Ken Epp

[Parliamentary Reform, November 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I actually enjoyed the speech that the member opposite gave today. I wish I would have had the opportunity to ask the previous speaker this question, but I will ask this hon. member as he obviously comes from the same side of the House and I would like his point of view on it.

The previous speaker mentioned something about take note debates and how valuable they are. He included in that the idea of a parallel parliament. I would like to have the member's comments on this topic, because as we know it is difficult enough to time the schedule of members of Parliament so that they can attend the various committee meetings and all other duties that MPs attend to and also attend debates. I think it might be very appropriate for him to indicate right now, due to the silence of all of the members on the government side, how eager he thinks members would be to have yet another parliament to attend, another massive committee meeting, and whether it even would be practical to expect anyone to actually attend.

[Senate of Canada, November 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, Senator Nick Taylor reached the magic age of compulsory retirement on Sunday. Now the question is, who will replace him?

In the past the Prime Minister has snubbed his nose at the people of Alberta, who have elected their choice of senator. It requires no constitutional change to appoint the person the people have chosen. It takes only the will of the Prime Minister.

It was very interesting to hear the Prime Minister's statements when he was seeking the support of the people before the 1993 election. He told the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce “You want a Triple-E Senate and I want one too”.

Later he promised to dismantle the patronage system of appointing senators and he said he would establish an elected Senate within two years of the Liberal Party forming the government. Maybe the Prime Minister's problem is that he cannot count. He has been here for nine years and has done nothing.

When will the Prime Minister appoint Bert Brown, the people's choice?

[Question No. 21, November 18th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I regret to interrupt but I am unfortunately unilingual and right now there is no translation in my earpiece.

[Question No. 21, November 18th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I find it incredible to hear Liberal members today talking so much about individual freedom when it is the same Liberal government that puts farmers into jail for the vicious crime of marketing their own grain, the grain they raised themselves, at their own expense and at their own risk. The Liberals have a law in place that says that they may not sell it to anyone other than the government dominated Wheat Board monopoly.

It is just incredible that we are talking here about the invasion of that privacy.

[Canada Evidence Act, November 1st, 2002]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-284, an act to amend the Canada Evidence Act.

Madam Speaker, the title of the bill hardly says what it is about, but it has to do with dates. Since we have moved into the years 2000, dates have become very confusing. For example, what does 4/2/3 mean as it pertains to a date? Is that 4 February, 2003? Is it April 2, 2003? Is it 2004, February 3? Is it 2004, 2 March? When there is a conflict or when there is a possibility of misinterpretation of dates in the Canada Evidence Act, the bill would provide that the default would be year, month, day. This is the international standard to which Canada has acceded.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Income Tax Act, November 1st, 2002]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-283, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (deduction of property taxes paid in respect of a principal residence).

Madam Speaker, this bill is an important one as we are taxed to death in this country. My bill could actually be called the freedom from double taxation bill because we all have to pay income tax on money that we then subsequently use to pay our property taxes. The bill would permit homeowners to deduct from their taxable income the amount of money spent on their municipal taxes.

This is a much overdue bill, and I hope all members will support it when it comes before the House.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Committees of the House, November 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we saw an amazing spectacle in the House. In a desperate attempt to hang on to every vestige of power, the Prime Minister, the government House leader and the whip pulled all the strings they could to prevent MPs from actually being able to select the chairs and vice-chairs of committees.

It is widely expected that one of the backbenchers may become prime minister. Is it the Prime Minister's view that when a backbencher morphs into prime minister, he magically attains supreme wisdom, to know all things, with exclusive knowledge of who would be the best chair?

[Supply, October 31st, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I say this sincerely because I have always held this member in high regard and great respect. I hope he takes the time to watch the video of his speech today and observe the string of internal contradictions.

He talks about wanting to have this thing extended for 15 days so the committee can study it and get it right, yet how often has he been in charge of invoking closure in the House when exactly what we have tried to do, by promotion of debate and exchange of thoughts, is to try to improve a bill?

Another contradiction was in terms of democracy. It is bizarre that a member of the House should stand up and say: I am going to help promote democracy by making sure that the people that the Prime Minister appoints are elected by the members of the committee. That is just the opposite of democracy. It is a contradiction.

It would be much more honest on the part of the government if it is going to continue with the way it is right now to simply appoint the chairs and be done with it. It is a facade to say that here is the appointee and then force the members of the committee to vote in favour of that appointee as a way of putting up a facade of democracy for it. I have much more to say but I know my time is up.

[Ethics, October 31st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the Prime Minister to listen really carefully to this question, which is directed to him. On June 11, the Prime Minister wrote to the ethics counsellor instructing him to table an annual report by September 30. To date we have not seen a report.

Assuming that the ethics counsellor submitted his report on time, we can only conclude that the Prime Minister is sitting on it. He has something to hide. Is he going to table it in the House today?

[Health Care System, October 30th, 2002]

Madam Speaker, I would like to underline the necessity of bringing taxes down. My family and I went through exactly the same thing, working day and night. I carried two jobs. I worked until July 1 just to pay my tax bill and then for the rest of the year I worked for my family. I did not have time to exercise. How do members think I got into the shape I am in? It was because of a lack of exercise. The reason for my lack of exercise was because I had to work to pay my bloody taxes. That is the message.