Ron MacDonald

[Criminal Code, June 15th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief.

I have to say that I do not think this debate is good for the Canadian public. This is the highest court in the land. Quite frankly, I am fed up with members of the Reform Party getting up and either intentionally or unintentionally in their debates on their points-they have every right to debate points here, but it seems that each and every time they use an example about what is wrong they use the example of a native Canadian, an Indian, as he just said, to show that the whole sentencing structure in Canada is wrong.

Did he use the example of an adult white male from Alberta? No. He used the example of a native. It is the same thing when there is a crisis in the fisheries on the west coast: they get up and talk about native poaching.

Every single thing I have heard from this bunch opposite since they got elected smacks of racism. It smacks of the very type of thing I fought most of my adult life to stamp out. To hear it repeated over and over again in the highest court in the land I think is condemnable.

[Maritime Provinces, June 13th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the leaders of the world's wealthiest countries are meeting in Halifax this week for the G-7 summit to discuss greater economic and political integration.

In this climate of global change we are witnessing the dismantling of barriers to commerce regionally, continentally and globally. This coupled with the changing nature of federalism in this country offers the maritime provinces the opportunity if not the necessity to redefine their role within Confederation.

For too long the common concerns of maritimers have been diluted on the national stage by far too much local parochialism. If the maritime provinces are to re-establish their economies in the context of the national or international marketplace strong leadership must be shown now to arrive at a true economic and by extension political union of the maritime provinces.

I call on the maritime political, business and economic leaders to take up the challenge to place the maritime provinces in the position to succeed as Canada continues to undergo profound periods of restructuring.

[Firearms Act, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like it to be recorded that I am voting in favour of Motion No. 158.

I think part of the problem is that the sheet the Speaker is using which has grouped the votes is not available to the members which may be slowing down the vote. Perhaps if the Speaker could give us the list of motions as they are in groupings, that would allow us to get the votes done a little quicker because we will be able to anticipate what the vote is going to be on.

[Petitions, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions from constituents in my riding as well as ridings throughout central Nova Scotia.

The petitioners call on the government to enact changes to the Canadian Human Rights Act to protect individuals from discrimination based on sexual orientation, in keeping with the campaign pledges that were made by the governing party during the election campaign.

[Canada Elections Act, May 16th, 1995]

The hon. member for Delta knows of which I speak.

There are 32 ridings in Atlantic Canada. The Tories scored fairly well, better than they should have and better than they did on the national average. Yet if that were a regional party in Atlantic Canada it would have garnered only about two per cent of the vote nationally. I have a problem with the percentage. Two per cent is probably too high, and perhaps the percentage should be lowered to about one per cent.

Another concern is with respect to the establishment of minimums. When we establish minimums, many times they become maximums. Perhaps down the road, if this bill is fortunate enough to gain the consent of the House, people might say there is a precedent that there have to be certain criteria before you are deemed to be a legitimate political party in Canada. It may also be that at some point you must win seats in more than one province or more than one region before you get a political rebate.

I know that is not covered in the member's bill. I worry that at some point, unless a bill like this is crystal clear and the the debate is crystal clear leading up to the adoption of such a bill, somebody would try to use it as a precedent to do those certain things.

I do not support our colleagues in the House who represent the Bloc Quebecois. I believe that deep down they are good individuals but they are terribly misguided with respect to their desire

to take the great province of Quebec, la belle province, out of the great Canadian Confederation.

However, they have a legitimate right as a political party to voice their concerns, to go out and seek support in a general election through the democratic process. I would not want to see at some future point even separatists in the province of Quebec somehow trying to use a restrictive bill like this which seeks to put parameters on legitimate political parties for the purposes of rebate to stifle political thought they found to be objectionable.

I commend the hon. member for putting thought into this bill and I hope it does go to committee so it can get some fuller debate at committee.

[Canada Elections Act, May 16th, 1995]

We are awfully smart and perhaps that is it.

Different regions may find different political ideologies appealing for whatever reason. In Atlantic Canada we have 32 seats. We are a vital part of the nation. We have the great province of Newfoundland. We have Prince Edward Island, the birthplace of Confederation. We have the bluenosers from Nova Scotia and the herring chokers from New Brunswick. We have 32 wonderful constituencies and four tremendous provinces as part of this great country.

The Tories did not do terribly well in the last election, as we know, right across the country. In Atlantic Canada they did not do terribly well either. The message of the Reform Party was so objectionable to the people in Atlantic Canada that people who could not see their way to vote for the Liberal Party stayed with the Tory Party, knowing their vote would be lost, that the Tories would not get another term in office. They could not go with the third option, the Reform Party. They will never go with the Reform Party. That will never be an option down there.

The Tories did exceedingly well with respect to how they did in other parts of the country. They got wiped out as well there, with the exception of the member for Saint John, the former mayor, who perhaps most days wishes she had not been so lucky to win that night.

In Atlantic Canada the rough math tells me that the Tories in 32 seats polled about 290,000 votes. That is pretty close to the two per cent limit set out in the bill. I do not have them all marked, but I will run through the percentages of votes cast that Tories received in all of the ridings in Nova Scotia: 20 per cent, 8, 22, 11, 32, 36, 23, 20, 23, and 32.

I do not throw those numbers out to say the Tories are a viable alternative now or in the future. I throw them out to show they did still garner a significant vote because the Reform Party's message was not saleable in Atlantic Canada in the last election. It probably never will be.

[Canada Elections Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I am glad to be here today to debate this private member's bill.

Private Members' Business gets far too short a shrift in this Parliament as it did in other Parliaments. It is a time for private members who do not get to set the legislative agenda of the government, both on the government side and indeed in the opposition, to come forward with pieces of legislation that they believe will fix things that are wrong.

Some of Private Members' Business is inherently partisan, which is fine; that is the nature of the beast in this place. Some seeks to try to get some consensus and camaraderie around the Chamber with respect to principles, goals and ideas.

I do not support the bill in its entirety but I do understand the direction the hon. member is trying to set. Having run in two elections and having run election campaigns in a number of elections prior to that, I know it is extremely difficult as a candidate or as a campaign manager when one gets individuals or indeed parties that form for a very frivolous reason the intention to go out and paint everybody else who has a legitimate political belief as somehow ripping off the system.

We have seen that all the time. The Rhinoceros Party and some other regional parties form for the sole intention of trying to make some fun out of the very serious business of politics. It is difficult as a candidate when that happens. However, one has to be extremely careful when one starts introducing pieces of legislation whose impact may be to limit entry of legitimate political thought in our system. It begs the question of what is legitimate political thought. That is really in the ear or eye of the beholder.

One of the major problems I have with the bill and one of the reasons I could not support it in its current form, although I would support it's going to committee so that we can at least have some non-partisan debate not structured by our parties with respect to this issue, deals with the percentages. The reason I had difficulty with the percentages, and the hon. member will be interested in hearing this, is not so much that I am opposed to setting a benchmark below which a party is not deemed to be worthy of support by the taxpayers of Canada. I am worried for two reasons. One is that I firmly believe we have to do everything humanly possible to ensure genuine political debate is fostered, that it does not become the purview of the rich and the famous and those who can bankroll on their own.

The second thing we have to be very careful of is the minimums when one starts establishing in law certain parameters within which political debate and thought must be con-

ducted. Otherwise one will not be able to get the type of funding necessary, which in turn will thwart the fostering of new political thought, new political ideologies.

I did some quick math. In Atlantic Canada we have 32 constituencies. One thing that strikes an individual after getting elected, be they from Alberta, Nova Scotia, northern Ontario or Quebec, is the vastness of this nation. This is a wonderful piece of God's earth. Although from time to time we just deal with our troubles, it really behoves us to think about the enormity of the resource we have.

It is a regional country, like it or not. I am a regionalist. I believe the country is made up of a number of regions. We may have provincial boundaries that fit inside those regions, but most of all it is a country of regions.

In Atlantic Canada many times we have voted differently than the rest of the country has. I remember back in 1984 when the Conservative Party first came into power there was a sweep across the country. The sweep was not nearly as complete in Atlantic Canada. In 1988, while the Tories enjoyed a second electoral victory, in Atlantic Canada the tides turned. Atlantic Canadians moved away from that governing party in a larger percentage than any other region of the country.

[Pacific Salmon Fishery, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans as well.

For the past few months Canadians have applauded and supported the federal government's tough stand on what has become known as the east coast turbot dispute. There is an equally important fishery on the west coast which is under pressure from environmental factors as well as unresolved disputes with the United States.

Will the minister assure this House that he is prepared to take equally principled and responsible measures to ensure the long term viability of the Pacific salmon fishery?

[Corporal Neil Bernard McKinnon, April 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, on March 27 Corporal Neil Bernard McKinnon was killed in a training accident at Canadian Forces Base Suffield. Warrant Officer Kirk Drew suffered serious injuries in this unfortunate accident. Both men were members of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.

Corporal McKinnon was only 24 years old. He served Canada proudly and well as a peacekeeper during two tours of duty in the former Yugoslavia, far away from his home and his family in Sydney River, Nova Scotia. It saddens us all that he paid the ultimate price in service to his country. He truly will be missed.

I ask members of the House to join me in offering our condolences to Neil's family and to wish Warrant Officer Drew a speedy recovery from his injuries.

[Rail Strike, March 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois' continuing blockage of legislation that would put Canada's rail network back to work is clear evidence that the official opposition cares little about Canada's economy or the impact this strike is having on working men and women across this country.

Each day this strike continues costs the Canadian economy tens of millions of dollars. The port of Halifax alone has already lost millions as ships are diverted to American ports such as New York. The Bloc's actions are causing layoffs, shutdowns and misery from sea to sea, including the province of Quebec. This must not and cannot continue.

I urge Bloc members to recognize the impact their actions are having on the Canadian economy. Their continued blockage of the return to work legislation is just the latest example of how truly out of touch they are with the desires of Canadians, including the good people of the province of Quebec.