Jack Wendele SHIELDS

SHIELDS, Jack Wendele, C.D., B.Ed.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Athabasca (Alberta)
Birth Date
December 25, 1929
Deceased Date
November 29, 2004
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Shields
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=a8b48b77-419f-4e41-a8a0-05bd7730f8f3&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
businessman, teacher

Parliamentary Career

February 18, 1980 - July 9, 1984
PC
  Athabaska (Alberta)
September 4, 1984 - October 1, 1988
PC
  Athabaska (Alberta)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (October 15, 1986 - April 4, 1989)
November 21, 1988 - September 8, 1993
PC
  Athabasca (Alberta)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (October 15, 1986 - April 4, 1989)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade (April 5, 1989 - May 7, 1991)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Immigration (May 8, 1991 - March 10, 1993)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour (March 11, 1993 - June 24, 1993)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour (September 1, 1993 - October 26, 1993)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Immigration (September 1, 1993 - October 26, 1993)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 270)


June 15, 1993

Mr. Jack Shields (Athabasca):

Madam Speaker, Air Canada, headed by Hollis Harris, has done everything in its power to destroy Canadian competition in the airline industry.

Air Canada has applied to the cabinet to overturn the ruling of the National Transportation Agency, claiming that cabinet should not allow American Airlines to purchase a share of Canadian Airlines while at the same time Air Canada has bailed out the bankrupt Continental Airlines in the United States. Hollis Harris then calls for re-regulation of the airline industry in Canada. Is he also advocating re-regulation in the United States? Hollis Harris and Air Canada want a monopoly on air service to Canadians. Air Canada does not want competition.

I urge all members of Parliament in this House and the cabinet to give a resounding no to Hollis Harris and Air Canada and tell him to get on with the business of running an airline, negotiate Canadian out of Gemini and allow competition to flourish in Canada as it does in his home country, the United States.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   AIRLINE INDUSTRY
Full View Permalink

June 1, 1993

Mr. Shields:

It was on debate, but it is too late.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO AMEND
Full View Permalink

May 27, 1993

Mr. Shields:

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My friend over there should recognize this. I know he is a relatively new member in the House, but he should never refer to a member by name. He should refer to either their title or the place they represent and I would suggest he do that.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT
Full View Permalink

May 27, 1993

Mr. Jack Shields (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):

Mr. Speaker, the position adopted by the New Democratic Party and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, the Liberals, is becoming increasingly clear. It is becoming increasingly clear that the only party that has made clear statements on what it would do, although I do not agree, is the New Democratic Party.

I agree with the New Democratic Party that the Liberals are using this debate to present a mish-mash of argument and mischief, as my colleague earlier alluded to, knowing full well that the people on that side, if ever

May 27, 1993

Government Orders

they came to office again, would keep the free trade agreement as negotiated by our government.

I do not think most Canadians recognize how important free trade is to Canada. The free trade agreement guaranteed us, as we all know, secure tariff free access to the world's largest economy, the world's largest market. Canada is the only country in the world that will have, after the 10-year period is up, free and unfettered access to the largest market in the world.

We hear that we should not be focusing on a free trade agreement with the United States. Virtually every other country in the world is working for agreements, whether it be the European Common Market or the Australia-New Zealand agreement, whether it be countries in South America and so on. We are all working toward gaining better access to traditional markets that they might have in the trading area. All it does is complement possibilities.

My hon. friend said we should be focusing more on the GATT, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Of course we should, and we are continuing to do so. We must have a multinational and multilateral approach. We are doing that and we are going to continue to do that. Our efforts in the emerging eastern bloc countries are unsurpassed, particularly from western Canada where we have companies leaving on trade missions daily. We have businesses and government representatives leaving western Canada for the Pacific Rim nearly daily. Just recently we had a delegation from Edmonton touring Hong Kong, Faiwan, China, Singapore, and of course Japan.

So I cannot understand this kind of allusion that for some reason we have given up on a multinational or multilateral approach, because we certainly have not.

We are a country of 27 million people. We are one of the largest trading nations of the world. We have a very high standard of living, all dependent on trade. I find it hard to understand why anyone in Canada would be against freer trade. We have people in the NDP basically saying that we should do everything through the GATT. Yet when we are doing things that complement GATT, entering into a trade agreement with United States and now a North American free trade agreement, NAFTA, we are criticized.

The benefits of the free trade agreement are clear and the benefit of trade to Canada is clear. Let me go over some of the benefits of trade to Canada. Canadians earn 25 per cent of their income from trade. This is more than 2.5 times the comparable figure for the U.S. and twice that of Japan. We always think of Japan as being one of the largest trading nations on a per capita basis, on a gross domestic product basis, than any country in the world. We exceed Japan.

Among the Group of Seven countries, only Germany racks up a larger portion of GDP through the buying and selling of goods. We buy. We sell. We are a trading nation.

With 27 million people Canada ranks 31st in the world in population. But our economy is the eighth largest and our per capita income is the second highest of all the industrialized countries.

One of the reasons for this has been our outstanding trade performance. Without trade we wither. Without trade we cannot survive. People should recognize that. There is the size of the population. We have the resources. We have the knowledge. We have the education. We have all of those things that go into making us a very competitive trading nation.

Canada cannot, I stress, afford to not be part of the North American free trade agreement. It would be absolutely disastrous. If we stood aside and allowed the United States and Mexico to enter into a free trade agreement it would be detrimental to Canada and to Canada's interest. No self-respecting person and no one with Canada's interest at heart could allow this to happen.

If we stood aside and allowed a free trade agreement to be negotiated without our participation with the United States and Mexico, the United States would be the only country to have free access to all three markets.

What would that do? If I were an investor coming in from Japan, Korea, Singapore, Germany, France, the European Common Market or anywhere to do business and investing, I would go to the United States if Canada was not part of NAFTA. That would give me access to all three markets.

May 27, 1993

I would be deterred from investing in Mexico because that would give me only one market and I would be deterred for the same reason from investing in Canada. It would give me access to only one market. We would have more favourable access. The United States would have absolute control because it could play Mexico and Canada off against each other by allowing freer access of goods and services and these kinds of things that we are protecting with the North American free trade agreement.

Any freer access from Mexico into the United States on comparable products without Canada being a part would have a detrimental effect on Canada. We know that.

All of the studies, all of the experts have basically told us to go for it. We have to protect our position in this trading world, in the trading situations that come before us.

Let us look at the regional trade initiatives that are going on as a complement to the GATT. But all we have to look at is Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. They are entering into an agreement. Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Ecuador, Paraguay are entering into trading agreements. Australia and New Zealand are entering into free trade agreements. We have got a free trade agreement. The Asian countries are doing the same thing.

It is a fact of life that we are a trading nation. We have got to protect our position. That is why we are participating in the North American free trade agreement. I would urge my colleagues to really think before they vote today and vote in favour of this agreement.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT
Full View Permalink

May 27, 1993

Mr. Shields:

We wanted equality with a national energy program. That's what you did.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT
Full View Permalink