Peter Stoffer

[Prebudget Consultation, November 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, a few years ago the Alliance came to the House asking the government to get out of the lives of Canadians and to let the marketplace rule everything. It claimed everything would be okay if that happened. I was completely shocked yesterday when in question period Alliance members asked for government intervention in the economy. What a complete flip-flop by the Alliance.

Would my hon. colleague comment on the complete reversal of the Alliance's economic policies?

[Hepatitis C, October 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for St. Paul's for bringing forward this valuable motion to the House to further debate the concerns of victims of hepatitis C.

I want to correct a misconception from the previous two speakers. Canada already has a hepatitis awareness month, which is the month of May. I am pleased to say that I had a private member's bill which was drawn and debated in the last parliament. We tried to make it votable but unfortunately the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of health said no. However the minister, who has his own concern, announced at the hepatitis conference in Montreal that from that day forward the month of May would be known as hepatitis awareness month.

Even though the motion deals just with hepatitis C, those who follow the concerns of hepatitis know that there are seven different strains which have infected close to 740,000 Canadians from coast to coast to coast, with hepatitis C infecting over 300,000 Canadians.

I know the hon. member for St. Paul's has done a lot of work on behalf of people afflicted with hepatitis C. She should be congratulated by all members of parliament on both sides of the House for her continuous effort in this field

To reiterate, the month of May already recognizes the seven strains of hepatitis. The member for Yellowhead said he would like to bring forward recognition and awareness of hepatitis year in and year out. I encourage him to do so in his householders, mail outs, in his town hall meetings in his riding or for that matter throughout the country.

I know three individuals who have worked closely on the hepatitis file. They are Joey Haché and his family from Ottawa and two people from my riding specifically, Mr. Neil Van Dusen and Mr. Bruce Devenne. All three have hepatitis C. All three fought hard, not just for themselves but for all Canadians afflicted with hepatitis C, for some sort of financial assistance from the government. However the minister made a decision to make the window between 1986 and 1990. Unfortunately, anyone who contracted hepatitis C outside that window was not entitled to any kind of compensation or assistance in that regard.

I do thank the provinces involved for picking up some of the slack, but unfortunately people who have a disease of that nature are unable to work. While that kind of funding was welcomed, it was not enough to assist them. Canadians, and especially the Minister of Health and the government in charge, need to promote health wellness wherever we can.

The contraction of hepatitis C over the years has not just been through operations in hospitals and blood transfusions. It also comes from needles and other interactions that Canadians involve themselves in on a daily basis. We need to bring awareness to unsuspecting Canadians who may involve themselves in activities of that nature. We need to make them aware that whatever decisions they make may have dire consequences on their long term health or some may even die as a consequence.

I am not just talking about HIV-AIDS, which transmitted sexually or through needles. I am also talking about hepatitis which is very serious and contagious disease that can be contracted through various forms. One of those ways is through needles.

I encourage all Canadians who are listening to tell everyone, including their municipalities and health boards that more awareness of this very serious disease would go a long way toward the education of Canadians. Thus hopefully we can eradicate the disease from not only the face of the country but from the planet as well.

The New Democratic Party definitely supports the motion. Again, I thank the member for St. Paul's for bringing the issue to the floor of the House of Commons.

[Constitution of Canada, October 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to rain on anyone's parade but we do have a serious concern in Labrador with the Indian people at Davis Inlet. I know the minister is listening.

Will the member reflect upon what we can do as a parliament to improve the lives of the Indian people in Labrador, to increase their standards especially in regard to the economy and to becoming more of a player in the politics of Newfoundland and Labrador?

[Constitution of Canada, October 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member from Newfoundland's comments. Could he elaborate a bit more on the economic opportunities that await Labrador, not just in terms of the official name that is being presented now but in terms of the economic opportunities that await Labrador in the future?

[Terrorism, October 29th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in media reports over the weekend the United States is musing about using tactical nuclear weapons in the war against terrorism.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Will Canada in the strongest way tell our allies in the United States that under no circumstances will Canada accept the use of tactical nuclear weapons in any case?

[Veterans Affairs, October 25th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I bring to the attention of the House the announcement the other day of the compensation package for our remaining Buchenwald veterans. These veterans were Canadian airmen who were shot down in World War II.

Instead of being placed in a regular prisoner of war camp, the German government at the time placed them in a concentration camp. Many lives were lost as a result. After 56 years these brave men and their families have received the compensation and recognition they were fighting for and so rightfully deserve.

The other day the remaining 15 survivors and some of their spouses received that recognition from the German government and our Department of Veterans Affairs.

On behalf of the New Democratic Party and parliamentarians all over Canada we thank the Minister of Veterans Affairs and his department for bringing this issue to a final resolve for our veterans and their families.

On behalf of our colleague, Gordon Earle who served the House from 1997 to 2000 from Halifax West--

[Customs Act, October 24th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, before I ask the question, I am sure the member would support my call on the House to give personal congratulations to the Minister of Veterans Affairs for finally resolving the issue of the Buchenwald veterans.

We all know that the Minister of Veterans Affairs is going through his personal concerns but for him to lead the way in getting this issue dealt with I believe deserves a round of applause from all of us in the House of Commons for his great efforts to resolve that issue for those heroes of Canada.

I have two quick questions for the member for Edmonton--Strathcona. Would he not believe that pre-clearance at airports, which most airports are calling for, is a very important thing in Canadian airports to facilitate and expedite the transfer of American passengers or American bound passengers to the United States? Would he and his party not believe in the New Democratic position that the ports police in Canada should be brought back as a separate unit working in conjunction with other forces within the country?

[Customs Act, October 24th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I rise with great pleasure to discuss Bill S-23.

I represent the Halifax airport and one of the concerns I have is that many times the Halifax airport authority has asked the transport minister and the revenue minister about getting pre-clearance at the airport. This is something that the Ottawa airport, the Vancouver airport and other airports have. It is vital to the movement of U.S.A. passengers for them to have the convenience of being pre-cleared through the Halifax airport very quickly and expeditiously to the United States. All the authority is asking for is fairness, something that other airports in Canada have. In fact other airports that do not have it will probably be seeking this as well. We hope the minister, or at least his department, will take that under advisement to see how we can very quickly move that issue forward.

Also, when any bill of this nature comes forward it does absolutely no good unless it has full consultation with and support of the men and women at customs, the frontline workers, more or less the unionized workers. Again we encourage the government to ensure that the union is in lockstep with this measure, to ensure that union voices are heard, to ensure that their concerns have been brought forward as well.

The minister mentioned that there are about 130 additional employees being hired. In reality, within two years probably 300 to 400 employees will be lost through retirement. Therefore those losses will not have been offset at all. It would be prudent of the minister to go on a serious recruiting drive to encourage young people to get into the customs field and to become highly trained. The numbers should be in the 1,200 to 1,500 range, which is what is required to meet the new security measures post-September 11.

No matter what program we put in place we have to make sure that the movement of perishable goods, especially just in time goods, is not hindered by the actions on September 11. It is imperative as the two economies become more closely linked that the movement of goods and services is done correctly, quickly and efficiently and that both sides of the border are respected by both governments.

My former colleague, Mr. Peter Mancini from Cape Breton, raised in the House many times the divestiture of ports police in Canada to the normal city police, as was done in Vancouver, British Columbia and in my hometown of Halifax.

We argued at the time that it was wrong to do that. We felt that the ports police had to be specialized, a separate unit on its own, in tandem with government. The last time I heard any statistics on it, customs or the police check about 2 out of every 100 containers that come into the Halifax port. That is simply not good enough and is insufficient to say the least. We encourage the government to rethink that policy of the divestiture of ports police. It should reinstate the ports police, give them the training, adequate resources and personnel that is required so we can ensure that the goods and services that enter into our ports are properly checked and screened.

I am appalled that not so much the minister but his department would put a gag order on senior officials of the customs and excise union. It is simply unacceptable in this day and age of co-operation, open dialogue and transparency. “I want to be clear on what I would like to do” is what we always hear from the government front bench. At the same time that the ministers talk about openness and transparency, they tell their officials to put gag orders on the senior officials of the union.

I have a letter from Serge Charette, the national president of CEUDA, to the revenue minister, dated October 5. It clearly states that the union would like the gag order removed from its employees and rescinded.

In conclusion, I seek unanimous consent from all parties of the House of Commons to table the letter from the union to the minister so that it can be on the public record.

[Customs Act, October 24th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. minister for his time. I have two quick questions.

First, has the advice and input of the union and the employees of Canada customs been sought on the actions about which he just spoke?

Second, airports like Halifax's are searching for pre-clearance facilities at airports to transit U.S. bound passengers much quicker than they do today. Has that been given any consideration by the minister and his department?

[Customs Act, October 24th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This is such an important bill for all Canadians, and since the minister is in the House I would seek unanimous consent to have five minutes of questions and comments with the minister.