Lost his last election, in 1997, with 26% of the vote.
Gun Control February 17th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.
The new firearms' legislation includes universal registration, which is seen by many as a penalty to the responsible firearm owner, sporting enthusiast, farmer, game hunter and collector. Can the minister tell the House what benefits there are in requiring responsible owners to register their firearms?
Supply February 14th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, first I should say that government's involvement is certainly to set an economic confidence in this country in which the business and industry communities can build economically to create those jobs. That is where the jobs come from. The member is right. They do not come directly from government. They come from government indirectly because government has to set that confidence, that pace and that tone economically in the country for that to happen. That is exactly what this government is doing.
Supply February 14th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, relative to the points and concerns made by my hon. colleague across the way, I should say first of all that I am not sure how the Reform Party set its goals low as he has suggested. However the Liberal way is to set goals that are a challenge, yet goals that are achievable even though they may be somewhat difficult to achieve. We as a Liberal government have set those goals and we will achieve them, as everyone well knows.
I agree with my hon. colleague across the way that no question, when talking about compound interest, it is a wonderful thing when you are receiving it or if you have dollars to invest and can receive it. It multiplies day in and day out and is a wonderful thing. He is absolutely right. It is a terrible thing when it is the other way around and you are paying your debts. Whether it be us in our private lives, or business, or certainly as government, there is no question it is a terrible thing.
Those goals have to be set and we have to meet those goals and those challenges each step of the way as we go along. In this case we will meet our first goal of reaching 3 per cent of the gross domestic product. Our next goal will be on a balanced budget. Following that, we will break the back of this country's debt. We will take hold of these finances for years and years to come.
Supply February 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join in the debate.
During one of the question and comment periods this morning I mentioned that like many members on all sides of the House I have had an opportunity to host public forums on issues such as the debt and the deficit. We got input from people across our constituencies on what their approach would be. That is part of our responsibility. That is a part of our ongoing job.
Many people said to me that there had to be cuts on the expenditure side, that the government had to do better, that we had to eliminate waste wherever we find it or wherever possible, and that we had to avoid duplication in efforts whether with departments internationally or our provincial counterparts in their respective departments.
The finance committee looked at those matters during its review. The minister and his department have taken them into consideration during the process of preparing for the budget. I say to my colleagues across the way that many Canadians have told us at these meetings that they want government to get it right. That is exactly what we are attempting to do.
People lost faith in our predecessors. Goal after goal was set. Was one ever met? I do not recall one that stands out in my mind as being met.
The government set goals like one might in business. Any good business person knows that challenges and goals must be set for both the business and the staff. Goals are set that offer challenge; the goals are achievable albeit difficult. That is exactly what we have done as a government. We have set some difficult goals.
I have to admit in many cases I have scratched my head and asked how we are going to meet this, that it is going to be very difficult. During the process both the finance minister and quite obviously the Prime Minister have asked all departments, all portfolios and all ministers to share in this challenge before us. I am sure in many cases specific sums were expected to be cut from the respective departments.
As everyone in this House knows, program review has been taking place. That program review asked every department and every portfolio to look at every line of every expenditure to ensure that they were going to be able to justify it to you and me. Ultimately that is where our responsibility lies. It lies not in the
day to day operation but in the policy, the planning and the review of the results. That is exactly what the Minister of Finance will do when he brings down his budget.
As we mentioned earlier, this government did set a goal. We took over in the 1993 fiscal year a deficit of some $42 billion which had once again gone even further than the previous administration had projected. We set a goal to bring that deficit down this current fiscal year to $39.7 billion, next year to $32.7 billion, and the third year to $25 billion, thus meeting our commitment of 3 per cent of gross domestic product.
Members would know that in the last couple of weeks the Minister of Finance has stated publicly that not only will we meet that goal this current fiscal year but we will exceed it. That is great news for us. It is fantastic. That is what we should be working toward and challenging ourselves toward. I know the Minister of Finance is doing that and is impressing on the staff of the department to ensure we do all possible to not only meet the current year and subsequent year goals but to surpass them if we possibly can.
During this whole process of reaching our goals we have another goal. That goal is for growth and job creation in this country. Of all the G-7 nations in the world, the economic leaders of the world, in the 1994 calendar year this country was number one. We were number one in the world in economic increase and development.
That in itself is part of our challenge, the balancing part, to be very gentle. The actions we take must be balanced to achieve our goals in reducing our deficit, taking hold of our debt, bringing home those offshore portions wherever possible but at the same time doing it in a balanced fashion that will keep another commitment of this government for economic development: jobs and growth. We call it our growth and jobs agenda.
Members will notice that every piece of material which has been brought forward by this government has had that as the number one priority: jobs and growth. Growth economically for our businesses. Jobs for our young people completing community college and post-secondary education in universities. It is so they will have the opportunity we and our parents had to have a job, to have that self-discipline, to have respect for themselves, to know that following their education there is an opportunity in this country to go to work and to provide for themselves and their subsequent families.
As a member of this government I am indeed proud of the approach it and our finance minister have taken fiscally. There is no question we want to see the major part of deficit reduction done on the expense side. There is no question and the minister has stated that time and time again.
As I mentioned before, a number of those loophole areas are going to have to be filled. I pressured the minister, others did as well. That will be seen by some people as tax increases. I see it as being a fair and equitable tax system for all Canadians.
Supply February 14th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the hon. member's presentation this morning.
One of the things I should tell him and other members of the Reform Party is that they are not the only party or the only body
to invent public forums to create the opportunity for people to provide direct input to their members. Like the Minister of Finance and many other members of this House, I have had many public forums.
Last fall we talked about the debt and the deficit. We talked about the ratio of offshore debt which we currently have and the concerns which that gave all of us here in this House as well as Canadians.
He referred to the goal this government had set of bringing our debt under control over the next three years, starting with the current year of bringing the deficit down to $39.7 billion, to go on to $32.7 billion and $25 billion in the third year, to reach our 3 per cent of gross domestic product. I want to assure the hon. member across the way that is only the first goal. The second goal will be to achieve a balanced budget as we go on to tackle and to break the back of the debt which this country has.
One of the things I have often heard from that side of the House is: Let us fill those loopholes that are in our taxation system; I am sure learned accountants across the country will find new ones if new taxation forms, but let us fill them. The minister has indicated on many occasions that he will make every attempt to fill those loopholes.
The system which we have to work with today, which has been inherited and has been added to over many years is cumbersome. We would like to streamline it. There is no question it needs to be done. I believe the minister will make every attempt to fill those loopholes to make our tax system more fair and equitable to all Canadians, regardless of whether they are in the upper echelon of social status, in the middle income group, or in the lower income group. That is what balance and equity are all about.
There will be those who will consider that attempt to fill in those tax loopholes as a tax increase, no question. Anyone it is going to affect will consider it a tax increase.
I would like to ask the hon. member across the way if that is not really indeed what he and his party stands for and would support and which the minister, I certainly hope, will bring forth in his budget.
Border Crossings February 13th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the majority of my Carleton-Charlotte constituency lies along the 49th parallel between New Brunswick and the state of Maine. There are ten regular border crossing points in Carleton-Charlotte. As I am sure you can appreciate, Mr. Speaker, there are many family ties on both sides of the border.
The citizens of Campobello Island, who are Canadians, must cross the U.S. border twice, first at Lubec, Maine and then drive an hour through the American state and cross again at Calais to arrive at major services in St. Stephen and Milltown, New Brunswick.
The recent proposal by President Clinton suggesting a fee be charged per person and per vehicle entering the United States is both unreasonable and unwarranted.
This proposal would foster unfriendly relations between the two countries which have enjoyed friendly relations for many years. I encourage the Prime Minister and the Ministers for International Trade and Foreign Affairs to address this proposal at once and if necessary again during the President's upcoming visit to Ottawa.
Committees Of The House February 9th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I have a couple of points to make and perhaps a question I would like to address to the hon. member across the way.
I listened very carefully to the comments he made. They were somewhat in depth. Being from the province of New Brunswick, one thing we found with the presentation to us shortly after coming to the House was that there was a unilateral change. There were no additional seats. There was no need for additional seats. There would still be 10 seats in the province of New Brunswick, the same as before. Yet every riding in the province of New Brunswick, according to the new proposed mapping, was to be changed.
From my perspective politically the changes in my riding would have been great. I represent my constituents. The message they brought forward to me was about why we were making changes and spending millions of dollars for the sake of change. I had to admit that in that light it made absolutely no sense to me.
I particularly wanted constituents with concerns to appear before the committee to make comments. I intentionally did not appear at that committee hearing because of the exact reasons the hon. member suggested. I did not want it to be perceived in any way that there was a political reason for making those suggestions.
The comment to me was why change for the sake of change. Because a couple of urban areas slightly increased in population, they were going to change 10 ridings in the province of New Brunswick and spend millions of dollars. This makes absolutely no sense.
I would like to address this type of issue. It occurred not only in New Brunswick but in several other provinces as well. Addressed in the bill is the criterion that we can look at it and make some sense of it from the perspective of the Canadian taxpayers who ultimately will be paying for the changes in redistributions or riding maps.
I would ask the hon. member to comment, relative to the concerns he had previously made.
Liberal Government February 7th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, economic development, growth and jobs are the priorities of the government. I encourage the Prime Minister and the government to continue with this agenda during 1995.
During the past year this government has created an economy and the confidence to enable thousands of permanent jobs to be created across Canada. As a matter of fact, our country is a leader in growth among all G-7 nations.
This agenda is working. We are on the road to recovery and Canadians have renewed pride and confidence in our country and in our economy. Atlantic Canadians have a goal of self-sufficiency and the jobs and growth agenda is an important part of the future achievement of this goal.
We must continue with our agenda for jobs and growth to build and even stronger economic climate that will provide the opportunity for employment for all Canadians.
Petitions February 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, in the second petition the petitioners are asking Parliament to ensure not to amend the human rights code, the human rights act or the charter of rights and freedoms in any way that would indicate societal approval of same sex relationships or homosexuality.
Petitions February 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I have two petitions that have been duly certified by the clerk of petitions.
The first petition is to the House of Commons assembled and requests Parliament to ensure that the present provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibiting assisted suicide be enforced vigorously and that in addition, Parliament make no changes in the law that would sanction or allow the aiding or abetting of suicide or any activity designed to terminate human life.