Peter Goldring

[Petitions, October 27th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, after 54 years of denial of equality of opportunity for our merchant navy veterans a Liberal committee offered an empty handshake.

The petitioners disagree with that. They ask the Liberals for compensation for merchant navy veterans for the years of denial of equality.

[Merchant Navy Veterans, October 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, after 54 years of denial of equality of opportunity for our merchant navy veterans, a Liberal committee offers an empty handshake and a promise that the veterans will be studied by college kids.

Who would seriously believe that this would be fair? The minister must do more to resolve the issue. We simply cannot have this bitterness taken to the graves of our veterans.

Will the minister confirm that he will provide these veterans with a more respectful and just settlement?

[Vimy Ridge, October 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, while the sky rained shells and brave men died, 100,000 Canadians moved forth in a hell of inhumanity, testing their mettle and mortality of soul.

They advanced on unconquerable Vimy Ridge. On that same ridge tens of thousands had died before in vain British and French assaults. The goal—now Canada's turn.

Canada's finest young men won the contest that day, a victory for all the world to see. The greatest victory of World War I, Vimy Ridge, would enter Canadian history on April 12, 1917. Many would say that Canada took birth that day, born into the world of nations with respect, born by the blood of our young, born through their determination and skill. The spirit lives on to this day. It lives on in the name and scholastic pursuits of l'Académie Vimy Ridge in Edmonton.

[Supply, May 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the government had indicated earlier that one of the factors in the shipbuilding industry is high labour cost.

The hon. member across the way mentioned earlier the low cost of Korean labour. Could he comment on whether it is really a multiple factor on labour where we have higher income taxes, a lower productivity level or a varying productivity level that would be a factor?

The factor here of wages does not necessarily come into this discussion at all. After all, we are also competing on the world market in shipbuilding with England and Germany whose wage levels are relatively high. Could the hon. member comment on the taxation portion and productivity portion, and whether it is the actual root wage itself?

[Supply, May 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the true way to develop and encourage the industry is to approach the problems. This would not necessarily be through straight subsidies.

The problems seem to be apparent. I think we could relate back to possibly the 1960s when I first was an adult and the first time I voted. It was noticeable to me at that time that the Canadian dollar was $1.10 to the American dollar and the taxation level was far lower than it is today. Yet somehow there was some help to our shipbuilding industry at that time.

These are the things that we should be addressing as well as the very significant problems of levelling the international trade situation by possibly approaching a repeal of the Jones act. It seems to give unfair discrimination against Canada to its shipbuilding industry. These are the areas we should be approaching to resolve the taxation system and levelling the playing field on international trade.

[Supply, May 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the motion proposed by the hon. member for Saint John. This is a votable motion as should be the case in most activities in this House whether initiated by the government or as is the case here, by an individual member.

I will be supporting this motion. My comments will serve to demonstrate how two parties with supposedly different political outlooks can arrive at an agreement as to an outcome. Where we have disagreements is with respect to the specific processes by which mutually agreed upon outcomes can be arrived at.

By this motion the hon. member seeks the approval of this House to call upon the government to develop a new national shipbuilding policy to support the revitalization of the Canadian shipbuilding industry. The member asserts in her motion that historically Canadians have been viewed as among the finest shipbuilders in the world.

The motion addressed here today involves an assumption that our current shipbuilding industry is in a somewhat spent state and hence requires revitalization. This would rank well in the annals of understatements. There is also in the hon. member's motion an implicit view that the shipbuilding excellence and related technological advancements associated with Canadian shipbuilding are both in peril. I am in agreement with these views as well.

I have been able to develop a degree of familiarity with Canada's wartime marine history. I, along with the member for Saint John, have been a staunch advocate of the position of our merchant marine veterans who seek equivalent recognition, benefits and compensation for denial of equality relative to their wartime service in defence of Canada. Twelve thousand men and women served. Over 70 ships were sunk out from under them.

If we think of the history of Canada, the history of its ships comes easily to mind, the Bluenose being the most famous of Canadian ships. In my own family history, at the turn of the century Captain Richard Goldring sailed a commercial schooner aptly named the Maple Leaf from Port Whitby, Ontario.

However, in speaking of the nature of shipbuilding in modern day commerce we are talking about ocean-going supertankers and mega passenger vessels of such size they cannot be accommodated by even the Panama Canal. Some are specifically intended for one ocean travel only. Vessels of this magnitude need to be developed and constructed by world class companies.

World class companies become so by building on their experiences. Such experience exists in the Canadian shipbuilding industry. We must develop an approach to build on such experience and to assist in the creation of world class shipbuilders that are properly reflective of our history and expertise.

We were the leaders in the construction of wooden ships. Tall ships were the daily occurrence in Quebec City and Montreal with the St. Lawrence River being the portal of entry, a route of imports and exports, both cargo and human. Immigration to Canada was the result of our shipbuilding skills. The face of our nation is very much due to our shipbuilding efforts. Most immigrants came to Canada in Canadian built ships.

What happened to cause a decline in the shipbuilding industry to its current state? I suggest that the shipbuilding industry has been lost twice in Canadian history and in both cases the loss has been primarily due to research and development deficiencies.

The first decline occurred in the transition from wooden to steel ships at the turn of the century. At the time, Canadian shipyards in Quebec and the maritimes built most ships of commerce used by England and many other countries. Then we lagged behind Britain where the steel industry was already well integrated with the shipbuilding industry.

At the time, our history was that of exporting our natural resources to be manufactured elsewhere. The one notable exception, being of course wooden shipbuilding, was where Canada excelled. The interrelationship between the steel industry and the shipbuilding industry in Canada did not occur readily. The technological transfer from wood to steel simply did not happen.

I have said that we lost our shipbuilding industry twice. The second occasion was after the second world war. During the war our shipbuilding expertise was as renowned as the member's motion would have us believe. After the war however, it seemed that once again the tendency toward looking inward and to not exploit competitive advantages took hold yet once again.

We know for example that many of the difficulties of our merchant navy veterans had to do with the fact that after the war it was assumed our shipping industry would continue to be robust and that the merchant navy veterans would have no job worries. We know that within five short years after World War II many of our merchant mariners were unemployed. Shipping interests had focused on other parts of the world, taking much of their shipbuilding needs with them.

Once again the technological transfer from war purpose vessels to commerce efficient vessels did not take place. Canada's shipyards went into decline. Canada was once a major player in the global shipbuilding industry. Over the decades the history of Canadian shipbuilding has had its ups and downs, the highest demand coming during the war years.

For every one direct job lost in the shipbuilding industry, there are two or more jobs lost in the local economy. What was once an important employer in Canada has withered to the point where we cannot even meet our own modest shipbuilding needs let alone become a player in the global market.

In my view, I would suggest in the experience of most Canadians, economies do not gain any sustaining strength through government subsidies. Government subsidies do not in the long term make any industry strong. Instead, industry must gain its strength through trading internationally in the global peacetime economy.

What is the incentive for long term research and development if the government is there to pick up, or contract, or otherwise bail you out? It should be noted that the shipbuilding industry itself contributes little to its own research and development by world standards.

I will briefly mention taxation. It would appear to be self-evident that if income taxes are higher, wage demands will be higher. We see this in the auto industry and other industries which are attempting to compete globally. What people look to is what they are netting after taxes. Gross salary is largely irrelevant other than as some misguided notion of status or position.

Without getting into great detail, I would suggest that any thought of revitalization of the shipbuilding industry has to be based on a mix of lower taxes and enhanced freedom with respect to international trade. The answer to our problems is not to be found in further government subsidies, but to level the playing field for international trade.

Our country has the raw materials. It has the ports and it has the shipyards. It has the willing capable workers. Canada even has a 75 cent dollar selling price compared to the American dollar. Why are there no sales of Canadian made ships? High taxes and trade barriers. That is why.

[The Late Gordon Olmstead, May 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's merchant navy of World War II suffered losses more than the other three services at war.

Cold lonely duty, constant targets of a deep sea foe. Simply, a shudder of ship as torpedo explodes is the only notice of impending doom for the lucky. Lucky because in being alive there is still hope. For others, the shudder ushers internment to the finality of the ocean's depth. For some who did live, enemy prisons of hell were their fate until war's end.

Gordon Olmstead survived both, to return home and fight for veterans' rights. Gordon excelled at his task and Bill C-61 reflects his hard work.

Gordon Olmstead passed away on April 24. How fitting it would be to rename Bill C-61 the Gordon Olmstead act.

[Supply, April 27th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, once again I am pleased to stand in the House on behalf of the constituents of Edmonton East and contribute to a very important debate.

Canada has a proud war history, but our role in this conflict is very different from our triumphs in Europe earlier this century. While I support the troops no matter where in the world they are sent, I too share some reservations with respect to our role and long term plan, if there is one.

The official opposition is prepared to support our involvement under the following guidelines with respect to the war in Yugoslavia. We must obtain the moral objective and halt the ethnic cleansing that has been perpetrated by the Yugoslav government. We need to achieve the political objective of creating a safe home for Kosovars by stabilizing relations between the federal republic of Yugoslavia and its neighbours through peaceful negotiations. We will pursue the military objectives of damaging the offensive military capability of the Yugoslav government and reduce its capacity to practise ethnic cleansing.

No country in history has ever been conventionally bombed into total submission and likely never will. It is clearly evident even to most armchair generals that a more comprehensive plan is required. The largest participant in this mission, the United States, knows all too well that a 20th century ground war would be both ugly and deadly.

Military force is only a tool with which to achieve our objectives. The Reform Party has noted that it is prepared to support military force and the commitment of Canadian forces only if our government demonstrates to this House that new commitments from Canada are needed to halt ethnic cleansing and to provide for a safe return of Kosovar refugees and that the government demonstrates to the House that all Canadian duties fall within Canada's existing military capabilities and guidelines.

Until now the Liberal government has not been open with parliament and the Canadian people. The three take note debates on the crisis have been little more than a public relations token. Canada's elected government has really had no say at all. Most recently this issue came up with regard to ground troop deployment. Any naval blockade is also an escalation in this conflict and in my view deserves the attention that ground troops are due too.

The last debate was on April 12 and took place two weeks after Canadians were already involved in the conflict. The government informed parliament of Canada's involvement in the bombings when Canadian planes were in the air. Most important, there has never been any vote in parliament on Canada's involvement in the war.

Parliament has played no role in setting the parameters for involvement once again if we end up enforcing a NATO naval blockade. We must not fool ourselves into thinking that stopping ships on the high seas will not escalate this crisis. We must have clearly understood rules of engagement before we embark on any escalation in or around Kosovo.

The government must change its approach and keep parliament fully informed and involved. Canadians call on the government to give parliament a role in setting the parameters and conditions for continued or additional Canadian military participation.

The Reform Party has supported the use of air power as a means to stop Serb ethnic cleansing activities in Kosovo and to force Mr. Milosevic to the negotiating table. The air campaign has been presented as the best alternative. It would not have been acceptable or morally right to sit idly by and watch fellow humans massacred and driven from their homes. It would have handed the president a victory and fed his appetite for greater conquests. On their own, air strikes might not exert the necessary pressure to encourage Serb disengagement.

The human race has witnessed acts of genocide throughout its history. Genocide is not solely the horrendous byproduct of certain wars. Incidents of genocide are not war related at all. Genocide is also a failure of humanity, the dark side of a civilization run amok. We must admit that Kosovo unchecked could be just this, death and destruction of homes and whole families by dictate of a man gone mad.

It is important for groups that have been decimated by genocidal acts that the world remember the particular atrocities in order to learn and understand what happened. Groups affected by genocidal acts want only to be remembered. The genocides of world history cannot be distinguished on the basis of size and scope. It is commonly understood that our history has witnessed one holocaust and many attempted genocides. In my view genocide should be regarded more as a failure of civilization than a product of war, whether it be the Ukrainian famine, the Cambodian killing fields, the Holocaust, or now reportedly Kosovo. In my view Canada should institutionalize remembrance through the construction of a stand alone world genocide museum.

NATO's collective strategy is seemingly starting to have an effect. We ought to give it more time to work. However, as the situation on the ground in Kosovo changes and new commitments are considered, the government must demonstrate to this House that any such commitments still fulfil the primary objective of stopping and reversing ethnic cleansing and Milosevic's genocidal tendencies.

Our pilots and troops are to be congratulated for the fine effort they have been making. They have been doing their best to help reverse this tide of inhumanity. For that we should be proud.

The families of ground force peacekeepers in past missions worried daily. Children had no idea of what horrors their parents had witnessed and had little understanding when their parents returned home permanently different from when they had left. Post-traumatic disorders are serious, debilitating and devastating to families who seek to pick up from where they left off months earlier.

Committing Canada's ground force troops will undoubtedly mean facing these challenges and trials again. Are we learning from past experiences? We must be extremely careful in planning our troop deployment.

A few weeks ago retired Major General Lewis MacKenzie stated in the Ottawa Citizen :

—we are not in a position to participate in any prolonged ground offensive in Kosovo.... During the past 20 years, successive governments, both Liberals and Tories, have used Canada's modest military as a cash cow which has resulted in a dramatic reduction of its operational capability.

These comments were made by one of Canada's most respected military leaders. General MacKenzie is saying that the ability of the Canadian forces to sustain long term ground operations, especially those far from home, has been sharply eroded by the government.

Between 1993 and 2000 there will have been $9 billion in defence cuts. About 18,000 troops have been cut. Morale is at rock bottom, especially when money is being spent on sex change operations and combat bras. Our soldiers are lining up at food banks and wearing hand me down battle uniforms.

I do not see the distinction between the escalation by land or by sea. Whether it is a blockade or an embargo, an escalation is just that and has inherent dangers and concerns. Putting our frigates on front line service as floating targets is daunting enough. To do so without clear objectives, plans of action and with poorly understood engagement rules in my mind is reckless.

We should clearly define the role of our naval contribution with every bit of seriousness as that we would with ground troops. The government must allow the military leadership of the Canadian forces to be more honest and forthcoming. Our military command must be allowed to brief all members of our involvement. We understand that sensitivity and confidentiality are very important in military planning and we would be pleased to have the briefings in camera. For the sake of our troops' safety we must remember that the need to know must be appropriately balanced through careful disclosure and full public debate.

[Petitions, April 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition containing over 200 names from people across Canada who add their voices to ask our government to support Canada's merchant navy veterans in their quest for recompense.

This weekend Mr. Gordon Olmstead, a long time advocate, passed away after a lengthy illness. I can think of nothing more fitting than to rename Bill C-61 the Gordon Olmstead act.

[Crimes Against Humanity, April 23rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, all too frequently humanity sinks to such depravity that it wreaks death and destruction on its own.

What motivates and drives such diabolical crimes against civilization might only be the understanding and the purview of the insane and the almighty.

Tens of millions have died in genocide this century alone; in the Ukrainian famine, the holocaust, Cambodia, Rwanda, Armenia and now possibly Kosovo.

Over seven million Ukrainians perished in the famine brought on by Stalin's Russia in the 1930s. Over seven million starved to death under the dictate of a man gone mad. Tomorrow in Calgary a monument will be unveiled on Memorial Drive to bear witness to this calamity.

Civilization's failure must be put on public display so that we can all see the dark side of humanity and hopefully learn.