Bill Casey

[Government Assistance, April 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food informed the House that he had sent 54 cheques to British Columbia farmers to cover the cost of poultry inventory that had to be destroyed because of a decision made by the CFIA to contain avian flu.

In a similar situation in Nova Scotia, woodlot owners cannot harvest their trees damaged by hurricane Juan because of the moratorium imposed by CFIA to contain the longhorn beetle.

Would the minister agree to provide exactly the same kind of compensation to Nova Scotia woodlot owners for their inventory as he did with B.C. poultry farmers?

[Government of Canada, April 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians should be reminded about how this Liberal government has had to make serious corrections after their policies turned out to be highly inequitable and simply unfair.

First, the Liberals provided hep C funding for a very limited group of people: those infected between 1986 and 1990. Finally, they had to expand the funding program after an outcry from victims and their supporters.

Then the Liberals expanded the veterans independence program to support widows if their spouse passed away on or after May 12, 2003. However, all those widows whose spouses died prior to May 12 were simply disqualified from those programs. Following yet another outcry, the Liberals were forced to make changes again.

And now our troops. The Liberals have given needed tax breaks to some troops, just some troops, for serving in dangerous areas but denied many others the same consideration. Again, they had to retreat and expand the program after the troops demanded fair treatment.

The Liberals should apply the principle of equality in all cases and stop trying to cheat Canadians who need the help when they need it the most.

[Income Tax Act, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly pleased to participate in the debate today.

I am surprised at how much response I have had in my own riding in support of Bill C-246. Twenty-three constituents have contacted me directly in the last few weeks. It is obviously a very worthy bill and I will be supporting it. I compliment the member for Prince George—Peace River for bringing the bill forward.

In my discussions with the people who have called me, I have been amazed to learn how much it costs to go through the adoption process, the difficulties one encounters and the endurance one needs to complete the adoption process. An adoption within the country could cost between $10,000 and $15,000. Internationally it could cost $20,000 to $30,000 or more.

It is not only the legal fees, the psychological studies and the travel that is involved, but it is the work that people have to go through. There is also the dedication and the time away from work. As one person said to me, it was a true test of endurance to go through the process. Certainly the parents are well rewarded.

It is an entirely legitimate request to have this deduction allowed. I will certainly be supporting the bill. I hope my party and all members will support Bill C-246.

This morning I called the parents of an adopted child before making these remarks. I talked with Roy Berliner from Truro. He and his wife Cathy have adopted two Chinese babies, Jasmine and Sascha. He described the problems and the challenges they went through in the adoption process. It was incredible. It cost an incredible amount of money. It is an incredible sacrifice of time and effort. However, they are so gratified with the outcome of having these two wonderful little girls with them now that it has made it all worthwhile. Still the tax deduction could help.

Mr. Berliner was wondering if the deduction could be retroactive. Hopefully we will get it through for the future, but it would be difficult to make it retroactive.

Mr. and Mrs. Berliner adopted Jasmine and Sascha, one in 2000 and one in 2003. The process is that people first apply, then go through a home study to be certified as qualified parents. Then they have to obtain an order for permission from the province of Nova Scotia. They had to contact a facilitator in China and travel back and forth. There is documentation, translation, filing fees at the China desk and in Canada. Finally, after all this process, there is a proposal that comes forth and then they actually start the application to bring the babies back to Canada.

The process is extremely expensive. It is extremely time consuming. The process requires a great deal of dedication on behalf of the prospective parents.

I understand there are 400 children in Nova Scotia from China. That number surprised me, but that is the number that I understand are currently residing in Nova Scotia.

On behalf of the Berliners and all of my constituents who have gone through the adoption process and all of the future parents that will go through the adoption process, I encourage all members to vote for the bill. Let us bring this very reasonable tax deduction into force.

[National Security, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, while the government is talking rhetoric, the port of Halifax has to buy its own boat. It does not have the resources to man it, to crew it, for waterside security. Meanwhile, Boston has the total force of the U.S. coast guard to provide waterside security.

How can a Canadian port that has to provide its own security compete with the U.S. ports? How can it maintain a high level of security if it is all done on an ad hoc basis, when the competition has the United States government and the U.S. coast guard providing its waterside security?

[National Security, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is demanding ports like Halifax to establish a high level of security as of July 1, but it is not providing the resources to do that. Meanwhile, its competitors, like Boston, have received millions of dollars in grants from their federal government. Boston has received three grants of over $5 million totally dedicated to security.

How can the Government of Canada expect Halifax or other Canadian ports to provide a high level of security and still remain competitive if their competition gets millions of dollars in help and the Canadian ports are left hung out to dry?

[Petitions, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to present this petition signed by 74 people from River Hebert in my riding. They are objecting to proposals by the post office to close down their community post office. They feel it will have a very detrimental effect on their community. They are asking the government to uphold the moratorium on post office closures.

[Public Service Employment Act, March 31st, 2004]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-510, an act to amend the Public Service Employment Act and the Public Service Employment Act, enacted by section 12 of chapter 22 of the Statutes of Canada, 2003 (area of selection).

Mr. Speaker, the bill would stop the government from using geographic criteria to determine a person's eligibility to have a job in the national capital region.

It affects almost all of us, including you, Mr. Speaker. Just today I took seven jobs off the Internet. These are seven jobs, with a wide variety of qualifications, for seven different departments. Only those people who live in the national capital region can apply for them. The people in Timmins—James Bay cannot apply. The people in Red Deer and the people in Cumberland—Colchester cannot apply. Even you, Mr. Speaker, cannot apply.

It is an offensive practice and I want to stop this discrimination by postal code and I want to stop it now with the bill.

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

[Airport Security, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, that does not respond to my question.

Moving right along, the government has chosen to focus its security efforts on cyber security intelligence and border protection. Meanwhile, ports like Montreal and Halifax see the priorities as completely different. The ports need funds now to establish uniform security coordination with U.S. ports. They need funds now for waterside security.

If the government wants to get value for the money, why does it not listen to the port officials and put the money where it is really needed?

[Airport Security, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, a couple of days ago, when the Deputy Prime Minister made a speech to the Canadian Club of Ottawa, she said that security at airports had been enhanced. She went on to say that CSIS, the RCMP and other agencies were continuing to share relevant information on a timely basis.

However the Auditor General blew her out of the water. The Auditor General totally disagreed with her today when she said that thousands of employees at airports have not passed examinations and they could possibly have criminal associations because examinations were not done. She also said that there was not sufficient sharing of information.

Why is the Deputy Prime Minister trying to mislead everybody?

[Sponsorship Program, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the piece of paper I am reading from is signed by Pierre Tremblay, executive director of Public Works Canada. Mr. Tremblay said in the letter that the Government of Canada would pay the fees of Compass Communications but the letter from Compass said Media/IDA Vision in Montreal would send the final bill.

Did the government pay commissions to Media/IDA Vision in Montreal or did it pay commissions to Compass Communications in Halifax, or did it pay commissions to both of these Liberal advertising firms?