend to proceed, to create jobs, to achieve success.

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to rise to take part in this budget debate, however sad that example of the Reform from Alberta cozying up to the separatists may have made me. It is surprising that the comparison the Bloc did not make was to the fair share that Alberta received in this budget as well which was so warmly received by Mr. Klein.

Under the leadership of our Prime Minister, the federal government has now created conditions where Canadians can be optimistic about the future. After years of difficult choices, the finances of the nation are now solid and the government can act on those things that matter to Canadians.

By far the greatest priority for Canadians is the strength of our public health care system. Over the next five years, an additional $11.5 billion will be transferred to the provinces to be used in meeting the health care standards that Canadians have a right to expect. In my own province of Ontario, an increase of almost $4.4 billion will go into health care.

Health care is an obvious element of our quality of life and our quality of life is clearly dependent on our standard of living. The question is how can we maintain or, better still, how can we improve our living standards in Canada?

Since 1987 we have done okay. Our standard of living has grown by 7%. However, when we look at our American neighbours we see that in the same time they have increased their standard of living by 17%.

To understand why this has happened we need to look at the productivity growth rates that we have realized in Canada over that period of time. Productivity, the measure of the efficiency with which people, capital, resources and ideas are combined, is the most important determinant of our standard of living.

Unfortunately over the last 25 years Canada has had the lowest rate of productivity growth in the G-7.

If productivity in Canada had grown by 1.2% per year faster, which is the gap between the average U.S. and Canadian growth rates, our per capita income would have been $7,000 per year higher than it is.

It is no wonder that last fall the finance committee of this House warned that the slower rate of productivity growth is a cause for real concern for Canadians.

According to an Ekos survey, 82% of Canadians believe that increasing Canada's economic productivity is essential to improving our standard of living. Canadians understand the challenge. With time and a concerted effort, the government and the private sector acting in partnership can make sure that all Canadians see an increase in their wealth.

We have a strong foundation from which we can work. The broad economic conditions of the country are coming together. Last year this government recorded the first budgetary surplus in 28 years. Our inflation rate has been the lowest in more than a generation and interest rates are low.

And on the employment front, Canada is creating jobs at a rate unequalled in the G-7.

Canadians have demonstrated that when they put their minds to a task, as they did to eliminating the deficit, they can achieve their goals. This aptitude will stand us in good stead for the productivity challenge to which we must now turn our minds.

In terms of the nation's accumulated debt, first of all, the government acknowledges that debt is simply too large. The Minister of Finance has confirmed that we will make greater and greater inroads on the debt and in this fiscal year alone the debt to GDP ratio should drop to 65.3%. In the last two years we have seen the retirement of $20 billion of market debt.

Second, Canada's overall tax burden ranks about the average among the G-7, but the reality is that it is higher than that in the United States which is our major competitor. In the budget the government set out its plan for tax relief, that it needs to be fair, it needs to be focused on the individual and it needs to be sustainable or permanent. Taken together, the 1998 and 1999 budgets provide tax relief totalling $16.5 billion over three years.

Third, stronger productivity growth will require stronger business investment in technology, machinery and equipment.

Four, we need more foreign investment in Canada because it can bring new technology and ideas.

Fifth, Canadians must take more chances, innovate more often and bring our ideas to market. The government's decision to invest an additional $50 million in technology partnerships Canada signals that we understand innovation is a strong determinant of productivity growth.

Still though, Canada's private sector spends less on research and development as a share of its GDP, despite our more generous R&D tax incentives. Fewer than 1% of Canadian firms perform any R&D. Moreover, not enough Canadian ideas are commercialized in Canada.

Sixth, while the World Economic Forum ranks Canada first in knowledge workers, we are not following through with on the job training.

Seventh, our exports are concentrated in too few firms.

Taken together, training, trade and R&D, the World Economic Forum ranks Canadian businesses as 15th in terms of company operations and strategy. And that ranking is dependent on too few firms.

The government started down the productivity path with a program called “Building a More Innovative Economy” in 1994 and has broadened its strategy with the last federal budget.

In 1997, the Canada Foundation for Innovation was created with an $800 million dollar investment from the federal government. The foundation's mandate is to fund new and modernized research infrastructure. This budget will increase that investment by an additional $200 million.

To ensure that our research infrastructure is fully utilized by the brightest minds in the country the government has further increased its total support to the research granting councils and to the National Research Council by more than $120 million. We are accelerating our efforts to disseminate knowledge. The budget will broaden access to the information highway with $60 million for the smart communities demonstration projects. Our networks of centres of excellence have brought together the best of our brains in a uniquely Canadians way that creates ideas like sparks off a flint. I want to see those sparks ignite and blaze in as many productive paths as possible.

That is why the government has invested an additional $90 million in the networks of centres of excellence. Moreover, by investing an additional $430 million over the next three years in the Canadian Space Agency and thereafter stabilizing its annual budget of $300 million, the government has determined that Canadians will participate in exploring the space frontier.

When Canadians compete with the best in the world we can win. We can come out ahead. It happened in the automotive sector, the pharmaceutical sector, the aerospace and biotechnology sectors. Our investments in education, training and technology pay important dividends in jobs and growth.

As we look to the 21st century we can pull that same resolve together as a nation to address the productivity challenges that are core to high quality accessible health care, a strong educational system, second to none, a society that provides real opportunities for youth and security for their parents and grandparents.

This budget is a further step in implementing the long term plan that we began to set out in 1994. Success is a journey, not a destination. With this budget, we continue our progress on the road of success.

The Economy February 12th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I think the issue of productivity gains is one of the most important economic issues confronting Canada at the present time. I agree with the hon. member to that extent.

I think, however, to be fair, he should look at a number of the measures that have been taken over recent years which are contributing directly to an improvement in Canada's productivity performance, which in fact we did see in the 1997 statistics, the last year for which we have those numbers, including the investment in the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, including renewed investments in the university research granting councils, including support for industrial research and development through technology—

Business Development Bank Of Canada February 10th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I have made it clear in the House before that the process for dealing with loans authorized by the Business Development Bank of Canada is one that is entirely within the control of that organization.

In this case, because the level of the loan was such as it was, the decision was not made at the local level. It was made at the head office level by a vice-president whose responsibility it is to determine whether or not such loans should be given. There is not even an order in council appointee who was involved in determining that process.

Furthermore, I want to emphasize that this money was not only loaned by the Business Development Bank of Canada, there were also loans from the Caisse Populaire, a private sector lender, determining that this was a project worth supporting by private sector funds.

Technology Partnerships Canada February 10th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the facts the hon. member is presenting. I agree that it would be important for us to increase the funding available to the Technology Partnerships Canada program, but the government always has to set priorities. I am sure that next Tuesday the Minister of Finance will be presenting a budget that will balance the various priorities very well.

Business Development Bank February 9th, 1999

I agree, Mr. Speaker.

What we know is that the loan was granted in the ordinary course. It was a commercial loan. It was part of a broader financing package that included financing given by private sector lenders. It was not only the Business Development Bank of Canada which advanced money. It was secured by a mortgage, a hypothèque, on the property. It was at commercial rates.

If the member has a problem with the Business Development Bank lending on hotel properties, then he ought to raise it at committee.

Year 2000 Bug February 9th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, that is right, 325 days left is not very long. We have not forgotten about consumers.

This week we are delivering brochures to every household across this country hoping to give Canadian consumers an indication of the kinds of things they ought to be concerned about as they prepare for the change of the millennium. Some things will be affected in their household, many will not.

In that context I commend the work of the industry committee which this week released its second report on the Y2K problem. It is another important contribution to ensuring that Canada is one of the most prepared countries—