House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 63% of the vote.
Anti-terrorism Act October 16th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. friend opposite is a lawyer, does he think there is anything in the bill which would tarnish our bill of rights? Is it possible that the individual rights of society could supersede the safety and protection of the entire nation?
I am really concerned about the latter. Do our individual rights exceed the security of our nation as a whole?
Veterans Affairs October 15th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the claim by Canada's merchant navy vets has been largely resolved. However I believe that this file cannot be closed without addressing the concerns of some 300 merchant navy vets or their widows who applied too late for benefits.
The government was able to get the message out to the merchant navy vets on how to apply. Yet there were a few vets or their widows who for one reason or another did not find out about the government payout until it was too late. Many of them are widows and I might say they were not fully informed of their husbands' eligibility.
Since there are such few cases remaining the government should for compassionate reasons open the final 300 files to determine their eligibility. Only then should this file be closed permanently.
Nuclear Fuel Waste Act September 27th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed the deliberation by the hon. member for Halton very much. I can tell he has a real interest in the issue and I am sure he is a valuable member on the committee.
The member mentioned one thing which has excited me since before the days of rural electrification, wind power. I had one of those 32 volt batteries.
Why is it that in Canada we have been so far behind what we find in Denmark and in parts of Germany in wind power? We have recently put some in, as the hon. member from Regina said, in a place called Gull Lake. Why have Canadians not taken advantage of this more in Canada? For example, they tell me that Pincher Creek, Alberta is where God invented wind yet those wind towers have never really proven to be successful.
Could the hon. member give me any reason why we have not progressed in that field?
International Boundary Waters Treaty Act September 27th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the hon. member and think he zeroed in on the main concern, which is the Great Lakes. However, we would be remiss in this debate if we did not refer to and mention those rivers which have their origin in Canada and flow into the U.S. Through real co-operation, the damming of those rivers or streams in Canada has helped to control the flow into the U.S. In most cases this has worked very well to the benefit of both nations. We have to say this because we have so many wonderful examples.
In my constituency, for example, we built a dam with the help and approval of North Dakota. It controls the flooding down there. That river then flows back into Canada, which is rare, and comes out in Souris, Manitoba.
Overall, I would not want people listening to think the House was at odds with the U.S. on this issue when we have had so many good treaties and outcomes from damming water.
International Boundary Waters Treaty Act September 27th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform my hon. friend that if he were to follow some water treaties that were made in the past, and I am including the Louisiana Purchase, there is a fair amount of land just south of where I live that drains into the Mississippi River. It is the only area in Canada that does so. Therefore, according to that treaty, where I live would be part of the U.S.
Two places in Canada, and I refer to Newfoundland and British Columbia, have large tarns. These are lakes way up on the mountains. The only drainage is right into the ocean. One inch is billions of gallons of water. There is lots of rain and they could very easily use that as an income to fill a bulk boat below and ship the water. It would not interfere with anyone, which is the argument B.C. and Newfoundland would put forward.
What would the hon. member have to say about the argument that it is provincial jurisdiction, that it is income for the people and that they have the right to take the water, which normally runs down the rocks into the ocean, and sell it.
International Boundary Waters Treaty Act September 27th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the member. The U.S. is trying to change the natural flow of water into the Mississippi so that it would go into the Red River which flows north into Canada. We are opposed because the water could be polluted. More important, our dam procedures and our frequent flooding of that river, particularly in Winnipeg, is always iffy.
Does the member see any opening in the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act which would guarantee that Canada could prevent this from happening?
Supply September 25th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Edmonton North mentioned a question within the context of her fine address in which she asked what we were doing about it. No matter where one lived in Canada what happened on September 11 affected people in different ways. In the Toronto Star there was a section which showed people at one of the ports of entry in my constituency, North Portal, where the golf course has different holes on different sides of the border.
I will describe to the hon. member the fear of people in my constituency that has nine border crossings. I do not believe any other member's constituency has as many. If someone intends to escape from Canada and get by U.S. customs, the border patrol, the highway patrol and the county forces are notified. When it is the reverse and someone is coming back into Canada, many of these nine border crossings do not have an RCMP detachment for 25 or 30 miles and the RCMP may be at another scene. We have no means of stopping anyone. The people in my constituency are becoming very nervous about the border situation.
Would the hon. member not agree that national security goes beyond the deployment of troops, that it goes beyond other items within our society?
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2001 September 20th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, we have a big industry in Saskatchewan which is sponsored by the largest conservationist group that I know of, and that is the Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation. That organization is irate with the bill.
One reason for that is that it hatches and releases thousands of pheasants. This bill and the animal rights people want to stop that. They want to deny us the pheasant under glass, which I enjoy. They want to deny us hunting. They want to stop all the ways in which people have enjoyed this heritage and tradition. This bill will destroy that.
As a member of parliament, I want to preserve the heritage of the east and west coast fisheries and so on. However, I am also very concerned about preserving my own heritage. This bill destroys it.
Could the hon. member comment on this because the destruction of our heritage is a national issue?
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2001 September 20th, 2001
Madam Speaker, in response to my hon. colleague, the determination of what is cruelty is not contained in the bill. Therefore, who will make that decision?
My brother-in-law had to go to court as he inadvertently threw something at a squirrel and killed it because it was in his attic causing a disturbance. That is cruelty to animals. If I were charged every time I took a .22 and popped a Richardson's ground squirrel, I would never get out of jail.
The hon. member knows the problem is with the terminology respecting what activities are cruel. We do not know. We should applaud the ranchers and farmers who have governed themselves.
I inform the hon. member of a request that came through the other day about a minimum height in stock trailers for horses. If we really want to know about people who are concerned about cruelty to animals, we should ask those who raise them for a living. We cannot have something as vague as this bill when it comes to cruelty.
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2001 September 20th, 2001
Madam Speaker, I spent a lot of my life in local government and some time in provincial government. I have never seen, nor would I accept, a bill like this one in either municipal or provincial government. If this becomes a habit, as my colleague has mentioned, democracy goes out and we literally disenfranchise ourselves.
The outfitting industry in Saskatchewan is big. I have two nephews who own companies and work in it, but they now know they must sell and get out. Bill C-68 has put them out. The people who have come into my province for 40 years, and their grandparents before them, no longer come. We have turned away a very big industry. That is what Bill C-68 did.
Come to think of it, I do not ever recall an infraction of law in any province by any of the people who made it a regular habit of coming in.
Again, let me make it clear. It is similar to an auction sale when there is one item in a lot but the whole lot has to be bought to get it. There are some good things in the bill, but in order to get the good things and make them applicable to society we have to take a bunch of garbage. I am confident the government will split the bill.