Karen Kraft Sloan

[The Budget, February 23rd, 1994]

I thank my hon. colleagues in the House for the patience they have shown me.

Government has a responsibility for taking leadership to create the framework and environment necessary for open, inclusive dialogue. The issue now is for government to continue to build on the consultation process that has lead up to this budget.

As members of Parliament we can support this process in our own ridings.

Fairness and equity are important principles upon which this budget is based. These principles must continue to be the cornerstones upon which the consultation process rests.

Equity is served when consultation is inclusive, when all perspectives that represent the differing aspects of Canadian diversity are respected and validated.

Our diversity arises from geography, race, religion, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, physical and intellectual capabilities, class, education and physical appearance, among many others. Equity is served when our intergenerational responsibilities are acknowledged, when our global roles and relationships are honoured.

Equity is also served when the natural environment is respected.

All costs, be they social, health or ecological, are economic in the long run. It is very important that the government, through these consultations, finds a way to include a new accounting, a new way to value the ecological and health benefits and costs that government programs, subsidies and taxes provide.

This new, ongoing budgetary consultation process, coupled with the review and renewal of major government departments and policies, particularly human resources, health, defence, and industry, means that this government is serious about taking action to meet the central challenges facing this nation.

This results in the kind of responsible government Canadians demand and deserve.

It was in my riding of York-Simcoe where the seeds of responsible government were first sown in Upper Canada. It was here that the rebel, William Lyon Mackenzie, joined forces with the farmers and small business owners to challenge the Tory family compact.

Although it has been over 150 years since responsible government has been instituted, the descendants of these rebels have carried on the tradition of farming and operating small businesses in York-Simcoe, a riding which I am proud to represent.

Today their farms grace the landscape of New Tecumseh, King, east and west Gwillimbury. The world famous Holland Marsh is located near Bradford. Small businesses were and are still the heart of the economic engine in communities like Newmarket and Bradford. Their trades have always been carried

out along the main streets of the villages of Sutton, Keswick, Mount Albert, Beeton, Tottenham, Pefferlaw and Schomberg.

My riding of York-Simcoe is also graced with the beautiful beaches of Georgina along Lake Simcoe. A tourist trade booms here all year long with boating in the summer and ice fishing in winter.

We are also fortunate to have a First Nations band, the Chippewas of Georgina Island. This band is determined to achieve its inherent right of self-government.

I am privileged to stand here today as a representative of a riding that reflects the diversity of this great nation. The 35th Parliament is a milestone in the Canadian parliamentary history as it, far more than any other, is representative of the rich tapestry of Canadian diversity.

Sitting in this Chamber I look around at my colleagues on both sides of the House and I know that we are merely passing through. This institution will exist long after the pages of Hansard fade and crumble.

As parliamentarians we will be measured by the respect that we show all Canadians.

[The Budget, February 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as a new member of Parliament I am pleased to deliver my maiden speech.

I am humbled by the history of this place and yet comforted to be part of the long tradition of Canadian democracy. This is not to say that tradition is static, unchanging. In fact, this is far from the case. Tradition, particularly the Canadian parliamentary tradition has adapted and evolved throughout the history of this institution.

There are many pressures on Parliament, on government and on parliamentarians to transform the way government operates. Economic, social, environmental, technological, political and global forces all act in different ways to challenge, to push and pull, to mould a new kind of relationship people have with their institutions. The Minister of Finance and the government recognized and welcomed this.

As a result the Minister of Finance has set upon an unprecedented budgetary process, a process that does not end with this one finite document. It is a process that if allowed to develop fully will lead to a new kind of partnership, a real and meaningful partnership among the people of Canada, their government, and their social and economic institutions.

It is only when we are able to understand the full extent and nature of our problems and when we undertake exploration of the widest possible range of solutions that we will ever begin to address the tough economic problems that affect our nation.

Canada has a rightful place as a leader among the nations of the world in the 21st century. Through the kind of consultation process the Minister of Finance has just begun we will not only solve our own problems successfully but we will also provide a model for other countries to emulate. The Minister of Finance has given all of us a great opportunity to work together and let our voices be heard, let our ideas be tested, let our vision of Canada meld with the rest to form the Canada we all want.

We have a difficult and challenging task before us: to restore integrity to government and erase public cynicism. As one parliamentarian I stand here today and say to the constituents in York-Simcoe, to Canadians from across this land, and to my colleagues on the other side of this House: We have the political will to open dialogue. We have the political will to renew the social, economic and political institutions of the country.

This is the reason I decided to run for office. I believed it is important, now more than ever, to rebuild the trust that has been broken between the people of Canada and their elected officials. I am sure that many of my hon. colleagues in this House have similar goals.

As Canadians, the most important thing we can remember is that we are in this together.

When I was elected a member of Parliament I did not stop being a citizen of Canada. I also have a stake in this. I have a family that I love dearly, a community that I am committed to and I have a country that I honour.

Like other Canadians across the nation, like my hon. colleagues on both sides of the House, I want this country to succeed. I want this Parliament to succeed.

My colleagues and I need all Canadians to have patience because as the hon. Minister of Finance said yesterday in his speech, the challenge today is not to rush. The challenge is to get things right.

We are not asking Canadians to have patience while the government sits back and does nothing. We have acted on our commitments and will continue to do so. We have fulfilled our promises to reinstate the court challenges program and to implement the national infrastructure program, the youth services program, the aboriginal head start program, the women's centres of excellence, the Canadian technology network, as well as many others.

The red book lives in this budget.

We need to have an opportunity for ideas to be generated and tested without being torn down. Creative juices are quick to freeze in a climate of frosty, unconstructive criticism. Now more than ever, it is necessary to develop alternative understandings and approaches to problem solving.

To paraphrase Albert Einstein, everything has changed but for our way of thinking.

If we are to approach government differently, we must all understand that not only government must change but we must change as well.

[Supply, February 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am really having a great deal of difficulty here. I thought the purpose of the motion was to increase democracy in Canada, to increase the opportunity for democratic debate and to further the goals of populism.

During the election I sat with people who were soon to become members of my constituency and had different ideas for example on the abortion debate. I gave them a very strong commitment that even though my feeling was very different from theirs I would bring it forward in the House.

I have a great deal of difficulty with the suggestion that a member of Parliament should decide what petitions are coming forward. If there are only 25 people in my riding of York-Simcoe who have signed a petition, their petition is coming to the House and their issue is coming to the House.

[Supply, February 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, once again members across the floor in the Reform Party have set up yet another false straw dog concerning the Canadian people.

It has been suggested that Parliament is not a democratic place. I support what the member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell originally said. There exists a mechanism to deal with petitions. It is up to individual members who bring these petitions forward to ensure they do the work for their constituents and on behalf of their constituents. As the hon. member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell pointed out, where are the Reform Party members in terms of their motions regarding petitions?

I sit on this side of the House. As a brand new member I am learning a lot about the traditions of Parliament. The very first day I sat over here on orientation day was most significant. I listened to the previous speaker talk about the fine tradition of Parliament which has existed and developed over hundreds of years.

When we take a tradition like Parliament and decide to throw it on its head, upside down, we cannot control the kinds of things that might happen and the injustices to the democratic process that occur out of naivety. It is not without passion on the hon. members' part on the other side of the House, but I would suggest this is yet again a false straw dog set before the Canadian people. There exists in Parliament a mechanism to do the very things they are suggesting on the other side of the House. If they were serving their constituents well they would be doing just that.

[The Budget, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have received a number of phone calls, letters and faxes from constituents in my riding of York-Simcoe expressing a great deal of concern about the possible taxation of health and dental benefits and a reduction of the RRSP contribution limit.

I urge the Minister of Finance to be sensitive to the views of these and all Canadians. We must take a fair and balanced approach when tackling the very difficult financial challenges we face as a nation.

[The Environment, February 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the IJC today released a report that claims governments have not done enough to clean up pollution in the Great Lakes. It is clear that toxic chemicals continue to enter the Great Lakes system. There is evidence to indicate that this is damaging not only to the environment but to human health as well.

My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Does the government have any specific plans to resolve this serious problem?

[Government Expenditures, February 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, last week I met with a group of individuals in Newmarket in my riding of York-Simcoe. These individuals represent a diverse economic and community interest and various political ideologies in all parts of the riding. They express different concerns and solutions to the financial and economic challenges we face as a nation.

However, in spite of this they successfully reached a consensus. This group of individuals concluded that Canadians are willing to pay taxes for services which are delivered in an effective and efficient way. They want value for their dollar.

I urge the government, in its ambitious agenda for review and renewal, to assess the cost effectiveness of all programs and services the government delivers. It is imperative now more than ever to assure Canadians that their hard earned tax dollars are being spent wisely.

[Social Security System, February 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as a working mom who has had two children in day care or child care I really object to the tone of the hon. member when he seems to suggest that my children have had an inferior upbringing. I would like to attest to the fact that my children have proven themselves to be admirable members of their community and have contributed a great deal.

Could the hon. member please give us a precise definition of what social engineering is?

[Mount Albert And District Lions Club, January 31st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the House to congratulate the Mount Albert and District Lions Club on the occasion of its 25th anniversary.

My family and I live in the village of Mount Albert. We are continually impressed by the contribution the Mount Albert Lions Club makes to our community. Community service groups like the Mount Albert Lions Club deserve special recognition for their good work and the time sacrifice made by individual members.

It is important for parliamentarians to realize the impact these types of organizations have on the communities they serve. In many cases they provide much needed assistance when the government is unable to do so.

Again I congratulate the Lions Club of Mount Albert on its 25th anniversary.

[Cruise Missile Testing, January 26th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. member on the other side some questions regarding the statement about increased instability in the world and the need to use cruise missile tests as a way of reducing some of this instability.

As I said earlier, prevention is the only treatment for war. The Canadian people through their government have a remarkable opportunity to take a stand against the proliferation of the tools of war by refusing to continue cruise missile testing on Canadian soil.

Contrary to an earlier statement by a member on the opposite side of the House, we do not prepare for peace by preparing for war. In fact the mid-eastern war of 1991 showed that in preparing for war we prepare and encourage more war. Most of the weaponry used by Iraq was manufactured by G-7 countries. In fact, even though we are in a post cold war period, the military industrial complex of western world countries flourishes as the result of sales to Third World countries increasing global instability and jeopardizing the world peace the member on the other side of the floor has recently spoken to.

If we are suffering from so much tension and problems in the world, won't supplying more armaments and guns just be like adding fuel to the fire?