Joe Peschisolido

[Human Resources, October 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, obviously that is not the case. An audit on HRDC's Internet development completed in May said the following:

There is uncertainty around the protection of data, personal information, secure channel, privacy and access.

The minister must know it is absurd to allow anyone, anywhere, to apply anonymously for a social insurance number.

Would the minister today put our national security first and stop pushing the offer of social insurance numbers on the World Wide Web?

[Human Resources, October 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House would be co-operating with the government if we had something concrete with which to co-operate.

The auditor general says there is a flagrant abuse of social insurance numbers across Canada. Yet HRDC is still considering offering social insurance numbers on the world wide web. This means anyone, including international terrorists, could apply for a basic building block of Canadian identity online. Will the minister today simply drop this frightening idea?

[Quebec/New York, A Show for Life, October 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday 12,000 people attended an event at Montreal's Molson Centre, to express the solidarity of Quebecers with those who lost loved ones in the September 11 attacks on the United States. The $20 entrance fee went to the Red Cross for the victims' families.

The show, “Quebec/New York, A Show for Life”, brought together a number of celebrity performers, including Céline Dion and Luc Plamondon.

Quebec Premier Bernard Landry and Opposition Leader Jean Charest both attended, joined in solidarity behind the event.

On behalf on my party and all Canadians I congratulate the organizers and Quebec performers for their compassion and generosity. They have set a great example and made this show the great success that it was. Bravo.

[Taxpayers' Bill Of Rights, June 13th, 2001]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-390, an act to confirm the rights of taxpayers and establish the Office for Taxpayer Protection.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this taxpayer bill of rights in the House today. The bill creates an office for taxpayer protection, headed by a chief advocate who will ensure fairness and protection of the rights of taxpayers.

The bill would protect the taxpaying public from abuses of the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency. Ensuring this protection in law would make our tax collection system fair for all Canadians.

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

[Taxation, June 12th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, when the price of gas goes up the government's gas tax revenues go up as well because of the 7% GST that is on top of the cost of gas and the other excise taxes.

We are going into a long, hot summer of rising gasoline prices. The federal government does not need the co-operation of the provinces to eliminate the GST on gas. The government can help reduce gas prices but it has not.

In fact an analysis has shown that if it were not for gas taxes Canada would have cheaper gas than the United States, but this federal government refuses to act. I call upon the Minister of Finance to make a difference in gas prices by removing its GST component.

[Auberge Grand-Mère, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in February the official opposition asked, under access to information, for any documents on the Auberge Grand-Mère from the Shawinigan HRDC office. We were told that there was more information available but that it needed more time in order to consult with the RCMP.

Will the Prime Minister today clarify the RCMP's involvement in the Auberge Grand-Mère?

[Auberge Grand-Mère, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the Prime Minister to answer a question on the Auberge Grand-Mère.

Has the RCMP been involved at all in this matter and, in particular, has the Prime Minister's Office been in contact with the RCMP regarding the Auberge Grand-Mère?

[Income Tax Act, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to speak to Bill C-222.

I would like to tell a story about my growing up in Toronto. My father was a labourer who worked very hard as a painter. His tools were very important to him because they were very expensive and they were his key to advancing in Canada. I can therefore relate to mechanics and to individuals who want to move ahead for themselves and for their children.

I must admit that I am somewhat surprised by the government's reaction to this private member's bill. The government talks about upward mobility and fairness. It talks about educating and training our citizens for the future. Here is a very simple, cost effective and equitable way of doing just that.

We have a situation where mechanics because of their jobs are forced to buy tools. This is a condition of their employment. It seems common sense to me and basic that these individuals are acting like business people. Yes, they are on an employment contract but they are acting as entrepreneurs.

In our tax code we put forth certain elements to deal with the situation. Members on the other side have argued that it is an employment contract. However I point to other sections of the tax code that deal with musicians, loggers or chain saw operators where this type of provision is there to take into account their situation.

I know mechanics in my riding of Richmond who have had to spend $40,000 to $50,000 to get tools for their trade. The bill makes sense, particularly at a time when Canada needs trained mechanics and blue collar workers. I read in a report the other day that there is a shortage of over 60,000 workers in this field alone.

Perhaps this is not the ideal way of dealing with the problem. However it is a reaction to a Liberal government that deals with the rhetoric of upward mobility and education of the workforce but which, when it comes to dealing with concrete situations, does not act.

There is a small, family run automotive parts business in my riding. It has six or seven mechanics. They would love to hire more individuals but they simply cannot find skilled, trained people to hire. Hiring new people would have an impact on the economy. I am not an economist, but I believe there are similar situations across the country.

My colleague from Quebec has talked about situations he knows of personally. I urge all members in the House to go beyond party affiliations and look at the merits of the bill. The bill does not deal with professionals who are making $200,000 to $300,000. It does not deal with individuals who have access to lobbyists. There will not be many wine and cheese parties to discuss this type of thing. The individuals the bill will affect are the backbone of our country. They are the small, middle class people trying to move up.

I am speaking passionately on the issue because it touches me. My parents came here from Italy with nothing. They used this type of work to move up the ladder that I call the Canadian dream. At the end of the day, when we vote as a House, I urge all members to look at the merits of the case and vote positively for it.

[Immigration, May 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, what is outrageous is the non-answer that is coming from the minister of immigration.

Regardless of what has been said there is no rhyme nor reason coming from the decisions made within the immigration system. The system is clearly broken.

When will the minister of immigration undertake real reform of the system which will ensure that legitimate individuals are allowed in and criminals and assassins are denied entry?

[Immigration, May 18th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Sklarzyk family has been ordered out of Canada mere weeks after the immigration department became aware of the situation. Yet a man wanted for political assassination in the Philippines has been allowed to stay in Canada for administrative reasons.

What message does the minister believe this sends about Canada when our system deports hard-working, law-abiding people and does nothing about assassins?