House of Commons Hansard #209 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was quebec.

Topics

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

In the coming months, four groups will consider the future of the CBC: the heritage committee, the Juneau committee, the McKinsey firm from the U.S., and the Canadian Conference of the Arts. Even before these studies are completed, the CBC is already cutting staff, in particular at its library in Montreal.

Does the minister not agree that these cuts are premature, since officially he should wait for at least two of these reports before making a decision on the CBC's future, and that a moratorium should therefore be imposed on the proposed cuts?

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Laval West
Québec

Liberal

Michel Dupuy Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, the CBC's financial situation results from a series of budgets that go back a number of years. It is quite normal for the CBC's president and managers to make adjustments in line with budget needs.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, does the minister agree that the alacrity with which the CBC's senior officials are cutting services without knowing what the committees' findings will be suggests that we can expect more drastic cuts in the coming years?

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Laval West
Québec

Liberal

Michel Dupuy Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I have full confidence in the CBC president's ability to manage his affairs. What I find surprising is that our friends from the Bloc Quebecois do not seem interested in the fate of Radio-Québec, which is being cut to pieces.

Canadian Wheat Board
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Reform

Elwin Hermanson Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK

Mr. Speaker, regarding allegations of illegal dumping by the Canadian Wheat Board we now have confirmation from the RCMP in both Winnipeg and Ottawa that no one from the solicitor general's office ever asked it to review these allegations.

Why did the solicitor general write to the member for Lisgar-Marquette on March 28, 1995, saying the RCMP had been asked to investigate this matter?

Canadian Wheat Board
Oral Question Period

2:45 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. friend is misinterpreting my letter.

My office took the material given to it by the member's colleague. According to our practice it was transmitted to the RCMP for such action as it considered appropriate.

It has not been my practice or custom to give direction to the RCMP on matters of investigation. Information was provided to me by the commissioner of the RCMP who reviewed the matter and decided that on the basis of that material there were not grounds for a criminal investigation. That information was put in my letter to the hon. member's colleague.

The whole thing is quite consistent with what I said in my letter. I regret my hon. friend keeps pursuing the matter in spite of the totally inappropriate conduct of his colleague. Instead of pursuing the matter he should get his colleague to apologize.

Canadian Wheat Board
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Reform

Elwin Hermanson Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP has reported the matter was not even brought to its attention. The RCMP did not even receive a file on the matter from the solicitor general and was not even notified of the incident.

How can the solicitor general tell the House he pursued the matter when the RCMP was not notified that it should look into it to see whether it was worthy of an investigation?

Canadian Wheat Board
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP will provide further information about the way it dealt with the matter.

I put on record an accurate quote from my letter of March 28: "The commissioner of the RCMP has informed me that the commercial crime section in Winnipeg has reviewed your", the hon. member for Lisgar-Marquette, "allegations and the RCMP has concluded there is no basis to support an investigation into the Canadian Wheat Board. However, the commissioner has informed me that the RCMP is willing to examine any new information you might have to support these allegations".

I transmitted to the hon. member information provided me by the RCMP and I think if the hon. member and his colleagues had any respect for Parliament they would apologize for the unwarranted accusation.

If they will not apologize and withdraw their unwarranted accusations, everything they say about their respect for Parliament and making it a better place is nothing but a sham.

The Environment
Oral Question Period

June 1st, 1995 / 2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.

There are disturbing reports on airborne pollution in the form of dioxins, furans and hexachlorobenzenes emitted through the incineration of medical waste, sewage sludge and cement kilns burning hazardous waste.

Does the government have plans to regulate carcinogenic emissions from incinerators and are federal guidelines for human exposure to dioxins adequate to protect human health and ecosystems?

The Environment
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the 1995 guidelines by Health Canada on the acceptable level of dioxins and furans for human exposure are under review.

We are extremely concerned about activities south of the border which could put the health of Canadians at risk. In Canada we already have an acceptable smog level about 30 per cent lower than the level in the United States, but at the same time the Americans are looking at raising their smog level.

The issue of dioxins and furans is under review here but we also need to examine some transboundary issues to ensure long range pollutants do not in any way affect the health of Canadians currently being put at risk because of decisions being made by the U.S. Congress.

Research And Development Contracts
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.

In answer to a question in this House, the Deputy Prime Minister said that this government could not be held responsible for the iniquity of previous governments regarding R&D. Yet, since October 1993 the minister of Natural Resources has granted less than ten per cent of external R&D contracts to firms or research centres of Quebec.

How does the minister explain that Quebec received less than 13 per cent, or half of its fair share, of external R&D contracts from her department since the Liberals took office?

Research And Development Contracts
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Edmonton Northwest
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate, as did the Deputy Prime Minister last week when this issue first came up, the government awards contracts on the basis of identified research needs.

Let me reassure the hon. member my department and, I am sure, every other department in the government is committed to research in Quebec. Perhaps I could share with the hon. member some examples.

My department makes a significant contribution to Forintek technology. My department makes a significant contribution to the research into fusion. We make a significant contribution to the Canadian Centre for Geomatics in Sherbrooke. We also make considerable contributions to the Varennes laboratory. My department has a significant research practice in Quebec.

Research And Development Contracts
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, even if we mentioned the whole list, it would still be only 13 per cent of the total.

Research And Development Contracts
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

Research And Development Contracts
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC

Quebec is already being robbed of $650 million a year in expenditures by the Department of Defence. The Department of Justice awards only one per cent of its external contracts to Quebec, and now the Department of Natural Resources refuses to give Quebec its fair share of R&D contracts. Can the minister explain why Quebec is once more being robbed of its fair share?