Lorne Edmund NYSTROM

NYSTROM, The Hon. Lorne Edmund, P.C., B.A.

Personal Data

Party
New Democratic Party
Constituency
Regina--Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)
Birth Date
April 26, 1946
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorne_Nystrom
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=3aa665bd-9be3-4142-bf3c-cb3fa717b0cb&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
consultant, teacher

Parliamentary Career

June 25, 1968 - September 1, 1972
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
October 30, 1972 - May 9, 1974
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
July 8, 1974 - March 26, 1979
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
  • Whip of the N.D.P. (June 1, 1974 - January 1, 1981)
May 22, 1979 - December 14, 1979
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
  • Whip of the N.D.P. (June 1, 1974 - January 1, 1981)
February 18, 1980 - July 9, 1984
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
  • Whip of the N.D.P. (June 1, 1974 - January 1, 1981)
September 4, 1984 - October 1, 1988
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
  • N.D.P. Deputy House Leader (September 5, 1986 - December 1, 1988)
November 21, 1988 - September 8, 1993
NDP
  Yorkton--Melville (Saskatchewan)
  • N.D.P. Deputy House Leader (September 5, 1986 - December 1, 1988)
June 2, 1997 - October 22, 2000
NDP
  Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)
  • N.D.P. Deputy House Leader (June 25, 1997 - February 5, 2003)
November 27, 2000 - May 23, 2004
NDP
  Regina--Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)
  • N.D.P. Deputy House Leader (June 25, 1997 - February 5, 2003)
  • Deputy Whip of the N.D.P. (February 6, 2003 - July 21, 2004)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 1315)


May 11, 2004

Hon. Lorne Nystrom

What has happened is that we have had radical cutbacks by the Liberal Party to health care funding in Canada. Back in the 1960s, the NDP managed to force the Liberal Party to bring in national health care. I know that the member across is running in shame and hiding his head.

When the NDP managed to force the Liberal Party under Pearson to bring in health care, it was funded on a fifty-fifty basis by the federal government and the provinces, but there have been massive cutbacks by the federal government. Now the federal government funds only about 16% of health care and the provincial governments about 84% in terms of cash payments for health care in the country.

What we in the NDP are saying, and it is what Roy Romanow said as well, is that the federal contribution to health care should be brought up to 25% of the total costs.

What does that mean? In my province of Saskatchewan, which is one of the smaller provinces of the country, the health care budget this year was $2.69 billion. That is an increase of 6.3% in the last year. In other words, the Saskatchewan NDP government has been funding health care at a rate higher than the inflation rate, so it has been keeping up, but despite that, health care is underfunded in my province, just as it is in other provinces. If the federal government increased its share from 16% to 25%, it would be an additional $306 million per year for the province of Saskatchewan. That would be a significant contribution to the Saskatchewan health care system.

In British Columbia--the member for Vancouver East is here--if the federal government paid 25% of the costs instead of 16% there would be an additional $1.1 billion put into the health care system there. In Alberta, it would mean an additional $751 million. In Quebec, there would be an additional $2.15 billion in health care funding. In Newfoundland and Labrador, it would be an additional $175 million.

In New Brunswick--the member from New Brunswick is across the way--it would be an additional $214 million if the federal government paid 25% of the costs as opposed to about 16% of the costs. Imagine what that extra $214 million would mean for a province like New Brunswick. That is an awful lot of cash for the health care system in the province of New Brunswick. We should not forget that is at only 25%. In the 1960s when the health care system was brought in, the federal government paid 50% of the costs. Now it pays 16% of the costs and the NDP is recommending 25% of the costs. That would be an extra $214 million for the province of New Brunswick.

Prince Edward Island would get another $43 million if the federal government paid 25% of the cost of medicare for Canadian provinces. Manitoba would also receive a large increase and Quebec, as I mentioned, would receive another $2.15 billion.

In every province in this country there would be a large increase if the federal government were to pay some 25% of the costs of health care.

Therefore, one thing that has to happen is more federal health care money coming into the health care system. The other concern we have is the privatization of health care in this country. It has increased during the Liberal Party's term of office. The main reason for it is that they have starved and strangled the health care system. When we starve the health care system, we force the provinces to look elsewhere and we have seen the establishment of some private clinics, some private health care facilities, some for profit health care facilities.

I believe that health care in this country should be provided on a non-profit basis. It should be a public system, accessible to each and every single Canadian, regardless of the thickness of one's pocketbook or wallet.

That is not the way the government across the way is going. The health minister himself was open to more privatization in the health care system. I do believe that is absolutely and totally wrong. The Minister of Health, just a few days ago, made this statement:

If some provinces want to experiment with the private delivery option, my view is that as long as they respect the single-payer, public payer, we should be examining these efforts.

So the Liberals want to explore the private delivery of health care, and we do not have private delivery in health care unless we build in the profit motive. The profit motive has to be there to attract private investment and the minister is open to private investment. He is open to for profit health care. I believe that is the wrong way to go.

It is the way of the Conservative Party. The member from Penticton is leaving. I remember that his great leader Brian Mulroney talked at one time of greater health care. His friend in Ontario, Mike Harris, did exactly the same thing, and Grant Devine in my province of Saskatchewan. Now we have this other great conservative party, led by the Prime Minister from LaSalle—Émard--

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 11, 2004

Hon. Lorne Nystrom

Mr. Speaker, I did and I said that in British Columbia the NDP is skyrocketing in popularity. We will see on election night the great loss of Conservative seats in British Columbia federally as people react against the Conservative Party.

The member also asked about fiscal responsibility and about what social democrats do. I told him what happened in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the record of Tommy Douglas and Alan Blakeney and Roy Romanow right up to the current day, or Ed Schreyer in Manitoba and Howard Pawley and Gary Doer in Manitoba. These are examples of governments that are fiscally responsible compared to the Conservatives.

The Conservative Party of Grant Devine, they worship people like them. They are their heroes. The Conservative government of Grant Devine almost bankrupted Saskatchewan. We could look to their great leader Brian Mulroney and the great debts that he had. Mulroney was the leader of the Conservative Party.

It is going to be very interesting in Blackstrap for example, to ask the ordinary people what they think of Brian Mulroney and the Conservative Party. There are some people here who fought really hard against Brian Mulroney and now all of a sudden he has endorsed the party, he is the former leader and they worship this guy. It is the same old party once again.

George Bush is running up a huge deficit in the United States and yet they worship him. They want us to go to war in Iraq. They want to send young people to Iraq who would be killed there. George Bush is the guy who lied to the world and lied to Congress about weapons of mass destruction, yet they support George Bush all the way.

People do not want that kind of extremism in our country. That is why the NDP is now the alternative to the government across the way. That is why the NDP is on the march. That is why that extremist republican party north is going to be marginalized after the next campaign.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 6, 2004

Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Regina—Qu'Appelle, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Earlier today it appeared in the newspapers that the justice committee report on the appointment of Supreme Court justices may have been leaked to the press. I am a member of that committee and I feel my privileges have been infringed upon.

I was called by three journalists yesterday and made a point of not talking about the contents of the committee report or minority reports that will be attached to that particular report of the justice committee.

Mr. Speaker, for your thought and study, I would refer you to an article that appeared today in the National General News . The headline reads:

Feds won't let provinces nominate Supreme Court candidates, say sources.

I would also refer you to an article in the Victoria Times Colonist . The headline reads “Report says PM should pick justices”.

Finally, I will read an article from Montreal's La Presse . The headline reads: “Liberals refuse provincial input into Supreme Court appointments”.

The article contained more alleged details from the committee report that has not yet been tabled in the House of Commons. I think that is an infringement upon the rights of any member of Parliament who sits on a parliamentary committee.

This is a report that was drafted in camera and details of the report appear to have been leaked to the press. That is a serious infringement upon the rights and privileges of all members of the committee and all members of the House of Commons, whether or not we sit on that particular committee.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Privilege
Full View Permalink

April 30, 2004

Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Regina—Qu'Appelle, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, I think the House is back next week, but I am not sure the member for Souris--Moose Mountain will be speaking then. I want to take this opportunity to wish him well when he retires from this place and to say publicly that he is a very decent human being. He has become a very good friend over the last number of years, and is one of those people we can learn a lot from.

Sometimes there are those of us in politics who are very partisan and let that partisanship affect our friendships. The member for Souris--Moose Mountain is a partisan Conservative politician, but that has never affected his friendships. He has become a very good friend over the years. I wish him all the best. I will miss him around this place.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Canada National Parks Act
Full View Permalink

April 30, 2004

Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Regina—Qu'Appelle, NDP)

Mr. Speaker, there are some other facts as well. One fact is that the U.S. missile defence agency has a budget line for space based programs. An additional fact is that a former United States assistant secretary of defence said missile defence “is really star wars two”. Another fact is that Russia has already tested a hypersonic weapon capable of penetrating any missile defence shield.

Does the government have the courage to stand up today and say no to missile defence or is it happy to have the same policy as the Conservative Party to my extreme right?

Topic:   Oral Question Period
Subtopic:   National Defence
Full View Permalink