Debates of Nov. 7th, 1997

Industrial Research

[Ronald J. Duhamel, Liberal, Secretary of State (Science]

Mr. Speaker, this industrial research assistance program, which is managed by the National Research Council, is an excellent government program, and everyone agrees with that. Every year in Canada, it creates up to 10,000 full time, high quality jobs.

This program provides assistance to 10,000 businesses. Our consultants, the people who provide this information, come from every region in the country. They come from 140 organizations across Canada. This program is especially designed for young people.

Justice

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice stated that the House of Commons is not the place to discuss issues such as euthanasia and mercy killings.

Canadians were pretty shocked by that comment. If this is not the place to debate issues such as euthanasia and mercy killing, then where is the place to discuss such issues?

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I did not see the quote to which the member referred, but there are issues before this House on mercy killing, on euthanasia, and they will be debated, as is being done with the private members' motion.

Pay Equity

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in light of the response we have just got from the President of Treasury Board on pay equity, I will have another try at it.

Can the minister be more serious and tell me whether, yes or no, his colleague in finance has given him more than $1.3 billion to negotiate with?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the government considers pay equity an extremely important problem, and we wish to resolve this matter as quickly as possible.

We have already allocated $1.3 billion for settlement of this question. We have indicated that we want a response as quickly as possible, and I would again encourage my hon. colleague to put pressure on the union so that it will finally find a response that suits the requirements of our employees.

Veterans Affairs

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. He will be aware that in the late thirties hundreds of Canadians volunteered to go to Spain to fight against fascism prior to the second world war.

The Deputy Prime Minister will be aware that there is only a handful of survivors of the Mackenzie-Papineau brigade living today. He will also know that of 54 countries, 52 have recognized them as veterans and they are receiving the benefits of veterans.

Would the Deputy Prime Minister indicate today whether the government, on the eve of Remembrance Day, is at least considering recognizing this handful of veterans from the Spanish civil war who are still alive today and offering them veteran status?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I would be happy to take the matter under advisement, together with my colleague, the Minister of Veteran's Affairs, and get back to my hon. friend when I have further information on this important suggestion.

Fisheries

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the divestiture of the Nova Scotia salmon hatcheries has been stated by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans as being for the betterment of the public fishery in Nova Scotia.

Does the minister feel there will be a public fishery in 1998 on previously stocked rivers in Nova Scotia? If not, does this change the impetus of the divestiture process?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. It allows me to point out that this summer the Atlantic salmon returns were possibly one-third of what was expected. This was the result of at-sea conditions. The escapement from the rivers, the escapement from hatcheries, were as good for this year as in previous years from the fish that returned.

However at-sea conditions resulted in a very substantial reduction. It is a major matter of concern for the government. However, there are many factors involved, not simply hatcheries, and I will be happy to discuss them with the member more fully when I have more than 35 seconds, which is what the Speaker allows me at question period.

Land Claims

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, over the past few weeks there have been important land claims negotiations between the federal government, the Labrador Inuit Association and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Could the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development please update the House on the status of these negotiations?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member points out, over the last two weeks senior officials from the Labrador Inuit Association, from the province of Newfoundland and from the federal government have completed pressure cooker negotiations. These have resulted in the initialling of a framework that has been accepted by the principals. I trust they will lead us to an agreement in principle on this very important land claim and self-government agreement.

I congratulate all the parties involved because it was difficult. I commit the government to a quick return to the table to finish that agreement in principle as soon as possible.

Health Care

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in an appearance before the finance committee a very credible witness said: “Continuing cuts to health care across the country have been dramatic and Canadians are paying the price. The medicare patchwork is becoming threadbare”. Canadians queuing up for operations and laid off nurses agree with her.

If the government will not listen to waiting patients, if it will not listen to laid-off nurses, if it will not listen to the Reform Party, will it at least listen to one of its own, the wife of a deputy prime minister, and move quickly to restore much needed health transfer payments?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, as part of the election platform presented by what is now this government, we identified the important need to modernize health care. We identified the need for home care and pharmacare. We have identified a number of strategies to which the hon. Minister of Health is responding.

It is my clear partnership with him to identify that the biggest input was to restore funding to $12.5 billion as was requested by the National Forum on Health.

[The Speaker]

On a point of order, the hon. government whip, or, excuse me, Reform whip.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

One day, perhaps, Mr. Speaker.

Points Of Order

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding what happened in question period today, specifically during the questions by the member for Dewdney—Alouette.

You ruled his initial question out of order, I assume because you felt it was not within the jurisdiction of the minister to which the question was directed. However, in the supplementary when the member started to talk about the infrastructure program and some of the problems with the infrastructure program in British Columbia, before he had directed his question in this case to the minister in charge of that infrastructure program you rose and cut him off and ruled it out of order again.

It is interesting that the member for Burlington also asked a question about infrastructure. Why is it okay—

[The Speaker]

During the course of question period usually when certain words are used I do not know where the member is going a lot of the time. It seemed to me he was going down the same path as the other so I made my decision and my decision stands.

Order In Council Appointments

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table, in both official languages, a number of Order in Council appointments made by the government.

Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 110(1) these are deemed referred to the appropriate standing committees, a list of which is attached.

Committees Of The House

[Denis Paradis, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the Report of the Special Joint Committee to amend Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, concerning the Quebec School System.

As the member for Brome—Missisquoi, I simply want to say that the linguistic school boards Quebec is seeking to establish are similar to what we have had for about 15 years in my riding of Brome-Missisquoi, and I must say that the two linguistic communities in my riding live in perfect harmony.

We heard many stakeholders, and our joint committee conducted a high level debate. As a Quebecker, I am proud to note that the Quebec government just took an important step by requesting this amendment in compliance with the provisions of the Constitution Act, 1982.

I would like to thank the co-chair of the committee, Senator Lucie Pépin, as well as all the hon. members and senators who sat on the joint committee and the staff that worked hard to prepare this report.

In conclusion, I would like to read the conclusion of the joint committee's report:

We recommend that the two houses of Parliament adopt the resolution to amend section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, as tabled in the House of Commons on October 1, 1997, and in the Senate on October 9, 1997.

[Rahim Jaffer, Reform, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say at the outset that the caucus of the Reform Party strongly believes that education is exclusively under provincial jurisdiction and that it is essential that this be fully respected.

However, we might add that the proposed amendment does not address minority language educational rights or the establishment of linguistic school boards. What is at stake here is the denominational rights protected by section 93 of the Constitution.

Amendments to the Constitution should never be passed without due consideration or in haste. We believe that before any constitutional amendment is passed, Parliament must make sure there is democratic consent, that the amendment respects the rule of law and that it is in the national interest.

If it adversely affects enshrined minority rights, Parliament must be especially careful that the democratic consent includes indisputable agreement on the part of the minority. We have come to the conclusion that the motion does not meet these requirements.

First, the Reform Party would rather see a provincial referendum before Parliament considers any amendment under section 93. This referendum should be on a clear question and the rules of the process should be fair. Such a referendun would have shown us how extensive public support is.

Second, we believe it is essential that the people of Canada, ordinary citizens, be consulted when major changes are contemplated, but the Quebec government has chosen not to hold any referendum on this issue. There have been neither public hearings on this proposed amendment to section 93 nor a free vote in the National Assembly.

Third, this committee should ensure that what it proposes meets the second requirement: respecting the rule of law. Is the appropriate amending formula being used? Some have questioned the appropriateness of the bilateral process. The proposal was sanctioned by the Government of Canada and by legal experts. Most witnesses we have heard therefore took it for granted.

In fact, we should not expect this committee to settle the issue in haste—

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

I am sorry to interrupt, but the hon. member for Malpeque has the floor, on a point of order.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Is the member reading the report or tabling the report? I think he is taking too long to table the report. He seems to be reading it.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The hon. parliamentary secretary is correct. By custom the response should not be any longer than the initial tabling.

The hon. member for Hochelaga—Maisonneuve has requested unanimous consent of the House to speak to the tabling of this report with a few short words. Does the hon. member for Hochelaga—Maisonneuve have the unanimous consent of the House to speak to this report?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their consent. I also thank the government, the member for Brome—Missisquoi, and our Senate colleague, who made it possible for us to work in a calm atmosphere culminating in almost complete unanimity. I wish to emphasize that the Bloc Quebecois is very much in favour of and very pleased with the contents of the report tabled.

We hope to be able to follow up as quickly as possible on the vote to be held in the House. Once again, we have the feeling we are favourably representing the will of the National Assembly and think that this is a very positive occasion for all parliamentarians.