Dennis Joseph MILLS

MILLS, Dennis Joseph

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Toronto--Danforth (Ontario)
Birth Date
July 19, 1946
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Mills
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=807fcbb4-74d0-4f1f-8ed7-957075db258d&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
author, businessman

Parliamentary Career

November 21, 1988 - September 8, 1993
LIB
  Broadview--Greenwood (Ontario)
October 25, 1993 - April 27, 1997
LIB
  Broadview--Greenwood (Ontario)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry, Science and Technology (Industry) (December 6, 1993 - March 28, 1995)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Industry) (December 6, 1993 - March 28, 1995)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry (March 29, 1995 - February 22, 1996)
May 8, 1996 - April 27, 1997
IND
  Broadview--Greenwood (Ontario)
August 7, 1996 - April 27, 1997
LIB
  Broadview--Greenwood (Ontario)
June 2, 1997 - October 22, 2000
LIB
  Broadview--Greenwood (Ontario)
November 27, 2000 - May 23, 2004
LIB
  Toronto--Danforth (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 362)


March 30, 2004

Mr. Dennis Mills

No, corporate.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   The Budget
Full View Permalink

March 30, 2004

Mr. Dennis Mills

Mr. Speaker, I have tried repeatedly to educate my NDP opponent, Jack Layton, on the whole issue of taxes. On the notion of punishing achievers, whether they be small businesses or even large businesses that are paying Canadians good solid union wages, if all of a sudden we become such a persecutor of those people that are paying good solid union wages, those people are going to end up in countries where people get ridiculously low wages.

Jack Layton has to start cheerleading business. He has to start cheerleading those people that are creating jobs in this country, especially the small business men and women and especially those corporations that have good environmental standards and that pay good solid union wages. The day that this country slips into punishing achievers, that is the day when our fiscal framework will go right into the toilet.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   The Budget
Full View Permalink

March 30, 2004

Mr. Dennis Mills

Mr. Speaker, I celebrate. I am shocked. I am without words because we now have a shift in NDP policy. The NDP is now saying it wants a fair tax system. I would like to hear the specifics about this fair tax system. However, the reality is that the leader of the NDP, Jack Layton, for the last three months has been pounding our Prime Minister and pounding our Minister of Finance. I can show clip after clip where he is against stimulating the small businessman and small businesswoman economy of this country. If he wants to convert and change, I celebrate that.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   The Budget
Full View Permalink

March 30, 2004

Mr. Dennis Mills

I believe in and my colleague has reminded me about affordable housing. This is another thing that drives me crazy about my future opponent, Jack Layton. He made the statement that the government has done nothing for affordable housing. In the GTA alone, we have averaged $273 million a year for the last 10 years. That to me is a lot of money. That is separate and apart from the shelter money that we supply for the homeless.

We do not have an unlimited treasury here and I believe that there has to be a balance. If we ask a young person or a small business man or woman today if they would rather have a business loan at 5% or a mortgage at 3.5%, but to do that would mean that we would not be able to satisfy every need, that we would have to use balance, I bet that 9 out of 10 Canadians are going to say that they like the fiscal direction and the financial plan that the government is on.

That is why I say that this budget is like a crafted jewel because it has put most of the opportunity into entrepreneurship across this country. Our job growth, our job capacity, our domestic and international opportunities, and our future communities rest with small business men and women. That is my case.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   The Budget
Full View Permalink

March 22, 2004

Mr. Dennis Mills (Toronto—Danforth, Lib.)

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Kitchener Centre.

I note that the member for Etobicoke North is in the House and I cannot help but reflect on a comment that he made last week on national television about the performance of the government over the last 10 years in terms of its fiscal discipline. I call it sometimes a fiscal obsession. We have paid off some $46 billion in debt which is a savings of over $3 billion annually. By eliminating that deficit, there is a savings to Canadian taxpayers in interest payments of $115 million a day.

I am not particularly proud of that because I tend to be a little more left of centre. I would have preferred to have a little bit of that money invested in some of those other areas where we have people in pain. I want to bring this up because I want to illustrate the point that when a government's record is analyzed, we cannot just take one piece of a multi-trillion dollar budget over 10 years.

In regard to this so-called sponsorship scandal, I have listened in committee and I have heard over the last few weeks a series of misstatements that are so shameful to the House of Commons. I find it, quite frankly, hypocritical.

First of all, I want to make the statement to all Canadians that we had, in this hundred million dollars of contracts over five years, some stained contracts. There were some areas where there has been mismanagement.

The former minister of public works, Mr. Gagliano, acknowledged that last week in front of our committee and said he ordered an audit. When the audit said there were administrative mistakes and errors, he asked if he should bring in the police. He was told no, that these were administrative mistakes. He then ordered a 37 point program to begin the process of correcting this mismanagement on some of these files.

What drives me crazy is the hypocrisy of those members of Parliament and those members in the media that know $100 million did not go out the back door. The Auditor General acknowledged that the $100 million was made up of three components. There were $60 million in commissions to the advertising agencies. I checked with the advertising council of Canada and those are the industry's standard rates for advertising agencies. We cannot expect advertising agencies to get paid nothing. The standard rate is 17%. Now if there were agencies that on some jobs double-dipped, they should be punished, but they are still entitled to a basic fee.

We had $84 million in production costs on 2,000 special events across Canada. Only 60% of them were in Quebec. What drives me nuts is the way people are casting aspersions on the fact that all of this happened in Quebec. It did not because 40% of this work was done across the country.

I want to be very specific in my remarks because last week in committee a member of the New Democratic Party said that in the Pan Am Games in Winnipeg, where it said on our list that $2.2 million went to the Pan Am games, the organizers only received $600,000, and the balance went missing. That is not the truth.

That happened to be one project out of the 2,000 with which I had some familiarity. There was a 10,000 square foot exhibit celebrating the ingenuity of Canadians and $1.2 million of that money went to the design, manufacture and presentation of that exhibit for the period of the Pan Am games.

The opposition said that it went missing. I am telling all members, even members on my own side of the House, that we must stop the hypocrisy here. There were a lot of production costs in those 2,000 events across Canada over five years. We should punish the stained and bring in the police for those who tried to rip off the system, but we should not stain the entire sponsorship program.

I was involved in some of those projects. We looked after a family farm tribute and we used sponsorship money. It helped trigger the government to get an extra $1 billion for farmers six months ahead of schedule. We used some of the money for the Pope's visit on World Youth Day in Toronto. There was nothing wrong with that. We bought pilgrims bags that the prisoners of this country made. We used some of that money for the Rolling Stones for production costs. The money never went missing.

It is really shameful that before we cast aspersions and condemn people, we do not take a look at the production costs of every single one of those 1,987 projects, because surely to goodness people would admit that in 1,987 projects over five years there had to be production costs.

We saw the signs. Hon. members may not agree that we should be supporting CFL, lacrosse, tulip festivals or francophone games. They may not agree with it, but if they went to every one of those events, they would see that there was signage. They would see that there were all kinds of services and the Government of Canada presence was there.

Before we condemn people, before we say $100 million went out the back door, which is a lie, we should ensure that we get all those production costs and separate the real solid value for money production costs, and the real solid industry standard commissions from those that are stained. My prediction is that when this is all over, yes, there will be stain, but this will go from $100 million out the back door to probably less than $10 million.

I am not condoning in any way, shape or form anybody ripping off the Government of Canada of $10 million over five years, but this notion that we perpetrate and promote $100 million out the back door on production costs of 1,987 events is a sham. We should stop it and get it back on the right track.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink