House of Commons Hansard #120 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-36.

Topics

Diabetes Month
Statements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Liberal

Bernard Patry Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, somewhat belatedly, I have the pleasure of informing the House that November is Diabetes Month.

Diabetes is a national public health problem in Canada and in the world. It currently affects over 2.2 million Canadians, contributes to over 5,500 deaths annually and costs Canada's economy some $9 billion annually.

Type 1 diabetes, previously recognized as a disease that affected adults only, now affects children as well.

As Canada's population ages, the number of cases of type 2 diabetes is expected to increase. Unless we change our lifestyle, our eating habits and our physical activity, we run an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

In 1999, so that Canadians could benefit more from the expertise available throughout Canada, the Government of Canada invested $115 million over five years to develop a Canadian strategy on diabetes.

I take this opportunity to thank all those who contribute in any way to research into this disease.

National Security
Statements by Members

November 28th, 2001 / 2:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Loyola Hearn St. John's West, NL

Mr. Speaker, the government is ramming through Bill C-36 in order to ensure that Canadians are protected against terrorists.

Airport security has been tightened. Lineups exist at our borders as every vehicle is checked. However, there is another way into our country: by water.

Anyone who has anything from a dory to an ocean liner can enter anywhere in the country. The only way we will know they are coming is if they call ahead for reservations.

This dilemma is caused simply by government cutbacks to the DFO and coast guard specifically.

The greatest threat to the country lies not across the ocean but across the House.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Okanagan—Coquihalla
B.C.

Canadian Alliance

Stockwell Day Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, as the Liberals lurch toward their first budget in almost two years, we now know that we will see daily the headlines of things that have been leaked by one Liberal leadership candidate to try to diminish another leadership candidate.

Instead of all the sneaking and peeking that is going on by the Liberals, will the Prime Minister confirm today that the industry minister's latest high tech boondoggle has indeed been replaced for the higher priority needs of Canadians, security and defence? Can we just get a clear message on it?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we do not comment on what could or could not be in the budget. I appreciate the Leader of the Opposition's support for the traditional approach that we maintain on budget confidentiality.

I might add that the Leader of the Opposition is the last person in the country to talk about leadership.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Okanagan—Coquihalla
B.C.

Canadian Alliance

Stockwell Day Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, it is as confidential as the next reporter. We saw that very clearly.

From the same report, the public learns that a mere $600 million will go to defence and security. That is far too little.

Will the Prime Minister reassure people and commit to allotting $2 billion a year to the budget of the Department of National Defence?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the interest of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter but he will have to wait until December 10. I think he will be reassured when he sees the good budget the Minister of Finance presents.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Okanagan—Coquihalla
B.C.

Canadian Alliance

Stockwell Day Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are not waiting until December 10. They are leaking stuff daily.

We need to know. With the gaping holes that have been left in our security wall in Canada because of Bill C-36, will there be an extra billion dollars to the RCMP and to CSIS and our border security forces to be able to plug the holes that have been left by Bill C-36?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, what is strange is that the hon. member is wrongly asserting gaping holes in Bill C-36, because on October 16 his justice critic, the member for Provencher, said:

The government has taken some important steps. Although we will be considering the provisions of the bill very carefully, it is imperative that the legislation move forward as quickly as possible. I therefore thank members of the House for the increase in the number of hours for debate to raise concerns and move the matter along.

I say to the Leader of the Opposition: meet his justice critic.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, then the Liberals had to bring in closure and shut down debate. That was great.

Now that the industry minister's misguided broadband initiative has been pushed aside by the finance minister, it appears that a digital divide has emerged within the cabinet. Canadians frankly want assurances that their priorities will be given higher priority than this government will give.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister promise Canadians that there will be spending cuts in low priority areas rather than a deficit or tax increases? Yes or no.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I can promise the Leader of the Opposition and all Canadians that the budget that will be presented will be a good budget representing fairly the interests of all Canadians.

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, in the last election there was a lot of talk from these Liberals about Canadian values.

In the months since September 11, it has become clear that one of the great values of all Canadians is their safety and security. In fact, the Liberal dominated finance committee has joined with the official opposition and said that we should increase spending on security and defence.

Again my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Will we get assurances that they will cut down the wasteful spending and put money toward security and defence?

The Budget
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for reminding us and all Canadians that this week is the first anniversary of our third back to back majority victory.

That means that when Canadians looked at the potential and reality of the leaders of the various parties and the programs of the various parties, they rejected the Alliance Party out of hand as a discouraging, discredited, ragtag group, which has been confirmed every day over the past year.

Public Safety Act
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the public safety bill will allow the government to get around the National Defence Act, which prevents the army from being deployed in Quebec unless Quebec so requests.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister even alluded to Quebecers' right to protection by the central government to justify Ottawa's unilateral power to order the creation of military security zones.

Since the federal government does not want to have to wait for a request from the provinces before deploying the army in their territory, will the government admit that wisdom dictates that the bill should be withdrawn?

Public Safety Act
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

York Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, again the hon. member is exaggerating what the military security zone is all about. It really intends to protect military equipment, the property that is off base. We already have the right to protect it on base. It would give us the right to protect it if it was in another location or on visiting ships from our ally countries, to be able to make sure that we can protect them. It is nothing more than what is absolutely necessary for the proper protection of this military property. All of this is subject to current laws and regulations. There is nothing new in this at all.

Public Safety Act
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing new and yet they are bringing in a bill.

Examples have been given of many new things in this bill and the minister is not on top of it. It is a botched bill and it is being rushed through. Even if we want to split it—and we will—we are not exaggerating, just reading what is in the bill. We do not trust the minister's good intentions. A judge will look at the wording, not at what is in the minister's head, what he is thinking or what he does not understand.

I ask him to withdraw his bill and scrap it.