House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1997, with 65% of the vote.
Supply February 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, it will have to be very brief. I believe the member used almost my entire five minutes with some more Liberal rhetoric.
We believe in a zero tax increase. We believe money is much better left in the hands of Canadian citizens than in the hands of politicians. The whole problem is not increased taxes, it is the money the government spends. It is definitely a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
Supply February 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, today our country stands at a crossroads. Some say it is a watershed year for Canada. Two very crucial issues must be addressed as we go further into 1995, a year that could very well be the most decisive since Confederation.
The most important issue which must be addressed this year is the national deficit and debt crisis. It is growing by $110 million per day because of federal government mismanagement. The public is becoming all too aware of the effects of big government, big spending and big debt.
My colleagues alluded to the effects which are upward fluctuating interest rates, downward pressure on the dollar, higher taxes, lower consumer and investor confidence, and of course a lower standard of living.
It is interesting to examine what has happened to Canada's fiscal health since the 1960s. That decade rushed in the era of soak everyone, pay everyone's style of government, a government that would create a host of programs to look after the people, the creation of the just society.
Now we see the results of the so-called just society. We have the social welfare state, unsafe streets and the average family's tax bill which has soared by 1,200 per cent since 1961. That is three times the rate of inflation.
The time of government largesse must stop. The Canadian public is demanding balanced books from all levels of government. People are tired of paying for programs they never wanted, they never asked for and they certainly do not want to pay for.
That is why the Reform's supply motion is so important. We are asking that the federal government respond to the demands of Canadians for decisive spending cuts and no net tax increases to eliminate the deficit and to produce a smaller federal government.
My constituents are expressing their dismay over continued federal government mismanagement of their tax dollars. Like my colleague before me, I receive letters as well, lots of them.
Patrick W. Paul, a concerned taxpayer who lives in Edson in my Alberta riding of Yellowhead, expressed his sentiments in a letter to the finance minister. I have his permission to refer to it: Mr. Paul writes:
I would like to express my extreme concern over the fiscal quagmire our country of Canada has descended into. The taxpayers of our country have been forced to shoulder the burden of government fiscal mismanagement for too long. It is time for government to change. Increased taxes, year after year, rampant out of control government spending, rising interest rates and an ever downward spiralling dollar have caused tremendous pressure on the Canadian taxpayer.
Massive government bureaucracy, ridiculous social programs and paper tiger politicians are costing us too much. We cannot continue. We are the source of ridicule around the world, from the world press to even more seriously the world financial community. Our out of control debt, weak willed politicians and rudderless leadership are the sources of this ridicule.
Patrick Paul shares the opinion of most of my constituents who have taken the time to phone, to write or to stop me on the street. It is coffee shop talk. They want accountability. They want the federal government spending spree to stop.
Mr. Paul continues in his letter to the finance minister:
Now is the time to stop this lunacy. Use your mandate to dramatically reduce government spending and the size of government. This budget must reflect an immediate move by government to correct our problem. Do not increase taxes in any way, shape or form! Do not attack my pension plan through any alterations to the RRSP program-this is my pension plan, not yours. Do not approach this in a cavalier manner. There is no accountability in the federal political system, only pandering to special interest groups, lip service and finger pointing. Stand up, do the right thing and make the necessary cuts required. Accept the responsibility of your position, be accountable for your actions. Help your country. We are doing all we can.
Like so many Canadians, Mr. Paul has a warning for the finance minister and his government:
If this process does not begin with the new budget and there are no significant moves to correct this out of control situation, I promise that I will do everything in my power to contribute to the defeat of your party in the next election.
Despite the most serious warning from the taxpayers and voters of Canada this government continues to be unaccountable. We keep hearing through the media about possible tax increases in a few areas. People are demanding accountability. Unaccountability also takes form through the convoluted, cooked up answers we receive from the Liberal government regarding government spending.
Last week my colleague from Fraser Valley West asked a pertinent question regarding a suspect federal expenditure. He specifically questioned the merit of a grant for $33,800 for the study of major league baseball in Detroit and how this possibly benefits the taxpayers of this country?
The Secretary of State for Science, Research and Technology expounded a typical non-answer and told the House: "The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, an independent arm's length body, has done a great service to university researchers and has provided a very important foundation for knowledge in the country". Since when is the knowledge of the Detroit Tigers baseball team between 1945 and 1992 of any importance to the knowledge base in Canada?
The Secretary of State for Science, Research and Development does not have a monopoly on unaccountable answers in this place. The Minister for Western Economic Diversification is also good at dodging the issue of accountability of public funds. I asked him about spending in his department last week. He reply was filled with more rhetoric than substance.
I recently released a critical report of the Department of Western Economic Diversification. This 36 page document points out the inherent flaws of regional development programs, including using government money to subsidize private industry, distorting the competitive marketplace and pork barrelling.
The report I released, based on date received from the WED department, showed that the minister's home town of Winnipeg received a disproportionate amount of WED dollars between November 1, 1993 and November 15, 1994. The figures used in this report included a list of all the projects both announced and published by the department during that year. It shows Winnipeg received five times more than Vancouver, seven times more than Calgary and seventy times more than Regina.
In defence of this program the WED minister said there is another 80 per cent of projects which have not been announced yet.
I refer to an editorial which recently ran in the Vancouver Sun which sums up the absurdity of trying to defend this pork barrel program. The editorial is aptly entitled The Sage of Patronage'' and begins:And the prize for the worst political defence of 1995-yes, it's early but we just can't believe anyone will outdo this-goes to the staff of minister for Manitoba patronage, Lloyd Axworthy. Alberta Reform MP Breitkreuz pointed out that while Manitoba, population one million, had received $22 million between November 1, 1993 and November 15, 1994, British Columbia with a population of 3.3 million received $52 million. That is $22 a head for Manitobans, $15.75 for British Columbians''.
The editorial goes on to state: "Not fair, said Mr. Axworthy's communications assistant. A better comparison, she said, would include all projects which have been approved but not yet announced. Using her figures we see that while Winnipeg, population 652,000-plus, received $27.4 million, greater Vancouver with a population of 1.6 million received $19 million. That is $42 for every Winnipeger as against something less than $12 per head in greater Vancouver".
In trying to defend this program we see Winnipeg gets even more money than is stated in my report.
The taxpayers of Canada are tired of politicians trying to preserve the status quo because it is painfully obvious that the status quo no longer works. They want and demand their federal government to be fiscally responsible. The upcoming federal budget gives the government a chance to prove to Canadians that it is capable of acting in the best interest of the majority of taxpayers and cut spending, priorize spending to do the right thing for Canada.
Petitions February 9th, 1995
Madam Speaker, the third petition asks that Parliament make no changes in the law which would sanction or allow the aiding or abetting of suicide or active or passive euthanasia.
I am pleased to present these petitions.
Petitions February 9th, 1995
Madam Speaker, the second petition prays that Parliament extend the same protection to the unborn child as that enjoyed by born human beings.
Petitions February 9th, 1995
Madam Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 36 I rise to present several petitions signed by constituents of my riding of Yellowhead.
The first petition asks that Parliament not amend the human rights code or the charter of rights and freedoms in any way which would indicate societal approval of same sex relationships.
Western Economic Diversification February 8th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the minister stands here and gives his version of the facts while officials recently told the media that Winnipeg receives a disproportionate amount of funds, even more than I stated in my report. No matter how we slice it, western economic diversification is largely about pork barrelling.
Is the minister willing to dismantle the department to show Canadian people that he will put the nation's finances ahead of his own pork barrel agenda?
Western Economic Diversification February 8th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of Winnipeg, or is it western economic diversification?
I recently released a critical study of his department which showed conclusively that his home town of Winnipeg was receiving a disproportionate amount of WED dollars. This report, which was based on information obtained directly from his department officials, showed that Winnipeg received five times more than Vancouver, seven times more than Calgary, and seventy times more than Regina between November 1, 1993 and November 15, 1994.
Why is the minister funnelling far more taxpayer dollars into Winnipeg than any other western city?
Regional Development December 13th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have done it again. Last week the minister responsible for ACOA was such a hero for announcing that his pork barrel agency will no longer hand out free money.
Canadians can rest easy knowing that ACOA intends on following in western economic diversification's footsteps. Never mind the fact that WED wrote off nearly $12 million of taxpayers' money last year.
Then there is FORD-Q, Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec, the outfit the finance minister runs. He talks a good game and wants to cut the deficit but at the same time he doles out money hand over fist through his own pork barrel program.
Roughly three-quarters of FORD-Q's assistance is repayable. Taxpayers should not worry that FORD-Q gives out free money for amounts under $25,000 and they should not worry that last year FORD-Q wrote off $13.7 million of their money.
Yes, the minister of public works should be proud that he is now in very elite company.
Western Economic Diversification December 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, western economic diversification boasts about how many jobs it has created since the Tories invented the program in 1987.
Forget about the millions of dollars in write-offs and grants. There is one shining star that western diversification can trumpet about and he is Iain Williamson. Who is he, the Liberals might ask. He is a man who some would define as a real entrepreneur. He saw a unique opportunity created by federal government largesse.
Williamson wrote the book entitled: Your Guide to Government Financial Assistance for Business in Manitoba . You guessed it. He writes about finding taxpayers' money for your business. If you run a small business and are in receivership or default of a loan, don't worry, be happy. Just apply for the small business financing program.
Yes, the Liberals should be proud that they have created one good job by giving Williamson lots to write about.
Petitions December 6th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I also have a petition regarding enacting legislation to provide specific standards for acceptable content for CBC television programming.