Harold Culbert

[Youth Employment, April 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, during a recent public meeting a presentation was made regarding generation x, the lost generation, referring to young people between the ages of 20 and 30.

The message was that these young Canadians had done all they could to educate and promote themselves. After four or five years of university or college, graduation day arrives. The reality of visiting the local employment centre then sets in. They are told to check the job boards, check the computer for jobs and are given the telephone number for job lines.

This government and this House must continue to put the plight of these well-educated youth at the forefront of every decision. Instead of providing tax incentives for buying furniture, equipment and computers, let us look at tax breaks for hiring people.

Let us invest in humans and make these young people productive again. They are our future.

[Budget Implementation Act, 1994, April 15th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I stand today to respond to a few of the comments on Bill C-17 by members of the opposition this morning and on previous days.

I am a strong believer that we have the good fortune of living in the greatest country in the world. I would also include the province of Quebec in my country. It is part of Canada today. We certainly look forward to it being part of Canada for many years in the future.

With regard to Bill C-17, I am extremely proud of the Minister of Finance and the time he took for consultations across the nation. As every member of the House is well aware he gave every opportunity to bring forward expertise from the various sectors of our community and our business world. He did this in addition to bringing together a number of economists and other people with background and expertise in various fields.

In addition he did something a little different. He allowed the House to have the opportunity of a pre-budget debate. Members of opposition parties had the opportunity to bring forth suggestions, ideas and input previous to presentation of the budget.

I must welcome the occupant of the chair. We have a new Acting Speaker, a member from my home province of New Brunswick who looks exceptionally good in the chair of the House of Commons.

I am extremely proud of the minister and the opportunity he gave each and every one of us in the House to bring forward our ideas and thoughts. It should not have been an opportunity just to bring forward our own thoughts and ideas on the subject matter. It should have been an opportunity for us to bring forward the thoughts and ideas of our constituents. Like every member of the House I received many pieces of correspondence and many telephone calls with sincere suggestions, input and ideas about the forthcoming budget.

After all the consultation and opportunity, the Minister of Finance brought forward a balanced, fair and equitable budget for all parts of Canada and all Canadians. Some difficult decisions were made in the budget. They were difficult for the minister and for government members. Yet they were responsible decisions.

For example, I am sure no one on the government side anticipated prior to the election a $46 billion projected deficit for 1993-94. Even after being presented with it, did the government back off and say it was going to change its plans? Was it going to do something different because it was new and different news? No. The government said that it made it more difficult but it was going to keep its commitment to Canadians over the next three years of 3 per cent of gross domestic product. The government is not going to back off. It is going to carry forward on the commitments made in the red book that all members of the House have held up from time to time and referred to by section and page. It was well read across Canada. It probably was the most well read book in 1993 and we are extremely pleased by that.

The bottom line is that every decision the government has taken is looked at in light of what it would do to create an atmosphere in the country that gives our business sector an opportunity to create jobs for the future. We stated that up front, first and foremost, and we are backing it up today. We are going to continue to announce programs with that specific purpose in mind.

I cannot imagine why that is something anyone should be ashamed of, as some opposition members mentioned earlier. I am extremely proud to be working with the Minister of Finance. We will certainly continue to work with him in that endeavour.

Now is the time for the government, all members of the House and all other Canadians to work together. We have to continue to build confidence in our people and confidence in business and industry. They are the people who will create jobs in the future. Since February 22, the date the budget was brought down, that has been certainly brought forward to the people in my constituency and many other constituencies across the country. A new and modern Canada will see an opportunity for young people. This plan will bring back hope to Canadians, hope for their futures and the futures of their families.

During the recent break we had a couple of weeks ago I had an opportunity to meet with many people across my constituency in public meetings. Their comments were very positive. They were saying: "You are on the right track. Keep going in that direction. It is a good balance. It is a balanced budget. We think we can make it work". They had the confidence we want to see.

On arriving in Ottawa I am sure everyone in the House, especially the new members, had heard about our perks. One of the first things the government did was to look at the so-called perks. I have never had an opportunity to use low priced shoe shine outlets or to have low priced haircuts. Maybe that is obvious today. I have never had the opportunity to have free gymnasium workouts or masseurs. That was one of the things the government said first and foremost would be gone with one mighty slash.

In comparison to a projected $46 billion deficit, $5 million may not sound like much but to me $5 million is a lot of money. To my constituents $5 million is a lot of money. I believe to most Canadians $5 million is a lot of money. That is the amount the action of eliminating those perks is projected to save Canadian taxpayers during the next year. There is a lot more to be done, no question about that, but we have to continue moving forward with input and consultation with the citizens of the country. When we start working together that is when we start making accomplishments, that is when we start getting action and that is when we start building an economy and getting people back to work.

I am not embarrassed by the fact that every decision the government has made is based on creating the opportunity for jobs. I am proud of the Minister of Finance and proud of this government. I am proud to continue working with this government toward that goal.

[Rail Service, April 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, rail service, both passenger and freight, has played an important historical role in Canada. It is an integral part of our transportation system.

Most industrialized countries have modern, efficient rail systems. In Canada we appear to be closing them down. Instead we should be modernizing them with new technologies to make them efficient and effective for the future benefit of our transportation system.

Effective and efficient rail systems are most important to the future transportation needs of all Canadians. We must review all opportunities for the future advancement of our rail systems instead of closing rail lines and losing them forever.

This is an important issue in my Carleton-Charlotte constituency and indeed in all of Canada.

[Farm Business Management Committee, March 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, quality food production is of great importance to every area and to every citizen of Canada. Canadians are fortunate that the farm and agricultural community ensures a continual supply of quality foods.

Over the past few days the Canadian Farm Business Management Committee has been meeting in Ottawa. I believe some committee members are visiting the House today.

During the sessions I had the opportunity to sample food products. They were from displays consisting of food products of the particular native province. I must admit they were most impressive and very tasty.

Let us reaffirm in this House today our support for the Canadian farmer and for the Canadian food producer, their importance to our economy and their importance to every citizen in Canada.

[Carleton North High School, March 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate two coaches from the Carleton North High School who are being honoured in my Carleton-Charlotte constituency.

Mr. Iain Dunlop and Mr. Darrell Turnbull are being recognized by the New Brunswick Interscholastic Athletic Association for their superior contribution to basketball.

Both men had to meet six requirements including team success as well as player-coach relationships to qualify for their respective awards.

On March 27 Iain Dunlop will be presented with the Dave MacPherson Award for outstanding contribution in the male division and at the same time Darrell Turnbull will receive the Peg McAleenan Award for his work in the female sector.

On behalf of this House of Commons I extend congratulations to Iain Dunlop and Darrell Turnbull for their commitment to athletics, the community and the youth of Carleton North High School.

[New Brunswick, March 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of this month there are several important co-operative agreements due to terminate between the federal government and my province of New Brunswick. The co-operative agreements in such areas as agriculture, forestry, mining and economic development are extremely important to the citizens of New Brunswick.

Both my government and the Government of New Brunswick are emphatic about the importance of jobs and the dignity they bring to our citizens. These agreements are extremely important to New Brunswick in its efforts to maintain current employment and work toward future job creation.

I urge all parties involved to expedite a successful conclusion of the negotiations to extend these agreements for the benefit of the citizens of my constituency of Carleton-Charlotte and all of New Brunswick.

[Euthanasia, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the House is a place for discussion and debate of issues affecting all Canadians.

The government has agreed to allow a debate on euthanasia. Although there are various opposing views, I believe it is important for all members of the House to respect the current legislation governing euthanasia.

The House must set the standard of respect for law and order for our youth and for all citizens of our beloved Canada. I ask all members of the House to remember and to honour the current legislation respecting this issue.

[The Budget, February 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Concerning the previous speaker's presentation, one of the things I noted, and I believe I noted it correctly unless it lost something in its translation to me, was his reference to a very distinguished and honoured minister of this House, whom I believe, if I am not mistaken, he referred to as Mr. Axe. That was the translation I got. I do not think that was the intention of the hon. member but if it was I certainly suggest that this House take an action.

[Defence Policy, February 17th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I am certainly glad to see that my hon. colleague across the way has read the red book so faithfully. We are pleased to see that.

After listening to his comments with regard to economic and social programs and all the things we should be doing today, I assure the hon. member that they will be done by this government.

With regard to the defence committee and the subject matter of today and his comments, the hon. member made several comments with regard to alternatives and suggestions as to how government should be working with and for the people and providing the opportunity for input.

The committee he is talking about actually provides opportunity for additional input. I would certainly hope the hon. member will provide that committee with the opportunity to tap into his expertise to provide that input and those suggestions. That is exactly what it is for. It is a forum to provide as many people as we possibly can in this area with an opportunity to provide their expertise and their input to assist the department in making the best possible decisions in the final analysis.

I think we should indeed be pleased that this government continues to provide the opportunity for that input. That was not always the case with previous administrations.

Is the hon. member prepared to provide the benefit of his expertise and input to this committee to assist in the long term and short term as well to make those decisions that are going to be made and recommendations that will be made back to the department of defence?

[Criminal Code, February 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, listening to my hon. colleague speak relative to Bill C-8, I am wondering whether he has read it and studied it carefully.

My impression is that it very clearly gives those parameters he has mentioned. It sets the parameters for our policing agencies to go about their duties in a very responsible fashion. It leaves no question. It refers to reasonable.

We have to interpret the word "reasonable". If one looks at the bill it follows through in trying to give the best explanation possible of what reasonable is which is, in using force that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm unless that person believes on reasonable grounds that it is necessary for the self-preservation of the person or the preservation of anyone under that person's protection from death or grievous bodily harm. It is pretty straight forward.

I would ask my hon. colleague across the way if he feels that improves the situation we are in right now in which that police officer has that question in his mind. Now he has some jurisdiction to look at it to see if in his opinion at that given time, and it has to be opinionated because he is the only person who is going to be in that particular situation, it provides reasonable grounds.