Anna Terrana

[National Unity, June 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, Quebecers will celebrate Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. I would like to send all Quebecers my best wishes for a wonderful day.

All Canadians who want to keep the country together and who wish to say "My Canada includes Quebec" truly value the richness of the francophone culture.

According to the polls, most Quebecers want the same thing: united, we are strong, and we can remain united in our diversity.

Canada is a country which is very respected abroad. People everywhere think that we are the last paradise on earth. In one week, Canadians are going to celebrate Canada Day: on that day we celebrate wide horizons, vast prairies, high mountains, enormous lakes and the multicultural communities in our exceptional country.

All these special gifts can be enjoyed throughout Canada, including Quebec.

I would like to ask my colleagues and all Canadians to celebrate Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day and Canada Day together, in a spirit of harmony and peace.

[Cn Commercialization Act, June 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of Bill C-89, an act to commercialize the Canadian National Railway. This proposal is one part of the government's larger plan for ensuring a viable and competitive transportation system in Canada. It is also part of the government's intention to have the private sector operate in areas where it can do the job better than government. As the Minister of Finance said last February, our view is straightforward. If government does not need to run something it should not and in future it will not.

Under Bill C-89 all of the government's current shares in CN will be sold on the public market. All Canadians, including CN employees, will have the opportunity to buy shares of the railway.

During the hearings of the CN commercialization task force and of the Standing Committee on Transportation, concern was expressed by employees regarding their jobs and pensions. I am pleased to confirm that CN employees will continue in their current positions in the new CN and their pensions will be protected under the Pensions Benefits Standards Act.

Employees will also have a special opportunity to take a stake in CN through a standard stock savings plan which will be part of the share sale.

While we hope that many Canadians will be interested in buying a piece of CN to maintain its historical value, we cannot believe that the Canadian market is large enough to absorb the entire equity of CN. Therefore, recognizing the need for foreign participation in the share offering to ensure success, we have not limited the extent to which foreigners can participate any more than we have restricted Canadians.

The 15 per cent individual ownership restriction, which is included in the bill, treats all investors equally by limiting their ability to take over CN by putting a ceiling on how much stock they can own. This represents the balance between not jeopardizing the government's ability to sell all its shares which would be the case if foreigners could not buy the stock and ensuring that no individual will be able to take over CN.

The bill strikes a balance between the objective of maximizing return for the taxpayer by ensuring CN is viable into the future and the operating obligations some may wish to impose on the railway.

I am also pleased, contrary to the Reform Party, that the headquarters of CN will remain in Montreal and the Official Languages Act will continue to apply to CN employees. This is a bilingual, bicultural country. However, these are not changes from the way the railway currently operates and will not affect the saleability or price which will be received for CN shares because investors will expect CN to continue to operate in this manner.

We cannot, however, impose any serious obligations on CN that do not apply to its competitors if we are to ensure that CN can compete on a level footing with the other transportation sector players into the future, nor can we allow CN to become a private company without addressing its capital structure.

CN must be able to finance itself in the public markets in the future at a premium similar to what its competitors pay. For that reason CN is doing all it can prior to the public offering to reduce its debt. In addition, CN will transfer its real estate assets to the government for a fair consideration which will also pay down debts. Any further debt reduction will be the minimum necessary and will be undertaken with the goals of fairness and competitiveness in the rail industry and the transportation sector in mind.

I believe that Bill C-89 will enable the government to sell 100 per cent of its equity in CN, maximizing the return to the taxpayer and ensuring that CN can remain a viable, national railway serving Canadians long into the future from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustmentact, 1995, June 15th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We are here to discuss Bill C-69 and not the performance of one party or another.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustmentact, 1995, June 15th, 1995]

Madam Speaker The comparison between California and Canada is really unnecessary. It does not apply. Canada is a much larger country, the second largest country in the world, whereas California is a state and is not as large.

My riding is in an urban area and I represent a great diversity of wants and needs of over 110,000 constituents. They want me to speak on their behalf. I imagine that a member who comes from a rural area has a much tougher time serving constituents because they live far away from each other.

I also find my colleague's tone offensive. We are not here doing nothing. I work very hard and I hope he does too. I know that most of my colleagues work very hard. Apart from the travelling which we have to do from the west, there is a large amount of work to do both here and in our ridings.

I am a backbencher. I have no post nor am I a parliamentary secretary. I do not want to be any more than an effective, efficient member representing the constituents of my riding. I have as much voice in all of this as anyone else. The ministers are here for a purpose and have the experience.

I have done a lot of volunteer work in the last 20 years. I have my integrity and my reputation and I feel offended when I am told that I am not doing anything in this job except keeping the seat warm. I do much more than that, as do my colleagues.

I also want to comment on the gun bill. There are rural areas where the bill is not acceptable but the majority of people live in urban areas. There are two big boxes of letters in support of the gun bill in my office. Those letters came from my constituents. I received very few letters against the bill. I received letters in support of the bill. We all know how much more vocal people are when they are against something, but the surveys showed support for the gun bill.

I also want to remind my hon. colleague that we have a democratic system. Again, I say that the Prime Minister has been misquoted, unfortunately. It is not what he said. It is not up to me to tell my hon. colleague what to say. They are in caucus and know that caucus is the place where we can discuss our differences and our opinions. I want to set the record straight that the Prime Minister never said that. The Prime Minister is a very credible person and a great leader.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustmentact, 1995, June 15th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I have been travelling with my hon. colleague on the transport committee so I know what his principles are. We shared a good relationship on the committee.

The riding of Vancouver East that I represent includes a portion of the former Vancouver-Kingsway riding that will be re-established. In 1988 I made a presentation to the travelling committee on the Kingsway riding. I remember at the time I suggested that Vancouver-Kingsway should be kept where it was because the population would grow and we would need it again. Most of the constituents of the riding asked for Kingsway to remain. As we can see seven years later we are trying to re-establish Kingsway and at the time, as I said, the constituents wanted Kingsway to remain.

Does my colleague think that we should have some kind of order in a bill that helps us make better choices on the process of redistribution?

By the way, the part of my riding that will go is one of the best parts of my riding. However I am not speaking to that effect because whatever will come will come. I am not trying to change things. I am just thinking that there is a need for some order in the redistribution of the electoral boundaries and we need a bill to that effect.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustmentact, 1995, June 15th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am disturbed to hear that our hon. colleague is saying that the Prime Minister yesterday threatened the caucus that they would be out of caucus if they did not vote for our legislation. That is not correct, and I would like to say that I oppose it.

[Claire Culhane, June 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that Mrs. Claire Culhane of Vancouver East has been selected as one of the 23 recipients of the 1995 Canada Volunteer Medal and Certificate of Honour.

Mrs. Culhane is a respected and admired Canadian who is a competent fighter for justice. Some of her campaigns against injustice include: anti-Franco activities in Spain in the 1930s; anti-poverty activities in Montreal in the 1940s; assisting her husband with the Shipyard Labour Organization in 1944; leading the Workers Education Association in 1945; and opposing Canada's involvement in the Vietnam war.

She is currently forming the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted. She became involved in the support group for the wrongful imprisonment of Christine Lamont in Brazil. She has written books which are required reading for criminology courses in many of Canada's universities.

Mrs. Culhane received the commemorative medal for the 125th anniversary of Canada's Confederation and is an honorary member of the British Columbia Humanist Association.

I would like to thank Mrs. Culhane for her outstanding work and congratulate her for her many achievements.

[Criminal Code, June 6th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to lend by support to the private members' bill of my colleague for Quebec. The issue is extremely important and deserves the attention of all of us in the House.

During the recent hearings by the standing committee on citizenship and immigration we discussed and heard evidence on gender based immigration. Canada was the first country to recognize gender based persecution, and women who fear genital mutilation have been granted refugee status. Experts say over 100 million women have been subjected to genital mutilation-what horror.

In Montreal, the Human Rights Commission is threatening legal action against anyone performing such an abomination on young girls. The mutilation is practised on young girls for religious and cultural reasons.

We know how difficult it is to change traditions and customs, but we can at least forbid such violent acts in Canada, thus protecting naive young girls who do not have access to other cultures and traditions. The amendment to the Criminal Code will ensure that such a practice is neither accepted nor justified in our society.

The procedure is carried out by a woman who does not even need to have the necessary expertise or instruments to operate on the young girls.

Even though we cannot intervene in other countries, we must make sure that such tragedies do not occur in Canada where multiculturalism protects us, but does not condone practices which are contrary to human rights or criminal in nature.

Multiculturalists can help with educating Canadians on this and other issues. Nowadays new surgical techniques are being developed to undo the damage so that women who were subjected to infibulation can have children without having to suffer excruciating pain and can have almost the same type of life an

adult woman is entitled to. This is only a way to cure and we need to be proactive.

We are learning more and more about genital mutilation. We are also learning that in some countries it is inflicted on all young girls. It is known that after an extremely painful operation conducted without anaesthetics or proper surgical tools the young girls will never be able to enjoy a full life as an adult and they often die.

Because of the facts I just mentioned and for many other reasons mentioned by my colleagues, I will support Bill C-277 regarding the genital mutilation of female persons. I also want to thank the member for Québec for bringing this piece of legislation forward.

[Budget Implementation Act, 1995, June 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, not only the prairies and the farmers have been hit in this budget but many other people have as well. This budget is not good at all for the people in my riding. They will suffer.

We have subsidies and subsidies were cut which of course is not a pleasant thing to do. However they had to come to an end. There is a transition period and $1.6 billion is being offered to the farmers to adjust to the new situation. In my duties as a member of the transportation committee I also asked a question about the effect of Crow for instance on transportation. It seems they are not very concerned about it. I would like to see the situation adjust. It is tough we have had to do that, but we have taken great care to be equitable in our cuts.

[Budget Implementation Act, 1995, June 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I think that what my hon. colleague just said is incorrect because, as you know, this matter has implications not only in Canada but also throughout the world. I also think that in 1980, when Quebec decided against separating from the rest of Canada, the battle for separation was not over and this has been a source of major instability across the country. I think that while it may not be the only cause of poverty, it certainly is a contributing factor.