Geoff Regan

[Student Loans, October 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased the hon. member did eventually conclude. After saying in conclusion about three times, it was nice to see that he finally came to his conclusion.

The government believes our competitiveness and therefore our prosperity depends on the skills and talents of individual Canadians. The policy choices we make today will have important consequences for the future. Based on that belief the federal government is ensuring access to student loans and increasing the amount of money students receive under the program.

We have approached the provinces to undertake pilot projects in areas like school to work transition and learning technologies because we know Canadians will be placing more and not fewer demands on the educational system in the future. The resources we use must be carefully placed for the greatest impact. Research partnership with provincial governments will develop new ways of bringing appropriate instruction and training within the reach of all Canadians.

Members already know we have to make the most of every tax dollar. They should also bear in mind there are few better investments to make with those tax dollars than helping our people to learn, whether they are children, teenagers, people in the workforce or people who want to rejoin the working world.

It bears repeating that the government and most Canadians place a high value on post-secondary education. Canada and Canadians spend a great deal of money on higher education. Every college and university student in Canada owes the taxpayers a great deal, but the taxpayers benefit from a well educated workforce.

Our college and university graduates repay the investment in many different ways. University graduates have an unemployment rate of 5.7 per cent; the rate of those who did not finish high school is more than 16 per cent. Post-secondary graduates earn about 40 per cent more than non-graduates over their lifetimes. Last year more than three million Canadians were on some kind of income security at one point.

In a time of constraint, allocating resources becomes very difficult. There is greater need and there are more contending voices. Under these circumstances a government is obliged to listen carefully before choosing a policy.

To justify support for higher education we can point to the fact that in the last three years there were 17 per cent more jobs for university graduates and 19 per cent fewer jobs for those who had not completed high school. By the year 2000, 45 per cent of jobs will require 16 or more years of education.

With that in mind we have improved the Canada student loans program. These measures reflect the concerns raised over the years by the public, the provinces and student groups. There are many reasons for extending the benefits of student loans.

There is no question that an investment in education now will reduce social assistance costs in the future. A sound education and access to training now will help following generations of Canadians to grow up in a more secure world. We must invest in a skilled workforce now to ensure that Canada and Canadians have real choices in the future.

The work has already started. New financing arrangements under the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act will ensure income sensitive terms for borrowers as they repay their loans. Lenders will assume greater responsibility in servicing and recovering loans.

Under the reform, students in similar situations will receive similar treatment in each participating province. Some students are worried that income contingent repayment will load them with a huge burden of debt. We made our intentions plain in the new Canada Student Financial Assistance Act.

Take a look at what we did. We created four new grant categories under the student loans act. We responded to the needs of part time students, students with disabilities, single mothers and women in certain graduate programs.

We want people to get a good education. Canada gets a high return from its investment in competent and well trained graduates. At the same time the government believes that those who benefit from post-secondary education must assume their responsibilities. When we make student loans for example, we believe those students are obliged to complete their studies and then repay the loans if they are able.

In his motion the member calls for the government to consider the advisability of income contingent repayment. With all respect, the short answer is the government is already looking at income contingent repayment.

In May and June the government moved the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, Bill C-28, through Parliament to royal assent. This act provides flexibility for ICR schemes. We are consulting with the provinces on possible pilot projects. The province of Ontario and the Department of Human Resources Development among others promoted and took part in a two-day symposium on income contingent repayment in later September. Work is underway with Statistics Canada to develop an economic model of ICR which will allow the testing out of various scenarios.

The question we must ask about ICR or any other proposal about higher education is simply will this measure benefit Canadians by bringing college and university studies within the reach of everyone who wants to attend?

The discussion of ICR is not taking place in a vacuum. As we all know, Canada's economic future will increasingly depend on our college and university graduates. The choices those students make will determine the country's ability to compete and our

potential to remain one of the best countries in the world, in my view the best.

These brief remarks can hardly do justice to the concept of income contingent repayment. What I can say to the hon. member is the government is always willing to explore new ways to do more with fewer resources. We are already taking steps to investigate income contingent repayment.

The reforms to the student loans program which are now being implemented do not represent the government's final word on ways to help Canadians finance their post-secondary studies. If there is convincing evidence that Canada would benefit from an income contingent repayment system the findings will speak for themselves.

We do welcome good ideas. As a nation we spend 2.6 per cent of the value of our entire economy on post-secondary education every year. That is a lot of money. It is also the highest percentage of any country in the world. From high school 60 per cent of Canadian students now move on to college or university. We should bear in mind in a given year two-thirds of students do not take out student loans. The majority graduated with under $5,000 in student loans.

When it comes to ICRs we have done our homework. At the same time some student associations believe that any benefits they receive from ICR loans would quickly be taken away by their provincial governments in the form of fee increases.

We all know that we cannot impose educational fee schedules on provincial governments. They have gone up in recent years. Let me make this point. Education and training are shared responsibilities. Governments can offer students a wide choice of opportunities but Canadians have an obligation to invest in themselves.

As a country we are willing to commit resources to education, but many Canadians still feel we are not getting the kind of graduates we need. We all face a new reality. When people stop learning they stop earning. We do not want to burden new graduates with huge debts. The new act makes that clear. We are working for a system that supports people who go to school, not one that penalizes their ambition.

Throughout their working lives many if not most Canadians will need to learn new skills. Before that can happen all of us must learn new attitudes as Canadians, as governments, as businesses and associations. The challenge is accessibility. Potential students may have all the ability and all the desire in the world but we cannot expect them to undertake their studies without the means to finance their education and a realistic way to repay their loans.

[Employment, October 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this week Atlantic Canadians were encouraged to pack our bags and head west to find jobs and quickly.

I have news for the hon. member for Capilano-Howe Sound. The government believes that all Canadians deserve the dignity of a job. Our position of respecting and supporting the various needs of Canada's regions has built this country. It was the farsighted immigration policy of Sir Wilfrid Laurier that helped build the west.

I want to remind all members that since last October there are 275,000 more jobs in the country; 26,000 of those jobs are in Atlantic Canada. This sends a strong message of hope to our region. There is hope for improving our economy.

The government is committed to Atlantic Canada. It is committed to all provinces. It is committed to Canada.

[Municipal Elections, October 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the fine men and women of Halifax West who put their names forward to serve as school board members and municipal councillors.

To those whose bids were unsuccessful, I extend my thanks and appreciation for their commitment to our communities, our schools and our children.

To the councillors elected last Saturday I offer my sincere congratulations and best wishes. I have enjoyed working with the town of Bedford, the county of Halifax and the city of Halifax on the infrastructure program. It is already paying big dividends in communities across the country with 100,000 jobs.

I ask all members to join me in congratulating the women and men who work so hard to make our communities better places to live in and our schools better places to learn.

[Bravery, September 29th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, last Sunday a man was saved from drowning in Prospect Bay by two brave men. Gary and Richard Peddle of Whites Lake in my riding of Halifax West demonstrated great courage as they pulled 74-year old John Laverdure from the water.

Mr. Laverdure, a neighbour of the Peddle family, was more than a metre under when Gary plunged into the chilly waters of Prospect Bay and pulled back to the boat. District 4 volunteer firefighters are also to be commended for aiding Mr. Laverdure once back to the wharf.

I am pleased to inform the House that John Laverdure has been released from hospital and is very well, thanks to the efforts of Richard, Gary, and the entire Peddle family. It is indeed heart warming to know that such acts of selflessness and bravery still exist.

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the hon. member that I certainly prefer it to grants. I am concerned about that size of a guarantee. I think we should see companies locating where they think is best.

Companies are coming to Nova Scotia. People like the quality of life we provide. They do not like having to sit in traffic for four hours on the 401 into Toronto, or what have you. Companies are coming for reasons other than government assistance. In fact we are seeing that governments at all levels are finding it harder to provide that kind of incentive.

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is a real challenge, as the hon. member knows, to define exactly in a few words or a few moments what the role of government is in our economy because it is a complex question. Certainly my view would probably be for a little bit more involvement than his view. My view would be that government has a very important role in terms of consumer protection. I do not know if he would put the same emphasis or as much effort in that regard as I would, but that is for him to answer I suppose. However, it seems to me that is an important consideration.

In Atlantic Canada there is a need for government involvement. There is a need for investment capital. There is a great problem in Atlantic Canada with the lack of that kind of capital. Many business people come to me with the problem of getting capital to expand their businesses. Those businesses are doing well but they cannot quite get to the next level and cannot find the capital in Atlantic Canada to expand.

That is why agencies like ACOA which provides about 40 per cent of the business financing in Atlantic Canada are so important. In fact overall it has been very successful. We do hear about the failures which are sensationalized by the media, but the large majority of its programs and efforts in creating jobs and assisting businesses to expand and create more jobs have been very successful.

I gather sometimes there is the impression in the rest of Canada that all we do in Atlantic Canada is fish or collect unemployment and that is a great myth. It certainly is untrue in my riding where there are many businesses and people are hard at work doing a variety of things. Things are being done for example in high technology at Dynatek which produces computer memory systems. Pratt and Whitney produces some of the best aircraft jet engines in the world. There are Litton Systems and Farmers Co-operative Dairy and many others. People are working hard.

I agree that government cannot be the one to create the jobs. It is absolutely true that we have to rely on the private sector to do the main job creation. I also agree we have to make efforts and we have to reduce our debts so we can get off their backs, but we cannot do it overnight.

At the same time there is still a role for government to assist those companies in areas like R and D and international information. We receive information from our embassies about what is happening overseas, what opportunities are available for our companies elsewhere. There are many roles government can play.

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak on Bill C-46, the Department of Industry Act.

Bill C-46 creates a remarkable organization with wide ranging responsibilities and a far reaching mandate. There are many tasks in the government's agenda for growth and job creation that it will perform. Not the least of these is the slate of initiatives the Prime Minister announced to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Quebec City on September 18, namely: to improve the climate for entrepreneurship; to help business profit from new technologies; to seek expanding markets; and to promote the tourism industry that is so important in Halifax West and throughout the maritimes.

The successful pursuit of that agenda requires a concerted effort of all major players in the economic development game. The Department of Industry created by this bill is well designed to rally that kind of effort. Incorporating within one organization the very functions of industry, technology, science, communications, foreign investment, and consumer and corporate affairs permits a powerful focus of related interests in the formulation and implementation of our economic development strategies. Some may fear that this new department will not do as much in individual areas like communications, corporate affairs or consumer affairs as under the old setup. An impression of that sort is just that first and last, a mere impression.

While titles are important symbolically, they must not be mistaken for substance. Bill C-46 could not possibly include the names of all the functions in its title. In substance we do have a department of industry, science, technology, communications, investment, and consumer and corporate affairs. To include all of its concerns we would have to add small and medium sized enterprises, tourism, sustainable development and many other areas. These are all key functions in the pursuit of an innovative economy and in the pursuit of growth and job creation.

However the essence of the this new department is not found in the title. We have a Department of Industry. What does that name symbolize? Industry is not merely heavy industry nor manufacturing. Industry is whatever provides wealth and well-being in our society. Teachers, accountants and fishers are as much an essential part of industry in this country as employers, for example Litton, Pratt and Whitney, Farmers Co-operative Dairy and Dynatek in my riding.

We have to consider the interests of consumers as well. We want to give Canadian consumers the assurance that although the word "consumer" does not appear in the department's new title, their interests are still central to the concerns of the Department of Industry.

Many of us will recall when the federal government in the seventies decided to create the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Many will recall there was much concern that putting the affairs of consumers under the same roof as corporations was a bit like putting the chickens in with the foxes. Those fears proved groundless, as we well know.

In retrospect it was wise to incorporate the concern for consumer interests into policies and decisions affecting corporations. It is now recognized by governments and corporations more and more that attention to consumer interests must underpin sound corporate strategies. Increased consumer awareness, increasing competition and the relentless demand for ever higher quality of goods and services are leading businesses in the direction of more attention to consumer needs and consumer service.

This bill on the Department of Industry is built on that principle of common interest. The bill extends the same logic to the consideration of all economic development strategies.

By making the Department of Industry responsible for consumer policy, the government guarantees that the voice of consumers will be heard and considered when policies affecting the Canadian market are discussed in cabinet.

The Minister of Industry has a clear mandate to act as the advocate for consumer issues at the cabinet table. To do that effectively he has to seek input of consumers and advocacy groups across the country on all issues affecting growth. The Consumers Association of Canada for example plays a strong leadership role in consumer education and in raising concerns about products.

With advancing technology, consumer issues are becoming ever more complex. Issues like the access and cost for consumers to the information highway, the protection of privacy, electronic funds transfer, and biotechnology and genetic engineering are all new complex issues that require close examination from the point of view of consumer interest.

In the light of these complex issues an integrated process is needed to ensure that consumer concerns are incorporated as early as possible in policy development. In this way consumer protection efforts can focus on preventing problems before they happen instead of exposing them after the fact.

The government's priority is growth and job creation, but these goals must depend on efficiently functioning markets. Our consumers share with the business world a common interest in achieving that kind of efficiency. Both should welcome initiatives that help our businesses to be more efficient, effective and competitive.

The recently announced internal trade agreement which will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of trade in goods and services and the movement of people among provinces and territories will save businesses and governments millions of dollars. It is good for consumers.

All of us who take part in the economy have an interest in the actions of government directed toward consumer protection and promotion of competition. These actions not only right wrongs, they also enhance our overall economic performance.

We should all be glad the twin pillars of consumer and corporate affairs are under the same roof at Industry Canada. This bill in my view is well designed to help guide the efforts of Team Canada. I recommend its speedy approval.

[Employment, June 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the House of the government's strong commitment to job creation for Canadians and ensuring that Canadians get first crack at opportunities.

A case in point is the Nordic Challenger , a shuttle tanker which moves oil from offshore Nova Scotia to Canadian and foreign ports. It is operated by Lasmo Nova Scotia Limited. In past years the crew aboard this vessel consisted solely of foreign workers. In April of this year the exemption for the use of foreign workers aboard the vessel came up for renewal.

In spite of Lasmo's attempts to justify the hiring of only 12 Canadians, the government stood firm and refused to extend the exemption. The previous government routinely renewed the exemption, claiming it was acting for the benefit of the economy.

The government's major priority is jobs for Canadians. That is why the Minister of Human Resources Development and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration stood up for Canadian workers and refused to allow foreign interest to carry the day.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, May 24th, 1994]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your indulgence. I thank the hon. member for his question.

Next time I will try to listen more carefully. I tried to listen in French because I wanted to make sure I understood, but I was trying to translate. I apologize for that.

It is an interesting idea that we should transfer this whole responsibility to the province, but I think we have a joint responsibility. People from my part of the country believe very strongly that we need to have a strong education system all across Canada, that we have an interest across this country, whatever province one is in, in having students coming out of post-secondary education who are well educated and have had access to education all across this country. They look to the federal government to be part of that system, to be part of providing and ensuring that access.

To relegate it entirely to the provinces is not what people are asking for in my view. In fact, they are asking for us to be involved and to play a role. For instance some of the provinces lack the financial wherewithal to overcome these problems if they did do it on their own.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, May 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I was not able to hear entirely what the member said as I had a problem with the translation. However I want to point out that I know there has been a lot of-