Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1561 - 1575 of 1644
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the dedicated work of Robert MacKay of Grand Barachois, New Brunswick, in promoting awareness and compassion for those Canadians who suffer with mental illness. Robert has shown much courage and determination in addressing the many difficulties facing Canadians who live with mental health challenges.
He has appeared at the New Brunswick legislature to call for stronger client-run and family-run programs and he has campaigned for an end to the many discriminations faced daily by people with these illnesses.
Robert MacKay is a man of courage and determination. I salute his devotion to these people who are in such need of our support and compassion.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, I thought that adjournment proceedings were to focus on questions that in the opinion of the member were not answered properly when they were first posed.
This question was asked by the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke on May 9. However in her comments she chose to add a series of rather exaggerated and outrageous statements, but I will follow what I thought was the procedure and try to clarify for her, as we have many times.
The hon. member's question related to the theatre activation team that was deployed in April 2003 and was not permitted to carry weapons without the proper authorization given by the ISAF commander. This did not solely apply to the Canadian Forces but also to NATO's own reconnaissance team.
The responsibility to provide for the theatre activation team's security rested with ISAF. Our advance team elements were protected at all times.
That being said, it is important perhaps to remind the House and Canadians that it has never been more needed than to have Canadian participation to secure and rebuild Afghanistan.
There are people who oppose the international community's efforts in Afghanistan and who will try to dissuade us from our mission. The Canadian Forces will neither retreat from their mission nor will we retreat from our international responsibilities.
The government and Canadians are fully committed to our mission in Afghanistan. The operation in Afghanistan is part of Canada's broader commitment to the worldwide campaign against terrorism.
The member referred to some of the tragic events of late last week and I think it would be important to paraphrase what Lieutenant-General Hillier said at this week's memorial service for our fallen soldiers. He said, “soldiers are tangible expressions of our nation's beliefs and extend our values and ideals worldwide”.
I know that I speak for everyone when I say the professionalism and expertise of the Canadian Forces is also renowned worldwide. They are remarkable ambassadors and promoters of Canadian values and they are making us proud in Afghanistan.
The House can rest assured that the priority of both the Canadian Forces and the government is always the security of our soldiers. This is certainly the case as the Canadian Forces prepared for their deployment last spring to Afghanistan. Every effort was made in the planning of our mission to provide for the safety of the troops and to ensure the success of the mission.
That is exactly why we are providing our troops in Afghanistan with excellent equipment, such as remotely piloted aircraft that allow Kabul to be surveyed from the air, counter-bombardment radars, which detect incoming projectiles and new night vision equipment.
Not only are our troops properly equipped for their mission but they have also received the best training possible. It is simply not accurate, or I find very responsible, to pretend that our troops were not secure when they were in Afghanistan last April, nor are they protected as they carry out their important mission there today.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, as usual the member is full of rather dramatic exaggerations. It is in fact her goggles that are fogged up, not the night vision goggles that are there.
She talked about the Iltis jeep. General Leslie was on a patrol in Kabul in an Iltis jeep last Friday. To pretend that somehow this tragedy could have been avoided with different equipment is simply not borne out by the facts, and it is rather irresponsible for the member to make outrageous statements.
She said that the minister pre-announced casualties and sent these soldiers to their deaths. That is disgraceful to ascribe that kind of comment to the Minister of National Defence and she should be ashamed of herself.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, we are all saddened by the news of the two Canadian soldiers that were killed today by a landmine explosion in Kabul, Afghanistan while on a routine patrol around the capital. Three other soldiers were injured in this terrible accident.
Canada has close to 2,000 troops deployed in Kabul on the campaign against terrorism, providing peace, security and a better future for the Afghan people.
For years, landmines have killed and mutilated too many people, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Today's events are further justification of Canada's leading role in having landmines banned around the world.
In this very difficult situation, our sympathies go out to the families of the brave Canadian soldiers who were killed and those who were wounded.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, now that Hurricane Juan has passed through Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, it is time to assess the damage and clean up.
Hurricane Juan reached the eastern shore of Nova Scotia Sunday night, bringing with it heavy rain and winds up to 139 km per hour.
Worse yet, Juan took two lives. First, a paramedic who was responding to an emergency call died when a tree fell on his vehicle near the Halifax hospital. Later, at Enfield, another person died. These are very sad events.
I invite the House to join with me in thinking of the victims and their families and everyone who has suffered in the storm.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak this morning in support of Bill C-37, an act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act.
The Canadian Forces Superannuation Act dates from the 1960s. Although the fundamental principles of the system are still valid, the act has been improved a number of times over the years, and major changes were made in 1999.
Despite these changes, the act has not been substantially amended for some thirty years.
Times have certainly changed since the 1960s and new issues have arisen, issues that oblige us to take a fresh look at military pension legislation and begin working toward its modernization. One significant issue that has come up in recent years is the recruitment and retention challenge facing the Canadian Forces.
When the 1960 pension plan was drafted, the situation was quite different. At that time it was assumed that the Canadian Forces could count on being able to draw from a large pool of labour. The act was therefore designed with a view to supporting the forces profile and human resource realities of that time.
Today, we are facing a radically different job market. The trend toward smaller families, the aging population, and an increased enrollment in post-secondary education have all meant a smaller pool of potential recruits for the Canadian Forces. Competition for skilled workers is fierce and employment options available to people with the right skills are greater than ever.
For this reason, the Canadian Forces have taken, and are continuing to take, action to position itself as an employer of choice. Pension modernization is an essential part of this process.
In order to be competitive in today's labour market, the Canadian Forces must be able to offer a very complete benefits package comparable to those offered by other employers.
At present, the Canadian Forces need a pension plan that strongly favours recruitment and retention. They need a modern system with more flexible retirement programs that offer military personnel more control and choice with regard to their career path and financial planning.
However, modernizing the Canadian Forces pension arrangements is not just about recruitment and retention. It is about the government doing the right thing for the men and women who serve this country in the Canadian armed forces. It is also a quality of life issue.
The government has made impressive strides in improving the quality of life of our military personnel. There is still considerable work to be done. The amendments contained in this bill represent another positive step forward on the quality of life agenda by bringing fairness, flexibility, efficiency and inclusion to the military pension plan.
With these amendments we can ensure that our military personnel and their families are well taken care of and are properly compensated for their dedicated service to Canada. They deserve nothing less.
The bill before the House today would modernize military pensions through a series of major and minor amendments to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act. For example, some of the changes being proposed in this bill would shorten the period of time required to qualify for a pension benefit from 10 years to 2 years, improve pension portability, provide greater flexibility for members of the forces in building their pension incomes by basing calculations on total pensionable service rather than on completing a precise term of engagement, offer entitlement to an immediate unreduced pension after 25 years of service, and improve pension benefits for survivors. And a final but important point, the new bill would provide pension coverage for reservists.
I think we are all aware of the enormous contributions made by our reservists to the country and to the Canadian Forces. We have a duty to ensure that they are adequately recognized for their service.
In 1997, the Reserve Force Retirement Gratuity was established. This benefit is intended to encourage reservists to stay longer in the Primary Reserve and to reward them if they do.
Nevertheless, the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, among others, continues to push for a real pension system for reservists. The modernization of the pension plan lays the foundation for implementing just such a system.
The amendments set out in Bill C-37 bring long term, full time reservists under the same pension arrangements as their regular force counterparts. The bill lays the foundation needed to develop a pension plan for reservists who serve on a part time basis.
Pension modernization would not require new funding from the defence services program. Any cost increases are related to the implementation of the initiatives approved under the 1999 pension legislation. The costs for these initiatives have already been earmarked in the fiscal framework.
The chief actuary of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions estimated that the other changes contained in Bill C-37 would not result in cost increases and might, in fact, result in modest savings.
The benefits associated with this legislation are self-evident. To conclude, let me reiterate the two reasons why this legislation is not just important, but why it is crucial. First, the amendments would provide for a pension plan that better meets the needs of our regular and reserve forces, and their families as well. It is a plan that would ensure they get the benefits they need and deserve. Second, the proposed changes to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act will support the human resources strategy of the Canadian Forces in the critical areas of recruitment and retention.
For these reasons I hope the House will support the proposed amendments contained in the bill.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that September will mark National Arthritis Awareness Month.
This debilitating disease can strike anyone, anywhere, anytime—no one is immune. Arthritis comes in more than 100 different forms and affects four million Canadians—from infants to seniors. Joint paint and inflammation are the common factors, though their impact can range from minor aches to immobility.
The Arthritis Society has indicated that the annual funding for their research and career development program is $5.5 million.
Please join me in extending our appreciation to the collaborating organizations and individuals by applauding their efforts in monitoring the health and quality of life of Canadians living with arthritis.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, we are also aware on this side of the House of the superb job done by the chair of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs.
Canada has pledged $250 million for reconstruction in Afghanistan over the next two years. The Canadian Forces as part of their efforts in Afghanistan work with local people to rebuild schools, provide safe drinking water, rebuild health facilities. On this side of the House we are very proud of the remarkable contribution that the men and women of the Canadian Forces are making to make Afghanistan a stable and safe country.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, the government and the Minister of National Defence have shown remarkable success in achieving greater funding for the Department of National Defence. The member knows very well that in the last budget the Minister of Finance allocated $800 million of new money for the Department of National Defence.
The member talked about the problem of spare parts. One of the main expenditures was $221 million that the defence department was allocating to restock spare parts.
We are very committed to a strong and stable Department of National Defence.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, many times the government has talked about the importance of retention and recruitment in the Canadian armed forces.
The quality of life agenda was a priority for the previous minister of defence and it is a priority for the present minister of defence. Part of that is ensuring that we have the personnel to do the jobs that we ask the armed forces to do.
I have every reason to think that the Canadian armed forces will be very successful in recruiting the people it needs and retaining the people it needs to do the wonderful job they are doing.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Madam Speaker, I want to begin by congratulating the hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst for his commitment to seasonal workers. I also want to thank him for having raised this very important matter in the House of Commons.
I also want to begin by thanking of the Minister of Human Resources Development. I have had the pleasure of working with her over the last number of months in a very difficult situation. I have found her to be interested and responsive to the particular concerns of workers, and it is important for Canadians to understand that the government and the minister in particular have shown a great willingness to try to bring improvements to a very difficult national program.
The situation is my riding is a very difficult one as a result of seasonal work. In my opinion, this situation is deeply unfair and affects thousands of people and their families. I am talking, naturally, about investigations by HRDC of large fish processing plants, particularly ones in the Shediac and Cap-Pelé areas and in Kent County.
These investigations are a source of great stress and tension for the families of seasonal employees who work hard. The department claims that the practice of accumulating or banking hours, as we say at home, is widespread. And suddenly, the law has to be applied in a very harsh and unfair way, in my opinion, in southeastern New Brunswick. I find this unacceptable.
The problems of employment insurance and seasonal work are as profound as they are unfair and they need to be addressed urgently. I have worked over the last nine months with a remarkable group of local citizens led by two dedicated and articulate persons named Aline Landry and Rodrigue Landry. We had strong support from the mayor of Cap-Pelé, Mr. Normand Vautour, and the mayor of Bouctouche, Mr. Raymond Duplessis, and the provincial member for Shediac—Cap-Pelé in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, Mr. Bernard Richard.
This committee consisted of employees, employers and community leaders. They did remarkable work for the Minister of Human Resources Development. They proposed solutions to the unfairness in the current employment insurance program, solutions that will give a modest yet adequate income to seasonal workers during periods when work is not available, especially in the fishing industry where access to the untreated product is uncertain. That is not the workers' fault. Also, the product is perishable.
These workers deserve an employment insurance program that will allow them to live and take care of their families during the winter, when the fishery is closed. In my view, today's program does not pass this fundamental test of social justice in a rich and generous country like Canada.
In my riding, this committee reviewed the special situation at fish processing plants. It found that the method for calculating employment insurance benefits discouraged people from accepting work at these plants if the work was only for a few hours or a day or two. Their benefits would be reduced because of what is called small weeks. In effect, employment insurance punishes those who go to work under very difficult conditions.
I visited these plants. It is very difficult work. There was not enough lobster, crab or herring for a certain time or certain week to provide work for 40, 50 or 60 hours a week, as is the case in the spring. The lobster season often provides workers with 60- or 70-hour weeks, except when the fishers cannot go out because of the weather, for instance. There is just not enough lobster.
The unfairness in my constituency can be illustrated by two simple examples. For example, a national park employee who works 18 weeks in a row, let us say 40 hours a week, earns $10 an hour and works 720 hours would have gross earnings over those 18 weeks of $7,200. That person at the end of the 18 weeks would be entitled to an employment insurance benefit at a certain rate.
If a fish plant worker in my riding works the same number of hours, 720 hours, at $10 an hour, that worker would have exactly the same gross earnings as for example a national park employee. However, instead of being able to work 18 weeks in a row at 40 hours a week, this person may only work 28 or 30 weeks and some of the weeks will be short weeks and represent a smaller number of hours of work. When that person goes to apply for employment insurance in December or January because the fish plant closes until the season opens again in May, that person will have a significantly reduced employment insurance benefit. Yet that person has worked 720 hours and earned $7,200 in gross wages. Compared to a national park employee, I believe that is unfair.
Another unfairness has to do with the rate calculation period. In my constituency most of the fish plants open in late April or May for the spring lobster season and over the last number of years they have been able to extend the season to stay open as late as December and January. When the workers finish and go to file an employment insurance claim, the rate calculation formula says that they look back 26 weeks to determine the average weekly earnings.
The problem is if the fish plant closes in December or January and people go to apply for employment insurance benefits that they have paid into, the 26 week period that is used to determine the rate of their benefit and the amount of their cheque does not take into account the weeks in May and June where they may have worked, as I said previously, 50 and 60 hours. It is an arbitrary rule to look back six months. I think it might be fairer to say nine months or 12 months for example and these workers then would not have this injustice.
Improvements to employment insurance legislation are needed quickly. The act is designed to reflect the reality of year-round work in regions of the country that are not as dependent on natural resources or seasonal tourism, for example, as is my area of southeastern New Brunswick. The reality of seasonal industries, and it is not only in the fish processing sector, requires an EI system that is both responsible and fair. Seasonal industries contribute enormously to the economy of Canada, but they need the generous understanding of the government as they move toward longer seasons, better wages and stronger financial postures.
Workers cannot afford to live on ridiculously low EI benefits at a time of the year when work is not available. Workers in my riding do not pay less for a litre of gas or for their car insurance or for babysitters because they work hard in a fish plant. They have to go to work, many times very early in the morning before government offices even open, and they get out of bed and go to work in difficult conditions. Yet they are asking for a fairer employment insurance system to reflect the reality of their industries.
This is an ongoing dialogue that we have had with officials at Human Resources Development Canada. It is important for Canadians to understand that this is a national problem. I have used a local example which I believe is fundamentally unfair, but the issue of banking of hours for example is national. That is why we need national changes to this program to make it fair.
Until we get there, I will not stop fighting for the workers of my riding who deserve better.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, September is Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada month.
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada is the leading child and youth serving organization providing mentoring programs across the country. Over 170 local agencies provide support to more than 300 Canadian communities.
Currently, over 10,000 children are matched with adults. Big brothers and big sisters reap benefit from their experiences while the “littles” benefit on a number of levels as well, including improved self-confidence and social skills.
During this month, we encourage all Canadians to donate time to this wonderful organization.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) I wish to table, in both official languages, two copies of the 2002-03 annual report of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House we are very proud of the commitment that members of the Canadian Forces made. Over 2,600 military personnel and reservists were fighting with civilian workers.
We are also very proud of civilian employers who gave reservists a chance to participate in this important effort.
The minister has made it very clear that the government has received a request from the province of British Columbia and we will do whatever we can to assist the Government of British Columbia.
View Dominic LeBlanc Profile
Lib. (NB)
Mr. Speaker, the member knows very well that the government was not blowing smoke, it was fighting fires. That is exactly what the Canadian Forces have done.
The minister has made it very clear, as have other ministers of the government, that at all times when a request is received from a provincial authority for disaster relief assistance the request will be studied. I have every reason to think that the Government of Canada will be generous with the province of British Columbia.
Results: 1561 - 1575 of 1644 | Page: 105 of 110

|<
<
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data