Mr. Speaker, New Democrats vote nay on this motion, including the member for Kamloops who had voted yea on the previous motion.
Lost his last election, in 1997, with 28% of the vote.
Firearms Act June 12th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, New Democrats vote nay on this motion, including the member for Kamloops who had voted yea on the previous motion.
Committees Of The House June 7th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that the New Democrats have expressed concern in the past about the way in which supply is dealt with here, we certainly concur with the motion put forward by the government whip.
In light of the fact that the government whip indicated there was agreement from all recognized parties in the House, we are happy to participate in the process.
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that government orders were extended by some 12 minutes because of a ministerial statement made earlier in the day. I am wondering if perhaps we are not ahead of ourselves here.
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Vancouver East, like the hon. member from Halifax before her, has an obligation to all Canadians to review and ensure that their support for legislation is fair.
I am wondering if the hon. member for Vancouver East understands that if the bill before us cuts $1 million from various rural communities that it will result in the loss of elevators, increased input costs for farmers and decreased prices for farmers. I have newspaper clippings galore here that indicate all sorts of problems will result in agriculture trade as a result of this legislation.
How can the hon. member in all good conscience support this legislation when these immediate and long term impacts will be so devastating on prairie people?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to again put a question to a member on the government side.
Members have had an opportunity to review the bill, to study it in caucus, to talk to cabinet members about it, review it in the finance committee and examine it in their own ways.
The hon. member comes from a part of eastern Canada with some agricultural base. Therefore he should have some understanding of rural life in Saskatchewan. As a member of government he has an obligation to review the effect this legislation will have on rural Canadians right across Canada.
The hon. member talked about small business. When we in Saskatchewan think about small business we think not only about those who are entrepreneurs selling or manufacturing products but also those who are producing products on the farm.
In all fairness to the government to have claimed otherwise, this bill and the budget in general will have a more devastating effect on rural Saskatchewan than on any other part of the country.
With regard to the bill, the legislation and its effect on the farmers through the reduction of the Crow benefit, I ask the member if he can identify any studies that will back up his government's claim that this legislation will lead to increased crop diversification and enhanced value added production.
At the same time, given his commitment to small business, can he tell us and the farmers of western Canada what transition measures he believes are necessary to secure the future of rural communities given the immediate withdrawal of federal support for grain transportation?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to raise a question with my colleague and friend from Yorkton-Melville.
His earlier comments to the House were quite well received. However, I want to bring to his attention some comments which were recently made in a committee of the House by the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities concerning the future of agriculture and rural communities on the prairies.
One of the comments made by the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities was with respect to the government's claims that crop diversification and value added production will be a direct result of the elimination of the Crow benefit. The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities said this in its opening remarks:
It is difficult to predict with any degree of accuracy whether the elimination of the Crow benefit will expedite the move toward diversification and value-added opportunities.
It goes on to say:
It must be mentioned-that lack of capital is a significant obstacle to the realization of many successful value-added businesses.
It concluded the section by saying:
Our association has made consistent statements to federal and provincial governments that the establishment of equity and/or capital venture funds is necessary for Saskatchewan to fully realize growth in value-added processing.
I believe very strongly that the position brought forward by the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities represents the view of many communities in rural Saskatchewan. They realize that with the withdrawal of the Crow benefit their communities will lose income and will need to find alternative sources of income to maintain not only their tax base but their quality of life.
The development of equity funds is one way to ensure that investment capital will exist. However we all know that the number of communities that will lose significant amounts of money will never be in a position to attract all of the investment necessary.
Will the member for Yorkton-Melville inform the House whether he supports the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities' position in this matter and what sort of investment opportunities he thinks will result because of the loss of the Crow?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, the hon. member began his comments today by saying that the budget measures were necessary. I wonder if he could clarify that.
This move today takes approximately $1 million per elevator point away from communities in western Canada. The budget bill essentially withdraws about $400 million worth of federal commitment from the province of Saskatchewan alone with no plans in place to manage what is left behind. Can the member tell us today how it is possible that he thinks it is necessary?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, my comment relates to my earlier intervention. I did ask the member who spoke just prior to this member some questions about the farm economy. The bill in fact addresses the farm economy quite significantly. Whether or not members of this House are from farm constituencies, they have an obligation to understand the implications of legislation on all Canadians regardless of where they live.
I would have thought that a bill that has such substantial impact on rural Canada would be something that all members of the Chamber would be able to address. It seems to me that we as MPs have an obligation to Canadians as well as our own constituents.
The member indicates she is a member of the finance committee. Is she aware of any studies relating to the long term implications of this legislation on rural communities? Specifically where will the investment to replace the lost income come from to ensure that these communities are able to continue to exist?
Keeping in mind what I said earlier, in my constituency alone income that presently exists, up to some $40 million a year will be lost as a result of this bill, all from rural communities. A considerable investment will have to be made in order to make that up.
My other question deals with the health care part of the bill. The member will recall that earlier this week the Canadian Hospital Association expressed what it said amounts to a call to arms against the plans in this bill for health care. Essentially the Canadian Hospital Association president said that the reluctance of the federal government to match its moral commitment with a financial commitment is inexplicable.
Can the member of the finance committee explain what has happened to the federal government's fiscal commitment to health care?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, could you clarify for me how much time was used on questions and comments?
Budget Implementation Act, 1995 June 6th, 1995
Madam Speaker, I appreciate your intervention. Although I have other questions for the member, perhaps if I could have an answer for those two, it will satisfy me for the time being.