May 13, 1983

STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

PC

Thomas Scott Fennell

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Scott Fennell (Ontario):

Madam Speaker, as new technologies advance, Canadians will be working fewer hours and shorter work weeks. The most significant result of this development is the time not spent at a regular job when people individually and collectively can create new technologies that will develop our basic industries and natural resources.

Canadians can exploit their traditional image as hewers of wood and drawers of water. We can, for example, advance new technologies for growing trees, producing higher volumes of grain, and cleaning up our great resources of water.

Someone once said to me that he can imagine a time when he will work three days a week. He will be able to devote over 50 per cent of his time to his own interests, and yet retain the same basic income and maintain his standard of living.

Imagine the benefit to this country from people with new ideas and new concepts. It will be very exciting, but we have to identify what people are going to do with their time.

There is potential for an exciting future, but unless it is properly planned it could be disastrous. Canadians will have to change their way of life so that the time not spent at a regular job is less passive and more structured and productive to provide self fulfillment. Canadians can become a creative society.

And so I ask the Government today to ensure this creative future for us and recognize and study ways to deal with the social implications that will arise from the new technologies.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Sub-subtopic:   IMPLICATIONS OF FUTURE WORK HABITS
Permalink

METRIC CONVERSION

PC

Stan Darling

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Stan Darling (Parry Sound-Muskoka):

Madam Speaker, on the page opposite the editorial page of today's Globe and Mail is an article by one of this nation's most illustrious

barristers, Mr. Morris Shumiatcher of Saskatchewan. His article is entitled, "Going Down the Drain with Metric", and its thrust is that the decimal system is far less practical for everyday use than is the duo-decimal system that was the free and voluntary choice of the people of Canada before this Government, with its mania for controlling people and things, stepped in.

The lead editorial in today's Toronto Sun is on the same theme. Amongst others, it makes the point that, while the U.K. and the U.S. have abandoned their metric commissions, ours has gone from having a budget of $44,000 a year to spending some $32 million annually. Mind you, it does serve to provide employment for 20 commissioners, 19 of whom are "Liberal hacks".

That this issue is so alive after these many years of Liberal pressure and propaganda speaks volumes about how deeply Canadians still feel, not only about the practicality of the metric system but about the Government's tactics in forcing its adoption. When will the Government admit that on this issue above all others it has misread both the requirement and the public will? Metric must be voluntary.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   METRIC CONVERSION
Sub-subtopic:   DENIAL OF VOLUNTARY CHOICE-SIZE OF COMMISSION'S BUDGET
Permalink

TRADE UNIONS

NDP

Sidney James Parker

New Democratic Party

Mr. Sid Parker (Kootenay East-Revelstoke):

Madam Speaker, the Government of Canada is surely aware that in Poland Mr. Lech Walesa and nine other unionists representing a majority of Polish workers sent a letter this week to their Government calling for the release of those convicted for union activity and political beliefs, and reinstatement of persons fired for union work or membership.

The union leaders pointed out that "disregarding the will of society can profit neither the Government nor society". The letter further noted that "re-establishment of union freedom is one of the indispensable elements of a much desired and genuine national agreement".

The New Democratic Party urges the Government of Canada to voice its support for the re-establishment of free trade unions in Poland, in the strongest terms possible, and actively to seek unanimous support at the International Labour Organization to be held in Geneva at the beginning of June.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   TRADE UNIONS
Sub-subtopic:   CALL FOR FREEDOM IN POLAND
Permalink

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM


May 13, 1983


PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO CONFIDENCE AND NONCONFIDENCE MOTIONS

LIB

Stanley Hudecki (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Mr. Stanley Hudecki (Hamilton West):

Madam Speaker, a curious anomaly exists in Parliamentary procedure. Not infrequently a Member of Parliament must vote along with other Members of his or her Party on a resolution which he or she favours but which he or she must oppose on the grounds that the vote is a confidence vote. Voting against it would defeat the Party.

The rational question is: why must there be a separation of voting in Parliament into two broad categories, confidence votes and non-confidence votes? The parliamentary rules indicate that all expenditures of money are considered confidence votes, as are resolutions arising out of the Throne Speech. As for non-confidence votes, these include motions in Private Members Bills and Bills proposed by the Opposition on so-called Opposition days. However, each year the Opposition may declare not more than two of these motions as confidence motions. Accordingly the Government in power must vote against these motions whether it agrees or disagrees with them.

It is little wonder that the general public labels politicians as primarily interested in maintaining themselves elected or ensuring future election, rather than supporting enlightened and constructive legislation.

I feel that the rationale for having these two broad categories of motions should be discussed in some detail before the Committee on Parliamentary Reform for clarification and possible revision.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO CONFIDENCE AND NONCONFIDENCE MOTIONS
Permalink

CHARTER OF RIGHTS

PC

Constantine George (Gus) Mitges

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Gus Mitges (Grey-Simcoe):

Madam Speaker, Dr. Jerome Lejeune, professor of fundamental genetics at the University of Paris, and a world reknowned authority in this field, has stated unequivocally that life begins at conception, that there is no diversity among his fellow scientists as to the truth of this statement, and that they are at a loss to understand the continual controversy regarding this matter.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms as it is now constituted does not recognize and does not apply to the fetus or the unborn as a living person. This is one of the reasons, Madam Speaker, that I and 23 other Members of Parliament voted against the amended Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 7 of the Charter gives everyone the right to life, liberty, security of the person, and the right not to be deprived of the same except by due process of the law. This right must also apply to the living unborn fetus because such persons are obviously not in a position to speak for themselves.

It is up to us to speak on their behalf to save and protect their lives.

Therefore, I call upon the Government to correct this monstrous inequity in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by making the necessary changes and thus eliminate the wilful slaughter and murder of some 60,000 to 80,000 Canadians every year across Canada.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   CHARTER OF RIGHTS
Sub-subtopic:   APPLICATION TO UNBORN INFANTS
Permalink

WESTERN GRAIN TRANSPORTATION ACT

PC

Gordon Edward Taylor

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Gordon Taylor (Bow River):

Madam Speaker, this is the relevant part of a telegram from a constituent:

-our business is pig breeding. We are proud of our western Canadian base and of our accomplishments as a world exporter of breeding stock and a major supplier to the industry in western Canada. We now face legislation which threatens our future. We see the impact so great so as to have us consider moving our base to a location favoured with a better future freer of political interference.

-concerning the Crow question we totally oppose the capitulation to Quebec as aided and abetted by the wheat pool bureaucrats. We fully support the 67,000 farmer commodity coalition position that Gilson compromise be adopted completely.

We feel the Pepin proposal of 50 per cent to producers, 50 per cent to the railroads with a review is absolutely the furthest we can afford to go.

The current legislation before Parliament will cost our own operations $217,000 in direct feed cost disadvantage each year. This type of distortion over time will reduce and then eliminate our customers and industry and us with them.

-secure a future for diversified agriculture in western Canada. Failure to get amendments will mean the sentencing of western agriculture to primary grain production, marketing its grain through an inefficient handling system reliant on subsidies to compete in world markets.

Bill C-155 unless amended, will impair and perhaps destroy the hog industry-

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   WESTERN GRAIN TRANSPORTATION ACT
Sub-subtopic:   DISADVANTAGES TO WESTERN HOG INDUSTRY
Permalink
LIB

Jeanne Sauvé (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Madam Speaker:

Order, please. The Hon. Member for Simcoe North (Mr. Lewis).

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   WESTERN GRAIN TRANSPORTATION ACT
Sub-subtopic:   DISADVANTAGES TO WESTERN HOG INDUSTRY
Permalink

INCOME TAX

PC

Douglas Grinslade Lewis (Official Opposition House Leader; Progressive Conservative Party House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Doug Lewis (Simcoe North):

Madam Speaker, it is becoming more and more obvious that the Income Tax Act and the forms are far too complicated for the average Canadian to understand. In 1979, 43 per cent of the returns submitted were revised by the Income Tax Department. In 1980 that figure grew to 45 per cent, and in 1981 it was 46 per cent. When almost half of the returns submitted have to be revised by the Income Tax Department, it is an indication that the form is too complicated.

In addition, I would point out to the House that the federal Government sends refunds to 11 million Canadians each year. That is 75 per cent of Canadians who submitted returns. Clearly, the income tax tables are adjusted and weighted in favour of the federal Government. I suggest to the House that

May 13, 1983

the Government should look into this. First, why the form not be simplified and, second, why is the federal Government charging 75 per cent of Canadians too much income tax as a result of the income tax tables?

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   INCOME TAX
Sub-subtopic:   COMPLICATED NATURE OF TAX RETURN FORMS
Permalink

ABSENCE OF MINISTERS

NDP

John Edward Broadbent

New Democratic Party

Hon. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa):

Madam Speaker, I rise to express concern about the absence of some crucial Ministers. In fact there are now 36 Ministers in the cabinet. I had some questions for the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) on an international matter.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   ABSENCE OF MINISTERS
Permalink

May 13, 1983