Peter Stoffer

[National Defence, April 20th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when the defence minister was the chair of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, he supported an all-party recommendation that stated very clearly that any new or replacement vessels for Canada's navy will be built in Canada's shipyards.

Now, as the defence minister and a member of the cabinet, can he assure the House and all Canadians, and especially those people in the shipyard industry, that those new vessels for the Canadian navy will indeed be built in Canada?

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, April 19th, 2004]

moved that Bill C-31, an act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada, to make related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Canada National Parks Act, April 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I just wish to say to you, for the House and for my colleague from Winnipeg who is still mourning the loss of the Jets, go, Habs, go tonight.

My question for the hon. member from Winnipeg is about this sort of partial opening of a park, this rejigging of it, as we say in the Maritimes, to satisfy the concerns of an outstanding grievance that an aboriginal group has had for a while.

What advice would he give to the government to ensure that these types of grievances or concerns do not intercede or impede future development of parks as we go along in the future? We are hoping that we have many more national parks, such as the marine national parks, of course, coming in the near future.

One of the concerns is the competing interests of, for example, oil and gas groups, and mining companies, the provinces, the territories, et cetera. They would want to have a say, of course, in how these parks are developed for the future. What advice could he give to the government to ensure that this type of action is done in a very careful manner? And let me say again, go, Habs, go.

[Canada National Parks Act, April 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I know my hon. colleague will get those west coast names, like Ucluelet, right one day. I also know they are very difficult to say.

I appreciate that in his speech we could tell that he is very concerned, obviously not only for the future of the park but for future generations of Canadians and visitors from around the world who come to Canada and use eco-tourism as an aspect for spending their tourist dollars.

Does the hon. member believe that, with this ongoing debate, there is a danger that it may set a precedent and that once we open those parks on a reserve basis to deal with aboriginal concerns, which are legitimate concerns, that quite possibly the provinces, municipalities or other interest groups may come by and say that since the door has been opened what are the chances of that door opening up for them too? It is sort of that “me too” argument.

What does the hon. member think about that possibility in the near future?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2004, April 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it sounded like the hon. member has all the answers to the problems. As his party is in government, it should do it.

First, the Conservative government brought in the drug patent legislation that caused drug prices to triple. What did the Liberal government say in 1993? It said that it would change it. I remember Mr. Tobin saying that it was an outrage and that it would cost families far too much money for drugs and prescriptions. Instead of changing it, the government enhanced the legislation to give pharmaceutical companies the patent protection for an even longer time.

If the member is really serious about the cost of pharmacare, his party should change it.

My second comment is about caregivers. I brought a bill forth in 1998 to allow caregivers, those people who care for people in a palliative care situation, be it a child or another relative, to take a year off work with job protection and employment insurance while they provided care for that person, whether it was palliative care or serious rehabilitative care. In the case of a couple having a child, one of the parents can take a year off work on maternity or paternity leave. The government, kicking and screaming, put in a six week program this year, for which we are grateful. At least it is a start. Will the hon. member at least admit that it goes nowhere near enough?

In the Ottawa Citizen today there is a story about Sharon Ruth and her daughter. It is a classic example of a woman who is not working outside the home but needs assistance right now so she can care for her daughter who has cancer, and I hope her daughter will recover from it.

Those are just a few of the points I have for the hon. member. I would interested in hearing his comments.

[Air Canada, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport rose earlier and expected the investors, Air Canada and the unions to solve all their problems. My question was very clear. April 15 is the deadline. If it does not work, what does the government plan for April 16?

The people of Canada and the employees have a right to know. The communities across the country and our economy has a right to know what the government's plan is for Air Canada if it does not work out on April 16.

[Air Canada, April 2nd, 2004]

What utter nonsense, Mr. Speaker. I will try another minister, the transport minister.

On April 15 Air Canada and its employees face a very crucial day. If Air Canada is allowed to fall, it will have a devastating effect on the 30,000 employees and their families. It will have a devastating effect on communities across this country. It will have a devastating effect on our economy.

The transport minister said he likes to stand behind our port security. Will he now tell the employees and the people of Canada that he will stand behind that airline and support its employees? Will he please tell the House what is the government's game plan?

[Government Advertising, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to warn the government that Canadians are not amused. When it comes to corruption, the Prime Minister likes to blame the previous administration, yet this one claims that it is new.

When it comes to the ads, the Liberal government only speaks to things done by the last Liberal government when the Prime Minister was not even in cabinet. Student loans, Chrétien; age drug bill, Chrétien; health money, Chrétien; yet corruption, Chrétien.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister tell us, is this Liberal government the same as the old Liberal government? If it is, will it take those ads off the air?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2004, April 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague from Winnipeg has talked for quite some time about the issue of a tax deduction for workers who go across the country to work. He also has spoken about tax deductions for companies and corporations. They can write off any fines that they receive.

We cannot give a tax break to families for the registration fee for themselves and their children who enter into sports activities, but we can give a tax break to a corporation that has a skybox at a hockey rink.

If someone lives in Nova Scotia and goes to Alberta for work, he or she cannot deduct the cost of their tools or their transportation, but if that person is an accountant, he or she can write off the business costs and hotel costs and everything else.

Also, there is my colleague's work in bringing to the forefront the issue of when corporations and companies commit an offence and get fined. They can claim that fine as a business expense. If we want to free up a lot of money for very good causes, we should stop those loopholes right there. That would really help Canadians.

I would like my colleague to comment on that, please.

[Visually Impaired, April 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, since 1918 the Canadian National Institute for the Blind has been helping visually impaired and deaf blind people throughout this country.

It would like to bring to the attention of the House two major recommendations. First, is the fact that only 5% of reading materials in this country are available in the other format to help visually impaired people. It is asking the government to initiate a fund, and work with libraries throughout the country and the provinces to have more reading materials available for those who are visually impaired.

Second, the CNIB hopes to have the government form a task force to help those people, who are visually impaired, with assisted devices such as canes and magnifying glasses so they too can participate and lead active lives.

The CNIB is a wonderful and great organization. The government should be doing more to help it help the most needy in our society.