Debates of Nov. 24th, 1999

Committees Of The House

[The Speaker]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among House leaders with respect to the televising of a committee of the House. I move:

That the House, pursuant to Standing Order 119(1), authorize the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development to televise its meetings on Wednesday, November 24 in the afternoon and Thursday, November 25 in the morning, during its study on Bill C-9, an act to give effect to the Nisga'a final agreement in accordance with the guidelines pertaining to televising committee proceedings.

[The Speaker]

Does the hon. member have consent to put the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

Petitions

[Rose-Marie Ur, Liberal, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to present a petition signed by residents of Grand Bend, Forest and Parkhill.

The petition states that the use of the additive MMT in Canadian gasoline presents an environmental problem affecting every man, woman and child in Canada. The petitioners call upon parliament to set by the end of this calendar year national clean fuel standards for gasoline with zero MMT and low sulphur content.

[Clifford Lincoln, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition by a number of residents of my riding, on the West Island of Montreal, which reads as follows “We, the undersigned Canadian residents, call on parliament to declare an immediate moratorium on the cosmetic use of chemical pesticides”.

They ask for an immediate moratorium on the cosmetic use of chemical pesticides until such time as their use has been scientifically proven to be safe and the long term consequences of their application are known.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present a huge petition of some 231 pages with names of people from Saskatchewan and Manitoba. They obviously have some considerable difficulty with the AIDA program. In their petition they wish the House to recognize the failure of AIDA and to replace it with an acreage payment. I present the petition to the House and ask the minister of agriculture to do so.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise, pursuant to Standing Order 36, to table a petition signed by 621 riparian owners along the St. Lawrence River in the riding of Verchères—Les-Patriotes.

Citing the end of the shoreline protection program, the petitioners point out that the phenomenon of shoreline erosion along the St. Lawrence River is assuming increasingly worrisome proportions and that it is affecting not just the environment, their safety and their well-being, but also the integrity of their property.

The petitioners therefore call on the House of Commons to take action to have the federal government assume its responsibilities with respect to shoreline protection along the St. Lawrence River as soon as possible, and to have it implement satisfactory measures to halt the phenomenon of shoreline erosion without delay.

I am also pleased to submit directly to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans resolutions passed to this effect by the municipalities of Boucherville, Varennes, Verchères and Contrecoeur, as well as the RCM of LaJemmerais.

[Norman E. Doyle, Progressive Conservative, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition to present on behalf of a number of citizens from the St. John's area.

The petition calls upon the House to encourage the federal government to financially support the clean-up of St. John's harbour. It would involve a financial commitment from the federal government for a sewage treatment system required for that clean-up. Given the fact that the federal government has made similar expenditures in the past, it is indeed a reasonable request. Over $100 million would be required to deal with this environmental problem. The petitioners are very anxious to have the project started.

[Paul Forseth, Reform, New Westminster—Coquitlam—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to present a petition today from Burnaby constituents who have been frustrated following the summer surge of boats containing Chinese migrants. The petitioners call upon parliament to enact immediate changes to Canada's immigration laws to allow for the deportation of obvious and blatant abusers of the system.

The petitioners advocate that legislation be enacted requiring refugee claimants to demonstrate that they are fleeing genuine political persecution or face immediate deportation without delay.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. It urges parliament to fulfil its promise of the 1989 House of Commons commitment to end child poverty by the year 2000.

It is a very timely, very poignant petition from dozens of residents of Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough. There was obviously a great deal of interest and debate on this subject matter before the House. I respectfully table the petition on the petitioners' behalf.

Questions On The Order Paper

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

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

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Motions For Papers

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Request For Emergency Debate

[The Speaker]

I am in receipt of four applications for an emergency debate. The four of them are about the maritime helicopter replacement program. They are marked as to the time I received them.

The first one I received was from the member for Compton—Stanstead. I will hear him and then I will make my ruling on it. I have a copy of his letter here which I have already read. Therefore, I would ask him to be quite succinct in his presentation.

[David Price, Progressive Conservative, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is rather straight forward just from hearing what the minister had to say today. As usual, he was skating around the issue.

The point is that through the Access to Information Act we received the actual briefing notes of the minister. In those notes it is stated quite clearly that there is an eight year time slot from the time of ordering the helicopters and the time that they will be delivered. At the present time, the Sea King helicopters with their life expansion program only go to the year 2005. Therefore we have a three year window with no maritime helicopters. That is what we are getting at.

It is a huge safety matter with our armed forces and the Canadian people. That is the main reason we would like to have it debated in the House, but there is a lot more to it.

[The Speaker]

Basically from what the four members have said and what you basically have here, it seems to me at this point at least that they do not meet the proper criteria for an emergency debate.

[The Speaker]

I am in receipt of a notice of motion under Standing Order 52 from the hon. member for Vancouver East. I received her letter earlier today. I have read it so I would ask her to be quite succinct in putting forth her point.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to be very brief. I rise on a very solemn and serious matter. As you know I wrote you a letter to seek leave to have an emergency debate under Standing Order 52(2).

Today is the 10th anniversary of the unanimous resolution that was passed in the House of Commons to seek to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000. Maybe the Speaker himself was present in the House that day. It was an honourable resolution that was made 10 years ago. Regrettably, today we are in a situation where not only have we not made any progress in this regard, a goal that was put together by all members of the House, but the situation has become much worse, to the extent that there are now 1.4 million children living in poverty.

We must not forget that those children are not alone. They are attached to families. Tens of thousands of families are living in poverty in this country.

For the 1.4 million children living in poverty this is definitely an emergency. For the 90% of single mothers of young children, it is an emergency. For the 300,000 children who make use of food banks, it is definitely an emergency.

Over the past two days, citizens right across the country have been holding vigils and meetings to address the emergency. Today, as the leader of the NDP pointed out, bells were ringing across the country at noon to draw to the attention of all members of the House the fact that the resolution has not met its goal.

I believe that members of parliament need an opportunity to report on the scale of the problem in our own communities, to question the government on why this emergency now exists and to set out some recommendations about what actions need to be taken to help poor kids in the country.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge that you grant the emergency debate because this did come from parliament and from all of us working together. Here we are 10 years later in a very sorry state of affairs. I think this is something that really necessitates an emergency debate. I would ask you to consider that.