Lynne Yelich

[Equalization Program, March 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, today the finance minister's provincial counterpart and the opposition finance critic from Saskatchewan are in Ottawa to speak before the Senate finance committee and demand equal treatment for their province.

The government's approach to equalization has to be consistent and has to be based on a sound, fair formula. This inequity is unacceptable for the future of Saskatchewan and for all Canadian provinces.

There is a united voice in Ottawa today. Saskatchewan continues to make its case. Will the federal cabinet minister listen to what his own province is saying and will he take action?

[Alzheimer's Disease, February 16th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak to this worthy motion in front of the House.

First, I would like to applaud the member for Thornhill for bringing the issue to the fore and, more important, for recognizing the need for the federal government to develop a national strategy on Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.

Alzheimer's disease typically affects older Canadians, attacking and destroying brain cells. This disease ravages the mind. As a result, it impairs memory, insight and judgment.

Current statistics indicate that there are over 420,000 Canadians who suffer from Alzheimer's. That is nearly one out of every 10 seniors. In my home province of Saskatchewan, approximately 18,000 residents are currently suffering from Alzheimer's or a related dementia. Furthermore, as our population ages, these numbers will likely triple in upcoming decades. The cost of this debilitating disease to society has been and will continue to be immeasurable.

However, the cost is not only a monetary one. Alzheimer's disease brings with it a much greater emotional cost. As anyone who has witnessed the effects of Alzheimer's disease on a loved one will say, there are few afflictions which cause such heartbreak. According to recent studies, the effects of one individual with Alzheimer's will reverberate on the lives of 10 to 12 family members or friends.

The impact that Alzheimer's disease has on the family of the individual diagnosed is, in a word, devastating, for not only does it contribute to a slew of physical ailments, it takes away the most vital mental capacities of a loved one: their judgment and their memory.

The slow pace at which Alzheimer's begins to take over an individual is especially heartbreaking. The life expectancy for those with Alzheimer's is typically 8 to 10 years after the first symptoms have been detected. Patients usually do not die from the disease itself but rather from secondary infections like pneumonia that take over as the body's organs decline. Immediately before death, patients are mute, bedridden and exhausted.

Watching one's own mother or father, husband or wife slowly slip away into the darkness takes an immense emotional toll on loved ones. It alters the normality of everyday life so that nothing seems normal again.

As there are so many affected by this disease, I would like to address the impact that Alzheimer's has on the everyday lives of those who serve as primary caregivers. These caregivers are typically family members: daughters, sons, husbands, wives, brothers or sisters, people with a deep personal connection with the individual affected by Alzheimer's, people who have the ability to read their every slight sign or movement. These people do not apply for the job of caregiver. There is no financial reward. This is truly a labour of love.

The demands on them are great. The caregiver's role constantly changes. They are at various times a teacher, a nurse, a maid, a cook, a cleaner and a chauffeur. The everyday routine of life we take for granted is interrupted. For instance, late at night when most of us are fast asleep, caregivers are tending to a loved one who may be waking up constantly, confused and scared, needing a steady reassurance to calm their fears.

The caregiver's life is engrossed in servicing the needs of the individual. Little time remains for one's own personal life, leisure, activities or holidays. To cope with these challenges requires one to push one's inner physical, mental and spiritual strength to the limit.

Over time, the caregiver is steadily robbed by Alzheimer's disease of the one thing they want from their loved one: recognition. As the disease erodes the mental capabilities of the patient, the caregiver is often given a blank stare of bewilderment from a person they have known and loved for most of their lives, such as a wife looking at her husband of 50 years knowing that he does not even know her name anymore.

Even more distressing for the caregivers is the realization that for all their efforts the end result is predetermined. The father, mother, husband or wife they have spent a lifetime with will become increasingly distant, a shell of their former selves. Few things in life are conceivably as heartbreaking as such a painful realization, yet thousands of Canadians are caring for loved ones with Alzheimer's, enduring much sacrifice and emotional strain.

Understanding the experience of those affected by the disease and their caregivers is but one step. It is imperative to examine and to build upon existing initiatives throughout the country in order to have a national strategy for Alzheimer's. This strategy should ensure that sufficient funding and other measures are available at provincial and regional levels.

This national strategy must encompass a variety of issues relating to Alzheimer's. For instance, there are many financial implications for someone who assumes the role of caregiver. They may have to give up employment while still having to pay a mortgage and support their family. A national strategy should examine programs at the federal level to see if they could be improved to meet the unique requirements of caregivers.

Those suffering from this disease, their caregivers, doctors and other health care professionals must be at the forefront of the consultation process in developing a comprehensive strategy to combat Alzheimer's disease.

Ideally the consultation process should identify areas Canadians can work on to ensure that the best possible care and support are available for those dealing with this disease. Working together in partnership with all relevant stakeholders, an effective response could be developed.

Furthermore, as the groundwork is laid for a national strategy, we must look at ways in which the federal government can work with the provinces and territories in a variety of areas like support for caregivers, increasing public awareness and scientific research.

Similar consultation processes are already beginning on a smaller, more local level. Communities are getting together to share ideas and strategies to assist those with Alzheimer's and their caregivers. For instance, in the next few months, the Alzheimer Society of Saskatchewan will be conducting retreats designed to achieve such goals. These are initiatives that should be commended and encouraged under any program.

It is time for Canada to recognize the growing need to address this serious disease and develop a national strategy to combat Alzheimer's. I urge all members of the House to support the motion.

[The Vatican, February 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, today, as His Holiness John Paul II returns to the Vatican following a brief hospitalization, I am deeply privileged to have the honour of expressing, on behalf of my colleagues, the most sincere wishes for continued good health.

I would also like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude for the profound affection he has shown Canada over the years. His Holiness has graced our country with his presence three times, visiting big cities, small communities and remote areas.

Many will fondly remember his most recent visit to Toronto for World Youth Day 2002. For these moments we are grateful.

As Roman Catholics around the world and across our country enter into the solemn Lenten season of spiritual reflection, we should pause and contemplate the Holy Father's message of peace and understanding, a message which has touched the lives of Canadians of all faiths.

Today our thoughts and prayers are with him. May God bless the Holy Father, John Paul II.

[Petitions, February 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, my constituents from Guernsey, Drake, Jansen, Watrous, Plunkett and Lanigan are asking us as parliamentarians to protect the definition of marriage.

The petitioners urge that the definition of marriage be defined as the lifelong union between one man and one woman. They state that it is the best foundation for families and for raising children.

The petitioners pray that Parliament will define marriage in federal law and that it be the lifelong union of one man and one woman.

[Equalization, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance, following equalization talks, suggested that Saskatchewan is not nearly as hard done by as it makes out. However, the Vanier Institute of the Family has released figures showing household incomes are stagnant, debts are rising and the savings rate for Canadian families has dropped to zero.

The residents of the finance minister's home province of Saskatchewan are even worse off. They have had a negative savings rate in each of the last four years. That is a far cry from the situation 20 years ago when the typical household was saving about 20% of its disposable after tax income.

Families are crumbling under the financial pressure. As their bank accounts dwindle, so does their sense of security for the future.

The Liberal government's tax and spend policies and the gross waste and mismanagement of the last decade have contributed to the cash shortage, and it is particularly hard on low and middle income families who are paying the price.

It is time to put money back into the hands of the hard-working Canadians who earned it.

[Excise Tax Act, January 31st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak this morning on Bill C-259, an act to amend the Excise Tax Act.

This bill was introduced by my colleague from Vancouver Island North. It would end the discriminatory excise tax on jewellery, a luxury tax that discriminates, a 10% levy paid by manufacturers on the sale price of items manufactured in Canada and by importers on the duty-paid value of imports. Exceptions include religious articles, watches that cost less than $50 and gems and jewellery that cost less than $3.

This tax, which was first imposed in 1918 after the first world war, is an outdated tax that no other industrialized nation in the world imposes on its jewellery industry. It is time for the government to recognize the need to eliminate this unfair tax.

Canada's jewellery industry is made up of 5,000 companies, most of which are small, private, family owned businesses. From an economic perspective, it is a $1.2 billion a year industry that employs 40,000 Canadians.

Let me give members some facts. Canada is one of the world's largest leading diamond producers, with all indicators pointing toward potential for future growth. In 2004, 40% of world diamond exploration expenditure was dedicated to the search for diamonds in Canada. We now rank third in the value of global production of rough diamonds.

Canada could strengthen its international position even further by encouraging and advancing domestic manufacturing involving diamonds and other sectors of the jewellery industry. By supporting this bill, we are encouraging domestic jewellery manufacturing instead of burdening the industry with such an archaic tax.

The excise tax addressed by Bill C-259 discriminates unfairly against the jewellery industry, which is the most heavily taxed consumer sector in Canada apart from alcohol, tobacco and gasoline.

The luxury label cannot be used as an argument any longer. In fact, jewellery is a commodity that is broadly purchased by all segments of Canadian society, from the very poor to the very rich.

A large part of the tax is collected from low value jewellery purchased by ordinary Canadians. According to the Canadian Jewellers Association, lower and middle income households account for more than 50% of jewellery and watch expenditures.

Whereas a $10 pair of earrings and a $500 wedding band are taxable, there is no luxury tax on a $250 bottle of perfume, a $2,000 suit or an $80,000 car.

The repeal of this tax would allow the jewellery industry to be on an equal playing field with other so-called luxury industries that are not subject to this discriminatory tax.

The excise tax on jewellery and watches is hurting small businesses. More than 90% of jewellery firms have fewer than 20 employees. These small businesses are subject to higher costs of financing inventory. The jewellery industry has considerable job creation potential, particularly as a cottage industry. While other industries cannot sprout up or survive in remote and rural areas, these small jewellery firms can and do succeed, creating Canadian jobs.

We are also killing jobs through the tax because its favours imports rather than domestic jewellery manufacturing. Imported jewellery is taxed on its duty-paid value when it enters Canada. This value is significantly lower than the taxable value of similar items on which domestic manufacturers pay the tax. Domestic jewellery manufacturers face lower profit margins and they lose to imports.

Canada has some of the best diamonds in the world and yet the excise tax makes Canadian diamonds more expensive at home than anywhere else in the world.

Another hit to the economy occurs when the excise tax is passed on in the form of higher consumer prices. Canadians are enticed to purchase jewellery and watches on their travels south of the border or on trips overseas and they use their personal exemption of up to $750 for a one time, one week absence.

Cost reductions from eliminating the tax would in part be passed on to consumers, which then would lead to increased jewellery sales, industry growth and jobs.

It is also important to consider the black market and how removing the jewellery excise tax could have an impact in reducing the incentive to smuggle jewellery.

One study found that the excise tax may account for more than 50% of the price difference between a smuggled piece of jewellery and a similar item purchased legally in Canada.

Bill C-259 would help Canadian manufacturers get back the market share that gets lost to the black market. Another study shows that the personal smuggling of jewellery from the U.S. and elsewhere, which is very difficult to police effectively, may cost Canadian jewellers up to 15% of their market. Again, Canadian jobs are lost there.

Furthermore, this tax is complex and difficult to administer. As manufacturers pay the tax, complications arise in constantly applying definitions, determining accurate valuations for tax purposes, and defining what constitutes manufacturing. For example, the tax can apply to plastic imitation jewellery, any articles made in whole or in part of coral or natural shells, and items made of gold or silver, except gold-plated ware for the preparation and serving of food or drink.

The flaws of the tax make it prone to evasion and avoidance, which also results in a significant loss to the government of GST and income tax revenue.

These same complexities and problems were also shared by the federal manufacturers sales tax. However, the difference in the case of the manufacturers sales tax was that its flaws and the structural weaknesses of administering the tax eventually led to its removal in 1991.

In addition to lobbying efforts from the jewellery industry, the Auditor General has also questioned this tax. The September 1996 Auditor General's report described a number of practical problems obstructing the fair and effective administration of the tax. Moreover, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance has twice recommended eliminating the tax.

In 1996 and most recently in October 2004, in a report on small business tax measures, the tax was called an anachronism that no longer serves any social policy objective. Nor does it fulfill the qualities that should be sought in a tax: equity, efficiency, ease of administration, and transparency. It is time for Canada to join the rest of the industrialized world and eliminate this unjust and discriminatory tax.

In closing, I would like to mention that the MLA from Great Slave applauds our member for Vancouver Island North for introducing this bill. He says, “The Northwest Territories has been blessed with diamond resources that now make us and Canada one of the leading producers in the world”. He says that the Northwest Territories has taken “strong stands to ensure that significant benefits from diamond development accrue to northern residents”. As a result, he says, residents have seen four diamond cutting and polishing plants established in the City of Yellowknife. He applauds and thanks the member for bringing this legislation forward and he can only hope that all members of the House will support this bill.

Let us support the creation of jobs and investment in Canada by repealing the excise tax on jewellery. I urge all members to support Bill C-259.

[Youth at Risk, December 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago Delores Bird was found dead in Saskatoon following a night of drinking and taking pills. Alone and wandering the street, she was looking for a place to sleep. Delores had dropped out of school. Her mother was out of town. She was left to fend for herself. She was a child. She was 11 years old.

This is by no means an isolated case. In Saskatoon alone it is estimated there are 1,000 other children like Delores Bird, out of school and on the streets. Every one of them is at risk.

Delores's death must not go unnoticed in this House and in our communities. The tragedy of her case must not be lost in jurisdictional wrangling.

I urge all parliamentarians to raise their voice in outrage and to act in order to ensure that no other Canadian child dies like Delores did.

[First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act, December 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is important for me to ask this question, because it has been a very important subject at the meetings of our Standing Committee on the Status of Women these past few weeks. We have been having different groups come in and give presentations. The biggest concern we have heard is that we are passing legislation in the House without any type of gender analysis, without any type of analysis that tells us how legislation is going to affect women.

Some women coming to our status of women committee meetings are from the aboriginal groups. They have a lot of concerns. I would like to know how this bill is going to address the concerns that the aboriginal women have been bringing to our committee, particularly their concerns about property rights. Yesterday we heard a lot of concerns about not having enough shelters for a lot of the women who are trying to get away from violence, from domestic violence and from violent relationships. We also have heard a lot of concerns about not having representation of women on councils.

I am wondering if any of this has been taken into consideration. It looks like we are going to be spending quite a few of the next months listening to more of these presentations. I am wondering if this bill has been analyzed for gender.

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the member across says yes. Of course, they agree that they are. I again have to refer to history, and history tells us that these things probably are not addressed.

We just went through a real schmozzle in Saskatchewan again with a Métis election. They are asking the federal government to intervene. By the past actions of the government, it has not dealt well with that. Going back over 100 years, it has been unable to do some of the simple things like fair elections and accountability. The province of Saskatchewan probably has example after example.

Again, I sat as a member on the status of women committee. We can ask the aboriginal groups have come forward. The parliamentary secretary has suggested that the agreement is well thought out and will serve the people well. I invite her to come to the status of women committee to listen to the women who would challenge her greatly. They have asked about their status. A royal commission studied this 10 years ago. They have asked why that has never been implemented? They have asked how the government has addressed the Amnesty International report on violence against aboriginal women?

Just by its mere history, it will tell us that I do not think there is much hope that accountability or fair elections will be addressed.

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, there is cause for concern. I sit on the status of women committee. Last Thursday many groups came forward and talked about how the government had failed the aboriginal people. The Métis people have come forward. They have not been recognized. They were concerned about the government and how it had not even acknowledged some of their problems. This has been ongoing for over 10 years. They have been recognized as a peoples, but they are not treated as Métis people.

As these women spoke, I wondered what the government had done for the aboriginal women in the Tlicho agreement. I had asked the minister, who said that we did not have to worry about it, that it would take care of this. However, according to the aboriginal groups that spoke to the committee last week, the government failed miserably. It has not helped the Métis people to be recognized nor has it helped with violence against women. In the Amnesty International report about violence against women, the government has not even paid its bill on that agreement.

That is my concern when it comes to any of this because of the government's record and past history in these agreements. The people themselves wonder if the government will come clean with what this agreement means to aboriginal women and to aboriginals as a whole. Will they have a conclusive agreement? It is important that it be conclusive.