Roseanne Skoke

[Supply, February 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kitchener.

I rise to speak on the motion put before the House today by the hon. member for Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup, a motion that seeks to create a special committee of the House to examine the expenditures of the government, to consult extensively and openly with the people of Canada and to recommend decisive

action to reduce the cost of overlap between federal and provincial programs.

Through this motion the hon. member has touched upon issues which this government supports.

They are: first, ensuring that this House has the means and opportunity to examine and debate those matters that are a priority to all Canadians; second, that government be open and accessible to everyone; third, that government spend as efficiently and effectively as possible in the service of the nation's interests.

These issues are not in contention. However, the disagreement and contention with this motion lies with the creation of a new committee of the House to duplicate the role of the public accounts committee at an added cost to taxpayers.

To support my opposition to this motion my remarks today will focus on the nature of the government's expenditures, what we spend now and the vital importance of spending this money more effectively to ensure a more stable and brighter economic future.

The government stated in the speech from the throne that it will pursue the fiscal discipline necessary for sustained economic growth. As well, the government attaches the highest priority on job creation and economic growth in the short term and the long term. These two objectives work hand in hand. Growth and jobs will enhance government revenues and reduce spending on unemployment insurance and welfare. Fiscal discipline to contain the deficit will create confidence and growth.

At the same time, it is known that a number of government programs and tax expenditures, some of which have been identified by the Auditor General, are inefficient, poorly managed or driven for purely political reasons.

Just as we as a government are proposing new measures to grow the economy, programs will be examined extensively with the objective of reducing waste and inefficiency and promoting economic growth.

So far the government has acted decisively on both fronts. The $5.8 billion helicopter program was an initiative that was too expensive given the government's fiscal situation and was cancelled.

To stimulate the economic activity and create jobs, an agreement has been reached with provincial and territorial governments for a $6 billion joint federal-provincial-municipal infrastructure program. These are important steps that send a real message to members of this House that this government means to keep its commitments to Canadians.

Most of us have wondered from time to time where all the money goes that government spends. It should be known that the Government of Canada's budgetary expenditures from April 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993 were $161.9 billion. Of this, $41.9 billion, 26 per cent, was spent on direct income support payments for individual Canadians. Almost half, $19.1 billion, went to supporting our elderly, and $19 billion of the remainder went to support the unemployed through the unemployment insurance program.

Public debt charges totalled $39.4 billion. Transfers to other levels of government through such programs as equalization, the Canada Assistance Plan and established programs financing amounted to $28.8 billion.

Defence spending was $11 billion. The operations of government providing services such as law enforcement, air traffic control, weather forecasting and health services to Indian and Inuit peoples cost $19.8 billion.

Crown corporations required expenditures of $6.2 billion. Direct federal government support for international aid was $2.8 billion.

For those members not keeping track of these numbers on their pocket calculators, it should be noted that the total of all these expenditures subtracted from the total budget leaves a remainder of $12 billion. This spending supports programs for industrial and regional development, job creation and training, support for our farmers and fishermen, science and technology and assistance to our students.

This 7 per cent of federal government spending should be viewed as Canada's investment fund. Used wisely it can stimulate growth, create jobs, develop knowledge and new technologies, and invest in the enterprising potential of our country and its people.

Most important, effective and efficient programs can help prepare Canadians for the economic environment of the future.

During this time of economic globalization, the days when Canada's wealth was measured only by its natural resources, capital and a protected domestic market are now gone.

Globalization is the growing trend in the international economy. It is a reality. Globalization refers to the ability to make the components of products wherever in the world their production is cheapest and transport them efficiently.

It means that with cheaper transportation and computer based information and communications, the world is becoming smaller and competition is fiercer than ever before.

High productivity will be the only route to high incomes in such an economy. Canadians must prepare to be successful in the modern economy in which success will be determined by the knowledge, education and skills of our Canadian people.

Governments have a responsibility to help in the transition to the new economy or to be left to cope with intractable unemployment and the needs of citizens with declining incomes.

As outlined in the speech from the throne, this government intends to pursue an active program for the growing economy, focusing on small and medium sized businesses as the engine for longer term job creation.

The government will work with financial institutions to improve access to capital for small business. A Canada investment fund will be created to help innovative leading edge technology firms to obtain the long term capital they need. A Canadian technology network will be created to improve the diffusion of technology and innovation.

The government will encourage technology partnerships between Canadian universities, research institutions and the private sector. The government will also implement a Canadian strategy for an information highway. The government will promote better training for the managers of small businesses and greater access to strategic information on new marketing opportunities. The government will work with the provinces to reduce the regulatory and paper burden on small businesses and to streamline the delivery of these programs.

Competing successfully in the emerging global economy will also require an investment in our own people. The government will work in partnership with the provinces and the private sector to help young people better prepare for the transition from school to the work place.

It will propose measures to improve job training as well as the literacy skills of Canadians with funding for the national literacy program restored to its original level.

I acknowledge that many of the initiatives aforementioned will require the government to act in partnership with provinces to be fully successful. This can be an advantage for these initiatives rather than a hindrance.

The government has shown through the infrastructure program that governments acting together can make advances that would be beyond the capacity of any one level of government working alone.

The challenges facing us as we adapt to economic globalization will require co-operation among governments in designing and delivering programs. Our task is to ensure that they are the right programs, effective and efficient, and that the government's spending is effective and efficient. Anything less jeopardizes our future as Canadians and our future as a country.

[Speech From The Throne, January 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

Throughout my speech I talked about the oppression of our people. It is correct for the member to say that the people in the maritimes and the Atlantic provinces have been unemployed more so than in other parts of the country. In my opinion there has been a form of oppression.

I think the answer to unemployment is quality education. Although I know education is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, I feel that the federal government has a responsibility under industry, science, technology and trade, and certainly for the common good of all Canadians, to intervene with respect to the issue of education.

Perhaps our youth and those people in the labour force, be it the fishery or whatever, who may have to look for new employment, are not properly educated in the basics of reading, writing and literacy skills.

One way to oppress people is to ensure that they cannot read or write. Then they cannot understand what is going on or that they are going to continue being manipulated and deceived by hidden agendas.

I feel that the answer and what this government should be looking at is education. It does not cost extra money to educate your people. What it takes is ingenuity and the basics. I think it is time we go back to the basics in our education system.

[Speech From The Throne, January 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the hon. member that I feel very at ease and very much at home with the Liberal Party. I think the principles and the philosophy of the Liberal Party certainly augurs very well with respect to our principles of justice, fairness and equity for all Canadians. I chose the Liberal Party for those reasons.

With respect to the issues of agriculture and fisheries, I am very confident that our party will do what is best, within its powers and within the limits it has available, to ensure that the dairy farmers, and particularly our fisheries, will be taken care of.

I am also pleased to have the opportunity to work with the hon. ministers in ensuring that my constituents, with respect to those issues, will be taken care of.

[Speech From The Throne, January 27th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the people of Central Nova have authorized me to represent their many diverse and urgent interests in the House of Commons; to speak on their behalf with courage, determination and integrity; to ensure that their families are protected and safeguarded; to ensure that their right to work with pride and dignity is restored; and to ensure that our country remains united, independent and free.

My people in Central Nova, by electing me as their member of Parliament, have bestowed the highest honour upon me and have placed me in a position of trust. I pray that God will grant me the wisdom, knowledge and understanding to fulfil my duties in this office with justice, integrity and equity.

The people of Central Nova must not be underestimated. They know the issues. They see the problems. They feel the heartache, pain and anxiety. They have experienced firsthand the devastating social and economic effects of government policies and decisions. Many are unemployed. Others are what I refer to as the working poor.

The speech from the throne and the initiatives and programs outlined therein offers hope to the people of Central Nova. Already initiatives are being implemented in my riding, such as the municipal infrastructure program. Hope has been offered for employment and hope for new opportunity. This is as a result of the speech from the throne and the initiatives set out in the red book, Creating Opportunity.

Let us look at the unemployment situation. Every day jobs are lost or being threatened. Unemployment, job security and job creation must be and will be the priority issues for this government. Unemployment is the scourge of mankind. It robs the person of his or her dignity. It has a crippling effect on the entire community and our nation as a whole.

The causal effects of unemployment can lead to the breakdown of the family unit, leads to family violence, suicide, alcohol and drug dependency, increased crime, theft, insurmountable financial and emotional problems, and dependency on social assistance. The effects are unlimited. The price society and the taxpayer pays in the cost of support services for family breakdown is also immeasurable. The price the family pays is immeasurable.

I am proud to represent Central Nova. Central Nova is known as the industrial heartland of Nova Scotia and rightly so because the industrial revolution in Canada began in my home town of Stellarton. It came about with the advent of steam power and the usage of the 40-foot thick Foord seam of coal in Stellarton. The steam power was applied to industry in Central Nova including shipbuilding, steel making, sawmills and railroads.

The first steel railroad ever built in Canada was built in Stellarton and is still in existence today.

New Glasgow, a town in Central Nova, built the first iron sailing ship ever made in Canada.

The development of the Pictou coal deposit created an industrial complex in the town of New Glasgow which in 1883 broadened into the opening of the first steel making plant in Canada. Today we have Maritime Steel and our New Glasgow foundry.

The first steel ever successfully made in Canada was produced in the town of Trenton. Since then, the town of Trenton in Central Nova has been referred to as the birthplace of steel in Canada. It was known as Trenton Works at one time and manufactured railway rolling stock. The plant is still in existence today but it is known as Lavalin.

Westville, a coal mining town, was incorporated September 1884 and became known as the friendly town. Coal mining began in 1865. As the town of Westville celebrates its centennial of incorporation this very year, once again it will look to its coal mines for another resource; that of geothermal energy extracted from the warm waters of flooded, abandoned mine workings.

The town of Pictou is an historic town in Central Nova that overlooks the best harbour in northern Nova Scotia. The Scottish immigration to Pictou began in July 1773 and the early economic base centred around the sea. Shipbuilding was and still is a very prominent part of Pictou's economy with our Pictou Industries.

The municipality of Pictou consists of geographically Pictou east and Pictou west. Located therein is the north shore which has a multi-purpose fishing industry and agriculture.

We have the eastern shore fishing industry in the county of Halifax. The eastern shore is an unscathed environment with a beautiful coastline and the most wonderful people you would ever want to meet.

Central Nova is now facing a fishing industry crisis that has devastating effects on our people and their livelihood both on the north shore and eastern shore of Central Nova.

We have the First Nation Micmac community of Pictou Landing with a population of approximately 420 band members living on about 250 acres of land. Although the area around Pictou has been settled by the Micmac for thousands of years, official status of reserve land has only been granted for a little more than 100 years. Education and high unemployment are issues of concern and our Micmac nation is open to the concept of self-government.

It is interesting to note that Central Nova, the birthplace of the industrial revolution of Nova Scotia, must now prepare for the technical revolution. It is imperative that we be strong in science and technology. To survive this technological revolution our people must be educated, for part of the oppression of our people lies in the failure to provide quality education and literacy skills for our youth and labour force.

Although education is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, I wish to remind the federal government that I feel that it has a major role to play in initiating the necessary changes to provide quality education for the common good of our country.

Our youth are without jobs. Our youth are without hope. The youth apprenticeship training program and youth services corps are two government programs that will provide hope.

In my 17 years of practice as a litigation lawyer, I have experienced first-hand the oppression, manipulation and abuse of many people arising from the abuse of power, abuse of authority and abuse of the process within the systems of government.

The system of government is not working as it should. The three branches of government, namely the legislative, the executive and the judicial, require reform to ensure justice and equity to all Canadians.

With respect to the legislative branch of government, it is time that we as legislators put responsibility and morality back into the law. Justice, law and morality go hand in hand. They are inseparable.

With respect to the executive branch of government that administers the law, it is time to diminish the authority, power and discretion of the bureaucracy and make it more accountable for its decisions and attitudes that affect our individual Canadians.

With respect to the judicial branch of government that interprets and enforces the law, it is time that perhaps consideration be given to electing our judiciary. The people must live with the decisions of the courts and therefore it is time that the people elect the decision makers.

In conclusion, the greatest investment we can make as a nation is in our own people. Our people are the human resource required to make it all work. The family unit is the basic institution of life and the solid foundation upon which our forefathers built this great nation. The protection of families, family life and family values must be a priority with this government. The family is where life begins. Life begins from the moment of conception and continues until natural death. The family is where our purpose to live, to work and to prosper is nurtured.

The conventional terms of debate in matters of political, economic and legal issues tend to focus on individual rights and the state, not the family. This is unfortunate and must change, for the family is the most important reality in our lives.

Remember, Canada was made for families. Families were not made for Canada. When families prosper so too will Canada prosper. When families are strong so too will our country Canada be strong.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Oh, I cannot do that. He was born in Croatia. I think I am going to be dodging and not answering the question specifically. What we have here is a classic case of conflict among ethnic groups. To think that peacekeeping or intervention is going to terminate that conflict is unreasonable.

We can look at our own country and its ethnic groups, and perhaps even at the House of Commons if I can use an example of where there may be some threat of the Bloc Quebecois wanting to separate from Canada. At what point in time can we solve all the world's problems with respect to these different factions and special interest groups? Because of that and because an ethnic war is going on there, it is my position that we should offer refuge to any of those who wish to leave the country, anyone who wants to seek the freedom we offer in our great country of Canada.

I do not feel we have a responsibility or can effectively carry out a role to solve or resolve all the ethnic problems. We are going to do very well to handle the situation we have in Canada.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I think I will defer to the hon. member for Cambridge sitting next to me because of his origin.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, most certainly in preparing my speech I have taken into consideration the various options. I think I indicated three in my speech, one being to retain the status quo. In so doing obviously we have to consider our position internationally and our credibility as far as Canada is concerned. The second option I presented was that of modification of a commitment, and the third option would be that of total withdrawal.

I repeat the same question I asked in my speech. We must ask ourselves what is the nature of peacekeeping when there is no peace to keep. I feel that is the issue here.

My final position or conclusion was that whatever position our Canadian government takes it will undoubtedly have profound implications because this very issue is begging us to answer many important questions. First, what will be the future shape and determination of Canada's armed forces in their mandate? Second, what is going to be the practice of future peacekeeping? Third, we will have to look at the evolution of the United Nations and its future mandate.

I reassure the hon. member that I have most certainly taken into consideration the various options. It is a very difficult question. Obviously we have heard controversial responses from various members. I want to reassure that I am not taking my position lightly, but the issue is: What is the nature of peacekeeping when there is no peace to keep?

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

I will take it as a comment.

[Foreign Affairs, January 25th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I rise in the House of Commons today in thanksgiving to God for our great country Canada. Canada, the nation, welcomed approximately 70 years ago my Croatian grandfather Alex Skok and my Croatian grandmother Veronica Pushkar and their children who came to this country from Croatia in pursuit of a better life. They settled in Stellarton, Nova Scotia.

Therefore, today I feel compelled, in memory of my Croatian grandparents and in defence of my family still living in Croatia and in defence of our Canadian soldiers, to enter into this debate.

This is the most difficult foreign policy question of our time. Since the end of World War II Canada has proudly stood as a leader in world affairs, stepping forward whenever international peace and security were threatened. However, the cold war has passed and the world we face today is much more complex.

The anticipated peace has given way to a resurgence of deep-rooted and often brutal ethnic conflict. The situation in the former Yugoslavia is the most striking example of this problem.

Canada has a long and proud tradition of participating in United Nations peacekeeping operations. It was the Right Hon. Lester B. Pearson, truly the greatest Canadian diplomat and foreign policy thinker, who conceived and developed the very notion of peacekeeping. For this he was recognized with the Nobel peace prize.

When the call came to serve in the former Yugoslavia, Canada was among the first to step forward. However, after many months of engagement in countless incidents and disappointments, it is time that our nation review its peacekeeping policy and take a leadership role.

When undertaking this endeavour to review our policy, we must ask ourselves, what is the nature of peacekeeping when there is no peace to keep? This pertains especially to the conflict in Bosnia where the Muslim, Croat and Serb factions have been unable to sign a peace accord. The United Nations therefore is engaged in an attempt to deliver humanitarian aid when possible and under extremely dangerous conditions.

The mission in Croatia is slightly different in so far as the peace accord between the Croat authorities in Zagreb and the Serbs in Belgrade has tenuously held since the early part of 1992. However, the situation is no less hazardous there either where, for example, two Canadian peacekeepers almost lost their lives when they were shot at by members of the Serbia militia this past weekend.

There are many proposed options for Canadian policy. The first is to maintain the status quo that exists today. Clearly this option is unacceptable from the Canadian perspective for the reasons aforementioned. Canada has done more than its fair share and, frankly, I feel that our allies have taken us for granted.

Canada should be proud of its peacekeeping heritage but we cannot continue to support every mission for an indeterminate amount of time. Cyprus is the best example of a costly Canadian commitment that went on far too long.

A second option available to Canada is to demand that fundamental changes occur in regard to how the United Nations handles its peace operations. For instance, if the conflict on the ground is such that peacekeepers are constantly attacked and prevented from fulfilling their mandate, then the rules of engagement need to be changed. United Nations troops need to be able to use adequate force to repel attacks by various factions. This is not a call for active peacemaking but it is a call for the

right for Canadian troops to protect their own lives in a hostile environment.

It is time to reform and strengthen the mandate of the United Nations and to reform the rules of engagement for our Canadian peacekeepers.

The third option is that our future posture must be one of selective commitment rather than blanket support for United Nations operations. Canada has spent $490 million and sacrificed eight lives in this mission to date. While many countries have talked peace, few have actually stepped forward with real commitment. How much more must Canada be asked to do, and to what end?

NATO talks and talks of air strikes, yet when the forces on the ground perceive the hour to be drawing near, it is our soldiers who are attacked. The time has come to bring our soldiers home.

In Croatia our troops are merely a political trip-wire with no real ability to effect events on the ground, or even adequately defend themselves. It is wrong to deploy Canadian soldiers in a zone where they are at such unquestionable risk while possessing so little control.

In Bosnia there is truly no peace to keep and Canada should not base its military engagements simply on moral grounds, but on real interests. Canadians are engaged in a sporadic and often dangerous humanitarian relief operation. Beyond this there is no clear mandate or time frame for their operations.

The position our Canadian government will take on this very important issue will undoubtedly have profound implications for the shape of Canada's armed forces, for the practice of future peacekeeping, and for the evolution of the United Nations and its future mandate.

It is my position that Canada should withdraw all its military forces from both Croatia and Bosnia. I am asking that our Canadian military be withdrawn.

Bring our soldiers home. Make way for the families living in the former Yugoslavia to come to Canada to seek refuge and to live in the land of peace and freedom that we all enjoy.