John English

[Stanley Knowles, April 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, today Canadian parliamentarians honour one of the greatest of their own, Stanley Knowles.

Mr. Knowles, who takes his place in front of you, Mr. Speaker, represents the finest traditions of Canadian public life. First elected in a byelection in 1942, Mr. Knowles quickly demonstrated his extraordinary knowledge of and exceptional devotion to the rules and history of Parliament.

For 41 years he served his constituents of Winnipeg North Centre with careful attention to their needs while always recognizing his commitment to his faith, his party and his country.

Later we will gather to honour the creation of the Stanley Knowles Chair of Canadian Studies at St. Paul's College at the University of Waterloo, a college affiliated with the United Church, a church in which Mr. Knowles was an ordained minister.

At a time when university chairs tend to honour those who have large stock portfolios, it is so refreshing that St. Paul's College has chosen to create a chair in honour of Stanley Knowles, a man of most modest material means but one who has contributed so much to the richness of Canadian public and political life.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, let us honour one of our own, one who represents the best of what we are and can be.

[Broadcasting Act, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, like the other speakers in the debate on Bill C-216, I too received hundreds of calls over a period of one week in my constituency office. This issue is perhaps the one on which I have received the most calls during my period as a member of Parliament. One resident of Kitchener continues to call me every two or three days on this topic.

The importance of this issue to my constituents is clear. I do not intend to talk today about the questions which have been raised by the member for Kootenay East or the member for Durham, which were on technology and the CRTC regulations in general.

The questions of negative option billing and consumer choice are important to me and to my constituents. Negative option billing is not something new to the cable industry in Canada. It is a practice which has been sanctioned and condoned by the CRTC. With the rapid change in telecommunications and the way in which television is delivered with black box decoders and satellite dishes, the cable industry faces major difficulties in adjusting to market changes.

We know fairly clearly what is in the cable companies' interests in this regard, but we must ask ourselves what is in the interests of the consumers.

When this issue first arose and when I heard about the intention of the hon. member for Sarnia-Lambton to introduce this bill, I immediately decided that I would second it when he asked me to do so. I did so because of the interests of my consumers and also because this practice raises other problems in the area of consumer choice.

Some have spoken about Canadian content and have seen that issue to be of particular difficulty. I do not share that concern. In fact I talked to many of my constituents about their reaction to the action by the Rogers cable system. It led some of them to be concerned about Canadian content. Indeed, they even suggested imposing higher Canadian content rules because of negative option billing. In short, there were unintended consequences of the action which impaired the support that Canadian cultural content has had in Canadian broadcasting.

There is a danger. Canadian content is very important. The CRTC, through its regulations, has accomplished some fairly important things. It has promoted the Canadian music industry.

We have heard a great deal about Alanis Morissette recently. At the Grammy awards Canadian entertainers did extremely well. CRTC practices may have in fact created this very strong and vibrant Canadian music industry.

Canadians, in general, support the cultural practices of previous governments in supporting the CRTC and its regulations. However, they do not support a policy which misleads consumers. As the hon. member for Durham said a few moments ago, this is a tactic which has developed. People take these channels without realizing the additional cost. Even after the controversy ended, it turned out that most did not opt out.

This approach undermines moral principles. The CRTC received a lot of criticism. Rogers cable system admitted that this practice would not be accepted. There was negative publicity about the entire industry. The fact that negative option billing still exists is unacceptable to all Canadians.

The government should listen to the statements which were made by consumer groups. The Consumers' Association of Canada was mentioned earlier. I would like to read into the record a statement which was made by the executive director of the Consumers' Association of Canada. She stated:

The new telecommunications environment is about competition and choice-this Bill will help to make sure that Canadians are informed and willing consumers of cable services.

Of course the bill she was talking about is Bill C-216.

The executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre stated:

Bill C-216 drags the regulation of the Canadian cable industry into the twentieth century. Governments have long recognized that consumers should not pay for unsolicited goods. No matter what the motive is behind negative option marketing, it is an abuse that must be corrected.

Further, Michael Janigan of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre stated:

This Bill is an important precedent for the future, when multi-media program services will be fighting for a niche on the Information Highway. Consumers have every right to know what they are receiving and to obtain only what they request.

The consumers of Canada have spoken. The member for Sarnia-Lambton has listened and I stand with him supporting the interests of the consumers of Canada.

[Racism, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, Martin Luther King dreamt of the end of racial discrimination. Nelson Mandela suffered years of imprisonment for it and hundreds of thousands fought for it in this century. Through their struggles they sought a world free of racial discrimination in which equality and harmony prevail.

Today, March 21, marks the United Nation's internationally designated day for the elimination of racial discrimination. While most governments are attempting to address this challenging issue, we continue to witness too much racism, whether it be in the workplace, the school yard or even our neighbourhood.

When former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau introduced the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms it was a bold step in an effort to combat racism and to ensure for all Canadians their fundamental rights and freedoms.

The challenge to eliminate racism is a great one but governments must remain determined in their effort to achieve this. As we mark this day I ask that all Canadians rise to the challenge by combating racism whenever and wherever it is witnessed.

As one authority once said, in the end you can only teach the things that you are; if we practice racism then it is racism that we teach.

[Borrowing Authority Act, 1996-97, March 21st, 1996]

My colleague from Waterloo reminds me of the making of shoes.

These industries remain but they do not employ as many people as they did earlier. Those thousands of jobs that have been lost in what we call the more traditional industries, which are still extremely important, have been replaced by others such as jobs in educational institutions, for example. A great university and one of Canada's leading community colleges are located in Kitchener-Waterloo. The auto sector and the aerospace industry have grown to fill the gap created by the loss of other industries. We have developed a fairly significant high tech sector.

The budget will help Kitchener maintain its competitive edge. An additional $270 million have been allocated over the next three years to encourage technological innovation. We have created through the technology partnership program in excess of $500 million over the next three years which will assist the aerospace industry in our area as well as in other industries.

For our youth in this year's budget we have allowed $30 million over the next three years for SchoolNet, an Internet computer program for young students. It is a program that I have personally examined and have found to be a remarkable achievement for Industry Canada. Its benefits can only be imagined in terms of the work done in schools and the effects it will have on young Canadians.

Once again this budget has created opportunities for youth and has dealt with the problems of the past. We have looked at the opportunities for the future and we can be proud that finally we are dealing with the hopes and fears of all Canadians, not only in Kitchener but throughout Canada.

[Borrowing Authority Act, 1996-97, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Winnipeg South.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on Bill C-10, which provides borrowing authority. The budget is an outstanding document. It is balanced and fair and comes to terms with our deficit while creating opportunities for Canadians.

I begin with a matter of deep concern to my constituents as well as to the constituents of Waterloo, the neighbouring riding, the announcement having to do with the insurance industry.

The announcement that the present restrictions will be maintained governing the selling of insurance by banks has been warmly welcomed in my riding of Kitchener. It was an important announcement. It has been applauded by large insurance companies such as Manulife, the Mutual Group and Economical Mutual, and by the many hundreds of agents who sell insurance in our area. It was an important decision which reflects the importance of the diversity in the financial services sector and which recognizes also the importance of insurance as the lifeblood of our communities.

The insurance industry, other businesses in Kitchener and the citizens of Kitchener are gratified that the budget takes an important step toward restoring Canada's confidence and toward restoring a sense of hope among Canadians.

Moreover, it addresses their worries about security. It has done this in so many ways, in direct responses in the changes affecting seniors security and in the broader questions of economic security. It addresses, in short, our fears and our hopes. Most important, it addresses a question which very much concerns my riding, the problem of youth and their future.

Let us admit that under the Liberal government the economy has shown significant improvement. Our interest rates have declined by three percentage points in the last year, a remarkable achievement. We were challenged to meet the American rates. We have done so and we will improve on that.

We have achieved a level of inflation which was unimaginable five years ago. It is the lowest level in 30 years. There is every indication that it will be lower.

The competitiveness of the country has been greatly improved. We are now a trading country setting a mark for the world to match. Our improvement in trade not only with the United States with which we have an agreement but with the rest of the world is improving rapidly.

Moreover, since our election in 1993, we have created 600,000 new jobs. In the last three months alone we have created 137,000 jobs. These are all real accomplishments but as the finance minister pointed out, much work remains to be done and we are doing it. We are assuring a future for our youth which can give them the kind of opportunities we had.

During the Christmas break I had the opportunity to speak at many schools in the Waterloo region and in my riding of Kitchener. I also spoke with many young people in my constituency office, over family dinners and at other gatherings during the holidays.

What struck me very strongly were the deep concerns of our youth. They do not have the opportunities we had when we were younger. They have legitimate fears about their futures. The youth unemployment rate is much higher than it was 20 and 30 years ago and it is very unacceptable for all of us. We are fulfilling our obligation to deal with these questions. The unemployment rate in my riding for youth under 25 is roughly 14 per cent. It is lower than the national average but is still absolutely unacceptable.

The stories I heard during my Christmas vacation were often very sad. I heard about individuals who studied for many years but who found no opportunities to use their degrees. There were fears of technological change which youth recognized could not be avoided. I sensed in their comments that although they had these fears, there was an enormous commitment to the challenges of the future and a recognition that learning and training were fundamental to the kinds of opportunities that our youth would have in the future.

The transition to work has been recognized as critically important in this budget and in all government policies: from school to the workplace, from the classroom to the shop floor. In this respect, the Waterloo Region Roman Catholic Separate School Board and the Waterloo County Board of Education have been leaders in Canada in co-op education. I have been privileged to have co-op students work in my constituency office. These students have learned computer and filing skills which supplement what they are learning in the classroom. I am confident my hope will be reflected in reality that this experience will lead them to job opportunities in the future.

As I have said, the government has recognized the concerns and the problems and has striven to create opportunities. Let me indicate how it has done so. First, the government has reallocated $315 million in budget savings to help create employment opportunities for young Canadians.

Second, the government has devoted $160 million to youth internship programs and Youth Services Canada. In the Waterloo region, Lutherwood has a program under Youth Services Canada which brings together youths with seniors and the police to work at finding job opportunities in the broadest possible sense within the community. It is a very successful program carried out by an esteemed institution within our region.

Third, there has been a doubling of funds to $120 million for student summer employment.

All of these things are extremely important but ultimately success will depend on encouraging a climate of innovation within Canada and within our region. In this case, the Waterloo region and Kitchener are models. Kitchener was the centre of traditional industry and manufacturing. Thirty years ago Kitchener was called the Akron of Canada and tires were its major business. Tires are still made in Kitchener but far more people are employed in other industries and far fewer make tires. Textiles was another industry, as was furniture.

[North American Aerospacedefence Command, March 11th, 1996]

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

I welcome this opportunity to participate in the debate on NORAD renewal. As the House has heard, NORAD was originally formed 39 years ago to provide for the common air defence of North America, and the first NORAD agreement was signed in 1958.

The original purpose of NORAD was to counter the Soviet bomber threat of the 1950s, but soon after its establishment we faced an additional challenge, Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles. While these remained the principal threats of the 1960s and 1970s, the introduction of sophisticated cruise missiles into the Soviet inventory meant further adjustments to NORAD in the 1980s.

With all these changes NORAD evolved to meet changing threats and it also adjusted its facilities and infrastructure. For example, outdated radar facilities were replaced or closed, operation centres were consolidated and the number of aircraft available to NORAD was significantly reduced.

Adjustments such as these ensured that NORAD remained efficient and effective in both an operational and financial sense as the command matured and adapted to changing circumstances. For NORAD flexibility, effectiveness and efficiency are established traits which continue to serve the national security interests of both Canada and the United States in ways which would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve unilaterally. As we have seen in the 1996 renewal negotiations, these traits continue to be a critical feature of NORAD.

The command and control structure of NORAD has also evolved over the years into the integrated structure that it is today with binational representation throughout. This means that at NORAD bases in both nations Canadian and American military personnel work side by side at all levels of organization.

The headquarters of NORAD is located at Colorado Springs. The commander in chief is an American four star general while the deputy commander in chief is a Canadian forces lieutenant general. This is an excellent example of co-operation between our two nations.

There are also three regional headquarters: the Alaska NORAD region at Elmendorf Air Force Base outside Anchorage; the Canadian NORAD region at 22 Wing North Bay, which will move to Winnipeg as announced in the recent federal budget; and the continental United States region at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida. The regional headquarters in the United States are commanded by American air force major generals with Canadian brigadier generals as deputies, while the Canadian region is

commanded by a Canadian major general with an American air force brigadier general as deputy.

This is a remarkable achievement and there is no other bilateral command in the world that is so fully integrated as NORAD. To the men and women who serve within NORAD, the national insignia on the uniform is immaterial in their day to day activities providing for the aerospace defence of North America. Yet despite this integration, NORAD today enhances rather than diminishes our sovereignty.

Air sovereignty and air defence operations have been enduring missions for NORAD since its genesis. Last year NORAD monitored over 400,000 flights entering North American air space. More than 400 of these flights could not be correlated with known flight plans and required further investigation, including in some instances the launch of fighter interceptors.

Approximately 200 fighter launches take place each year to investigate unknown contacts. About one-third of these result in interception. Generally the remaining two-thirds are identified by other means prior to interception. Although the bulk of these interceptions are innocent in nature, in the past a small number involved either Russian aircraft or suspected drug smugglers.

Assisting law enforcement agencies and countering suspected drug smugglers has been a NORAD responsibility since 1991. As I mentioned earlier, in addition to air sovereignty, since the 1960s NORAD has been responsible for missile warning for North America. While the end of the cold war has certainly reduced the risk of missile attack in North America, we must remember there are approximately 20,000 nuclear weapons in existence around the world.

As the defence white paper noted, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the technology for delivering them over long ranges is an issue of growing concern. Accordingly the missile warning capability of NORAD remains an important part of North American defence.

NORAD has specific responsibility to provide warnings of an intercontinental ballistic missile, submarine launch ballistic missile or cruise missile attack on North America. Global missile events are detected by American satellites. Currently there are some 100 launches into space each year, most having to do with the launch of military and civilian satellites. In the late 1980s annual launches numbered approximately 300. NORAD monitors all areas of strategic interest seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

The greatest benefit the Canadian and American governments derive from NORAD is the ability to share not only the responsibilities but also the resources for continental security. It would be militarily impractical and economically impossible for Canada or the United States to perform NORAD's current missions or function unilaterally.

As I said earlier, NORAD was signed in 1958 and it built upon post war defence arrangements and of course on wartime co-operation. Prior to the war there were defence discussions between Canada and the United States in the 1930s which built up the precedent for the permanent joint board of defence that a member earlier mentioned.

It is worth remembering that prior to 1930, Canada's defence planning was developed with the view of countering attacks from the United States or even in some wild moments thinking of small Canadian invasions of the United States. It seems ludicrous to us today that Canada should have the United States in its defence plan as a possible enemy, but within the last 60 years that had been the case. What changed the situation was Canadian and American leaders working together recognizing that greater threats were outside this continent than within. Working together they achieved the kind of co-operation that marks Canadian and American relationships today.

Paradoxically, through co-operation we have shown that we can preserve our sovereignty better than through conflict. In the case of NORAD the existence of NORAD made our voice louder in Washington rather than softer when we objected to American policy on the ABM treaty. It made our voice louder in Washington when we objected to aspects of the so-called star wars policy of the Reagan administration in the 1980s.

In summary, the NORAD agreement transcends defence co-operation between two nations. Its most visible manifestation is the broad based co-operation between two countries. It is a model for other countries in the world that face conflict and believe that such conflict cannot be transcended.

NORAD remains well postured to assist both nations in responding to current and future aerospace security challenges.

[North American Aerospacedefence Command, March 11th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the comments of the hon. member which were enlightened and sensible. Not surprisingly, I agreed with much of what he said.

He made several excellent suggestions such as co-operation among the polar nations, expansion of NORAD in some respects to work with other polar nations in terms of surveillance. He made some important suggestions in terms of UN reform. He said Canada's security is intertwined with the security of every other

country in the world and that Canadians must take a leading role in establishing the precursors to peacekeeping.

I agree with these sentiments. They are wise sentiments. However, we are talking today about NORAD and the advantage is surely that it does save Canada a great deal of money. We work with the United States in activities such as surveillance. We have based our defence policy on co-operation.

Many of the hon. member's suggestions would cause Canada's defence budget, indeed its foreign affairs budget, to rise dramatically. Does the hon. member believe his party, his constituents, his province and Canadians in general would support the kind of increase in the defence budget and foreign affairs budget that such policies would seem to suggest as necessary?

[Gemini Awards, March 5th, 1996]

The Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television recently celebrated its finest achievements in creating programs in the English language for broadcast during the past year. For the past 10 years the Gemini awards have honoured all aspects of television production in Canada recognizing over 55 categories of achievement annually. The Geminis offer a fitting tribute to the vitality, energy and creativity of Canada's cultural community.

I would like to offer congratulations to the nominees and winners of this year's Geminis. Compelling, humorous, or informative programs, such as "Due South", "Million Dollar Babies", "The Fifth Estate" and "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" captured our imaginations and well deserved the recognition they received. The standards they set are an example of the exceptional work Canadians produce.

Canadian programming is now seen in every part of the world, a result of the hard work and talent of our own creators and craftspeople. It is also due in part to support from the people of Canada through the various programs and policies which exist to keep our cultural life vibrant and meaningful to all Canadians.

[Supply, December 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member referred to the Quebec referendum process at one point. I recall the Reform Party talking about the need to continue government as usual. However, in this case we are being asked to hold back a process until there is an election in British Columbia. That election could be in the far distant future. It has not been called and it does not need to be called for some time. This appears to be a contradiction in the policy of the Reform Party.

The second point which I want to make relates to the comment which was made about the negotiations being held in secret. It is very clear that any negotiation requires an element of secrecy. It is required when we buy a car. We do not let the bottom line be known right away. However, in the case of the negotiations about which we speak today, the Government of Canada has issued a statement indicating how it intends to ensure that the treaty making process will be open and accessible and how public records will be maintained. In fact, there will be a sharing of information.

I wonder if the hon. member is aware of the statement and what her comments would be on the analogy with Quebec.

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, six years ago in a university, a place of learning, a Canadian tragedy occurred. On this day in 1989 a lone male directed his rage at 14 innocent women at École Polytechnique in Montreal.

In a country such as Canada where so many women have experienced some level of injury, physical or sexual, we must make every effort to live up to our reputation as being the best country in the world in which to live by ensuring a society which is safe from ethnic or gender based violence.

We mark this day of remembrance for the victims of the Montreal massacre and to raise Canadians' awareness that violence against women is not only a crime, but an infringement of human rights.

Violence against women reflects not power over others but the fear of cowards.