Anthony Rota

[Teen Suicide, December 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring awareness to the issue of teen suicide. According to Statistics Canada, suicide accounts for 24% of all deaths among 15 to 24 year olds and 16% among 16 to 44 year olds in our country.

In the words of my constituent, Chantal Fleming, who lost her only son Ryan to suicide:

Until your life has been devastated by the suicide loss of your child, family member or friend, a person can never truly comprehend these statistics; they are simply too chilling for our minds to understand.

We must break the silence on teen suicide. We must also look to provide services and support networks to those who need it most, teenagers and young adults. Furthermore, we need to develop better programs for those who are bereaved by the suicide of a loved one.

In memory of Ryan Fleming, I call on all hon. members to help raise awareness of this devastating reality and to work together to help develop and improve long term support solutions.

[Elimination of Intolerance and Discrimination, November 22nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, November 25, 2006, is the 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.

This declaration, which has worldwide importance, is of particular interest to the Baha'i community. This is because of the continuing discrimination and persecution displayed toward the Baha'i in Iran. The Baha'i teachings focus on unity and equality of all peoples and all faiths with the elimination of discrimination of every kind, encouraging all peoples to have the benefit of higher education.

Sadly, the Baha'i youth in Iran are being denied many of these fundamental freedoms. Representatives of the Canadian Baha'is are deeply involved in the United Nations and are especially active in the areas of human rights.

I encourage Canadian UN delegates to make relieving the suffering of the Baha'i spiritual community in Iran one of their priorities.

[Veterans Affairs, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I remember the promise the Conservatives made and they broke it.

The minister has confirmed that the government has no intention of honouring this commitment. In fact, at the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, the Minister of Veterans Affairs had the gall to tell Canadians that it was never promised in the first place, when it was very clearly laid out in the Conservative platform.

When will the government keep its promises to veterans and war brides?

[Veterans Affairs, November 9th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative election platform misled Canadians when it promised that:

The Conservative Party would immediately extend Veterans Independence Program services to the widows of all Second World War and Korean War veterans regardless of when the Veteran died or how long they had been receiving the benefit before they passed away.

The Conservative government voted against extending the benefits to these widows. This is yet another broken Conservative promise.

Is this the minister's way of honouring veterans and war brides?

[Canada Elections Act, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the electoral system is the machinery on which Canadian democracy was built. However, it must be reviewed occasionally and we need to trust it.

However, one of the things that we need to look at is the accuracy of the voters' list that is put out. That is something we often question, so it is nice to see that something is being put in place to make it as accurate as possible.

What happens occasionally is that we have people saying that they should be on the list but that they cannot be or that they are not there. There seems to be a problem. It is okay to bring some information but sometimes we have someone there who will vouch for someone. We have seen it happen in the past where someone comes with a busload of people and says that he or she is vouching for all these people. A reasonable limit needs to be put on the number of people one can vouch for.

How did the member determine how many people a person could vouch for? What is a reasonable number and what are the limits under the bill?

[Remembrance Day, November 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as Remembrance Day approaches, I would like to salute the many volunteers who are participating in the annual poppy campaign. I would particularly like to highlight the work of countless veterans who are distributing pins and collecting donations, often in very bad weather.

In 2005, the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 23 in North Bay raised more than $45,500 through the poppy campaign. The money was shared between veterans care, bursaries, donations, charities and service officer education.

This year Branch 23 hopes to raise even more funds for these worthwhile causes.

Boxes of poppies have been placed in many schools and businesses. Some legions are even campaigning door to door.

On behalf of all members, I would like to thank everyone participating in the annual campaign and encourage Canadians to buy a poppy in memory of Canada's fallen heroes. We will not forget them.

[Rural Mail Delivery, October 23rd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on Motion No. 170 this morning on the issue of rural mail delivery.

My colleague, the hon. member for Oak Ridges—Markham, has been working very hard to ensure that Canadians living in rural areas are being provided with door to door delivery and I commend his efforts.

Last week the intergovernmental affairs minister said in an Ontario newspaper that the government would take all and any measures necessary to ensure that rural mail delivery continues. This is welcome news.

However, I am concerned that we have not yet heard from the transport minister on this very important issue. As the minister responsible for this issue of rural mail delivery, I find it disturbing that he is not championing this cause.

Furthermore, Canada Post continues to stress that it is developing new criteria that will determine whether mailboxes are safe or whether they can still receive service. According to Canada Post, rural boxes that are deemed unsafe will lose home delivery. In other words, while the government is saying one thing, Canada Post is saying something completely different.

A growing number of my constituents are being affected by the changes in service. One example involves a couple from a rural community, Powassan, in my riding who received several notices from Canada Post asking them to move their mailbox across the road from where it is currently located. The couple is reluctant to comply with the request because in addition to being seniors citizens, they are visually impaired and crossing the highway every day would put them at risk of being hit or given this risk, it would really make it difficult for them to get across and get back.

Imagine an 80-year-old going out to get his mail every day.

Going to the end of the lane to a highway is no problem, but having to cross the highway at age 80 is unacceptable.

In many other instances, no notice was given to rural citizens before their mail service was interrupted. Imagine going to the mailbox one morning and realizing that mail is no longer being delivered to the door. Sadly, this has become a reality for many Canadians living in rural areas. Rural citizens depend on door-to-door delivery every bit as much as their urban counterparts and, in many cases, even more so.

This is about providing a service to Canadians, and having Canadians receive mail. This is not about a matter of convenience for Canada Post. Eliminating something that is not easy or something that may be a little more expensive than the ordinary, should not be an option. It is very important that rural people receive service, especially one as essential as Canada Post, even if it costs a bit more.

Rural communities are already at a disadvantage in terms of high-speed access to Internet. Reduction and elimination of door-to-door delivery risks creating even greater isolation from the rest of the world. Many residents who have been accustomed to receiving home delivery for decades are inconvenienced by having to drive to get their mail.

Again, what we are talking about is not just going a short distance. People in communities in urban areas get in their cars and drive maybe three or five minutes to the closest post office to get their mail. People in rural Canada, in rural settings, have to drive sometimes half an hour or an hour to get their mail. To do that every day is very difficult. When we think about it, we have an aging population having to drive for that long a period.

There something else, as well. We talk about maximizing the cost efficiency and what it takes to deliver mail. When one person delivers mail, that person is in one vehicle, which is environmentally friendly. However, if we have 50 people leaving their homes daily and driving 20 minutes to an hour to pick up their mail, all of a sudden we are creating a carbon load. This is something we have to look at, as responsible Canadians and responsible global citizens.

I recognize the fact that unsafe working conditions exist for rural mail carriers. Furthermore, I believe it is imperative that Canada Post deal with these concerns in a quick and efficient manner.

The motion urges the minister to direct Canada Post to restore traditional rural route delivery and protect public safety. There are a number of ways of achieving these results. My colleagues have already listed many of these, but I will repeat them because they are important.

One is to have vehicles equipped with steering wheels on the opposite side. It sounds simple enough, and they exist. Why not have the right equipment for our workers?

Another way is to move problematic mailboxes to better locations. I talked about the elderly couple in Powassan. Moving the mailbox across the street is not the solution. Maybe moving it a bit over one way or another, or even raising it a bit, would allow this couple to have it on the right side and have it accessible.

Another way is to have two employees per vehicle. That is an expensive option, but it is one of the options we have to explore.

I understand that this has already been undertaken, but perhaps arrangements should be made to have some vehicles pull into a driveway. That might be an option as well.

Another way would be to have employees get out of their vehicles to put the mail in the box.

These things sound a little more expensive but, again, they are a small portion and they make a big difference.

One of the things mentioned, and I think it is very important, is to ensure all vehicles have reflective strips and lights. For years vehicles have not been up to par. They do not exactly have all the proper accoutrements to make them safe.

Another way is to ensure adequate training, such as manoeuvring that takes place when they are delivering mail, on how to get in and out. It sounds very simple, but given the right directions, that would make things a lot easier.

One thing that really concerns me about all of this is it seems to be more about Canada Post cutting costs than it is about delivering of service. When I think of Canada Post, I think of a service to rural Canadians, urban Canadians, to all Canadians. It is an essential service and it has to be maintained. We are not here to have services cut at the whim of Canada Post.

Today, I urge Canada Post and the government to promote and keep rural delivery to all Canadians, in all of Canada.

[Canada Elections Act, September 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the question earlier about a concern that I truly have. I can see the issue being a real problem down the road.

I would like the hon. member sitting next to me to comment on a couple of things. One would be on priorities. The other is that the provincial elections in Ontario have been set for a certain date as have municipal elections. We know exactly when they are going to happen.

My concern is that if a minority government all of a sudden falls just before a municipal or a provincial election, two elections would happen at the same time. This would cause a lot of confusion. I do not see anything in the bill that would prevent this. There is a clause that allows for three days' movement, but that does not make any change to a whole election campaign.

Would the member be open to discussing an amendment that would allow that to be changed? I am not sure exactly what the parameters are. I have identified a weakness in it. Unfortunately, I do not have a solution.

I like fixed election dates; I think they are a good idea. However, I am really concerned that if there is an election at the same time as a municipal or provincial election and they are both held at the same time in perpetuity every four years, it would cause real problems not only for the parties, but also for the voters. It would be very confusing.

The other question I have is on priorities. There were five priorities and now it is down to four. Where does this come as a priority? It does not seem to be terribly high on the list. I never saw it before. All of a sudden it is a priority. It is the first item that we are talking about. Could you comment on that please?

[Canada Elections Act, September 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening closely. I like what I hear and it makes a lot of sense, but I have a real concern about fixed dates. I think back to 1988, when municipal and federal elections took place at the same time. At that time, the government fell and elections went on. My concern is that I do not see anything in the bill, and I hope there will be an amendment, so that this would not happen.

My big fear is that at some point the federal government will fall due to non-confidence during a time when there is a municipal election. Municipal elections now are scheduled every four years in Ontario. What would happen then is that in perpetuity, until the next non-confidence vote takes place, we would have elections happening at the same time at the municipal level and the federal level. The same thing can happen at the provincial level, because Ontario now has a fixed date. It all depends on when that non-confidence vote happens. My big concern is that we would have two levels of government having elections at the same time and it would cause a lot of confusion.

What we are trying to do is mix a congressional system, like those in the United States and other countries, with a parliamentary system. I have a concern when we start blending those two things and do not look at the consequences, because we solve one problem but we may cause 500 more. That is my concern. Other than that, I really do not have a problem with fixed date elections. Maybe the member can comment on what we can do to prevent that from happening.

[Patrick Fortin, June 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Patrick Fortin. Patrick was born on June 26, 1978, a severe hemophiliac. To manage his bleeding disorder, Patrick required biweekly infusions. As a result of contaminated blood, Patrick was diagnosed HIV positive in February 1986 at the age of seven.

A talented athlete and gifted musician, Patrick enjoyed life to the fullest. His positive outlook, courage and determination in the face of adversity inspired everyone he met. At every birthday and each full moon, Patrick had only one wish: a cure for AIDS. Unfortunately, Patrick passed away before that cure was found.

Yesterday the inaugural Run Walk 4 Patrick took place in North Bay, attracting over 500 participants. Patrick would be proud that through his enduring spirit we continue to raise HIV-AIDS awareness and funds for a cure.

On behalf of all hon. members, I would like to congratulate Patrick's parents, Christine and Christian, his family and all organizers for hosting such a worthwhile event.

Patrick was with us for only a short time, but for those of us who knew him, our lives are forever changed.