Mr. Carlo Rossi (Bourassa):

Mr. Speaker, during the last election campaign, the newly elected Member for La Prairie (Mr. Jourdenais) promised in his campaign brochures and advertisements to abolish tolls on the Champlain Bridge, and he made this a big issue. On "Face a face" on CKVL, the

Hon. Member also mentioned that this promise had the blessing of his party and his leader. But now, Mr. Speaker, it is a different story. It must have been a shock to the newly elected Member for La Prairie on Tuesday, when the Minister of State (Transport) (Mr. Bouchard) answered that he had no intention of doing away with the tolls in the near future. I suppose from now on the Hon. Member will perhaps refrain from asking questions in the House without first knowing the answer. Meanwhile, the people in Brossard, La Prairie and on the South Shore are still paying to cross the Champlain Bridge, despite all the promises made by the Member for La Prairie and his party.

I therefore want to ask that tolls on the Champlain Bridge be immediately removed as promised by the Conservative Member for La Prairie and otherwise, that the new Member for La Prairie resign, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Aurele Gervais (Timmins-Chapleau):

Mr. Speaker, as a new Member of Parliament I rise for the first time today.

Hear, hear!

Mr. Gervais:

I had not planned to make a statement today. As a matter of fact it is not a happy occasion for me, due to the nature of the topic. I refer to the nationally tragic incident which happened in my riding last Friday, more particularly in my home town. Of course I refer to the senseless shooting of OPP Officer Vern Miller of the Matheson detachment.

During the weekend I was inundated with calls from constituents in my riding expressing their view that capital punishment should be reintroduced in the House as soon as possible. They mentioned that, through polls and surveys, an overwhelming majority of Canadians wish the capital punishment issue to be brought before the House. On their behalf, and on behalf of all Canadians, the majority of Canadians who wish capital punishment to be reintroduced, I urge the Government to place it on its agenda as soon as possible for debate and a free vote.

November 21, 1984

Mr. Howard McCurdy (Windsor-Walkerville):

Mr. Speaker, the Romans recognized even in ancient times the indispensable requirement for a census in the determination of public policy. Of course the census counts people, but it appears that to this Government people do not count, at least not until 1991, in view of the announced cancellation of the 1986 census. This action has escaped critical notice until now.

Now we have the Royal Commission Report on Equality in Employment. Its recommendations for legislated employment equity indicate a critical requirement not only for census data but for an expanded data base respecting numbers and employment patterns for women, the disabled, native people, and visible minorities.

Indeed the report is complex and will require time for implementation. However, the Government has an easy way of quickly signalling its commitment to the achievement of employment equity-it must reconsider its cancellation of the 1986 census and implement it with an expanded data base, in light of the additional statistical information necessary for the effective implementation of the Abella report.

This is a step that must be taken. Otherwise, it will again reinforce the impression of the Government that social justice or sacred trusts should not stand in the way of prosperity for the privileged few.

Mr. George Henderson (Egmont):

Mr. Speaker, the recent government financial statement contains several changes which are of great concern to the tourism industry on Prince Edward Island, from increases to ferry rates, to increases to the cost of entering and using facilities in our national park, to increases in gasoline prices. The entire industry will in some way be affected.

Applications from the tourism industry for assistance under IRDP will no longer be accepted by DRIE. Instead, the Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion (Mr. Stevens) has indicated that tourism projects will be dealt with through instruments such as federal-provincial agreements. I trust the Minister has taken steps to ensure that the tourism industry will be fully represented in the months ahead while the transition from IRDP to the new and as of yet unnamed program is introduced.

It is my sincere hope that the Minister of State for Tourism (Mr. McMillan), as an islander with a great interest in the future of the industry, has brought to the attention of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney), the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mazankowski), the Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion, and the Minister of the Environment (Mrs. Blais-

Grenier), the dire implications that these changes will have on the Prince Edward Island tourism industry, not to mention on islanders themselves.

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg-Birds Hill):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (Miss Carney) if she intended to initiate a parliamentary inquiry into all aspects of the nuclear industry as the Progressive Conservative Government of 1979 intended to undertake. In her response the Minister conveyed two impressions which should be cause for concern on the part of the clear majority of Canadians who are concerned about any further investment in nuclear energy, whether their concern arises from the increasing cost of this energy option, the environmental hazard it poses, or the connection between nuclear power and the nuclear arms race.

The Minister said that she would have to consult with AECL to see if it thought an inquiry would be useful. This is like asking the Mafia if it thinks an investigation into organized crime would be useful. Then she made sense of this incredible answer by commenting that an inquiry might not be in order because, after all, it might only be a problem of marketing. She appears unable to ask the question whether the product should in fact be for sale either here or abroad. In this she has revealed just how uncritical an approach the Conservatives may be taking toward this issue-reminiscent of the Liberals.

I call on the Government to initiate an inquiry into the nuclear industry in consultation with groups like the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and to reverse the cuts in environmental services, conservation, and alternative energy. Let us have some evidence that we are on the eve of 1985 and not at the beginning of some terrible flashback to 1955.

Mr. Ken James (Sarnia-Lambton):

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian petrochemical industry was to some extent pleased with the financial statement made in the House by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Wilson) on November 8. The announcement that the petroleum compensation charge, PCC, would not be increased on crude oil used as a feedstock for the production of petrochemicals, was one the industry had been waiting to hear from the new Government. It has demonstrated the intent of this Government to aid, without resorting to financial bail-outs, an industry that has suffered under an

November 21, 1984

unfair tax burden for years. The PCC will, however, be increased on this industry's crude oil consumption for energy requirements.

The recent announcement by the Government of the Province of Alberta to the effect that ethylene producers there would receive bridge financing amounting to 25 per cent of their tax burden to relieve the fiscal problems of our gas based Canadian petrochemical industry, is an indication that Alberta felt it must take the initiative while waiting for federal government energy policy action. I submit this action by Alberta has swung the pendulum over to the gas-based petrochemical side of the arc and something must be done to equalize the situation.

The Ontario oil-based companies, which are now paying more for their crude oil used for energy requirements, can ill afford any increase in their tax loads. I must serve the Government with notice that the situation is, for some, fast becoming intolerable. 1 submit the job is not nearly finished.

Mr. Speaker:

Order. I regret to inform the Hon. Member that his time has expired.

Mr. Ted Schellenberg (Nanaimo-Alberni):

Mr. Speaker, 1 rise to request that our new Government curtail the cost of government. In his speech to the House on November 8 the Hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Wilson) set Canada on a new course of restraint and review, urging Members to find ways not only to reduce the federal deficit but, in his words, "to reduce the burden of unnecessary government". Surely my colleagues in this House will agree that Members of Parliament are effective legislators and problem solvers and that they perform a valuable service to our nation, but how many members are enough? Two hundred and eleven? Two hundred and eighty-two?

The Canadian Electoral Boundaries Commission, under the authority of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, will soon recommend that our number grow to 310, five new members in British Columbia alone.

Members of Parliament perform a valuable service, Mr. Speaker, but we are expensive. Now that my Government has shown the lead by reducing the salaries of senior Ministers, I repectfully ask that my Government postpone the readjustment of electoral boundaries until the economy of our nation improves. The savings to the treasury would total in the millions.

Oral Questions