House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2008, with 31% of the vote.
Taiwan March 12th, 1996
We understand, Mr. Speaker, that the tension is continuing to build up.
We have expressed our concern to the Chinese government. Hopefully it could start winding down those tensions in the strait. The United States deploying vessels to stand by in areas of interest is no reason to interpret this as anything but a cautious and prudent move.
Taiwan March 12th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased the opposition has asked this question.
The foreign affairs minister has met with the Chinese ambassador in Ottawa to express our deepest concerns about the situation in the Taiwan Strait. We continue to advocate that the political differences between Taiwan and China should be resolved politically and peacefully.
Because of our strategic importance in the Asia-Pacific region any escalation of tensions in that region would impact on Canadian interests. This is why we have advocated to the Chinese and the Taiwanese that any miscalculation of actions on either side would be very harmful to the situation in the strait.
Speech From The Throne February 29th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, with regard to the hon. member's statement I would like to share some of the concerns of my constituents in Richmond, B.C.
When I talk to my constituents they are worried about their future and their children's future. They want the federal government to get the deficit under control and they want a say in the future of our country. During and after the referendum, people in Richmond, British Columbia expressed their frustration at the way in which it was conducted. I passed this on to the cabinet and my caucus colleagues.
This throne speech shows that the federal government is listening. Our government has made a commitment to ensure that in any future referendum all the facts will be on the table, the rules of the process will be fair, the consequences will be clear and that all Canadians get a say in the future of their country.
The 1996 budget will set out the government's plan for hitting deficit reduction targets, bringing the deficit down to 2 per cent of gross domestic product in 1997-98 and ensuring that further progress is made in 1998-99.
Deficit reduction is a major concern of my constituents and I am pleased to see that our concerns are being heard. Our government has come a long way in reducing the size of the deficit from 6 per cent of GDP to 3 per cent, but we still have work to do.
On behalf of my constituents I urge the finance minister and the government to continue its steady but firm approach to deficit reduction to reach our ultimate goal of deficit elimination and paying down the debt. This throne speech is an excellent reflection of the discussion I have had with constituents about where our country should be going.
I appreciate the statement from the hon. member and I congratulate him for a good statement.
Human Rights December 4th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the human rights situation in China has always been a priority with the Canadian government. As a matter fact recently at the APEC summit meeting our Prime Minister had the opportunity to have bilateral talks with the president of the Chinese government, Mr. Jiang. He raised the human rights issue with him. We raise those issues not only in the bilateral forum but also in the multilateral forum, such as the UN High Commission on Human Rights.
We want to assure every member of the House that the Canadian government has put human rights on an equal priority with trade. We will continue to press those issues with the Chinese government.
Sri Lanka November 30th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, we are all very concerned about the continued conflict in Sri Lanka. Recently when I accompanied the Prime Minister and my colleague, the Secretary of State for Latin America, at the heads of the Commonwealth meetings in New Zealand, I personally sought out the Sri Lankan foreign affairs minister to express our concern to him.
Canada does not believe there can be a military solution to the conflict. We urge all parties, including the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, to negotiate a lasting political settlement. The LTTE must accept that there is nothing to be gained by continued guerrilla warfare and acts of sabotage. Also, the Sri Lankan government should recognize that only a negotiated political settlement will bring peace to Sri Lanka.
Vietnam November 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to respond to the hon. member that our foreign affairs minister was in Vietnam recently and made representations to his Vietnamese counterpart, the foreign affairs minister of Vietnam, and to the Prime Minister of Vietnam to encourage greater respect for human rights.
We are also seeking Vietnamese concurrence for a visit to Vietnam by Canadian Human Rights Commissioner Max Yalden to further develop dialogue in that area. Canada continues to voice concerns about the human rights situation in Vietnam in international fora.
Sri Lanka November 2nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this moment to pay tribute to our ambassador to China, who passed away Tuesday. Ambassador John Paynter served Canada well, both in India and in China. We offer our condolences to his wife Inga and his three children.
To answer the hon. member's question, indeed we are very concerned about the situation in Sri Lanka. This summer I personally travelled to that country on a fact finding mission. During that trip I told the President of Sri Lanka that we were disappointed at the unilateral resumption of hostility in Sri Lanka by the LTTE on April 19 after 14 weeks of peace. However, at the same time we also expressed our concern to the government that a military solution was not an option in Sri Lanka. We continue to urge the government and the LTTE to resume negotiations for a peaceful solution.
Canada has been saddened at the continuation and escalation of the conflicts in Sri Lanka and with the large loss of life. Canada totally condemns the slaughter of innocent persons, both Tamil and Sinhalese, in Sri Lanka in recent days. This slaughter is not helping the situation.
Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act November 2nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, if my plane had been on time I would have voted with the government.
Jaswant Khalra October 30th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, after my department learned of Mr. Khalra's abduction our high commission in New Delhi made immediate approaches to the Indian authorities regarding this case.
We have contacted the human rights person in the Punjab state regarding his abduction. I raised the case of Mr. Khalra with the foreign affairs minister of India in New York when I attended the United Nations conference earlier this month.
The Prime Minister and I will be travelling next week to New Zealand for the Commonwealth conference. At that time we will continue to follow up with the Indian government regarding this matter.
British Columbia Treaty Commission October 23rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure today to rise to speak on behalf of legislation that will have such great economic benefits for the people of British Columbia. With this legislation we can remove an obstacle that has hampered economic growth in B.C. for too long, uncertainty over ownership of land and resources. That uncertainty has carried a very high price.
In 1990 a Price Waterhouse study asked forestry and mining interests in B.C. about the effects of the uncertainty created by unresolved land claims. The results are sobering: $1 billion in investments were not made in those two sectors alone; 300 new jobs were not created; 1,500 permanent jobs were adversely affected; $125 million annually in capital investment is lost because of the lack of legal certainty with regard to land and resources. Since the time of that study the price has continued to be paid, year in and year out.
That is the toll we pay for leaving things unclear, uncertain, undefined. That is the price for refusing to sit down with our aboriginal partners and discuss rational solutions to real problems. That is the price opponents to this process will have us continue to pay. Here we have a chance to do something concrete, to create jobs and real economic growth for Canadians.
In September Ms. Marlie Beets of the B.C. Council of Forest Industries was quoted as saying their members know they cannot afford to ignore treaty issues. There is solid support in the forestry industry to resolve this, even though the industry has concerns about what treaties might contain.
People in the forestry industry of B.C. understand what is involved. They know they cannot function efficiently without clear policies. They know aboriginal rights must be defined clearly so that everyone knows the rules of the game. They know their time has come to realize the potential of their province and to expand
opportunities for the people. They want to get on with it. The proposition is simple: treaties will provide certainty and create a better climate for investment and economic growth. This is a reality that cannot be denied.
Treaties will provide a land base for aboriginal people and with it a foundation upon which to build self-sufficient communities. This will allow aboriginal people to become involved in a range of economic activities that in the absence of a land base have been foreclosed to them. Commercial activities like mining, forestry, and tourism become far more possible to be pursued by First Nations. And the growth of strong, self-reliant, economically vibrant aboriginal communities strengthens us all, because it will bring positive economic spillover into non-aboriginal communities.
For too long the aboriginal people of B.C. have been denied both their legal rights from the past and their hopes for the future. For too long they have suffered high rates of unemployment, low rates of literacy, and high rates of infant mortality and suicide. For too long we have denied ourselves the contribution they can make.
This situation cannot be defended and it must not continue. With rights and obligations clearly defined by treaties, all British Columbians, aboriginals and non-aboriginals, will be able to get on with realizing the potential of the province and expanding their opportunities for advancement.
This will be good news for the forest workers and the miners. It will mean an expanded tax base as the infusion of settlement funds stimulates economic activity and creates jobs. It will also mean lower social costs associated with the poverty and unemployment in aboriginal communities. It will mean the end of conflict and costly litigation and the beginning of co-operation and negotiation.
These historic issues will not go away. They cannot be wished away. As long as the issues remain unresolved, investment will stay away and the jobs that must be created will go elsewhere. The spiral will continue: uncertainty creating fewer opportunities and fewer opportunities creating more social problems. The cycle of poverty and dependence will continue.
These issues must be dealt with. We have a choice as to how we are going to do that. We can litigate at great expense to the Canadian taxpayer, knowing that at the end of this long, drawn out and often bitter process a court is likely to tell us to work out the details ourselves-something very similar to the negotiation process we have now-or we can negotiate directly from the outset.
Surely it makes good economic sense to avoid costly court battles, which cast each party in the role of antagonist. It makes good sense to instead approach these issues as partners, prepared to give and take in the spirit of trust and mutual respect.
Yes, there are real economic benefits in proceeding with treaties in B.C., but at the end of the day the most important benefit will not be felt in terms of dollars and cents; it will be felt in the lives of the individuals as they are given the opportunity to contribute further to the greatness of Canada.
The benefits of holding a job cannot always be measured by points on a graph. Having a job is really about hope. It means having the ability to plan for the future in order to realize your own potential and advance your family. It means having the pride of contributing to the overall health of one's community. Is it better to leave things in a state of confusion or to sit down with our aboriginal colleagues and establish certainty?
Perhaps it is expecting too much to hope that the Reform Party's vision of Canada is broad enough to include the first peoples, generous enough to expand the circle of opportunity, or far sighted enough to see the wisdom in finally completing this great unfinished business of our history. Surely it is not expecting too much to ask the Reform Party to take a hard headed look at the economics of treaty negotiations and admit that it makes real sense. Surely we can see the awful price we are paying for uncertainty. Surely even they can see the benefits of negotiating instead of litigating.
I would ask that the Reform Party and all other parties in the House join us in helping to close the chapter of frustration and fear and help us to write a new one of understanding and opportunity. Let us finally complete the work our forebears began.