Lost his last election, in 1997, with 33% of the vote.
Privilege February 16th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am a new member. Would the Speaker please clarify for the House whether this would be a question of privilege? I thought a question of privilege was regarding a personal matter. This does not seem to follow that qualification according to my understanding of the standing orders.
Prince Edward Island Fixed Link February 15th, 1994
Madam Speaker, it is indeed a privilege to participate in this debate on the amendment to the Canadian Constitution as it relates to the Prince Edward Island terms of union.
I have had two occasions to visit Prince Edward Island. My stays were not long enough. The first time I arrived by air and the second time I arrived on the island by ferry.
The island is beautiful. The residents of Prince Edward Island have much to be proud of. There are a lot of farmers on the island. Earlier we heard from the hon. member for Malpeque whom I notice has the same problem as I do in that he forgets to button up his jacket when he is speaking before the House. It must be a weakness of those of us who have earned our living by farming. I would also just mention that the best bowl of clam chowder I have ever had was in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island.
I am not opposed to Charlottetown. I am not opposed to Prince Edward Island. I am not opposed to building and I am not even opposed to this project in principle. However I believe it is time to look at the process, to look at cost and to assess whether this is the right decision for Canada at this time.
Some constitutional issues have been brought forward by other speakers, particularly from our caucus. I totally concur with the member for Calgary West who questioned why this was such an important issue but Senate reform had to be put on the back burner.
Senate reform seems to be taboo in the House as far as the government is concerned, while amendments to the Constitution that affect Prince Edward Island, that have affected New Brunswick in relation to language laws in the last Parliament seem to be no problem whatsoever. The discussion on property rights in this House seems to be taboo and cannot be brought forward. However the principle of aboriginal self-government seems to be quite appropriate and has been discussed at length in this House.
I do not want to dwell on constitutional issues. I believe the fiscal crunch facing Canada is the priority for most Canadians. I would like to make my address primarily on the fiscal aspects of this project and the priorization we as Canadians and we as members of Parliament need to expose ourselves to.
Megaprojects are wonderful. They grab headlines. A megaproject was completed in my riding. It had been promised for many elections before it was completed. Finally in the 1988 election it was promised and actually was completed, at considerably more cost than was projected I might add. In fact governments have been trying to opt out of funding this megaproject because they were not able to meet the estimated cost of the project. However megaprojects do grab headlines. They are vote getters and attention getters.
Unfortunately tax relief for the middle class does not seem to be as popular. It does not seem to get the headlines. Therefore politicians and governments tend to forget about that aspect when projecting the business of this House and introducing orders and bills.
A few thousand very costly jobs seem to be quite an attention getter. From what I am able to determine the cost of each job created, and these are just temporary jobs by the way, is approximately $310,000 per person year. That is a pretty rich plan if you ask me.
However long term low unemployment as a strategy does not seem to be attainable by this government. It seems to be a much lower priority. Oftentimes it seems to be forgotten. We all know that the private sector is the job creator and the way to create jobs is to reduce the tax burden on our private and small businesses so they can generate jobs and lower the unemployment situation which is intolerably high.
Hibernia is another megaproject-no problem. As an attention getter, a vote buyer it is going ahead. However, can we put a cap on federal spending? No, that is just unreasonable. We have to forget that.
I believe it is time that the government laid out in frank terms its priorities to all Canadians. We have had a lot of motherhood and apple pie stuff. A lot of it is in the famous red book. The naked truth is that as a nation we are over $500 billion in debt. That is over half a trillion dollars in debt and it is not a time when we can say we would like to do this or that. Rather, it is a time of deciding what we must do to maintain a reasonable standard of living and pass on a heritage to our children of which they can be truly proud.
It is time that we as leaders of our country must listen to Canadians to find out what their priorities are and then try to represent those priorities in this House in the legislation we support and in the decisions we make.
For the past few years Reformers have been listening very closely to Canadians to try to determine what those priorities might be. We think we have come pretty close to sensing what Canadians feel is important and what they would be prepared to see go by the way, at least for the time being. After all, I would remind this House that our caucus has grown from one member to 52. That was no small feat and no accident. It came from listening to Canadians and accurately representing their concerns in the election and we are responsible to also represent those concerns in this House.
Let me presume that the priorities of Canadians are also the priorities of Canadians on Prince Edward Island. I know that my comments do not remain in this assembly. The people of Prince Edward Island are watching me. I am not concerned about that because I think the aspirations of the people of Prince Edward Island are not that different than the aspirations of most Canadians. I want to talk about the priorities that I believe are the priorities of the residents of Prince Edward Island.
I know that most Canadians place a high priority on health care. I would just like to relate a little about what is happening in my own province of Saskatchewan. We had governments that liked to build monuments, that liked to build hospitals. We probably have more hospitals per capita in our province than in any other part of Canada. Unfortunately, we now have no money to operate those hospitals. Our priorities were probably wrong. In fact, I am sure they were wrong.
I wonder if the residents of Prince Edward Island would trade away their health care system to have a bridge to the mainland. It is an interesting thought and I have not heard that thought being represented by members on the opposite side.
Also, there is concern for the need for funding of ongoing education, particularly post-secondary education. It is important for young people in every province of Canada, including Prince Edward Island.
Do we want to build a bridge for the young people of Prince Edward Island so they can drive across that bridge and go into the United States to find quality post-secondary education? Or are we going to place a high priority on education within our own country even if it means not expending funds to build a bridge from New Brunswick to the island?
I think of quality of life for our senior citizens. I would like to ask senior citizens if they would be prepared to trade their Canada pension plan for a bridge or financial security in retirement years for another megaproject. These are the types of decision, the types of priorities we need to weigh in our minds.
Being a small business person, a farmer, I have to weigh the benefits of seeing megaprojects go forward or seeing a tax structure which I can live and prosper within and make reasonable profits for my business.
Canada is facing this fiscal crisis and if we as individuals were in exactly the same situation we would be very prudent to make wise decisions. Unfortunately, governments do not always makes those types of wise decisions. Quite often they are thinking about buying a yacht rather than keeping up with the mortgage payments. As the Canadian government, we must not only maintain the mortgage payments but we need to reduce the deficit so that the mortgage does not become totally uncontrollable.
That deficit and that debt also affect the residents of Prince Edward Island and I am sure that if they have a bridge that the country cannot afford to maintain, if they have an economy that does not justify the use of that facility, it will be a sorry day and a difficult thing to explain to future generations.
These are types of illustrations that we as Canadians need to hear if we are going to make wise decisions. We do not want the International Monetary Fund making those decisions for us. We do not want it lowering our credit rating, increasing the cost of borrowing all these dollars that we need if governments are going to continue funding megaprojects when we are past the half-trillion dollar bench mark.
I do not want to carry on too much longer in sort of a gloom and doom approach. I do not think it is time to be down on ourselves but I do believe it is time to make wise decisions as Canadians.
As Reformers we talked to Canadians and said that we feel governments have to cut spending and one area is megaprojects. We received broad support for that position right across the country. Even in Atlantic Canada we received quite a bit of support even though we were fairly new and unknown in that part of the country.
We preached the same message of fiscal responsibility, of placing our priorities on the things that are really important such as health and education, care for our seniors and hope for our young people.
We do not want to erode our reputation of being a country with a high standard of living, one that properly cares for its citizens and one that meets the most important needs of Canadians.
Saskatchewan Winter Games February 11th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the residents of Kindersley-Lloydminster, I am pleased to rise in the House to pay tribute to the 1,600 athletes who will take part in the Saskatchewan Winter Games to be held from February 13 to February 19 in Kindersley, Saskatchewan. These young athletes have put in many long hours of training and I congratulate them for qualifying for the provincial games.
Kindersley is the smallest community in Saskatchewan to ever host the games. I am sure all members of this House will join me in wishing the organizing committee and all of the people of Kindersley and its surrounding communities every success in hosting such a large event.
I commend all of the volunteers and organizers for putting in the many hours of planning, preparation and hard work necessary to hold such an event.
I would encourage all members and all Canadians to take this opportunity to visit Kindersley and see the best young athletes in Saskatchewan compete in this year's winter games.
Business Of The House February 8th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, could we call for a vote on that on that matter to see if there is support in the House for that position?
House Of Commons Standing Orders February 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the House that the hon. member for Calgary Southwest, a great advocate of parliamentary reform, will be speaking for 20 minutes and after that we will again divide our time pursuant to Standing Order 43(2).
House Of Commons Standing Orders February 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the comments of the hon. member with regard to the proposed changes to the standing orders.
I have a couple of comments and then perhaps a question. First, the door is open but we have not passed through it yet. I might say we have identified the right buttons but we have not pushed them yet. We are hoping that in the 35th Parliament we will not only identify the needed reform in this very institution but will also act upon those needs and implement them. I was glad to hear the hon. member say that the procedure and House affairs committee which he chairs would be willing to look at other issues with regard to parliamentary reform as well as the ones that are identified in the document we are debating today.
A particular interest of mine is reform of the other place by non-constitutional means. Perhaps once we have dealt with some of the issues on this paper we can get to those as well.
Another concern of mine is dignity and decorum in the House. I understand that the House is performing much better than has been seen in the past. As someone involved not only in campaigning in an election but also in candidate recruitment I found that young people were particularly turned off by this place. It would be appropriate for the House to do all in its means to change the appearance of this place so that young people would become excited about this institution and interested in the politics of their country.
Does the hon. member have some ideas on how that could be accomplished?
Exports February 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, indeed we will be co-operating with the government to try to bring an end to this work stoppage.
However, in the meantime there have been severe financial losses by many Canadian exporters, including agriculture producers. I am wondering if the government has any intention of covering some of the costs incurred by producers through high demurrage costs that are passed on to Canadian exporters.
Exports February 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I applaud the hon. minister for his announcement in the House. My question relates to the same subject.
I would like to ask the Minister of Human Resources Development if he is willing to bring reliability to Canada's export commitments by designating grain handling as an essential service so that we do not have to keep on introducing special legislation to deal with the situation Parliament after Parliament, session after session?
House Of Commons Standing Orders February 7th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On behalf of the Reform caucus co-ordinator I would like to notify the Chair that pursuant to Standing Order 43(2) we will be dividing our time.
Elections Act February 4th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Deputy Prime Minister. Political parties are not on an even footing and political parties have a financial advantage over private individuals in an election campaign.
Does the minister believe that Canadians should have to fight all the way to the Supreme Court to defend their right to freedom of expression during an election?