Carolyn Bennett

[Tobacco Products, May 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Children and Youth. Today is World No Tobacco Day. Recently released figures show that smoking rates for youth are declining, but we have a lot more work to do, particularly with young women, aboriginals and in Quebec.

Could the secretary of state tell the House what the Government of Canada is doing to combat smoking among Canada's youth?

[Brenda Bury, May 14th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, last week we paid homage to a great Canadian prime minister by unveiling his portrait. Today I rise to pay homage to the great Canadian artist who painted this portrait.

Brenda Bury was born, educated and trained in England. She took an honours degree in fine art at the University of Reading where she studied under Anthony Betts.

Ms. Bury travelled to Canada for just over a year where she painted portraits, beginning with the then prime minister, John Diefenbaker. She left Canada after a short period and returned to England where she thought England's strong tradition for portraiture would improve her skills. In 1964 she painted Lord Mountbatten of Burma and it was he who later arranged for her to paint the Queen herself.

Ms. Bury returned to Canada in the 1980s and set up a studio in Toronto. Very shortly after her return, she found herself back in England at number 10 Downing Street to paint a lifesize portrait of Prime Minister Thatcher and her advisors in the Falklands conflict. Ms. Bury has also painted the Right Hon. Jeanne Sauvé, a speaker of this House.

I myself have had the privilege of sitting for Brenda Bury. I will never forget the magic and amazement the first time I saw my likeness revealed on the canvass. I am thrilled that her talent and skills are being recognized by the people of Canada.

[National Palliative Care Week, May 8th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform hon. members and Canadians that May 7 to 13 is National Palliative Care Week.

Hospice palliative care is aimed at relieving suffering and improving the quality of life for persons who are living with or dying from advanced illness. This type of care includes the person and the family in planning treatment and care so they can make choices based on knowledge and understanding.

Hospice palliative care offers social, emotional and spiritual support to the person as well as the family from members of a diverse team that includes physicians, nurses, social workers, home care planners, volunteers and other therapists.

Please join me in commending the dedicated volunteers, caregivers and professionals who provide hospice palliative care and the Canadian Palliative Care Association and its affiliates that are working to ensure the comfort and dignity of the dying and their families.

[National Nursing Week, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, May 7 to 13 marks the celebration of National Nursing Week 2001. This year's theme, “Nurses, Champions for Health”, is significant on two fronts.

The nurses of Canada truly have acted as champions, standing by, supporting and leading Canadians in a collective effort to maintain and improve health.

Their efforts in a very difficult situation have not gone unnoticed. Once again the people of Canada have said that they place more of their trust in nurses than in any other group of professionals.

Just as important as speaking up for patients, nurses have consistently voiced their concerns about the health of our cherished health care system.

During times of significant restructuring and upheaval, nurses in Canada have stood by both patients and the system. They have spoken loudly in defence of the system, especially in support of its public funding. This is at a time when the very same system appears to be extracting a cost from their own health and well-being.

I invite my colleagues to join me in acknowledging National Nursing Week 2001 and saying a warm thank you to the nurses of Canada, our champions for health.

[Persons With Disabilities, April 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, one of the real challenges of people with disabilities is that the programs affecting them cross all departments and virtually all three levels of government.

Could the Minister of Human Resources Development tell us what the Government of Canada is doing to help the four million Canadians with disabilities access the support and services they need?

[Summit Of The Americas, April 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in light of the tremendous public profile of Canada's hosting the summit of the Americas last week in Quebec City, could the Minister for International Cooperation please tell the House whether she thinks Canada is doing enough to meet the needs of the poorest of the poor in this hemisphere?

[World Water Day, March 22nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, today, March 22, 2001, many Canadians are celebrating World Water Day. Started by the UN in 1993, World Water Day is meant to raise the world's awareness of the importance of water and to bring attention to the 40% of our population that has no adequate drinking water.

I congratulate the efforts of one of my constituents, Pauline de Gonzague, who has garnered support for this year's celebration by converging interest groups including the Toronto Environment Alliance and the Festive Earth Society.

Water and health are linked in many ways and it is important to address the increasing need for adequate and safe water to protect both people and the planet. Concrete efforts are necessary to provide clean drinking water and improved health, as well as to increase worldwide awareness of the problems and the solutions.

World Water Day is a good opportunity to remember the importance of this resource.

[Modernization Of House Of Commons Procedure, March 21st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, some of what the hon. member is talking about is actually perception. I was thrilled at the last election to write single spaced on one page what I thought I had been able to do here.

The committees I had the privilege to sit on, whether it was the national health products committee, the committee on custody and access or the finance committee, was one of the best abilities for the government to go out to real Canadians and harvest good ideas. It was been extremely satisfying. We got to push the issues we wanted. It was like any board that one might sit on.

In caucus we fight for the things we really care about. We do not win all the battles but we go out as a united front. It was the same as any other board I sat on.

There is so much to do around here. There are so many issues that require real champions. It is quite clear that when the stakeholders and the citizens of Canada who must work in concert with us as politicians to sometimes work through a bureaucracy that has too much on its plate, we get to shine the light and move those things through.

I am hugely optimistic. I think the frustration is real, but there are serious ways that we can make a difference here.

[Modernization Of House Of Commons Procedure, March 21st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate you this evening as the chair of the special committee on the modernization of House of Commons procedure. There is no one better for the challenge of trying to obtain consensus. For us to move forward, it was interesting to hear that not only the government would have a veto on this committee. Everyone on the committee would have a veto, so I hope there will be lots of opportunity for compromise, change and getting good ideas through.

In every organization there must be ongoing efforts to make things better. In the private sector it is called CQI, continuous quality improvement, or TQM, total quality management. In government it is called parliamentary reform, a phrase that seems to mean something different to everyone.

We need to make sure that people understand this is not about a revolution from the backbench MPs. It should actually be an ongoing process by which we discover the optimal practices of the 301 citizens who come to Ottawa to try to best represent the 30 million citizens. It is about ensuring the public good by identifying the obstacles and sharing the solutions. Today's special committee is an extraordinarily important step.

One of my heroes, Ursula Franklin, talked about good government as being fair, transparent and taking people seriously. It has been worrying to a lot of us over the past several months that somehow the public has become disengaged. If one went to Israel and saw six million politicians discussing what happened yesterday in the Knesset, it would be understood why we here worried on a daily basis about the cynicism and apathy of Canadians. We have to always look at what we can do. Each of us has a responsibility to hand on democracy at least as thick as we received it, if not a tiny bit thicker.

People feel Canadian democracy needs some reintegration. The most obvious symptom of the need for reform was the steep fall in the election turnout on November 27. After drifting down an average of 2.7% per election, turnout dropped more than 5% for the 2000 election. This confirmed years of academic admonitions, politician's anecdotes and pollsters findings that Canadians were indeed disengaging.

In 1984 the national average was a 75.3% turnout in a federal election of which we were always very proud. Last year it was 61.18%, and even lower in Ontario. It means that we have to see what we can do.

Today's special committee is an important first step. The idea that we can move forward by consensus is of huge importance to us collaborating on this important challenge.

It is clear that rules are not enough. Changing only the rules of parliament will not change what happens here. As Robert Marleau said to the rookie school of the new members of parliament, we can change all the rules we want but it is the culture of the place that really matters.

I wear four different hats in trying to make a difference and in trying to make sure that things change. The first is in the House and in committees. The second is within our caucus, in trying to make sure that the culture is one that is respectful of the kinds of changes that people want to make. The third is in my riding. The fourth is within the Liberal Party of Canada. We need to work on all four fronts if we are going to have the desired effect that Canadians again begin to engage.

It is extraordinarily important that the caucus has evolved a parallel process in which we can also look at all the things that have been done and the telephone books full of papers that have been written on the topic of parliamentary reform. We should start to look not at reinventing the wheel but going forward with Canadians at our side.

As a caucus we need to be able to look at the party options, the role of parliament, the role of parliamentarians, as well as what this very important committee will do in terms of how the House of Commons operates, its procedures, standing orders, question period and all of those things. Private members' business has been discussed and will be an important part of the deliberations of this committee.

It is also extraordinarily important that we look, as the member from Winnipeg South said, at the role of technology and make sure that if we are indeed modernizing parliament that we do it with all the citizens as engaged as possible, both at committees and with members in their offices.

It has a huge ability to create the new kind of deliberative democracy that I think we are looking for. I was heartened to hear the minister of Indian affairs, who came to women's caucus today, talk about his amazing project in terms of his technological ability to be in contact with the bands and the schools in order to do his job.

We know we have to have a look at standing committees. There are ones that are working extraordinarily well in a very non-partisan way and with its eye on the goal. Others have been rendered dysfunctional. We need to figure out why that is. It is important that we look at standing committees. It is important that they deal with horizontal issues across parliament. Chapter 20 of the auditor general's report said how difficult that was. We look at having the standing committees can help us with that.

I as chair and members of the subcommittee on disabilities were thrilled that the auditor general thought our committee, which looked at the issue of disabilities across all ministries, had been helpful in that management.

When we look at caucus committees and their culture, it is important for us to look at, like the English and French parliamentarians, the purpose for us being here is not to try to get into cabinet. That culture of careerism has to stop. There are important things that people can do. Look at some of the ministers in other countries who actually give up their administrative roles in order to be able to do an important project. It is a culture problem. We need to make sure that people are not paralyzed by some fantasy of a role at cabinet.

It is really important that we look at the accountability of government. This is not just about what money we spend, but whether we get good value for it. With the chairman of the public accounts committee, I was thrilled to chair these round tables on societal indicators. We discussed how we could use the estimate process in a better way to make sure we were funding programs that worked and ones which would ensure we had safer streets, healthier populations and cleaner air. We also discussed how we could measure that and use that to build back the credibility of Canadians so they would know we were spending their money wisely. There are extraordinarily interesting things that can happen in terms of the accountability of our government and building back the faith.

It is also important that there be good supports. Above all things, the most interesting to me in parliamentary reform is the relationship we need to build with the citizens of Canada so they see this institution as relevant.

St. Paul's is an amazing riding. Forty per cent of the people have a university education. We have an amazing ability to engage. However, one thing I adored doing over this last month or so was taking the problem of cynicism and apathy of Canadians to the students of grade 10 in all the ridings. This was related to the citizenship engagement award. I asked them what they thought the problem was in terms of cynicism and apathy and what they thought we in the government could do differently to help them. I did this understanding that their knowledge of the technology was much better than mine and that maybe they could find us some web based solutions on which we could move forward.

It is clear that in all of the Ekos polling, Canadians believed that if we as parliamentarians could take the national problems to the people at the grassroots, we would solve most of our big national problems. We must figure out a better way of doing that. It was quite clear that Canadians felt the media, senior business leaders, lobbyists and interest groups had too much power. The Ekos poll noted that Canadians felt that parliamentarians had little power and that the average citizen had way too little power.

The challenge of democracy between elections is what we need to see. We need to see that it is not just about going to the polls. If we are not engaging citizens between elections they stop going to the polls.

In conclusion, the people of Canada have an enormous contribution to make in the development of public policy. We must try to involve them in a grassroots movement for democratic reform, which will produce lasting results.

[Member For Etobicoke—Lakeshore, March 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of one of our very own parliamentarians. Last weekend the hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore was honoured with three distinct awards for her outstanding contributions to her community and her country.

She, along with our colleague the hon. member for Parkdale—High Park, was the recipient of the Canada-Estonia Gold Order of Merit, which was awarded to mark the 83rd anniversary of the independence of Estonia.

The hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore was also recognized by the Canadian Association of Black Lawyers with their community award. This award honours her work in advancing human rights in the law and recognizes her role in mentoring and supporting others.

Finally, she was awarded the special Citizens Thank You Award at the National Archives of Canada. This award gives national recognition to Black History Month.

At the end of Black History Month, it is appropriate that we all take this opportunity to thank the hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore for all her tremendous efforts in advancing the causes of minority groups in our society. As a former chair of the national women's caucus, she has also been instrumental in bringing to the fore issues that affect women all across Canada.