Audrey McLaughlin

[Cbc North, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleagues from the Liberal Party and the Bloc Quebecois for addressing this issue seriously. I might not agree with all of the responses, but I do feel that it has been an important debate.

I am saddened that the Reform Party has not seen fit either to participate or to be present for this debate because I think that they too-

[Cbc North, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a point of order. I see that members of the Liberal Party do not want to put this to the heritage committee. I would then ask for unanimous consent to make this motion votable.

[Cbc North, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address this motion today. It is an important motion, not just for CBC and Radio Canada in the north but of course for all of Canada.

I have specifically chosen to address the portion of CBC North because obviously, I have heard most about that from my constituents. I would add that throughout many years, the New Democratic Party members in this House have supported our public national broadcasting system. We continue to do that and feel it is essential to the unity of our country and to bringing Canadians together.

With respect to CBC North, this motion has received a lot of interest in the north. MLAs in the Northwest Territories legislature very much support the motion and support the intent of the motion.

In November 1996 Charles Dent, Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, wrote and spoke to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. He conveyed to her that the Government of the Northwest Territories strongly urges the minister to recognize the unique and vital role of CBC in northern Canada.

The member for Nunatsiaq has lent his support to the campaign to save CBC North and I thank him for that. I have not heard anything from the member for the Western Arctic on this issue, but I do hope she will have the opportunity to respond to the motion today and to support CBC in the north.

The Yukon government very strongly supports the motion as well and CBC in general. Both the government leader, Piers McDonald, and minister Dave Keenan have shown a strong interest in the issue.

I want to quote briefly from a letter written to the Minister of Canadian Heritage by the hon. Dave Keenan, a minister of the Yukon government. It succinctly outlines why this issue is so important to Yukoners and to people in the north:

As a national institution the CBC is mandated to strengthen Canada by reflecting and sharing the diversity of its regions and cultures. In the Yukon the requirement to build national unity is tied also with the requirement to strengthen the unity of our peoples as major changes in economic and political institutions take place. The cuts proposed to the CBC northern service threaten to remove the ability of the CBC to speak with Canadians who live and work in the north as local news and current events programming is reduced, and will direct the service toward a service that speaks to these people, often with more prepackaged programs from the south.

That succinctly says what much of the concern is by northerners. I should add that the NDP Yukon government has also passed an all-party resolution calling for an end to the cuts to the CBC. The resolution was supported by members of the Liberal Party in that legislature.

I had the opportunity today to look through Hansard and to realize once again that New Democrat MPs have been the only ones, along with perhaps one or two interveners from the Bloc Quebecois, who have stood in this place and defended the vital role of the CBC. New Democrats are the only ones who are speaking for the majority of Canadians when we say that the Liberals should keep their election promises and restore funding to the CBC.

Since Mr. Beatty announced in September the CBC board of directors plan to deal with the most recent cut to the corporation's budget, my office has been absolutely inundated with letters and telephone calls. I might say that in the almost 10 years I have been a member of Parliament, as surprising as it may seem, I have never received more calls, conversations, letters, petitions than on this issue. That is why it is so important that people across the country and in this House hear how vitally important this national broadcasting system is to the people of the north.

In December I sent the Prime Minister some 140 letters which until that time had been received by me in a two to three week period. Since that time I continue to receive calls about the future of CBC and Radio Canada. I would also like to mention the strong movement within the community again through petitions to urge the government to have adequate and stable funding for CBC and especially for CBC North in our view.

I would like to also mention the editor of the Yukon News , Peter Lesniak, who has undertaken on his own and in his own name a save the CBC campaign. Again this illustrates the real intent, the emotional attachment and intellectual attachment people have to the service of the CBC.

This is an important motion to northerners and I believe to all Canadians. It is our way to be heard by other Canadians. I have to note that without a strong CBC and Radio Canada in the south, we do not have a strong CBC North either.

We would have liked to have seen much more debate on this motion and have had it brought to a vote, however we do not have this. This has been denied but I would like to point out a few facts to the House today.

In the past 28 months CBC North has dealt with budget cuts of $1.9 million and has already laid off 30 staff. The latest cuts will mean a further reduction to CBC North radio of 28 per cent and to CBC North TV of almost 40 per cent. This is not death by a thousand cuts; this is being hung, drawn and quartered. This is not what the public want to see, nor what they expected from this government.

Aboriginal language programming in the north could be one of the first victims. I have been told that cuts could also affect programs now being broadcast in Inuktitut. Inuktitut will be one of the two official languages of the new Nunavut territory. In fact it might be argued that cuts may violate the Nunavut Settlement Act since the federal government has an obligation to provide basic services in both languages.

French language services in northern Quebec could also be affected. CBC North provides a weekly news magazine called "Boreal Hebdo". There is a good chance that this program which is widely listened to may also be seriously affected and see its last

days. So we have aboriginal languages, French language, obviously English language programs all being affected by these cuts.

There is the red book promise, which I am sure we could debate at length. I think many other Canadians believe that during the last election the Liberal government and the current Prime Minister made a commitment to maintain funding for the CBC. But like many other promises during the last election, the Liberals promised they would stabilize funding for the CBC and they did not do it. During the last election the Liberals said they would scrap the GST and they did not do that.

Pierre Berton best summed it up when he said: "The Prime Minister promised us that he would trash the GST and save the CBC and then he saved the GST and trashed the CBC". That is Pierre Berton's comment. As we know he is a national hero and has supported national unity. He and many other national figures are now speaking out on this.

In the last election the Liberals said they would make jobs the number one priority but they did not do that either. In the last election they said they would renegotiate NAFTA and they did not do that. In the last election the Liberals made 21 promises to aboriginal people. So far they have kept only three and have shelved the royal commission report on aboriginal peoples. In the last election the Liberals said they would fund the national day care system to create 150,000 new child care spaces for children and they did not do that either. In the last election the Liberals said they would protect medicare and education from Tory cutbacks but by 1997-98 they will have cut $7 billion from those programs.

There are many challenges facing the country today, including the child poverty issue which we are all aware of and the 1.5 million people who are unemployed. What do changes to the unemployment insurance mean to the Liberal Party? It means a change of name to employment insurance. Who buys that? Less than half of the unemployed now even qualify for the benefits and social program spending has been slashed.

Now at the 11th hour we are going to hear some new promises from the Liberals. They are going to say: "You know those children who have been put into poverty? We are going to do something about that. We will start to do something about it after you have voted for us in the next election". It is shameful. It is a betrayal of Canada. Canadians will not forget these broken promises, just like the CBC cuts that were not supposed to happen.

I know all members of the House do not all agree on what should be done with the CBC, but at the same time it would have been important to ensure that everyone here could have debated this issue. We should have had a debate about something as fundamental as our 60 year old national broadcasting system. It is a system which in French and in English has served Canadians well. It serves our country well. Canadians need to have the opportunity to express their views.

Throughout the north CBC North is one vehicle. We have very good radio stations which operate in the Yukon, however, it is the CBC which provides that connection with national and international events. It makes the linkages to all parts of the country possible. It allows us as Yukoners and as northerners to speak with the rest of Canada and it allows the rest of Canada to speak with us. Surely that is what this country should be about.

We have seen the destruction of many of our national symbols. Just flying the flag does not hold the country together, as important as it may be. We need a vehicle which will allow us to express our identity and to express our soul.

I want to say that the emotional reaction to the potential loss of the CBC and Radio-Canada really underscores that the government got it wrong. There are certain values, there are certain principles, there are certain things that we need to maintain to preserve the Canada that we know.

Some people have argued that people should take their complaints to Mr. Perrin Beatty, the chair of the CBC board of directors. However, I would point out that the CBC board of directors does not have anyone on it from the north speaking for northern communities. That is why this issue needs to be revisited in the House of Commons. Every other region of the country has someone in that boardroom who can say, "No, we should do this. Yes, we should do this. Here is an alternative. Here is our regional concern", but there is no one from the north.

The cuts to the CBC, as I mentioned earlier, are more than just figures in a book. We all realize that there are stringent necessities in terms of budget. However, we also realize, and it has been brought home to us very well, that it is important that we not only have symbols of our country but that we have a way to talk with each other. CBC Radio-Canada has provided that. In the north it is a vital link for us in many areas.

I would like to close with the words of the New Democratic Party leader, Alexa McDonough, who does not yet have the opportunity to speak in the House of Commons, but in the new Parliament we will be happy to see her here. We know she is a representative who will keep her word, who will speak for the people of Atlantic Canada and for all Canadians. In November, Ms. McDonough said that the CBC is one of the most important institutions in this country and that it is capable of holding Canada together. I believe that from the bottom of my heart.

A national and international public broadcasting system is important to this country. To the north and to rural areas it is the vital link that makes us the country that we are.

I would like to end by asking for unanimous consent to refer this motion to the heritage committee for further study.

[Cbc North, February 4th, 1997]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the Minister of Canadian Heritage should proceed immediately to exempt CBC North from layoffs and funding reductions to the operating budget resulting from the $127 million reduction in federal funding to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation announced in 1996, as well as future cuts should they occur.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the issue of-

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 12th, 1996]

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. Of course I withdraw the word.

Today the Prime Minister is breaking not just a promise but a fundamental trust with aboriginal people in this country.

In 1969 he tried to assimilate aboriginal people with the recommendations of the white paper report. Now, 27 years later, changes are being introduced to the Indian Act which are not accepted by the First Nations of this country. Five hundred and eighty out of six hundred and thirty-three chiefs and councils say they were not consulted about this process.

Following the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples which came out just days ago, it is time for the government to finally listen to aboriginal people, to consult aboriginal people, and not to make unilateral changes to the Indian Act.

Aboriginal people are asking for a new relationship with Canada. Let us see the Prime Minister keep his promise this time.

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 12th, 1996]

Yes, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have heard a lot this week about the Prime Minister's broken promises. The Prime Minister broke his promise to Canadians on the GST, on jobs, on the CBC and on many other issues. Some Canadians even say he lied, but today he went well beyond broken promises-

[Indian Affairs, November 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for Indian affairs.

There is a great concern that the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples' recommendations will be shelved and not taken seriously or acted upon.

I would like to ask the minister if he, along with his government, would consider the immediate establishment of a special committee made up of representatives from aboriginal groups and parliamentarians to discuss and develop an implementation plan of the recommendations and, second, to encourage the Prime Minister to call a first minister's meeting in April 1997 to discuss implementation at that time and also to have the committee report before then.

[Royal Commission On Aboriginal People, November 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People's report was released today. The commission outlines some 400 recommendations which are an attempt to address the serious issues facing Canada today.

The commission's report is not about how to address what has been called the Indian problem. It is about restructuring the relationships between federal-provincial-territorial governments and aboriginal people to redress the current problems which have been created historically by those same governments.

The Prime Minister has two choices on this issue, shelve the report or assume real leadership. In 1990 the Prime Minister told aboriginal people that he wanted "aboriginal issues to be front and centre on the agenda of the Liberal government". Here is the chance to do it.

The government can begin by immediately establishing a working special committee of parliamentarians and representatives of aboriginal people to develop an implementation plan.

[Disabled Persons, October 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Acting Prime Minister.

Today the task force on disability issues released its report. Of the 52 recommendations, many were similar to those of the subcommittee on human rights and status of disabled persons which this government had previously rejected.

One of the key recommendations is that a Canadians with disabilities act be brought forward and enacted. It would ensure that persons with disabilities would have broad interpretation of citizenship in areas affected by the federal government.

What steps will the government take to respond to those persons with disabilities and provide an act like that and enact it before the next election?