Peter Stoffer

[Budget Implementation Act, 2001, March 11th, 2002]

My colleague from Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough brings up a good point. When my former colleague, Peter Mancini, was in this place he pushed very hard to reinstate the ports police, an initiative which I supported. We need him back.

However I suspect the airport surcharge will be used to offset security means in other areas. The government will make air passengers pay for that.

My Liberal colleagues across way will not put in $60 million worth of security at airports in Atlantic Canada but that is what they will take out. They will divert that money into other areas and that is offensive to the people of Atlantic Canada, especially to the people my area. I represent the Halifax airport and it is absolutely criminal for the government to do that.

The government talks about balanced budgets. If it were not for employees and employers of this country, there would be no balanced budget. The government has used the money from the EI fund to offset its other items in the budget for a long time. It is completely unacceptable that workers and small businesses have to pay for the fantasy work of the Liberal accounting spin doctors over there. That $24 surcharge is completely unacceptable. The government will not put that money back into Atlantic Canada. We are asking the government to reduce that cost.

No one is denying the fact that we have to put more money into security and that the airports are a good place to put it. On top of every other fee Canadian air travellers have to pay, it is completely unacceptable to charge them that much money. Just as unacceptable is the fact that the government has asked when airlines to lower their fees when they are struggling.

There is another point in the budget that the Liberals never mention. I and my colleague from Nova Scotia, and others probably, received over 106,000 phone calls from Canadians who received the most offensive letter I think I have ever seen from anybody in government. It is halfway down the first page of the new form they got for the disability tax credit. It is not a review. It is not to see if anyone is cheating the system. It blatantly says that if a person can go 50 metres on a flat surface with a device, they can no longer qualify for the disability tax credit. That is one of the most offensive things I think my colleagues in the Liberal Party have ever done in their history of being in government.

Can anyone imagine that? Because of new wording in that form, our amputees, our elderly and our veterans no longer qualify for the measly disability tax credit. The maximum allowable was only $1,000. In most cases in my riding, and I have had well over a couple of hundred calls on this, the average disability tax credit refund was about $450. The government is taking that money away from the amputees, the mentally challenged and the physically disabled of this country. That is one of the most offensive things I think I have ever seen from any government, let alone this Liberal government.

I encourage the government to stop that form, to drop it, to put a moratorium on it and to allow people to claim their disability tax credit. It should then work with the various organizations.

My colleague from Dartmouth has been front and centre on trying to encourage the committee and the government to stop harassing the most vulnerable in our society in order to put that money into other areas.

The government is very good at wasting our tax dollars. It spent over $1 billion on a home heating oil rebate. Seven thousand people in the United States got the rebate. Every prisoner in literally every jail cell in the country got the rebate. People who did not even buy fuel got the rebate and thousands of dead folks got the rebate. We know now that it was just a typical move for the government to spend the money and hope the election would go its way. That is unacceptable.

The Liberals spent $1.6 billion on the technology transfer programs. Again, no accountability. Only 2.5% of that money has ever been returned. The Minister of Industry called it an investment but there has been no clarification on where those taxes actually went.

The Minister of Public Works spent $500,000 on a study and nobody knows where the study is or what it is for. The money would have done a lot for the people of Canso, Nova Scotia, for example. My colleague from Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough has been fighting very hard for the people of Canso. But no, it has to go to the government's Liberal friends for a report that nobody knows anything about or even knows where it is. It is incredible.

There are concerns about the military. Everybody was telling the government to put more money into the military: the Standing Committee on Defence and Veterans Affairs; the auditor general; the Conference of Defence Associations; everybody. If there was ever a time to put more money into the military, it was then. What did the government do? It put in $1.2 billion over five years when everyone was saying that we needed a minimum $1 billion just to start. Half of that money has already been spent on Operation Apollo. The money given to the military through the budget is woefully inadequate.

I have to reiterate my opposition to this budget and our party's opposition. The $24 surcharge is far too much. The disability tax credit is an affront to the most vulnerable in our society and our military deserves a lot better than what it got from the government.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2001, March 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as you can tell, only Liberals can make that last budget sound so rosy. It is unfortunate that they tend to forget a lot of things that happened before and after that budget. Two committees come to mind, one being the environment committee and the other being the transport committee.

My colleague from Windsor--St. Clair worked very hard on the environment committee. Members of the committee came to unanimous agreement on various amendments and brought the bill back to the House of Commons only to have the Liberal government rip the guts out of those amendments and proceed in its own way. This made a facade of the environmental committee's work.

The committee does not need to go back to Canadians to ask for their opinions because it has already done that. The committee heard from industry, environmental groups, aboriginal groups, the provinces and so on. To delay that process another two years makes committee work a facade, and it is most unfortunate.

The transport committee made a unanimous recommendation to have a labour representative on the board. What did the government do? It slapped its Liberal members on the head and told them it did not care what they thought. It told them it would proceed in its own unilateral approach. That does nothing for democracy in Canada.

I want to speak about the $24 airport tax. Instead of listening to reason and reducing the tax, what did the government do? It imposed a $24 fee on airline fares, $12 one way and $24 return. I could not believe the transport minister had the gall to do this. To offset the new Liberal tax, the government asked the airline companies to reduce their fares so the travelling public would not be harmed by the tax. I do not think I have ever heard a minister of the government say that before. It is funny that I never heard the Liberals say that when the GST was brought in. I never heard them say that when all the other taxes were brought in. I never heard them tell the business community to lower its prices so they could add even more taxes. It is unbelievable.

If this new $24 charge goes forward, the government will take approximately $60 million per year out of the local economy of Atlantic Canada. How much money will the Liberals put back into Atlantic Canada for security reasons? I suspect they will take a lot of that money and put it into the RCMP, the coast guard or into ports and then tell everyone to look at what they are doing.

[Observance of Two Minutes of Silence on Remembrance Day Act, March 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to also thank and congratulate the hon. member from the Alliance Party for bringing this worthwhile motion to the floor of the House of Commons, which is exactly where this type of debate should take place.

At the outset, the New Democratic Party will be supporting this motion. We think anything that gives recognition to our valued veterans and their families is long overdue and something we should vote on fairly quickly. I am surprised that it is not votable at this time but I hope the hon. member will bring it back, that it will be made votable and that the governing party, the Liberals in this case, will get behind this initiative and support it.

I met with members of various legions throughout my riding and discussed many of today's issues dealing with veterans and their families. They of course are not just issues in terms of health care and various financial concerns veterans have, but also the symbolism of what veterans require so that they indeed will not be forgotten in years ahead.

Anyone who gets the Legion magazine on a regular basis, such as myself, and reads the section of the publication called “The Last Post” will know that we are losing our veterans and military personnel who fought in various conflicts throughout the years at a very rapid pace. In fact, every month we seem to lose more and more of our World War II and Korean vets. There is only a handful of World War I veterans left as we speak.

Prior to any more veterans being laid to rest, it is imperative that we put forward a motion and vote on it as soon as possible which would allow two minutes of silence in their honour. One can imagine being in St. John's, Newfoundland on the 11th day of the 11th month at the 11th hour and having a wave of two minutes of silence across the country all the way to Victoria and into the Yukon. That symbolism would indeed tell our past serving military personnel and their families that they would be remembered forever and that their contributions would not be forgotten in any undiluted form whatsoever.

As well, it is for our military personnel who are currently overseas or at home. When they retire, they and their families will also be remembered at the various legion and Remembrance Day ceremonies. This is not just for those who fought in the world wars. It will be for those who served in the gulf war or in Afghanistan or who will serve in many other future conflicts in which I am sure Canada will be involved. When we are willing to send our brave, young men and women overseas or wherever conflicts arise to help the peoples of those countries and to help spread democracy throughout the world, we need to do whatever we can to honour and value their sacrifices.

It is not just those who are killed in conflicts. As my colleague from the Bloc said, it is also to recognize the psychological stress that these people were under. Imagine what it is like for our people who are currently in Afghanistan. They are faced with flying shrapnel and whatever. They are not only worried not about their own personal safety but also about the safety of their families back home. Imagine what they must be thinking.

I have had the honour of representing the riding of Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern Shore which comprises the great air base of Shearwater. Just recently I attended the homecomings of two frigates, the Halifax and the Charlottetown . To see the looks on the faces of the families of these military personnel once they were home safely put a lump in everyone's throat.

When the Halifax returned home I will never forget a little girl saying “Welcome home, daddy.” She was there with her sister. I asked her what was the first thing she would ask her Dad to do when he got off the ship. She replied “Take me bowling.” That is all this little girl could think. Her father had been away for over six months in a very dangerous situation and all this little girl thought about was having dad take her bowling. That is what our military personnel represent: a sense of family, pride and duty. The least we can do as legislators is provide them with the honorary symbolism they deserve. Two minutes of silence would definitely honour them, and this is long overdue.

I did not want to take up too much time in the House today but I would like to thank the hon. member from Alliance Party whose parents I know happen to live in the great riding of Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern Shore. They must be awfully proud of his initiative today. I encourage all members in the House and the other place, the Senate, to look at this motion with seriousness and give it the attention it so rightfully deserves.

On behalf of all the veterans and the military personnel in my riding and across the country, we want to thank the member once again. We hope this motion will pass fairly quickly.

[Cenotaphs, February 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my hon. colleague from the Bloc Quebecois that the concerns of the legions about the facilities they maintain throughout the entire country also needs a review. I would like to advise my colleague from the Bloc that we raised the condition of many of the legions throughout the country with the veterans affairs minister a few years ago. We said that the federal government should work with other levels of government to see what could be done to maintain those facilities for the future.

I thank the hon. member for Fundy--Royal for bringing forward this very important motion for debate in the House of Commons. It is a debate we can have in a non-partisan pragmatic way.

Many of the cenotaphs are located in rural parts of Canada. One of the difficulties facing the smaller communities from coast to coast to coast is that a lot of young people have moved to the urban centres. Roughly 80% to 85% of all Canadians now live in large urban centres.

Cenotaphs in rural areas are being neglected through no fault of the people who have stayed behind. They require assistance to maintain those cenotaphs for when people honour the veterans, especially on Remembrance Day but on other days as well. The Battle of the Atlantic is honoured in Nova Scotia. We go to the beautiful cenotaph at Point Pleasant Park every year to honour the Battle of the Atlantic.

Lower Sackville, Nova Scotia has what I consider to be one of the most beautiful cenotaph locations anywhere in North America. The cenotaph was built with over 60 stones. The stones came from over 60 countries. Each one of the stones represents a country where a Canadian soldier was killed and is buried.

I encourage my colleague from Fundy--Royal and everyone in the House to visit Lower Sackville, Nova Scotia. They will see an outstanding memorial and cenotaph to those who made the supreme sacrifice. This remarkable effort was done mainly by volunteers with some minor assistance from various levels of government. This is an outstanding facility which represents a great honour to those who made the supreme sacrifice.

We are encouraging the government to consider this motion. It does not have to give us an answer right away, but it should seriously consider what it can do, perhaps not on its own, but working in conjunction with other levels of government. I am thinking of something similar to an infrastructure fund where people could access the capital. They could make a bid for funding in order to maintain and upkeep their cenotaph.

There is one thing which ties the country together. No matter where people go in Canada, there is a good chance they will find a legion or an army, navy and air force veterans club. There is a good chance there will be a cenotaph.

I do not see how anyone in Ottawa could just walk by the memorial for our fallen which is not far from here. This memorial also includes the tomb of the unknown soldier. Every time I walk by that facility I stop in my tracks and reflect for a few moments before I continue on my way. I have seen other people do that as well.

I have seen that done not only in Ottawa, but in Middle Musquodoboit, Nova Scotia, Tofino, British Columbia and Watson Lake, Yukon. I have seen people pause to reflect at these places, not just on Remembrance Day but on other days as well.

This is why it is imperative that we honour the motion put forward by the member for Fundy--Royal. He has made a valid point. All he is asking is that the government initiate some kind of effort or fund that could kick-start additional funding from other sources. He is not saying that the provincial government or municipal government should not be involved. He wants the federal government to show leadership in the effort to maintain the over 6,000 cenotaphs in Canada.

I also want to mention something that is found in Winnipeg that is found nowhere else in the country. It is the cenotaph memorial for the women who served in our armed forces and who also made the supreme sacrifice.

In most cases throughout the country a cenotaph is either a stone in a triangular formation or it represents the male perspective of what we have in Canada. It is a very honourable thing.

In many cases the female aspect throughout the war effort has been inadvertently omitted and I do not think it was done deliberately. There are many examples throughout the country where we will see figures of male soldiers but none of female soldiers.

A couple of years ago I had a motion that recommended there be a monument, a cenotaph, placed in every capital city in country, territorial and provincial, dedicated to the efforts of women who served in the armed forces and who paid the supreme sacrifice. That included those women who worked in the factories or the fields to help provide food and nourishment for people while the men went off to war. They kept the home fires burning. Their sacrifice was just as great as those who went to war. Without them there would have been no families for those men to return to, no munitions and no armaments for that matter. This is something we should honour as well. I just thought I would throw that little plug in.

Again, what the member for Fundy--Royal is asking for is a very simple request. The government should seriously look at it to ascertain the type of funding to maintain these important structures within our country.

To the member for Fundy--Royal, we in the New Democratic Party from coast to coast to coast support his motion and hope that the government will see to it in a very positive way.

[Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, February 22nd, 2002]

No you don't. You did not. The CMA did not--

[Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, February 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, with all the greatest respect, I have never heard such nonsense in the House of Commons in my entire life. The fact is 106,000 insults went to the most vulnerable in our society. What is even worse, the environment minister has said we have to consult, yet the CMA, which represents all doctors from coast to coast to coast, was not even advised about this new disability tax credit form that doctors were forced to sign in some cases to help their patients.

My question again is: why did the government not even consult with the CMA and why is it still picking on the most vulnerable in our society?

[Species at Risk Act, February 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise with great honour today to recognize my hon. colleague from Windsor--St. Clair, colleagues from Fundy Royal, York North, Lac-Saint-Louis and Davenport and others who did outstanding work on the committee. They brought to the forefront a very technical and very difficult bill, with all those recommendations and concerns, were able to get input from provinces, industry, environmental groups and politicians together and come up with something that has broad based support.

One would assume that when politicians can get competing sides to agree on something they would want to run with it. Unfortunately this government, with its agenda, will gut the bill completely.

I tremendously appreciate the efforts of the member from the Alliance Party who just spoke in support of the small family farm. I think it is a good tribute to him to do that, but at the same time that he talks about drought his party does not want Kyoto. He talks about money for farmers and agriculture but it was his party in a previous election that was going to gut hundreds of million of dollars from the agriculture department. I wonder if he told the people in his town halls and his riding that when he was talking to them. That is the last thing I will say about it.

The problem is that the environment minister stood here in question period and said that we cannot move on Kyoto until we have consultation. Kyoto has been around for five years and now we are to have consultation. What have the Minister of the Environment, his department and his government been doing for five years? Absolutely nothing.

Now we have a bill supported by the Liberal members on the committee along with other members of the opposition. They worked their guts out on the bill, only to have the government, in a very backhanded, very mean and vindictive way, tell its own backbench members of parliament that their work does not mean anything. All the money they spent, all the time and all the effort mean absolutely nothing. That is unacceptable in a parliamentary situation. If the Liberals treat their own members that way, no wonder they treat the rest of us in parliament the way they do.

We have talked about species at risk. The reality is that the committee considered over 330 amendments to the bill and tabled its report with over 125 of them. The bill in its current form, prior to the government getting its hands on it, represents the absolute minimum in terms of what we are willing to accept and falls far short of what was originally called for.

The bill that was brought back to the government is the minimum. What is ironic is that this is a government that downloads everything in sight to the provinces, but when it comes to classification of endangered species, oh no, it does not want scientists or experts to talk about that. It wants bureaucrats and politicians to decide on what is an endangered species. That is absolutely unbelievable.

I represent riding that is very suburban but very rural as well. I can assure the House that many of these farmers, fishermen and people in the logging industry support initiatives that protect endangered species. Everybody knows that for every species we lose or that becomes endangered, be it plant or animal, that goes up the food chain until it finally reaches us. Every time we lose an animal or we lose a plant or we lose a valuable protected space for habitat, we are signing our own death warrants. That is a fact.

The bill done by the committee was the bare minimum that people were willing to accept and the government has the audacity to just rip it up and have its own agenda. That is absolutely unbelievable.

Off the coast of Nova Scotia is one of the most beautiful underwater canyons on the planet, the Sable Gully. For close to three years the government has been dithering around on whether to make it a protected area or not.

The government cannot decide. The oil and gas industry is saying to protect it. The fishing industry is saying to protect it. The provinces are saying to protect it. However what do we have to do? We need to have more studies. For three years we have been asking for this to be protected. There are 15 species of whales. It is an area larger than the Grand Canyon. Many varieties of fish and plant life live in the gully. All we are asking is that it be protected. What does the government do? It waits and waits. The environment cannot wait. The people of our country, and for that matter people from around the world, require legislation that is broad based and protects spaces for our endangered species and other species to inhabit. We share the planet and ecosystem with many other species. Our role is not to dominate and rape and pillage the planet on our own.

If we continue on this path, the government's eight year legacy will be a scorched earth policy. When the Liberals get out of government, and one day they will, what will happen is that the people of Canada will ask them what they did for the environment. Absolutely nothing. The government looks at other species and just ignores them. It wants to give control of this and the scientific listings to bureaucrats and politicians. It is absolutely unbelievable that the Liberals could do that.

For the absolute life of me I do not understand how a government could treat nine members of its own committee in this way. However, I remember very well the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans a few years ago, which was chaired by the member for Gander--Grand Falls. We spent over $180,000 on the east coast fisheries report. We consulted widely and broadly across the east coast. We told the people of those fishing communities that we would bring their recommendations to the House of Commons. All five political parties on the committee spent a long time on it.

It was the first time that five political parties in the House of Commons unanimously agreed on a report, word for word, and as we know, in committee it is difficult to get unanimity on most things. This report would have protected an awful lot of fish stocks. It would have protected coastal communities. It would have done an awful lot of good. Nine Liberals signed that report. We moved consensus for the report in the House only to have those same Liberals stand up and vote against their own report. They did not do it with just the east coast report; they did it with the west coast report as well.

Therefore, what we basically told the people of Canada is that we will fly on luxury aircraft to their communities, talk to them, promise them the moon and the stars, go back to Ottawa and write a report. However, unbeknownst to the people of Canada, especially people in rural Canada, the Liberals do not tell them that they have an agenda that completely ignores their future needs.

The day will come very soon when the people of Canada will wake up and understand that, because every species we lose, be it plant or animal, brings this closer to us ourselves. If the government and the Prime Minister want to leave a legacy for the people of Canada from coast to coast to coast, I will tell him now and I will tell the Liberal Party that I would support their initiatives if they did the following: if they made their legacy one of leaving the country in a very healthy condition, a condition in which we can drink the water, breathe the air, eat the natural food and maintain a livelihood from the labour and sweat of our brow for farmers, fishermen, loggers and so on.

I encourage the government to reverse itself, to accept the recommendations of the all party committee and to move forward in a positive light to protect the fellow species we share the planet with.

[National Remembrance Day, February 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great personal pleasure to rise today on behalf of the federal New Democratic Party to support my Liberal colleague's motion and give a little personal insight on why I think this is an extremely important bill that should be taken seriously. It is too bad that it is not votable.

We are one of the few western nations that does not have a statutory holiday for the remembrance of our soldiers, the men and women who died in various conflicts around the world.

In my conversations with many Canadians they believe that Remembrance Day is already a statutory holiday. When I tell them that it is not they get quite confused about it. The reality is, as we speak, November 11, Remembrance Day in honour of those who made the great sacrifice and their families, is not honoured through a statutory holiday. I find that a serious omission and one that I am very proud my colleague across the way has brought forward.

I also have a motion that will be debated within a couple of weeks which says exactly the same, that Remembrance Day should become a statutory holiday.

I will elaborate on a personal note. I was born in Holland. My parents were liberated through the sacrifices of the Canadian military. It is quite an honour for me to stand in the House where the decision was made to send troops overseas so that my family could be freed. Not only my family but millions of other people around the world were freed by the efforts of the allies in their fight against Nazi Germany and Japan in those years.

It is only understandable and the right thing to do. We are debating a motion and the relevance should not even be debated. It should be automatic. We should be able to take a motion or a bill of this nature, rush it to third reading, send it to the Senate and have it done.

If we can give ourselves a pay raise of over 20% in the matter of a few hours, certainly we can do something for our remaining veterans who are still alive and those who have passed on by honouring them with a special day on November 11.

November 11 in many ways is a special day, but by not making it a statutory holiday it basically says that we still have not honoured their sacrifices completely.

Some businesses have come to me and asked how they could afford it. I told them with great respect that if it were not for the sacrifices of those Canadian soldiers they would not have their businesses. We must never forget that.

I have a letter dated May 17, 1993, written by the official opposition member who is now the Prime Minister of Canada. He thanked a woman for her correspondence regarding private members' Bill C-289, a bill introduced by a former Nova Scotian Liberal, Mr. Ron MacDonald, to provide that Remembrance Day be included as a holiday in the public service collective agreement. He had narrowed it down just a bit.

He went to say that the Liberal Party understood her concern. Remembrance Day is a time when we honour the more than 100,000 Canadian men and women who sacrificed their lives for our country. Every year on November 11 we are given the opportunity to reflect on the values that Canadians fought and gave their lives to uphold. It is important that these ceremonies continue so that Canadians will always understand the extent and meaning of these sacrifices.

Then he stated that he supported the bill to guarantee Remembrance Day as a holiday for federal public servants. It was not just for public servants. Its intent was to make it a statutory holiday.

Unfortunately treasury board indicated that government members could not support the bill because it had collective bargaining implications and would cost too much. Liberals felt this reasoning was petty. He said they would continue to press the government to pass Bill C-289. As leader of the opposition he indicated that he appreciated the time taken to write and bring those views to his attention.

The Prime Minister took the time to have a letter written on his behalf telling someone that he supports making it a holiday for public servants. There is always speculation that the Prime Minister may decide to leave. In the last few remaining years he may have as a politician, why would he not want to leave a little memento for Canadians by making November 11 a statutory holiday? He has the power to be able to do something like that very quickly.

On November 11 members visit various legions in their ridings to say hello to current military personnel and their families and remaining veterans. It is a very sombre moment.

I personally go to eight legions on that day. I drive over 500 kilometres. I always make a presentation of the Canadian flag and of the national war poster of that year. We have them mounted and we present them to the legions on that specific day.

What an honour and privilege it is to represent not just my party but all members of the House of Commons. That is what we all do. Besides Canada Day, that is the other day when all members of parliament become equals. I have talked to many members of parliament who do the same. They go to the various legions in their ridings. They attend the functions. They shake the hands of the veterans and of the remaining spouses. They shake the hands of the current military and members of the legion. It truly is a wonderful blessed day.

It is time we put the debate aside and realize that now we need to have a proper statutory holiday in remembrance of the brave people who gave the supreme sacrifice. In the end military personnel always paid the ultimate liability. The ultimate responsibilities are up to government and members of parliament.

One of those responsibilities is to ensure that we never forget, that we pass the traditions and their sacrifices on to future generations. One of ways to do that is to have a statutory holiday from coast to coast to coast that properly and once and for all recognizes the supreme sacrifices that were made.

My mother is watching the debate as it is taking place. She is almost 80 years old. We came to Canada in 1956. My dad was a POW. He met a Canadian soldier and asked him why Canada sent so many young people to Holland, why it sacrificed so much. The answer was that they had a job to do. That was it. Then he walked away.

In 1956 the economic situation in Holland was not that good so the only answer for my family and thousands of other people was migration. My father remembered the words of that Canadian soldier and said that if Canada has such a military he could not imagine what kind of country it was.

My family came here in 1956 and has been able to prosper because of the efforts of Canadians. It is only fair and right that we as members of parliament put aside our partisanship this one time and recognize the value of men and women who served in the past and the men and women who are currently overseas in defence of freedom and democracy.

We should honour the motion of my hon. member across the way and recognize that this is a serious bill. We should address it and move on it very quickly. I cannot for the life of me see one reason we would not want to support the bill.

I do not want to talk only about Canadian sacrifices. There is a province in our country that was part of the British empire at that time. It also sacrificed tremendously. That is the great province of Newfoundland and Labrador. No one should ever forget the sacrifices it has made.

If members of the House want to see a lobby dedicated to the sacrifices of Newfoundlanders and Labradorans they should go to the house of assembly in St. John's, Newfoundland. I know my colleague from St. John's East will mention it. They will see something that will bring tears to their eyes. These people have done it right. They understand the sacrifices. We in the rest of Canada should do the same.

On behalf of my late father, mother and family I want to thank the hon. member very much for this motion. Hopefully it succeeds in being passed very quickly.

[National Defence, February 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the hon. Minister of National Defence. The defence minister stood in the House year after year and said that the Sea Kings would be replaced by the end of 2005. Everybody in the House and across the country knows there is not one supplier in the world through the split procurement process that can meet that deadline.

I would like to ask the Minister of National Defence one last time: when will the Sea King replacements arrive in Canada? What date?

[Supply, February 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder that Canadians from coast to coast to coast really ignore what any of the Liberals have to say. We had the comment from the previous industry minister, Mr. Tobin, who was once quoted as saying the drug patent law would destroy pharmacare for seniors. He was right, but when he became the industry minister years later he turned around and supported the additional extension of the drug patent law. This government also turned around and gave an insulting disability tax credit form to 106,000 Canadians, which changed their disability position.

How does the member expect Canadians to believe a single word any of the Liberals say when it comes to health care? They are the government and they are responsible for the adequate funding of health care from coast to coast to coast and right now, as we speak, under their government we have a 13 tier system in our country.