Elinor Caplan

[Criminal Code, September 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to the member for New Brunswick Southwest, although I believe the question he asked of the minister some time ago was with respect to the bureau of veterinary drugs.

However, if his question is about the HPB, the health protection branch, I want to assure him that this minister and this government take the health of Canadians very seriously. We understand the very important role that is played by the health protection branch.

The minister today in the House spoke about a task which has been undertaken that will look at the role of the HPB into the future. We have begun a countrywide consultation.

There has already been a meeting in Halifax. There will be meetings right across this country. I would encourage the member opposite to participate in those discussions. The role of the health protection branch, whether in veterinary drugs, pesticide management, approval of new drugs, medical devices and so forth, touches the lives of Canadians every day. It also has a very important role to play in the area of not only protection but promotion.

We are all equally concerned about ensuring that Canada is as prepared as it can be and that we have the very best science. That is the reason the minister brought together leading Canadians with a science focus. The science advisory committee is overseeing the review.

We are very serious about ensuring that the health of Canadians is protected at all times and that the role of the federal government and Health Canada under HPB is appropriate to meet the needs of Canadians today and into the new millennium.

[Competition Act, September 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has had an enviable record in smoking cessation and in its smoking cessation policy. This government is committed to public education. We realize that public support is essential in a civil society if we are to make progress toward our goal of a smoke free society.

Specific to the member's point in question regarding the 1994 tobacco tax reduction, it is important to remember that at that time, as the Prime Minister explained on February 8, 1994, we were dealing with an enormous problem of law enforcement and organized crime.

The problem had become a deep rooted and far reaching national issue of smuggling of contraband tobacco. Action was necessary. The four point national action plan on smuggling was an enforcement crackdown, a reduction in consumer taxes on tobacco; a special surtax on tobacco manufacturer profits and, most significantly, the tobacco demand reduction strategy which was the most ambitious tobacco control initiative in Canada's history. It was designed to counter the impact of the tax reductions.

Further, the reduction in Canadian tobacco taxes was clearly stated as a temporary measure. Because of the government's actions since that time in the area of anti-smuggling efforts, the contraband situation has improved.

The Minister of Finance in collaboration with the provinces has introduced three tax increases in provinces where taxes were cut in 1994. In addition, the 40% surtax on the profits of tobacco manufacturers was instituted in 1994 and will remain in place until March 2000.

These tax measures are consistent with the government's desire to increase taxes in a gradual manner to meet our health objectives without creating renewed contraband activity.

Yes, public education, particularly to our young, is important. Pricing is important. Advertising policy is also important. As the member opposite knows, we are moving toward an absolute ban on advertising tobacco products.

[Teaching Excellence Awards, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Stavros Naxakis and Penny McLeod, two teachers from the riding of Thornhill who have been awarded the Prime Minister's Award for Teaching Excellence.

Dr. Stavros Naxakis is a chemistry and physics teacher at Vaughan Secondary School. Under his guidance Vaughan students consistently score in the top five percentage in an international chemistry contest, the University of Waterloo's Chem 13 News Contest.

Penny McLeod is a chemistry teacher at Thornhill Secondary School. She has spent 25 years developing new ideas for teaching her students. She recently has brought an integrated curriculum and new technologies to her teaching. Ms. McLeod has helped her gifted students excel and is also commended by her colleagues for her determination in seeing weaker students succeed.

On behalf of the students, the parents and all my constituents of Thornhill, I would like to congratulate these two outstanding teachers and thank them for their commitment to excellence.

[Judges Act, June 3rd, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in today's debate. Quite honestly I did not plan to speak but I was provoked. I felt it was important not only for the constituents in my riding of Thornhill but for people across the country listening to the debate to understand what the legislation is all about. We need someone who will speak on the topic of the bill and explain to people why the government is taking the action it is taking.

The independence of our judiciary is important. As a matter of principle I believe judges must be independent of political interference, and they are. Those who call for accountability of judges should know that accountability is through judicial councils which review the work of judges.

They cannot have it both ways. They cannot support the principle of judicial independence and at the same time use the word accountability in anything other than judicial review of judges' decisions.

I stand in my place today to say that I stand for the principle of judicial independence. I believe that judges should be accountable through the judiciary. Those who have complaints can go to the judicial council to ask for a review.

I have to further say that as a second principle I want leaders in the legal profession to come forward and apply to be judges. I do not want us to have people other than those who have years of experience and respect within the profession to have the opportunity to apply. I do not believe there should be a financial penalty for people who choose to serve. Being on the bench is a form of public service and I believe they should be well paid. If we want to attract those who are in leadership position among the profession, we have to make sure there is no deterrent to those who wish to serve.

I would also like to comment on the issue of courts administration. For the people who are watching and for my colleague across the House in the New Democratic Party who spoke at length about courts administration I point out that this is entirely a provincial jurisdiction. Courts administration is a responsibility of the provinces. They determine what resources they wish to put into courts administration. Anyone who has concerns about that should address their concerns to the attorney general of the province they live in or to their premier.

Since we see many provinces such as my home province of Ontario reducing their revenues through tax decreases of some 30%. costing in excess of $5 billion, anyone who wants to know where the money has gone that could have gone to courts administration, improved health care or improved education must look at the policy of tax cuts. Since that is the policy of the Reform Party opposite I find it heckles interesting on this matter. The responsibility for courts administration is entirely a provincial jurisdiction. It is inappropriate for us to take time of the House discussing matters that are clearly a provincial jurisdiction.

Regarding Bill C-37, the facts are that federal judges have not received a pay increase since 1992. They contributed to the deficit reduction plan which resulted in the first balanced budget in 30 years being tabled this year by the finance minister. That is something I am very proud of.

We also know that there are provincial judges across the country and there were remarks raised about what was happening on the provincial scene. While that is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, many of the provinces are adopting the same method the federal government has adopted, the establishment of an independent commission. For example, the Province of Quebec at the present time has a commission studying judges' salaries.

My assumption is that if a government establishes a commission it will look very carefully at the recommendations of the commission. That is exactly what the federal government did. We established an independent commission to make recommendations to the government so that we could ensure we were attracting the very best and the brightest, the leaders of the profession, to sit on the bench. They make very important and difficult decisions which affect not only public policy but public life.

The commission was called the Scott commission. The government accepted its recommendations on pay increases for federally appointed judges. I believe that is appropriate. It reinforces the notion of independence of the judiciary, which was my very first point.

If we are to determine salaries it is a very good process to engage people who are expert in understanding the role and ask them to advise the government. They did that and the government took that advice. While some may believe that number is too high, I am sure others believe that number is too low. The government has made the decision to accept the compensation recommendations of the Scott commission and I believe that is appropriate.

I also believe that the process for the selection of judges is a good one. We have public representatives on the committees who review the applications. There are also consultations with the law societies. Just for the record, I think people watching this debate should know that Bill C-37 is supported by the Canadian Bar Association.

We have those who are aware of the role of judges, how hard judges work, not only from the Canadian Bar Association but also from an independent commission established to review the matter agreeing that the government's action is appropriate.

I ask those in opposition to think about the implications of arbitrarily making decisions without seeking advice from those who know like the Canadian Bar Association or an independent commission that would review the workload and so forth.

My view is that there will always be debate. Salary issues are always contentious. There are always different points of view, but it is a responsibility of government, a responsibility the government takes very seriously. Bill C-37 reflects the appropriate balance between judicial independence and the obligation of government to set a salary level which will attract the very best, the very brightest and leaders in the profession to sit on the highest courts of the land.

The actions taken by the Minister of Justice are appropriate. The legislation deserves support. Our process in coming to this conclusion has been one that has been filled with integrity. As the member for Thornhill I feel it is not only in the public interest but in the interest of my constituents in Thornhill.

I am pleased to support the legislation because it responds not only to the principles I have articulated but to the needs of the judiciary and the judicial system. That is good public policy.

For those who stand in this place and use this opportunity to vent, I think it is completely inappropriate on this type of legislation. We should be talking about how we reward through compensation and remuneration those people who sit in judgment on the most difficult of subjects frequently and mete out justice in a way which is impartial and which should be wise and thoughtful.

How do we say to federally appointed judges that we appreciate what they do? On behalf of my constituents of Thornhill I say to them that we believe they provide a very important service to the people of Canada. We thank them. I believe the debate, much of what I have heard, is an insult to the judges of Canada.

[A Year In Review, June 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, one year ago I was elected the first member of Parliament for the riding of Thornhill. My constituents in Thornhill, along with other Canadians, honoured the Liberal Party with a second majority mandate. What a wonderful year it has been.

We have the first balanced budget in almost 30 years. In December we saw the creation of the one millionth new job since October 1993. The April unemployment rate was 8.4%, still too high but the lowest in nearly eight years. In the first quarter of 1996 Canada's gross domestic product grew at 3.7%, surpassing economist expectations. Canadians have recorded the largest personal income gains this decade. As the chief economist at the Royal Bank of Canada said, this shows a healthy, robust economy.

I take this opportunity to wish all members of the Liberal caucus a happy anniversary. I also say a very special thank you to the people of Thornhill for allowing me to come to Ottawa and try to make a positive difference.

[National Nursing Week, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, May 11 to 17 is National Nursing Week. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the valuable contribution of Canada's nurses.

This year's theme “Nursing is the Key” could not be more appropriate. We need nurses and nursing. Nurses are key cost effective providers of health care. Almost everywhere health services are received nurses are there. In hospitals, doctors' offices, seniors' residences and private homes, a nurse is always found providing high quality care.

I congratulate nurses and nursing for their forward thinking. Nurses are helping on the frontline, finding solutions to some of the complex problems in health care today. If an hon. member knows a nurse or receives services from a nurse, take a moment and thank them.

I have often said that a hospital without nurses would just be a hotel. We need our nurses. We must respect and honour their noble profession, not only this week but every day of every week of every year.

[Petitions, May 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition signed by hundreds of people from across the country who are concerned about the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The petition is calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. In particular they are asking that parliament support the immediate initiative and the conclusion by the year 2000 of an international convention which will set out a binding timetable for the abolition of all nuclear weapons. I table this petition today on their behalf.

[Immunization, May 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Co-operation.

A report this morning from the World Health Organization identifies immunization as a key factor for increased life expectancy. This reinforces the goal set at the world summit for children in 1990 to immunize every child against diseases such as polio and measles. What is Canada doing to support global immunization efforts?

[Rights Of The Child, May 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has long championed the rights of the child. We are signatories to the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. We led the fight on land mines which kill and maim children and we are leaders in the fight against the use of children as soldiers and cheap labour.

I would like to congratulate one Canadian, a constituent of Thornhill, who is known throughout the world for his commitment to protect children and their rights.

Mr. Craig Kielburger, founder of Free the Children, has been awarded the 1998 Franklin Delano Roosevelt freedom medal. The Roosevelt freedom medal was created to honour individuals and institutions whose work has given special meaning to those freedoms which President Roosevelt outlined in 1949: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from want and freedom from fear.

Through public speaking and personal advocacy, Craig at his young age is an example of someone who is really making a positive difference. I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the people of Thornhill to congratulate Craig on his most impressive achievement and encourage him to continue his crusade to protect children.

[Israel, April 30th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, today from Metulla to Eilat, the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, Israel is celebrating her 50th anniversary.

This year Israelis and Jews from around the world gather to celebrate our collective past, question the present and propose solutions for the future.

Israel, a rare democracy in the Middle East, is the homeland of the Jewish people. For the past five decades with the incredible immigration of nearly 750,000 Russian Jews, the miraculous immigration of the Ethiopian Jews and of course the World War II European Shoah survivors, many Diaspora Jews now call Israel home.

Starting as a dream in the desert by a handful of people through sweat and determination, Israel has blossomed into a modern day nation with close to six million people living within its borders.

As people celebrate in Israel and around the world, on behalf of my constituents in the riding of Thornhill, I extend a hearty Mazel Tov to the state of Israel. May your borders be safe and may all your people live in harmony. Shalom.