Rodger Cuzner

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is a very interesting ploy on the part of the government to try to defend the rooking that the people of Nova Scotia took on the accord by having a downtown Ottawa member get up and try to play the shell game, change the subject, and talk about child care. Talk about a joke: it is a joke that has everything in it except the knock-knock.

Let us talk about the taxing of that benefit. Let us talk about the $250 million you put in the last budget to create new spaces. It was one-quarter of what we had allocated, the $1 billion that had been negotiated to create new child care spaces, which you guys ripped out of the last budget upon coming to power--

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the relatively capable and, most times, eloquent member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.

It is sad to think that as an elected member from Nova Scotia, representing the people of Cape Breton Canso, I must come to this chamber and again fight for what is theirs and fight a battle that has already been won.

When we look at the accord, the deal that was signed by a past government with the premiers of two provinces, it is shameful, as a result of the budget last week, that we are forced to once again go back and plead our case and make it look like it is cap in hand politics coming from the east coast. That is shameful and it is as a result of the actions of the government.

The saddest part for me is that the Conservatives, through today's debate, have been able to look straight into the camera and spin to the people of Nova Scotia and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that this is a good deal for them, that there is no loss and that they are supportive of the people in their provinces. We know that it is just not true. However, it is not surprising because we have seen this time and again: a break in the trust, a word given by the government and promises made by the government but yet all we get are broken promises.

However, I can say that Nova Scotians know. The government is not going to spin Nova Scotians who know the difference on this particular issue. Atlantic Canadians know the difference.

I want to mention a comment by the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, Danny Williams, because when he came out hard against the budget I thought he nailed it early. He referred to a written promise by the Prime Minister that he would have received in a lead up to the last election. The letter reads.

A Conservative government would support changes to the equalization program to ensure provinces and territories have the opportunity to develop their economies and sustain important core social services. We will remove non-renewable natural resource revenue from the equalization formula to encourage the development of economic growth in the non-renewable service sectors across Canada.

That was in writing to the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. We know the result of that. We know how things have changed and of the broken promise to those people. We know the comments of Premier Danny Williams. He stated that the Prime Minister “should not be trusted”. Surprise, surprise. We have seen time and again the actions of the Prime Minister. He has broken faith and broken promises continually, not just to the provinces, but to the people of Canada.

What about income trusts? We can take another blurb from the campaign platform, from the Prime Minister.

A Conservative government will stop the Liberal attack on savings and preserve income trusts by not imposing any new taxes on them.

We know the break in trust there, the big trust bust of a 31.5% tax on income trusts; $25 billion in losses for hard-working Canadians. It drove the TSX down over 300 points. We saw that promise made and we saw that promise broken and yet the Conservatives will look straight into the camera and tell us that we are getting one heck of a deal from them.

I spoke earlier in the debate with the member from Eastern Shore. Both he and I have raised in the House the promise in writing to the widow of a second world war veteran, Joyce Carter, a fabulous lady who has done a temendous amount of work for the veterans independence program. Prior to the last election, she had in her hand an assurance from the then leader of the official opposition that if put in power his party would deliver provisions under the VIP for all veterans, second world war veterans, Korean War veterans. All veterans would be covered under VIP immediately.

A little bit of time has passed. The Conservative government has had two cracks at it. It has had two budgets and both times it failed to deliver on that VIP promise. It failed to support the promise that was made to the veterans of this country and the widows of those veterans. The government has broken faith.

Premier Rodney MacDonald has put forward a resolution in the provincial legislature. Danny Williams came out strong as a result of the budget announcement by the government. Premier MacDonald was a little more tentative. He said that the budget was disappointing. I was a little surprised by that because it is sort of like Britney Spears walking out of the barber shop two weeks ago and looking in the mirror and saying “It is a little disappointing”. If we think Britney was skinned, the people in Nova Scotia were skinned with this budget.

Today in the Nova Scotia legislature the premier has rallied the support of all parties. The premier understands that the intent of the Atlantic accord was to be a stand alone, economic tool to support Nova Scotia's goal of self-sufficiency. I want to quote the premier today. He said:

The federal government has laid down a discriminatory budgetary hammer on the people of Nova Scotia.

It is blatantly unfair.

In altering the formula and treating our accord money as equalization, the federal government has done exactly what it said it would not do, and pushed us backward.

Those statements were made by the Conservative premier of the province of Nova Scotia. The entire legislative assembly has rallied around this. There is a call to the Prime Minister to ensure that the intent of the Atlantic accord is respected and honoured.

I am sure my colleague from Sydney--Victoria would support me on this. Although both he and I are of different political stripes from the former premier of Nova Scotia, John Hamm, we held a great deal of respect for the former premier. He was a man of his word and he was honourable. He certainly was not scared to deliver bad news. We were able to work with him on a number of different files. I can look at the Sydney tar ponds file and the money that was peeled out for that of $400 million; $280 million federal and $120 million provincial. The premier and both of us as elected federal officials worked with the community, which put a tremendous amount of time into the project. We moved forward with the moneys allocated to clean up that project, and it will be done.

It was sort of cute that after it made an announcement about what technology it would use, the Conservative government sent down the Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency to do its dirty work and said that nothing had been done in the last 13 years. It was a kick in the teeth to the community.

When the agreement was negotiated, Nove Scotia was guaranteed that it would receive 100% protection from clawbacks resulting from any increase in non-renewable resource revenue. The former Liberal prime minister went beyond that and wrote a cheque for $800 million, which the former premier applied to Nova Scotia's debt. That money loosened up $40 million a year for schools, roads, health, education, those types of initiatives.

I am standing with the legislature of Nova Scotia and with all Nova Scotians and I am asking the Prime Minister to honour the intent of the Atlantic accord through a revision to the budget.

[Business of Supply, March 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, although we are from different parties, my colleague across the way and I walk in similar steps in many regards.

One case that I know the member is very aware of is the case of an 80-year-old widow of a second world war veteran who also received an assurance from the then leader of the opposition, now the Prime Minister, and a written guarantee that provisions were going to be taken and that all veterans would fall under the help of the veterans independence program We are very aware of that in the House.

If the government is able to break a promise to the 80-year-old widow of one of our second world war veterans, is it any surprise that the Prime Minister would break a promise to Danny Williams?

[The Budget, March 21st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address my question to my colleague with regard to not just what was not in the budget, but the expectation that was set in the previous election prior to the budget. The government has had two swings at it now with two budgets to deliver on some of its campaign promises.

Certainly the people in Atlantic Canada are hearing loud and clear the shortcomings from this past budget for example.

I guess the question would be better addressed to one of the Atlantic ministers but apparently the Minister of Justice has enrolled them in the witness protection program and we cannot find them to get answers from them. We know in Atlantic Canada how we on the east coast have been short-sheeted by this budget.

What about the people in Manitoba, some of the expectations that have been set and how this budget has fallen far short?

[The Budget, March 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have to question the commitment of the government, certainly the lack of commitment through this budget, to the sporting community in this country. The minister talked about the own the podium program. There was no new money for own the podium. The money was accelerated and that was it. Nothing for the road to excellence program. That turns our back on our summer athletes, those going to Beijing and those going to London in 2012. Zero support for those athletes.

However, the most obvious and prevalent loss through this budget is the campaign promise that was made by the Conservatives back in the last election. They have had two shots at it now and that is 1% of the health budget for sport. There is nothing in this budget on that. Why has this sport minister thrown in the towel on sport in this country?

[Wladyslaw Guzdziol, March 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the good people of Cape Breton and eastern Nova Scotia have suffered a tremendous loss with the passing of a committed and distinguished citizen, Dr. Wladyslaw Guzdziol. Dr. Guzdziol passed away this week at the age of 93, having served multiple generations of families in the Port Hawkesbury area.

Born in Poland in 1913, he completed his medical doctorate in 1937. During the second world war he was a prisoner of war in Poland and placed in a Soviet prison camp. He remained captive for more than five years, surviving seven different camps.

After liberation, he served as a lieutenant in the Polish navy where he met his wonderful wife, Anna. They were wed in 1947 and soon afterward came to Cape Breton.

He was a doctor who prided himself on extending a helping hand to the poor, the vulnerable and did so for over 55 years. Our community mourns the loss of a man of fortitude and distinction.

To his wife, Anna, and daughter, Barbara, we pass on our heartfelt condolences.

[Lloyd Clemett, February 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that we mark the passing this week of Lloyd Clemett, who was one of the last three surviving Canadian veterans of the first world war.

Mr. Clemett represents a generation of Canadians who so bravely served their country on the fields of Europe over 90 years ago. We must never forget the contribution made by Mr. Clemett and his comrades to the cause of democracy and peace around the world.

His passing at age 107 also reminds us of his much younger comrades serving Canada today. As proud as we are of the past achievements of our war veterans, we are equally as proud of all Canadian men and women in uniform around the world.

The Liberal Party of Canada and indeed all members of this House offer their heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of Lloyd Clemett.

[Canadian Human Rights Act, February 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Hochelaga has really echoed a number of the concerns that have been brought forward to the floor with regard to the implementation time and the transition period.

We are looking at the six month period for transition with the bill as put forward by the government. However, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has recommended an 18 to 30 month transition period, so that is obviously of concern. A lack of consultation is another concern.

One concern my colleague did not address was the cost. These aboriginal communities are those least able to accommodate this type of change. Within their A based budgets, within their annual operating budgets, I cannot see them taking money from an important aspect of running their communities such as housing, social program or whatever it might be. That money has to come from somewhere and it could be substantive.

Perhaps my colleague could make a comment on that. Will there will be costs? What kinds of costs will there be? Where should the money come from?

[Canadian Human Rights Act, February 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague brought out two points that I would like more information on. I asked my colleague from Nunavut about consultation, or the lack thereof, throughout this process and on this piece of legislation. Could the member comment on the groups and various agencies he has been in contact with and the concerns that have been raised over consultation or the lack thereof with moving this piece of legislation forward?

The other issue I would like the member to comment on, and he mentioned it twice through his presentation, pertains to the resources that are going to be needed by the various communities in order to build capacities to address this. I understand fully that these communities are not in a position that they can draw any moneys from their A-based budgets, and that they should be given the opportunity to have access to additional funds should this legislation go forward.

Is there any indication of where that would come from? Is there any indication of what kind of money we are talking about? What are some of the costs to the community that may arise by the passing of this legislation? Does this legislation do anything to help the communities deal with those types of challenges? Could my colleague please comment on those two areas?

[Canadian Human Rights Act, February 19th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Nunavut brings an honest and sincere attitude as well as a great deal of respect to this issue. She speaks with great knowledge.

We on this side of the House see a theme emerging from the government. The government has no will to consult with stakeholders on any piece of legislation. We saw that on income trusts. There was absolutely no consultation with the financial community. I am very leery about the fisheries act that will be coming forward in the next number of weeks and the sheer lack of consultation. An essential basic aspect of developing legislation is to include people in the process.

My colleague from Nunavut is a very respected member with respect to a number of aboriginal issues and is very much dialled in with many national aboriginal groups. I would like to ask her what the response has been from these groups. Have they been consulted? Has there been any respect shown for the concerns they have brought forward?