Peter Stoffer

[Income Tax Act, March 28th, 2001]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-320, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (expenses incurred by care-givers).

Mr. Speaker, this is again another fine piece of legislation coming from the riding of Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—Eastern Shore that will sweep the nation.

With the pressure on families, with what we call the sandwich generation looking after their children and elderly parents, this bill would allow caregivers the opportunity to deduct the expenses that are incurred in the care of an elderly or infirm person.

As our population ages, more and more people will require the benefits of family caregivers. The cost of caring for an infirm family member can be enormous. Without financial assistance, many families will simply be unable to provide care.

The bill would help all Canadians to make home care financially viable. I thank the Canadian Palliative Care Association and the Canadian Association for the Fifty-Plus for their expression of support for the bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Do you remember South Moresby National Park? We would not have that forestry today if it were not for us. We protected that park. You would have had every tree cut down in that park if you had your way.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note that the member for Medicine Hat and the member for Fraser Valley, both of the Reform Party, get very afraid when the New Democrats and their leader stand up for the environment and human rights. They get very frightened of that because they do not understand the issues.

I want to mention something to the member from the Bloc for whom I have great respect. He mentioned the growing inequality, not only around the world but in this country. Since free trade, the wage, earning and social gaps between the poor and the rich have expanded tremendously. We see it every day. This is a result of the free trade agreement which is not balanced and equitable to all people of all economic status in the country.

Could he comment on that? Would he agree that there is a growing inequality among the various levels of the economic ladder?

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I would say to my hon. colleague from the Bloc Quebecois that in my own personal view this is not really a talk about free trade. It is more a talk about the protection of investor rights.

Would her party not agree that prior to any sort of profitability being discussed or the protection of investors or the movement of goods and services, that environment and human rights should be discussed? The protection of our environment is so sacred to any agreements that it must be discussed first. Agreements must also be discussed in terms of human rights throughout a country, so that a country's workers are not exploited to the advantage of another country. Would the hon. member agree with this statement?

[Fisheries, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, today Greenpeace is bringing the attention of the House to the rapid rise of genetically engineered or transgenic fish. The New Democratic Party agrees with Greenpeace that the government should respond to the Royal Society of Canada's report by bringing in a moratorium on the rearing of GM fish in aquatic facilities.

GM fish represent a huge potential danger to our oceans, plus an added unknown risk to human health. The fisheries minister must stop this dangerous new technology. The threat to our wild stocks and our oceans is too great to ignore.

At this time, on behalf of the federal NDP and our counterparts across the country, we would like to extend condolences to the family and friends of Mr. David McTaggart, the founder of Greenpeace and a great Canadian.

[Petitions, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to introduce a petition signed by the great people of Toronto, and thousands more will be coming, regarding prohibition of the release of genetically modified aquatic organisms into the natural environment.

The petitioners pray to parliament to prohibit the release and to commence a full and open public consultation and review process to determine the ecological, social and financial consequences associated with the development and use of transgenic aquatic organisms.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I have no question, just a comment. I would like to thank you and the staff of the House of Commons for participating in this debate and helping us to get the message out. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my best to all the pages and the clerks and to everyone who helped make this evening a success. I thank them.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Yes, anarchists. How dare they, a Conservative premier of Nova Scotia and a self-professed Liberal mayor of Halifax, support working people in the country?

Guess who else was there? Lo and behold, yours truly. Imagine that. We had a Conservative, a Liberal and a New Democrat standing together outside the plant to listen to speeches in support of the workers and to support their quest for fair compensation for the years of service they had dedicated to Volvo.

Guess what? Not one light bulb was broken. The plant was cleaner after the protest than when we went in. The workers got what they deserved. They did not maintain their jobs, but they kept their dignity and respect and received better pensions. That is civil disobedience 101. That is how it is done.

Lo and behold, the premier of Nova Scotia was there, the mayor of Halifax was there, and I was there: the great anarchists of our society. Imagine a member of parliament, the premier of Nova Scotia and the mayor of Halifax, great dissidents of democracy. It is absolutely incredible that those three anarchists could be there supporting working people.

Why would the Alliance, the Liberals, the Bloc and the Conservatives be so nervous about the NDP going there? I think there is an underlying tone to what they are saying. I believe that in their heart of hearts they know the FTAA will be a very frightening proposition for Canada. Municipal, provincial and federal governments in the future will lose the ability to enact laws or bylaws to protect the citizens of Canada.

What will happen? All of a sudden we will hear that they cannot do something because of the trade agreements, or that they cannot enact protective laws because of the trade agreements.

Since NAFTA and free trade have come in never in the history of this country have seniors found life harder. If we really want to see the inadequacies of this trade deal, we can look at what it has done to our seniors, one of the most vulnerable groups of people in the country. Ask the seniors in my riding and across the country. The choices they have to make now are among food, home heating fuel and prescription drugs.

We put them in that position. These people worked hard their entire lives, but because of these trade deals we cannot do anything about energy prices. Because of these trade deals we cannot do anything about drug prices. Because of these trade deals we cannot support and protect our farmers. Our seniors are saying that they elected us to do something about it and are asking us why we have not done anything. However, we hide behind the cloak of the trade deals.

We in the NDP have never been against trade. We are a trading nation. All we are asking for is fair trade, fair trade that benefits all working people and the environment of this planet.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, you have been very patient with me so far today and I appreciate it. I will say, as probably the last speaker in the House today, that we in the NDP and many others throughout the country and around the world, believe democracy itself is threatened by the FTAA. We need go no further than the Metalclad decision, the one that should be coming up in the appeals, or the UPS decision.

UPS is now suing Canada Post because Canada Post had the audacity to have a courier system, which, by the way, supplements other postal services in the country. UPS, an American firm, is saying Canada Post cannot do that and that it will sue.

The government of British Columbia is being sued because it had the audacity to try to protect its bulk water. Across the country, we believe, environmental concerns such as water, lumber and everything else are at stake.

It was absolutely shocking in the House to hear, once and for all, a member of the Alliance Party tell it like it is and say that, yes indeed, health, education and other public services should be on the table when we negotiate the FTAA.

We knew all along that was the Alliance's position. We knew all along it was the Conservative position. We had a sneaking suspicion all along that it was the government's position. It is amazing what happens at this hour of the morning. The truth eventually does come out. It is shocking.

I wonder if the hon. member for Surrey Central has told the people in his riding that health, education and other public services should be on the table. I do not think he would represent the riding for long if he were forthright enough to tell them that.

When the Conservatives negotiated free trade they forgot to include a shipbuilding policy. The United States protected itself with what is called the Jones Act, which says a ship carrying freight between New York and Miami must be American built, American crewed, American registered, everything American. Canada forgot to protect its own shipbuilding industry, and it will now be virtually impossible to institute a shipbuilding policy in this country.

We would encourage the Minister of Industry to include one and to do everything in his power to rebuild the industry so that thousands of people can go back to work in shipyards in Saint John, Marystown or Halifax. However, I suspect that with talks continuing the way they are it will be virtually impossible for him to do so unless he takes a stand and says no.

We have heard the member from Calgary say in the House that there will be Molotov cocktails, violence and everything else like that. No one in the NDP has said that. We have said only that we have the democratic right to attend a people's conference, a citizens' initiative from a broad section of society in Canada and around the world, to register our protest to people on the other side of the fence.

To suggest we would disrupt the proceedings in the buildings behind the fence is to suggest we would be going over the fence. That is simple nonsense. More than 5,000 police officers will be there to make sure we do not. I was planning to wear a scarf in case it got cold, but I understand there will be a bylaw in Quebec that if people wear scarves they could be arrested. Imagine that. The member wants to know why we are nervous about the talks going on behind the fence when the municipal government enacts a bylaw to prevent people from wearing scarves. It is simply incredible.

The Alliance, the Liberals, the Conservatives and the Bloc are concerned about the NDP attending the people's conference. I attended a civil disobedience event in my own riding. A few years ago the Volvo plant was to leave Halifax and move to Mexico. It was to leave without looking after the workers. What did the workers do? They occupied the plant, but in a very peaceful way. That was civil disobedience. They occupied a private piece of property and just sat there.

Who attended the rally to support them? That great dissident of all time, the current premier of Nova Scotia, John Hamm, was there to support the workers of the Volvo plant. Guess who else was there? Another great dissident of democracy, former Halifax mayor Walter Fitzgerald, was there to support the workers.

[Summit Of The Americas, March 27th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the hon. member for Surrey Central if he believed health, education, water and sewer and public services should be part of an FTAA agreement, and his answer was yes.

I wonder if the hon. member for Edmonton—Strathcona would agree that health, education and public services such as water and sewer should be on the FTAA negotiating table.