Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was liberal.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as NDP MP for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre (Saskatchewan)

Lost his last election, in 2000, with 42% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canada Elections Act May 16th, 1995

Madam Speaker, in late April gas stations across Canada raised prices as much as 10 cents a litre. It was the sixth price increase of gas in 11 months.

These increases excluding tax increases represent a 20 per cent increase in the price of gas to consumers. What is even more startling is that oil companies have seen a 40 per cent increase in their revenues once taxes are factored out in the same period.

There has been no reasonable justification by the oil companies for these repeated increases. Each year since 1991 the average daily price of crude has declined. Crude prices today are virtually the same as they were a year ago with the 11 months in between seeing lower prices.

The profits of the major oil companies including Imperial Oil, Shell and Petro-Canada have increased each year over the past three years. In 1994 Imperial Oil profits went up 29 per cent; Shell went up 43 per cent and Petro-Canada went up 62 per cent.

When gas prices have risen they have risen uniformly from company to company in each region within hours of each other. Consumers are outraged and believe strongly that they are again the victims of price gouging at the pumps and price fixing by the oil companies.

This latest series of price increases is nothing more than a cash grab by the major oil companies that monopolize the industry.

In a recent court case in Ottawa a gasoline retailer, Mr. Gas, admitted communications between gasoline retailers are common in the industry when setting prices. What this means is if smaller chains set prices, certainly the majors do.

This latest increase in gas prices represents an extreme polarization of power and wealth into one sector, multinational oil companies. This increase is also extremely bad timing for farmers who are seeding their crops.

The increase is injuring Canada's economic recovery and must be addressed. Every two-cent increase costs Canadian $750 million a year. These recent increases of six cents will take over $2 billion out of the Canadian economy in one year.

The federal government must intervene in arbitrarily rolling back gas prices until a full energy price review can take place to ensure these increases are fair and justified.

In my question to the Minister of Industry on April 28 and on May 3, the minister commented: "When the prices are the same, it is consistent with both competition and price fixing. Therefore how do you know which it is?" I suggest that if one does not know the difference that in itself demonstrates the need to conduct an investigation.

The House of Commons is elected to ensure Canadians are not victims of the marketplace and to ensure the interests of Canada are protected. A gas price review would send a clear message to the oil companies and to Canadians that in a key economic sector such as energy fairness must prevail and significant price increases must be justified.

The setting of energy prices is no different than the regulation of communication services. When Rogers cable or Bell Canada want to increase prices, the CRTC reviews their request to ensure they are fair and justified. Having the oil industry justify its increases is no different. Gas prices are viewed by the public as being set unfairly and unjustifiably and must be reviewed and regulated.

The government has the power to question industry on its pricing practices and to create new laws that would demand gas price increases be made only after justification.

Why do the Liberals refuse to act in the best interest of Canadians? The federal Liberal Party receives substantial donations from the oil companies. Husky Oil donated $14,000; Amoco, $27,000; Imperial Oil, $47,000. Is this the reason the government will not conduct an investigation into gas pricing? Is the Liberal Party concerned it will offend its top party donors? He who pays the piper calls the tune. The government-

Old Age Security Act May 15th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, we do not agree. The New Democrat members present in the House today vote yes on this motion.

Old Age Security Act May 15th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the New Democrats in the House today will vote yes to Motion No. 12.

(The House divided on Motion No. 12, which was negatived on the following division:)

Old Age Security Act May 15th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, members of the New Democratic Party will vote no on all of those motions except report stage Motion No. 12 on which we vote yes.

(The House divided on Motion No. 1, which was negatived on the following division:)

Veterans Review And Appeal Board Act May 15th, 1995

The Democrats in the House vote no on this issue.

Cn Commercialization Act May 15th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, members of the New Democratic Party present vote no on this motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Cn Rail May 15th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal red book highlighted the importance of Canada's infrastructure to our economy. Yet the Liberal government has done another about face by selling off CN Rail which takes away a vital link in our transportation infrastructure.

The Canadian people will no longer be participants in our rail economy, the transportation link that built Canada.

In preparation for the sell-off, CN laid off 11,000 Canadians. As a former trainman for CN Rail, I saw firsthand the good work done in bringing grain and other Canadian products to market. I am one of thousands of Canadians who are deeply concerned about even further job loss caused by putting CN Rail on the auction block.

With no rules on foreign ownership, CN is destined, with the Liberal government's blessing, to be purchased by individuals and corporations with no interest in Canada's future. The Liberal government is exchanging an east-west transportation system for a north-south system that will see even more foreign control of the Canadian economy.

Bill C-89 brings to an end Canadians' ownership and control of their own railway and only leaves further job loss and more debt for Canada.

Members Of Parliament Pensions May 9th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I offer my congratulations to the Saskatchewan NDP government for its initiative on capping MLA pensions and abolishing the premier's pension bonus.

The Saskatchewan NDP has set an example for the Liberal government to follow. I challenge the Liberals to abolish the special bonus pension for the Prime Minister which totals $50,000.

The Saskatchewan NDP has proven its commitment to fiscal responsibility and fairness with a money purchase pension plan for MLAs that has been in place for 16 years.

Unfortunately the Liberal government did the absolute minimum in addressing the concerns of Canadians with respect to MP pensions. The government did just enough to make the pension issue go away. However, it is an improvement over the Reform Party idea of doubling MP salaries.

Unlike the Reform Party, New Democrats have respected the concerns of taxpayers by keeping both salaries and pensions in check. This is an issue on which the Reformers and Liberals

come together in their race to the trough. They are taking different routes but end up in the same place.

Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act May 4th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, there are no Reform members in the House. I call quorum.

Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act May 4th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I call a quorum count.