House of Commons Hansard #128 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was transportation.

Topics

Species At Risk
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Reform

Rahim Jaffer Edmonton—Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the parliamentary secretary was reading from the right page.

First we learned that leaseholders, ranchers and farmers will not be compensated for financial loss that results from the act. Then the minister decided in committee that corporations will not qualify for compensation.

As Canadians are trying to put habitat protection and protection of species ahead, why does the minister refuse to guarantee fair market compensation for landowners and leaseholders who have economically crippling restrictions placed on their lands?

Species At Risk
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Kitchener Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Karen Redman Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the government has put forward a very sound piece of legislation. We have asked for expert input on this very topic of compensation.

I would ask the members opposite why they are not co-operating to make sure that this important piece of legislation, important not only to the government but to Canadians, gets into committee in order that we may deal with it.

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Dick Proctor Palliser, SK

Mr. Speaker, as all of us know, this weekend is a time when Canadians count their blessings and give thanks for a bountiful harvest and a full larder. However, once again few of our farm families who produce that bountiful harvest are celebrating because farm federal safety nets are simply too restrictive and too skimpy to allow them any meaningful return.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture says that $2 billion would go a long way toward levelling the playing field with our major competitors.

My question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. With large and growing surpluses, why will the government not commit $2 billion to help resolve this crisis?

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings
Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, the government has already increased support and safety nets to farmers by 85% in the last 24 months. The program that we put in place specifically for the 1998 and 1999 business years will deliver $1.6 billion to farmers with assistance from our partnership with the provinces. That program will be continuing into the year 2001.

As a federal government, we are continuing to look at many different ways to work with the provinces and the industry in order to assist farmers with their financial stress in all the ways that we can.

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

NDP

Dick Proctor Palliser, SK

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are being told by the government that the coming election will be about values. I cannot imagine fundamental values that Canadians hold more dearly and believe in more strongly than fairness and equality. Too often what the government has done to a growing number of Canadian farm families who desperately need a helping hand has been to give them the back of its hand.

The government has large and growing surpluses. Why does it persist in refusing to share some of that with our farm families?

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings
Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, we have shared and we will continue to share. I suggest to the hon. member that he speak to his provincial government at home, which informed me the other day that it did not have more money to help farmers. It did not see that as its role even at the very same time as it was telling me how important agriculture was to the province. I agree with the provincial government on how important agriculture is to the province, so it has a role to play too.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

Rick Borotsik Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, the decision on the future of Manitoba's land forces was to be made months ago. The Minister of National Defence stood in the House and said that the decision would be based on military operations and not on politics.

The report is in place, but the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the minister responsible for western economic diversification did not like the report so they have commissioned their own. I ask the Minister of National Defence, is this not political interference and why will the minister not accept the recommendations of his own military?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke
Ontario

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, as the