Elwin Hermanson

[Employment, April 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing more disillusioning to young people than false hopes.

There is nothing wrong with leaf raking and sign painting but these youth corps jobs are very short term. The debt the government is creating is very long term as is the tax burden and unemployment that young people will inherit from this Liberal government. This phoney job corps reflects a 1970s mentality. I expected disco music to be playing here in the House.

Can the Minister of Human Resources Development tell us if any permanent jobs ever were created by the 1970s make work projects? Can he tell us how many permanent jobs have been destroyed by the high taxes and high interest rates driven by a quarter century of Liberal and Tory deficits?

[Employment, April 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all Canadians want their government to create a heritage all Canadians, especially young people and future generations, can be proud of. But the Liberal governments, past and present, have been leaving a heritage of debt, taxes and joblessness.

The best job creation program for Canada's young people would be a program of deficit reduction which would boost investor and consumer confidence in the Canadian economy and lead to lower taxes.

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. Why is the government creating more debt to buy mere temporary employment for a handful of people at $10,000 per temporary job instead of encouraging the creation of real jobs?

[Customs Officers, April 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I join with members of the government as expressed by the minister and my Bloc colleagues in expressing the grief and sympathy of Reform members in the tragic deaths of Inspector David Moore and Superintendent Jim Finnamore.

I grew up beside the South Saskatchewan River and know first hand the beauty, the benefits and also the danger associated with our waterways. In fact, I remember as a young boy when my father lost an employee to the river. We sense the shock and pain and sorrow those involved in this situation are experiencing.

I have also visited the Perth-Andover area and I can envision the landscape and the beauty of the Saint John River valley and the rolling hills in western New Brunswick. I have met with some people in that region and I am sure they share in the grief caused by this accident. I am also confident that the community is rising to the situation and will give comfort and support to Kelly Moore and to Frances, Tamara, Brent and Peter Finnamore, as well as to other loved ones.

With my colleagues I express appreciation for the lives of Jim Finnamore and David Moore and our sympathy and prayers go out to their families and other loved ones.

[Questions On The Order Paper, April 15th, 1994]

With respect to the conference on the deficit and the economy held by the Minister of Finance on December 13, 1993, at the Ottawa Conference Centre, were any of the conference participants' expenses, fees or honoraria paid by the government, and if so, what are the amounts, as well as the total costs of hosting the conference?

[Agriculture, April 14th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, farmers have been very disappointed with the performance of the government so far. They have been ignored. There was no mention of agriculture in the throne speech. There was no mention of agriculture in the budget. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has been a virtual non-participate in the House so far. It is no wonder farmers have grave doubts about the government.

The minister appears to be losing a war of words with the Americans. Farmers are worried and they have good reason to be. The government is giving in to unfounded allegations of unfair trade from our friends to the south. The Financial Post reported:

"Canada to soften position in farm battle with U.S."

In a free trade agreement with a trading partner, we should demand that the principle of free trade be upheld. We shouldn't have to sell out on free trade by imposing quotas on ourselves.

Farmers are not asking for special favours. Farmers are not asking for more programs. Farmers are not even asking for more government money. Farmers simply ask that the government show a little backbone and go to bat for them.

The message from farmers is clear. The government had better not strike out this time.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 13th, 1994]

I have a question. I am trying to say we hear Bloc members and wonder who they are speaking for. We hear the Liberals and we know they are speaking for themselves. Canadians have to ask who can represent them on this issue. On many issues it seems like Reform has been representing the people.

Has the hon. member for Red Deer consulted with constituents? Does he feel he is representing them on Bill C-18?

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Red Deer, as many Reform MPs have suggested, recognizes the importance of representation by population as well as regional representation.

We have had debate on Bill C-18; we are coming to the end of it. The Liberals proposed that something was terribly wrong. Reform looked at the situation. We were sincere in reviewing it. We were sincere in our agreement with Canadians that there were too many seats. We looked for ways and looked for a commitment from the government to find solutions. When that was not forthcoming my colleagues and I became very concerned about the whole process.

We are amused at why Bloc members who do not seem to have an interest in the matter would be so concerned. Once again it is-

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 13th, 1994]

Wise owls.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 12th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, just to make it clear, we are supporting the second vote on the motions; only the vote on the report stage would be reversed. I think we better make that clear.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, April 12th, 1994]

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Statements were attributed to me that are not correct. Prior to the introduction of the bill there was a discussion on whether an 18 month period was the proper time for suspension of the bill. In fact my party and I recommended that it be either 12 months or 24 months.