Bruce Hyer

[The Environment, May 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, to reiterate what we have just heard, the Conservatives claim to have been working hard to preserve the Experimental Lakes Area, when nothing could be further from the truth. People from across Canada, and especially in the Kenora riding, know very well that the Conservative efforts to kill off the ELA ran into a solid wall of public and scientific opposition. They are now attempting to spin to do damage control.

Saving the ELA will go down as one of the few times in the life of the government that science and reason actually prevailed, despite this administration's best, or perhaps we should say worst, efforts.

Very soon, a new government will work to restore the damage done by this administration and will recognize that building a sustainable 21st century economy depends on the innovation and expertise that begins with science. Then, hopefully, we will resume having policies based upon facts and real science rather than policies based on blind faith in trickle-down, pseudo-economic theories.

[The Environment, May 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, rarely have I had the opportunity to stand in this place and celebrate a victory for reason and science under this regressive government, but that is exactly what I have the honour of doing here tonight.

Just over a month ago, with its interim, life-support agreement set to expire at midnight that day, I stood here and asked if the Conservatives were again attempting to finish off the Experimental Lakes Area.

Operating since the late 1960s, the chain of 58 lakes in northwestern Ontario that make up the ELA has been responsible for breakthrough science on acid rain, eutrophication, mercury contamination and climate change. It has deepened our understanding of the impacts of human activity on freshwater ecosystems and the boreal forest.

Well, I am relieved to report that it is still alive, albeit needing intensive care for quite a while yet.

The people of northwestern Ontario, along with the rest of Canada and the world, will continue to benefit from the science done at this remarkable facility. It has been saved by the efforts of scientists from around the world, citizens from across Canada, the minority Government of Ontario and the superhuman efforts of one special young scientist.

Dr. Diane Orihel has led this charge from the beginning. She deserves immense credit and respect for keeping the ELA alive.

Dr. Orihel's work stands as a testament to what one informed, passionate and determined person can achieve. All Canadians who believe in science owe her a debt of gratitude.

As she wrote in The Globe and Mail, on April 1:

This is potentially an exciting new chapter in the history of the ELA. Inhibited by years of abuse and neglect under successive federal governments, the ELA could finally realize its great potential.

However, it should never have come to this. We are grateful to the IISD for taking over operations at ELA.

Since those Conservatives came to hold 100% of the power in 2011, with only 39% of the vote, literally thousands of science jobs have been eliminated, with thousands more pending on the chopping block.

The cuts to scientific programs and research facilities are too long to list tonight, although the blog called, “The Canadian War on Science: A Long, Unexaggerated, Devastating Chronological Indictment”, has done a great job of bearing witness.

When that administration is finally run out of Ottawa in 18 months, we will begin the job of fixing the mess the Conservatives have left behind: environmental laws will have to be rewritten, the power of the PMO reined in, and a balanced and sustainable 21st century economy created.

Scientific evidence, consultation with Canadians and respect for science must be brought back into policy-making.The Conservative's most lasting legacy may well be the destruction of federal scientific capacity. Respected publications like The Economist, The New York Times, and Nature are all criticizing our administration for muzzling, cutting and outright eliminating what were once world-leading science programs.

It could take a generation to recruit, train, hire and otherwise reacquire the scientific expertise that the current Conservative administration has so foolishly discarded, and this is a tragedy.

When economic competitiveness in the 21st century depends on leading the way with scientific and technological expertise, how will those Conservative members explain to their constituents and to all Canadians why and how this administration has set Canada's scientific and economic competitiveness back a full generation?

[Democratic Reform, May 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, some amendments to the unfair elections act are finally being accepted after overwhelming criticism of the bill from experts and ordinary Canadians alike. However, the government still refuses to give investigators the power to get to the bottom of election fraud. Why not?

Why can the commissioner not report publicly to Parliament instead of just to the minister? Even more important, the bill still fails to actually grant Canadians fair elections by fixing our unfair electoral system and excessive party discipline. Canadians clearly feel that their MPs work more for parties than for them. If the Conservatives are serious about change, they will allow the important reform act to pass with a free vote and most importantly, they will let Elections Canada consult with Canadians about what voting system changes they want, including more proportional voting.

It is time that every vote counted equally.

[Democratic Reform, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the hon. member is in error about the position of the NDP on this issue. It has always been in favour of proportional representation and still is.

Bill C-23 will be back before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs late tonight. The leader of the Green Party will be tabling substantial amendments to this very flawed bill and we all hope that Bill C-23 looks very different when it returns to the House.

My question this evening has not really been answered. I and hundreds of thousands of Canadians would like a proper response. Will the Conservatives fix the crisis in Canadian democracy resulting from the antiquated and anti-democratic electoral system that discards half the votes cast in every election?

There is no evidence of voter fraud in Canada, but there is lots of evidence of electoral unfairness in the way the government abuses an already flawed electoral system.

I will ask again. Will the Conservative government ensure equal and effective votes for all Canadians through a more proportional electoral system?

[Democratic Reform, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on March 25, I asked during question period whether the minister would fix the real electoral problem and make our electoral system more proportional. The answer I received at the time was completely irrelevant to the question that I posed. I hope the parliamentary secretary will attempt to provide a more on-topic response this evening.

Unamended, Bill C-23 could have prevented thousands of Canadians from voting, and likely violated the charter in the process. I am pleased to see that the minister of state has finally agreed to amend at least some of the most anti-democratic aspects of this legislation, but only after thousands upon thousands of Canadians stood up against this bill.

However, the fact remains. The real problem facing Canadian democracy is our first-past-the-post, antiquated, unfair and undemocratic electoral system, which delivered 100% of the power to the party that received less than 40% of the vote in the last election. And what is the primary symptom of that? Many Canadians believe their vote will not count, and increasingly they remain home on election day. Too few voters is our problem in Canada, not too many. As many voters stayed home during the last election as voted for the governing party. This appears to suit the Conservatives just fine.

What is the solution to this crisis in our democracy? The answer is to move to a more proportional voting system where every vote counts, and all Canadians have a genuine opportunity to have an equal say in selecting their government. First-past-the-post probably harms the electoral prospects of the Greens more than any other party. For example, in 2011, despite receiving almost 600,000 Canadian votes, the Green Party of Canada was only allowed one member in Parliament. In a proportional system where every vote counted, as in the vast majority of countries with real elections, these same 600,000 Canadians would have elected 12 Green members to Parliament.

Yet our electoral system does not target only Greens; it disenfranchises voters from coast to coast to coast whose ballots, whether cast for Conservatives, New Democrats or Liberals, are not reflected at all in the make-up of the House of Commons today. This huge group of Canadians of all political stripes cheated out of their votes adds up to approximately half of all eligible voters. Can we really be surprised that 40% of Canadians could not be bothered to cast a ballot in 2011?

However, there may be hope. I see hope in the thousands of Canadians who spoke out against the Conservatives' unfair elections act, forcing them to accept amendments to Bill C-23. I also see hope in the widespread support that has greeted the important private member's bill, the reform act by the Conservative MP for Wellington—Halton Hills, which would allow MPs to return to working for their constituents.

After eight years under this administration, these questions are increasingly understood as central to the health of our democracy. Electoral reform and restraining the centralized power of the Prime Minister and other party leaders must be understood as central to fixing the crisis in Canadian democracy and restoring Canadians' faith in our government.

I ask this question again. Rather than attempting to invent some fake plague of voter fraud, are the Conservatives prepared to fix the real problem facing Canadian democracy? And what are they prepared to do to ensure that every vote actually counts?

[Petitions, April 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have hundreds of petitions from Canadians urging that despite sexual orientation, people be allowed to give the gift of life to those who need organ transplants or blood transfusions. The petitioners remind us that to refuse people the right to donate on the basis of sexual preference is unconstitutional.

[Petitions, April 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from people from Thunder Bay and across Canada who want our government to recognize the importance of study of aquatic ecosystems and to continue to financially support science, particularly science in the Experimental Lakes Area.

[Rail Transportation, April 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, our passenger trains are dead or dying. Routes from Montreal to Saint John, Toronto to Cochrane, Barrie to Orillia are all dead; Toronto to Sarnia has been cut in half. The route from Sault Ste. Marie to Hearst will die on April 30. The route from Toronto to Niagara is dead. The route from Montreal to Gaspé is suspended. Both the Ocean and Canadian trains are threatened.

Why are we the only country in the G20 that is not investing in passenger rail?

[Democratic Reform, April 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing I would like to say is that I wish we did have a majority government, but we do not. With 39% of the popular vote in Canada, the Conservatives cannot be said to have a real majority, as most democracies in the world have.

I believe most MPs value democracy and want to see it improved in Canada. That is one reason the reform act is an exemplary bill. It is a non-partisan initiative to improve the way our democracy works. It is something every member should vote for, regardless of political stripe. It would improve the functioning of our democracy for everyone, voters and MPs alike.

I know most members from every party here would like to vote for this bill. In my opinion, Bill C-559 must pass if we are ever going to find our way back to democracy and responsible government. It would give MPs the power to escape party servitude; to think, speak, and vote for their constituents and their conscience; and to put the best interests of Canada ahead of hyper-partisan party tribalism.

[Democratic Reform, April 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I stand to address a vital issue here tonight, perhaps the most vital issue before the House in decades. The issue is our parliamentary democracy and how dysfunctional it has become, and the critically important efforts of the member for Wellington—Halton Hills to fix it with his reform act.

I have a long and diverse resumé, but Parliament is one of the most dysfunctional organizations I have ever seen. Many Canadians are not happy with the excessive control that party leaders' offices have over everything from what MPs say to how they are allowed to vote. No greater example exists than the dictatorial control by the current Prime Minister's Office. We have devolved into one of the most rigid top-down party systems in the western world. Political parties here control everything, at the expense of constituents.

The three main parties often muzzle their MPs. One of the reasons I left my former party was that I was punished for voting the way I promised my constituents over four election campaigns, with the full blessing of our leader at that time. I was not violating party policy or anything other than the whim of new leaders and backroom apparatchiks.

Party leaders have become far too powerful, mainly because they can withhold their signature on anyone's nomination papers. They hold this like a poised club over every MP to keep MPs toeing the party line.

It was not this way when Canada was founded. Parties are not even mentioned in the Canadian Constitution. From 1867 to 1970, candidates ran for office on their name and voters had to know who stood for what before marking a ballot. Then Pierre Trudeau changed the Elections Act to give party leaders the final say over nominations and override the wishes of local ridings. We also saw Pierre's son do this recently. Since then, backbenchers have been reduced to “mere trained seals”, in the elder Trudeau's own words.

A key part of the reform act would restore local democracy and effective representation by ending the requirement for nomination papers to bear a leader's signature. Also, the reform act would give MPs a say in who leads their caucus. All these reforms would rebalance power back toward the British model and make Parliament work for Canadians again.

I was seconder of the reform act. It is an important first step, but it is only one of the many reforms needing to be made to Parliament. In 2012, I introduced Motion No. 404 to end party leader signatures on nomination papers. I introduced Motions Nos. 391 and 340, proposing randomized seating in the House and allowing MPs from more than one party to co-sponsor legislation. These changes would make politics in Canada less about win-lose combat and more about compromise and co-operation.

A key needed reform is to fix our dysfunctional voting system. Motion No. 304 would involve Canadians from coast to coast in any changes, to add an element of proportionality to voting.

Finally, my Bill C-512 would clarify the rules around the confidence convention, to make our fixed election date meaningful, allowing the splitting up of huge omnibus budget bills and empowering MPs.

The reform act is one of the most important pieces of legislation in half a century. Will MPs dare, and be allowed, to vote for it?