House of Commons Hansard #167 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was trade.

Topics

Parliament Hill
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel
Québec

Liberal

Alfonso Gagliano Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, first, the member should know that all parties sit on the board of internal economy, which is chaired by the Speaker, and that board is consulted on every expenditure concerning buildings on Parliament Hill.

I did not say that the auditor general was wrong. I said that I had to deal with reality and could only comment on figures and projects that have been approved. The hon. member can use his imagination and say everything that he says, but the auditor general asked for a long term plan and that is what we are working on. The auditor general asked for an advisory committee and I announced that there will be an advisory committee.

Western Economic Diversification
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, western economic diversification boasts about creating jobs and diversifying the economy in western Canada.

How does the Secretary of State for Western Economic Diversification guarantee accountability and maximum return on taxpayers' investment when it loans moneys to small and medium sized businesses?

Western Economic Diversification
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Saint Boniface
Manitoba

Liberal

Ronald J. Duhamel Secretary of State (Science

Mr. Speaker, there are two main points to be made. First, money loaned in the past is being collected very successfully. There is a loss of about 9.4% versus 3% for commercial lending and 20% for venture capital firms.

But WD does not loan money directly to businesses any more. It brings clients to the banks and they decide whether or not money should be loaned.

I should add that WD now focuses on providing information, business plan counselling and mentoring, particularly in the rural areas, through our 1-800 service. We are there to help the people locally.

Fisheries
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Reform

John Cummins Delta—South Richmond, BC

Mr. Speaker, I asked the fisheries minister a question and he did not answer it, so I will ask him again. Why was the minister's friend and largest campaign contributor allowed to kill 30,000 coho in a no-kill coho zone in the Queen Charlotte Islands last summer?

Fisheries
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for some time now has repeated these remarks.

I should point out that there was a red zone around the Charlottes. Two experimental fisheries were allowed. One was a sports fishery and one was a commercial fishery.

The exploitation rate was so low, the death of the coho was so far below 1%, that our scientists decided is was insignificant from the point of maintaining stocks.

Parliament Buildings Renovations
Oral Question Period

December 7th, 1998 / 2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Ghislain Lebel Chambly, QC

Mr. Speaker, in his report, the Auditor General of Canada expressed concern about the skyrocketing cost of renovating the parliament buildings, which currently stands at $1.4 billion.

Does the minister remember that, three years ago, disregarding the opinion of the board of internal economy referred to earlier and even that of the current minister, the hon. member for Sudbury, who was in charge of this project at the time, ordered that a Senate cafeteria be build? Does he admit that this is the kind of decisions that resulted in a dramatic cost overrun?

Parliament Buildings Renovations
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel
Québec

Liberal

Alfonso Gagliano Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, first of all, for clarity concerning the figures, what the auditor general said was that, if all the plans currently on the table were approved, we may be looking at a total cost of $1.4 billion. We are not there yet.

The auditor general asked for a long term plan. In September, I asked my officials to develop a long term plan. The auditor general has been asking for one since 1992, and he asked for one again in the report he released last week.

On Tuesday, I announced the creation—

Parliament Buildings Renovations
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst.

Employment Insurance
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations committee made it clear on Friday that the Canadian government does not take good care of the disadvantaged members of its society. The UN committee recommends a reform of employment insurance.

Will the minister finally carry out the employment insurance reform the UN committee is calling for, as are the Canadians I have met in my travels across the country to gather information on employment insurance, or has his titled changed to Minister of Human Resource Impoverishment?

Employment Insurance
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Halton
Ontario

Liberal

Julian Reed Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, the report formally reviewed Canada's performance from 1987 to 1994 and some questions were asked of the delegation about performance post-1994.

Here is what I would like to tell the House about the performance post-1994: $1.7 billion a year in child tax credits; tax relief for low and middle income families, taking 400,000 Canadians off the tax rolls; the youth employment strategy; the aboriginal head start program; integration programs for the disabled. Shall I go on?

Employment Insurance
Oral Question Period

3 p.m.

The Speaker

Order. I have notice of a question of privilege from the hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester. I will hear that point of privilege and then I will hear a point of order from the hon. member for Wild rose.

Privilege
Oral Question Period

3 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Bill Casey Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a point of privilege arising from an incident that occurred here in this chamber on December 3, just last Thursday.

I rise based on citations 93 and 92 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms which say that any threat or attempt to influence the actions of a member is a breach of privilege, and that that action must relate to the member's parliamentary duties. I assure the Speaker this action did affect my parliamentary duties.

As I sat at my desk preparing questions about the New Brunswick toll highway issue which I was intending to ask in question period just a few moments later, I was confronted by the member of parliament for Kenora—Rainy River. With no introduction, he demanded to know what I “had against Doug Young”. When I asked for clarification, he accused me of calling Doug Young a crook, which I did not do. Then the member warned me to “back off” because “Doug Young has a lot of friends and they have long memories”. I do not know who these friends are. I do not know if somebody else put the member up to this. The member was obviously agitated at the time and therefore I did not argue with the member. I just wanted the confrontation to end.

I proceeded to prepare my questions which actually referred to a letter of Doug Young's. Then the member challenged me to take my comments outside the House, which I assured him I already had. When that did not work, he pointed over to the Liberal benches and said “you better be careful because there are a lot of us over here and we will not forget either”. He left, warning me to remember what he had said.

At the very, very least, this is intimidation designed to prevent me from asking effective questions on matters of concern to my constituents. At worst it is a threat against me as a member of parliament.

There is no place in this House for intimidation or threats. To be intimidated and threatened makes it very difficult to remain focused on the issues. I am sure that was the purpose of the implied threat.

Mr. Speaker, if you find that I have a prima facie case of privilege, I am prepared to move the following motion, “that the matter of possible threats uttered by the member for Kenora—Rainy River should”—

Privilege
Oral Question Period

3 p.m.

The Speaker

Order, please. I take this as a serious circumstance, I want the hon. member to know. I am not going to make a ruling on it today. I believe you named the member for Kenora—Rainy River, is that correct? I would rather wait until the member was here in the House. You have raised it at the earliest possible moment. I would like to hear what the hon. member for Kenora—Rainy River says, so I will hold this in abeyance until the hon. member comes back to the House.

Points Of Order
Oral Question Period

3:05 p.m.

Reform

Myron Thompson Wild Rose, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding the adjournment proceedings and notice of question. It says that notice must be given no later than one hour following question period which is fine.

There is one thing which disturbs me and I am not sure how we should go about changing it or if we want to change it. Today for the second time I have received notice that I will have the opportunity to bring an issue forward at the late show, as we call it, on March 3 which is approximately six months after it was sent in.

This is the second time this has happened. I find that delay of time a real hindrance to achieving what we are trying to achieve. It is totally unacceptable. That is enough said but I would like that corrected, if possible.

Points Of Order
Oral Question Period

3:05 p.m.

The Speaker

I thank the hon. member for his intervention. I will get more information for him. I think it had to do with the list they have. We will look into it and will get back to the member with an answer.