Neil YOUNG

YOUNG, Neil

Personal Data

Party
New Democratic Party
Constituency
Beaches--Woodbine (Ontario)
Birth Date
August 28, 1936
Deceased Date
March 7, 2015
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Young_(politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=603c8d65-29c6-43b6-88fe-80d9994519b0&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
business agent, business manager, tool and die maker

Parliamentary Career

February 18, 1980 - July 9, 1984
NDP
  Beaches (Ontario)
  • Whip of the N.D.P. (October 1, 1981 - October 28, 1984)
September 4, 1984 - October 1, 1988
NDP
  Beaches (Ontario)
  • Whip of the N.D.P. (October 1, 1981 - October 28, 1984)
November 21, 1988 - September 8, 1993
NDP
  Beaches--Woodbine (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 231)


June 1, 1993

Mr. Neil Young (Beaches-Woodbine):

Mr. Spieaker, there is absolutely no question that Bill C-62 is very complicated in my reading of it. The hon. member for Okanagan-Shuswap, our critic on communications, has

been extremely helpful in my gaining a better understanding of the legislation. The amendment the member for Okanagan-Shuswap just introduced in the House raises a concern I have that it changes the whole concept people have of their relationship with Bell Canada and other telecommunication companies in the field.

It is my understanding the bill indicates a consumer or a customer of a telecommunications company would rent equipment from that company's telephone pole in the middle of the street, that is the wire that goes from the pole to the house. Once that wire goes into the house, however, it becomes the consumer's responsibility to maintain the wiring within the house, apartment building, hotel or wherever it happens to be.

That is quite different from how customer relationships have been established over the years with telecommunications companies. If this legislation goes through without that amendment being included in the act, an awful lot of people over the next 10 years or so will have a rude shock whenever they have a problem with the wiring within their places of accommodation and suddenly get a bill from Bell Canada or some other telecommunications company for repairs.

Generally speaking Bill C-62 proposes sweeping changes to the framework surrounding the telecommunications industry. They reflect the present government's philosophy on deregulation and privatization of everything that moves, walks or sleeps.

The complexity of the bill is clearly understood when we consider the number of amendments the government has brought forward to the bill introduced for the first time on February 27,1992. It is my understanding the bill requires such clarification that it has been changed something like 74 times from the time it received second reading to report stage. That is an awful lot of amendments, especially by a government that drafted the bill. Before it introduced it in the House I would have assumed it would have been satisfied the bill met what it intended it to do. That clearly is not the case. Considering the number of amendments that are being moved by members from both sides of the House it clearly is not a very satisfactory bill.

June 1, 1993

I would certainly make an argument that the amendment that was placed before the House 10 or 15 minutes ago deserves full consideration by members on all sides of the House, whether on the government side or not, because it does not seem to me that it offers consumers the protection from those telecommunications companies that they have enjoyed for many years.

If this bill passes without that amendment I will be receiving letters from people in my constituency over the next number of years complaining quite bitterly about how Bell Canada is now charging them for maintenance and repair costs that they never had to pay in the past. I do not think that would do the consumers of Canada any good at all.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT
Full View Permalink

May 12, 1993

Mr. Neil Young (Beaches-Woodbine):

Madam Speaker, I too have a petition that has been certified correct as to form and content pursuant to Standing Order 36.

This petition is signed by a number of individuals from various points in Ontario and Quebec. It is in respect to the lack of health and safety protection for employees of the House of Commons.

The petitioners indicate that whereas parts II and III of the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act have remained unproclaimed since 1986; whereas the employees of the House of Commons, the Senate, the Library of Parliament and the staff of members and senators have no health and safety protection under the law; whereas employees have no legislated role in a common agenda for joint staff management, occupational health and safely items; and whereas employees have no legislated labour standards, the undersigned petitioners humbly pray and call upon Parliament to press the

May 12, 1993

Routine Proceedings

government to finally reclaim parts II and III of the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   PETITIONS
Full View Permalink

March 31, 1993

Mr. Neil Young (Beaches-Woodbine):

Mr. Speaker, using the most recent figures avaUable, the Roeher Institute estimates disabUities cost Canada and Canadians some $19.5 bUlion a year. That is a lot of money and the bUl goes up each year.

For this reason alone all levels of government, as well as business and labour, should be finding ways to co-operate in order to deal with and address these costs and the effects of disabUity in our society.

March 31, 1993

However we must never forget that disabilities affect Canadians where they live: in their families and in their communities. The Canadian Association of Community Living is working to ensure that mentally handicapped people can live at home, go to the local school and take a job. Allowing people with disabilities to take their rightful place as full members of our society ought to be our goal.

Independence and integration of persons with disabilities makes not only good economic sense but it respects the rights of citizens and promotes social and political values that will benefit us all.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S. O. 31
Subtopic:   DISABILITIES
Full View Permalink

March 18, 1993

Mr. Neil Young (Beaches-Woodbine):

Madam Speaker, I know the hon. member for Saskatoon-Clark's Crossing has always displayed a concern for those individuals who have to depend on the social system in order to have any kind of standard of living.

I wonder if the hon. member is aware that an organization named the Coalition of Provincial Organizations of the Handicapped made a pre-budget presentation to the Minister of Finance on March 11, I believe it was. Its members expressed some concern not only about being trapped within the social welfare system and unable to get out of it because of the lack of employment opportunities, but they tried to bring to the attention of the Minister of Finance two things that were of great concern to them.

First of all the shifting of revenues under the Consolidated Revenue Fund of employment and immigration which they have relied on to a great extent for employment opportunities has been cut back in recent years. Also, the policy of employment and immigration now of increasingly applying training opportunities to those individuals only who are recipients of unemployment insurance benefits has effectively presented a barrier to someone who is not on unemployment insurance benefits from entering into those programs.

They were also very concerned about the transfer payments to the provinces which had to a large extent created a position where they cannot even get assistance under the Canada Assistance Plan because of the cutbacks from the federal level of government to provincial levels of government.

March 18, 1993

Supply

I want to ask the hon. member whether or not he has any information about the amounts of money that are involved in those transfer cutbacks. COPOH, the organization I just referred to, did not have those figures at hand the time they made the presentation. I think they would find that very useful information to have.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81 -CANADIAN YOUTH
Full View Permalink

March 18, 1993

Mr. Young (Beaches-Woodbine):

That would be satisfactory to the New Democratic Party also.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ALLOTTED DAY, S. O. 81 -CANADIAN YOUTH
Full View Permalink