Peter Stoffer

[Canada Small Business Financing Act, November 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talks about tax cuts with the surplus that we have.

The surplus was accumulated on the backs of those people in this country who can least afford it. Now we have a record number of children in poverty. We have record numbers of people who pay into EI and who cannot collect it because of the changes in the rules.

Would the member not agree that the surplus is really money that was confiscated from employees and, I am sure they will argue employers as well, and that money should go back to the employees? When they could not find work or when they were displaced from the work force, they at least had EI to fall back on while they were looking for other work.

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Souris Mountain asked where was the NDP in all this. I can assure the hon. member that when farmers are in trouble or anyone in this country is in trouble they can always count on the NDP provincially and federally for support.

In the last parliament it was not the New Democratic Party that voted for the privatization of CN. It was not the New Democratic Party that voted for the privatization of our transportation system in Bill C-101. It was not the NDP that voted for the dismantling of the Crow rate. It was not the New Democratic Party that laid the burden on farmers for the transportation problems right across the country.

The government and the Reform Party must have known that when we download that kind of financial responsibility on the farmers they are going to have problems down the road. Would the member not agree that because we do not have a national agricultural policy that is one of the major reasons why we are in such trouble today?

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the member for Selkirk—Interlake. He accused the NDP of wanting to throw a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there.

I can assure the hon. member that our agriculture critic, the member for Palliser, has estimated that anywhere from $500 million to $700 million is needed for emergency aid now so that farmers right across this country can get through the winter.

As a former member of the fisheries and oceans committee, I want to express this statement, relating it to farming and agriculture, and see if he agrees. “Our fisheries and marine policy is a perfect example of how Canada does not work and how unaccountable and dysfunctional our system of government can be”.

If we relate that to farming and agriculture, would he not agree that is a valid statement?

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have a tremendous amount of respect for the parliamentary secretary.

He indicated that everyone is coming to Ottawa. He hoped that the provincial premiers would get out of their houses and come to Ottawa.

I do not see very much farming going on inside the House of Commons today. If the Liberal government wishes to know exactly what is going on in farming communities across the country, not just in the prairies, the meeting should be held in Strasbourg, Saskatchewan or in Upper Musquodoboit, Nova Scotia.

The ignorance of the problem by the government and the arrogance of the minister of agriculture toward the farmers is absolutely appalling.

In the last parliament the government brought in Bill C-101, the deregulation of transport. It also privatized CN and eliminated the Crow rate. These were all supported by the Reform Party.

The government must have known that when we download these responsibilities to the farmers, their income is going to drop rapidly and that is one of the major reasons why we have such a crisis today.

I thank the hon. member for mentioning the word crisis because we have not heard that from the minister of agriculture yet.

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, if we listen to the conversation in the Liberal Party we would think there is nothing wrong with our farming communities and farm families.

Unfortunately the fact is that farmers are in a crisis and need help now. They do not need further consultation with industry leaders and Liberal backbenchers or government people. They need emergency assistance now, and not just on the prairies but from coast to coast to coast.

The hon. member mentioned that some industries and some parts of the farming practices were doing well. I remind him that the farmers and agricultural producers of the Annapolis Valley, as well as the Hants East area and the Musquodoboit Valley in my area, are suffering due to weather droughts and everything else that is happening.

Members of the federal government are downloading responsibility on to the backs of the provinces. It is similar to what they did in health care. It is similar to what they did in the fishing industry.

We do not have a national agricultural policy. That is one of the main reasons we have such a crisis today. If the government had paid attention to rural Canadians and their needs, we would not be having this discussion today.

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the west coast fisheries report came out today and there is one statement in it that applies very equitably to agriculture and farming in this country. It says “Our fisheries and marine policy on the west coast is a perfect example of how Canada does not work, how unaccountable and dysfunctional our system of government can be”. If we get rid of the words “fisheries and marine policy” and replace them with “farming and agriculture policy” would the member not agree that statement is accurate when it comes to farming and agriculture in this country?

[Supply, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, what is it the Reform Party would like to see done first? Its motion reads that Canada should defend the interests of farmers by challenging the unfair subsidies and unfair trading practices of foreign countries, and that failing that it should come up with emergency measures to provide tax relief, lower input costs, reduce user fees and address the inadequacies of the farm safety net programs. Before the hon. member answers, I would like to know which one the party wants first. I would say that if there is no emergency relief right away, it does not matter about the first suggestion.

I do wish to remind the Reform Party as it so eloquently fights for farmers on the central Canadian plains, as does the NDP, we also have a crisis in farming on the east coast in Nova Scotia, particularly in the Annapolis Valley and the Musquodoboit Valley.

I wanted to remind the member of the crisis we are facing as well. I would also like him to answer the question I asked.

[Military Missions Beyond Canadian Boundaries, October 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is always refreshing to hear the Liberal Party talk about public safety. The member for Ottawa Centre actually admitted in the House of Commons that they were responsible for the depletion of the fish stocks. The member said “we destroyed the fish stocks”. A Liberal member said that. I wanted to reiterate it for the record.

My question for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans will be on the coast guard. The parliamentary secretary was in the meeting of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans when we asked the acting commander at that time, Michael Turner, of the coast guard a few pointed questions about the serious cuts and erosion of morale at the coast guard. Referring to the coast guard Mr. Turner said:

We are undergoing a period right now where we're having to re-examine some of our present operations. We are under considerable pressure funding wise, the whole department is. It is true that yes we have transferred a fair amount of money over the last few years from the coast guard to the rest of DFO.

That figure is $200 million of coast guard money which was sent to DFO. As we all know the DFO does not have a good track record when it comes to handling money. He continued:

There will be some additional changes in the maritimes but I can confirm the $55 million figure mentioned mentioned in yesterday's paper is not correct. Not at all, nowhere near correct. We are simply looking at a few percent that have to be adjusted.

I will speed up the clock a bit. Neil Bellefontaine, regional director of DFO in Atlantic Canada, said that his department was forced to cut its national operating budget by 5% or $45 million. We are almost there. We are almost reaching the cuts.

After the Swissair disaster off Peggy's Cove the brave men and women of the Mary Hichens , the first coast guard ship that arrived, received a letter weeks later from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans indicating how proud he was. I give the minister credit for indicating how proud he and the government were that these people went through their own private little torture chambers after seeing what they saw in the waters that night and throughout the following weeks. However, it is an absolute disgrace that in the same envelope they received from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans was another letter saying that the ship they were on would be tied up and they would be laid off.

We cannot say to these people that they did a great job under horrific circumstances and then turn around in another letter and say they are to be laid off. What a wonderful Christmas present that was. It was a major slap in the face.

The Daily News , a great paper in my riding in Nova Scotia, asked a question the other day of their readers saying “Given the importance of the service to the Atlantic region, should the federal government have left the coast guard alone and found the money from another source?” Seventy-one out of seventy-two callers said absolutely yes. The people in Atlantic Canada know the value of a good coast guard.

Who will guard the coast? Who will look after our three coastlines from coast to coast to coast and our inland waters of Lake Winnipeg and the Great Lakes, for example? The cuts to the coast guard have been absolutely devastating. We heard recently here about the cuts to the RCMP. We heard recently about the cuts to the military. Yet government members stand up and say that public safety will not be compromised. It will be compromised.

I would just love for the parliamentary secretary to come back with an answer to those remarks.

[Military Missions Beyond Canadian Boundaries, October 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say it is never really fair to follow the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. He mentioned speed. I know about his love for horses and he knows a lot about speed.

Speaking of speed the member talked about the lives that could be lost if we brought this motion to parliament. The fact is that lives are being lost now, even without this motion. Many lives have been lost in Kosovo, in Asia and other parts of the world because of bureaucratic bungling.

Yesterday in this House the Indian affairs and northern development minister stated “This government must be accountable and transparent”. Truer words could not be spoken. The unfortunate part is that this government is not acting on what she said.

There are 301 elected members of parliament in the House of Commons. Probably each and every single riding has military personnel serving in the country, very proudly and very well. It only stands to reason that members elected from those ridings should have a vote or a say on where we deploy these brave men and women around the world.

I wish to digress and mention my family background. My father was in the Dutch resistance during the war, was captured by the Germans and put in a prison camp. He and other members of the camp were rescued by the Canadians. The Canadians valiantly liberated the south of Holland and moved north through the rest of the country.

In 1956 my parents decided to immigrate to Canada. I was eight months old. My father said the only place to move in the world would be to Canada because it had a brave military and absolutely wonderful people. He said it would be a great opportunity for his children to grow up there.

Forty years later I stand in this House as a member of parliament. I came from the country of Holland and am now in Canada because my mother and father gave me and my eight brothers and sisters that opportunity. That is what this country has done. This country is based on fundamental democratic policies, policies that this motion reflects.

Our current military is under attack through underutilized resources. The media heavily attacks military concerns.

Everyone here has seen the tapes. Everyone here has read the media articles about our military men and women around the world. The unfortunate part is that those articles do not reflect the true essence of our military today.

In my riding of Sackville—Eastern Shore there is a town called Eastern Passage which has the military base of Shearwater. Shearwater has been there for 80 years, serving this country proud. I might note that 80 years has passed since World War I.

The men and women of Shearwater do an outstanding job. The problem is that they do that job, literally, on a shoestring. They are under attack by their own personal wages, they are under attack by the equipment they have and they are under attack by their deployment. Yet the motto of all military people, especially those in the navy, is “Ready, aye ready”.

The previous speaker from the Liberal Party indicated that this motion would risk or delay their capability of being ready. I would like to remind him and all of his colleagues in the Liberal Party that our military stands to be ready at a moment's notice. They are proud people.

The member from the Bloc indicated quite rightly that we are now in a globalized world. There is global uncertainty in other parts of the world. Our forces are traditionally put under UN forces to merge with other western nations to assist nations that are in conflict. Many times members of this House, especially in opposition and even those in the Liberal government, do not really know where the troops are being deployed or whose directions they are following.

All this motion is asking is that all elected members of parliament should at least understand where the troops are going and what they are doing. Members should have a say in that movement. I do not believe for a second that in the event of a crisis the opposition would purposely delay action.

Regardless of the suffering that our military personnel are going through on a domestic level, they do an outstanding job. On November 11 all of us in the country will honour the sacrifices of our military personnel, who are buried in over 60 countries around the world. We will remember all of the conflicts which they have encountered.

I will be very proud to lay a wreath in my riding on November 11 on behalf of the people of Canada. Wreaths will be laid by veterans at eight other cenotaphs in my riding on behalf of the people of Canada.

All the Reform Party is asking for in this motion, which I support, is the chance to have a say. We just want to have an opportunity to speak before we send men and women into areas of the world where they may run into conflict. An ill-fated decision which is made too quickly may cause the lives of our military men and women.

In the 1990s military action means more than just the deployment of troops. It is about families. It is about the women and children left behind or the men and children left behind.

We have a right as members of parliament to decide their respective partner's future. I do not believe that it should be just the government that decides. If the government is fully confident in this House of Commons and fully confident in other members of parliament, it would bring it to the House for debate. It could be a very quick debate if need be, but it should be one in which every member of parliament can debate and vote upon the situation. That is all we ask.

In speaking about veterans, the Liberal government talks about the work it has done, yet when it comes to the merchant marines it is very slow to react. We recently had three merchant marines on the steps of Parliament Hill, on a hunger strike, fighting for compensation for something that should have been dealt with right after the war. But this government waited and waited, and it still has not acted.

The fact is that merchant marines also died in the war. They were abandoned by the government after the war and that situation continues today. I pray to God that this government does not abandon them and fulfils its promise to speak with them and deal with their concerns.

If we are to continue to have a proud and honoured military tradition in this country, we need to have an open and transparent debate. That is true democracy. That is why I support the motion put forward by the member for Red Deer.

[Committees Of The House, October 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have the greatest respect for the member, but the fact is I did withdraw that statement.