House of Commons Hansard #233 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was victims.

Topics

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Oral Question Period

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

According to the timer I have, the hon. member was over his 35 seconds. I will double check with the clerk.

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Oral Question Period

11:35 a.m.

St. Catharines
Ontario

Liberal

Walt Lastewka Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that the two companies are not related. The former company did go bankrupt, but the new company has all new people. It just happens to be in the same building. All new people are running a new company and the member should know that. Perhaps he should learn a few more details before he asks a question.

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Oral Question Period

11:35 a.m.

Reform

Lee Morrison Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, no legitimate financial institution would even consider giving a refill to a company that has already stiffed it once. When will this minister take some responsibility? When will he decide that the taxpayers' money should be guarded and not handed out to friends of the government?

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
Oral Question Period

11:35 a.m.

St. Catharines
Ontario

Liberal

Walt Lastewka Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member makes a number of accusations which are totally wrong. When a firm gets changed over to another, brand new firm, I do not think the policy of the Reform Party would be to tear down the building. I am sure the member does not want that to happen. This is a new company, with new management, a new business plan and new products to make things happen for the Atlantic provinces. We want to create more jobs in the Atlantic provinces under new management.

Radio-Canada
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, the CRTC wants to force Radio-Canada to reduce its advertising revenues.

However, the vice-president of the CBC's French network clearly said that any reduction in advertising revenues without equivalent compensation from the government would necessarily result in a loss of services to the public.

My question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Considering that the government has already significantly reduced its subsidies to Radio-Canada, will it now let the CRTC deprive that network of its separate revenues without compensation?

Radio-Canada
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, when one looks at what the public expects from Radio-Canada, one realizes that there is a consensus on the quality of radio programming.

There is currently no advertising on the radio. Therefore, why does the hon. member claim that the quality of the programming is dependent on advertising revenues? I do not agree with that claim.

Publishing Industry
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

John Finlay Oxford, ON

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

This week the minister used Canadian Bride as an example of a magazine that calls itself Canadian but contains very little Canadian content. The National Post , the Financial Post and the Ottawa Citizen all attacked the minister, saying there is no such magazine. This proves how little the minister knows about Canadian magazines.

Who is right, the people at Conrad Black's newspapers or the minister?

Publishing Industry
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I have never accused the National Post of letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

Yesterday it said “There is no such magazine as Canadian Bride ”. I have here a copy of the magazine that does not exist. The magazine that does not exist asks readers who have questions about Canadian Bride to direct their questions to its office in New York City.

With the consent of the House, after question period I would be very happy to table a copy of this non-existent magazine.

Customs Act
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Reform

Jake Hoeppner Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, in 1996 the government passed an order in council to close a loophole in the Customs Act that led to the acquittal of David Sawatzky for exporting his own wheat into the U.S. without a wheat board export permit.

Crown prosecutor Clyde Bond categorically stated that the crown would have to appeal the decision in order to prosecute the other 100-plus farmers for the same violation. The government lost that appeal.

Why is this government still prosecuting these 100-plus farmers?

Customs Act
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Wascana
Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board

Mr. Speaker, to be certain of the facts as alleged by the hon. gentleman I would need to check the course of the various legal proceedings.

I can assure the hon. gentleman that this government in no way interferes in the appropriate administration of justice. That is entirely an arm's length process and is administered without any involvement by me or any other minister of this government.

Customs Act
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Reform

Jake Hoeppner Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows very well that I am not asking him to comment on individual cases. I am asking him whether the crown prosecutor is above the law. If not, why is he still prosecuting these farmers?

Customs Act
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Wascana
Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman would care to give me the specifics of the cases he is referring to I will refer them to the Minister of Justice for a complete answer.

Publishing Industry
Oral Question Period

May 28th, 1999 / 11:40 a.m.

NDP

Bev Desjarlais Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, two days ago the heritage minister said “For the first time in history the U.S. has recognized our right to promote Canadian content”.

The minister insists this means majority Canadian content. Today's Inside U.S. Trade quotes the written agreement as stating “a substantial level of original editorial content”.

Which is it? Was the minister's parliamentary secretary just confused yesterday when he said that the deal specified majority content? If not, will the minister table that signed agreement with the U.S. along with that bride magazine in the House today?

Publishing Industry
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, the regulations that accompany the package that was distributed yesterday, the draft regulations, specify majority Canadian content.

Publishing Industry
Oral Question Period

11:40 a.m.

NDP

Bev Desjarlais Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, the minister has told Canadians that the U.S. has agreed not to pursue Canada in any trade forum for any measures Canada takes that are part of this deal to assist Canadian industry. Today we find out that not only does the U.S. not agree with this interpretation, but her pal, the Minister for International Trade, disagrees with her.

Now U.S. trade officials and publishers say that they have the right to access any subsidies Canada makes available to our publishers.

How does this minister intend to stand up for Canada on this one?