House of Commons Hansard #91 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was vote.

Topics

Multilateral Agreement On Investment
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

York West
Ontario

Liberal

Sergio Marchi Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 109 it gives me great honour to table in the House of Commons, in both official languages, the government's official response to the report on the multilateral investment agreement, pursuant to the subcommittee on trade, wherein Canada's government agrees with all of the 17 recommendations.

Government Response To Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Peterborough
Ontario

Liberal

Peter Adams Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to six petitions.

Competition Act, 1998
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Roger Gallaway Sarnia—Lambton, ON

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-393, an act to amend the Competition Act, 1998 (negative option marketing).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to give first reading this morning to this bill which would amend the Competition Act to deal with negative option marketing.

The objective and the thrust of this bill is to prohibit certain financial institutions, including broadcasting and telecommunications undertakings and companies to which the Insurance Companies Act applies, from charging money to their regular clients for the provision or sale of a new service without the expressed consent of the client.

I would point out that this dovetails with a report released by Industry Canada under the office of the consumer which identifies negative option marketing as being the area in which a number of industries have targeted growth. This is simply intended to protect consumers.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Nelson Riis Kamloops, BC

Mr. Speaker, just as the Minister for International Trade is about to fly off to Paris to meet with his OECD compatriots to work hard in the next few days on the signing of the multilateral agreement on investment, I am presenting a petition on behalf of a number of my constituents who are adamantly opposed to the MAI as they presently understand it.

They believe that it is an attack on Canadian sovereignty. They believe that it will expand and entrench unprecedented rights to transnational corporations and that it will severely limit our government's ability to promote economic growth and job creation strategies. They speak to the fact that we are now in court with Ethyl Corporation of the U.S. over the fact that we tried to improve the environment of Canada and we are being sued over that.

They also mention the fact that certain clauses will be locked in for 20 years. I could read a long list, but I will not.

I believe the point is well taken that these folks do not like the MAI as they know it and are asking parliament never to sign the multilateral agreement on investment in spite of the minister's best efforts.

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Nelson Riis Kamloops, BC

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from a number of residents in communities throughout British Columbia who are hearing rumours about the government's intention to introduce a seniors benefit package. Knowing what the provisions were for the last package they are totally panicked.

They believe there are all sorts of hidden agendas here and are simply worried that the government is up to no good basically.

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Nelson Riis Kamloops, BC

Mr. Speaker, I suppose because it is tax filing time this is what initiated this last petition. A whole number of people feel that our present tax system is unfair, unjust and biased in favour of certain Canadians at the expense of others. They are simply asking for comprehensive tax reform.

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Reform

Jim Gouk West Kootenay—Okanagan, BC

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the residents of West Kootenay—Okanagan, I present the first in a series of petitions in which the petitioners draw to the attention of the House that violent crimes committed by youth are of great concern to Canadians, that the incidents of violent crime by youth would decrease if the Young Offenders Act were amended to hold young persons fully accountable for their criminal behaviour and that increased periods of incarceration could deter young people from committing criminal acts.

Therefore, the petitioners call upon parliament to significantly amend the Young Offenders Act, including but not limited to making protection of society the number one priority, reducing the minimum age from 12 to 10, allowing for the publication of violent young offenders' names, increasing the maximum three year sentence for all offences except murder to seven, increasing the penalty for first degree murder from a maximum of 10 years to 15 years, and ensuring parental responsibility.

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Mississauga South, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of a number of Canadians, including Canadians from my riding of Mississauga South.

On behalf of the family, the petitioners would like to draw to the attention of the House that managing the family home and caring for preschool children is an honourable profession which has not been recognized for its value to society.

The petitioners also agree with the National Forum on Health report which stated that the Income Tax Act discriminates against families who choose to provide care in the home to their preschool children because it does not take into account the real costs of raising children.

The petitioners therefore pray and call upon parliament to pursue tax initiatives to eliminate tax discrimination for families who choose to provide care in the home to preschool children.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Peterborough
Ontario

Liberal

Peter Adams Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the following question will be answered today: No. 86 .[Text]

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Reform

John Reynolds West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC

Can the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration please provide: ( a ) the rationale and justification for the right-of-landing-fee (ROLF) as it applies to the sponsorship of family members; ( b ) the total revenue collected as a consequence of this aspect of this fee since its inception; ( c ) the location of this revenue item within the public accounts for this department; ( d ) the amount spent from this collected revenue on Language Instruction for Newcomers (LINC) and an item breakdown on the use of this funds; ( e ) an outline of the accounting process in place to ensure proper use and distribution of this fund for LINC; and ( f ) any studies or documentation that may identify the LINC program is not duplicating English as a Second Language (ESL) program?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Westmount—Ville-Marie
Québec

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

(a) The introduction of the right of landing fee, ROLF, by the government in February 1995 was in response to extensive public consultations held by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, CIC, in 1994 and to the government-wide program review exercise. During the public consultations it was recognized that, if the department was to continue to provide an acceptable level of service to immigrants in view of the government-wide commitment, a greater share of the costs should be transferred from the taxpayers to the direct beneficiaries of immigration services. Further, program review made reduction of the federal debt a priority for all government departments.

The government concluded that the acquisition of permanent residence and Canadian citizenship had tangible and intangible value to the recipient. This value was derived from access to an enhanced economic and social opportunity in Canada as well as access to a wide range of programs and services available. The right of landing fee provides partial compensation for the many rights and privileges that landed immigrant status confers.

(b) The ROLF was implemented February 28, 1995. Since its inception a net revenue, revenue minus refunds, of $458.5M has been generated.

Family class immigrants 19 years of age and over represent approximately 24% of all permanent resident landings in Canada. On this basis, total ROLF revenue derived from family class immigrants is estimated to be $110.04M.

(c) Citizenship and immigration revenue, including revenue derived from the right of landing fee is located in the public accounts, details of expenditures and revenues, volume II, part I.

(d) All revenue collected by CIC is deposited to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund, CRF. The revenue generated by the ROLF does not go directly toward the department's budget. The ROLF revenue assists to generally offset the costs throughout the immigration portfolio.

The language instruction for newcomers, LINC, was funded by $102M in fiscal year 1997-98 from CIC's contribution budget.

(e) Please see response for (d) above.

(f) Under LINC, CIC funds organizations for the provision of basic language training to adult immigrants in one of Canada's official languages. In some communities, other levels of government will fund language training options also.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Peter Adams Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Reform

John Cummins Delta—South Richmond, BC

Mr. Speaker, on October 28, 1997, I asked Question No. 33 and again on December 2, 1997, I asked Question No. 56. I have asked the hon. gentleman opposite on a number of occasions about the placement of these questions. The questions relate to the Oak Bay Marine Group, a company owned by Mr. Bob Wright, and a company perhaps favoured by the minister of fisheries. I wonder if the member can tell me the status of those questions.

As well, on December 1, 1997, I asked Question No. 51 which has to do with the aboriginal fisheries. Again it is another question which the minister may not be too happy to answer, but I would like to know what is happening to my question.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Peter Adams Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have once again noted Questions Nos. 33, 51 and 56. I did follow up the previous time, I assure the hon. member, and I will do so again.

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is it agreed that all the remaining questions shall stand?