House of Commons Hansard #31 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was kyoto.

Topics

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, the figures on health care funding in Quebec are very clear. The federal government has cut its share of health care funding from 22% in 1994-95 to 14% in 2000-01. This is a drastic cut in an area where it will be felt the most.

How does the federal government plan on explaining to the people of the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean that government cuts have cost them more than $28 million for health care alone? Can the government explain this to the people of Saguenay, Roberval, Dolbeau and Alma?

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Edmonton West
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, as I am sure the hon. member is aware, we are all committed to working in partnership and together to renew our health care system. In fact, this collaboration has been a continuum, an ongoing partnership. That is why in September 2000 our Prime Minister and first ministers entered into an accord in which we agreed to put in an additional $21.1 billion of cash so that provinces could in fact renew and continue the process of revitalizing their health care systems.

I am sure that with Mr. Romanow's report this week we will see ongoing cooperation--

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans.

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, I remind the Minister of Health that we are still far from the funding levels that were in place before the Liberals took office. A quick calculation reveals that the region of Lanaudière was short close to $32 million for health care in 2000-01 because of the cuts the federal government has made since it came to power.

Does the federal government not understand that the only way to repair the mess it has made of health care is to at least restore funding to its 1994-95 levels?

Health
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Edmonton West
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to look at what the September 2000 accord provided in additional dollars, new dollars, for the province of Quebec: $5 billion in CHST transfers, $5 billion of new cash over the next five years; $239.5 million for medical equipment in the province; and $133 million under the primary health care transition fund.

In fact, we are all committed to renewing health care in this country and in fact the accord of September 2000 speaks to the commitment of the government.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Diane Ablonczy Calgary—Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, if the killers of more than a dozen innocent people in the recent U.S. sniper tragedy had made it to the Canadian border, they may never have faced justice.

These Liberals have decided that convicted and accused murderers will be welcomed in at our border even as other claimants are turned back due to the new safe third country agreement.

Why does the Liberal government pretend it will help fight terrorism at the same time that it is writing regulations to give safe haven to terrorists and murderers?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bourassa
Québec

Liberal

Denis Coderre Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, I find the way my hon. colleague has phrased her question rather unacceptable.

When we established the safe third country agreement, the main purpose was always to make the system consistent. However, given that the hon. member is herself a lawyer, she will understand that the rule of law must be respected. And we fully respect the Supreme Court ruling in this regard. However, there is no question of welcoming murderers. We are fully committed to protecting Canadian citizens in this country.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Diane Ablonczy Calgary—Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the government does not want the U.S. rule of law to be respected. The U.S. snipers would be guaranteed Canada's protection under the new Liberal safe third country agreement regulations. Canada would fight to make sure they did not have to face U.S. justice for their murderous acts.

The new regulations set up a Liberal open door policy for migrant murderers and capital criminal fugitives and escapees. How does the government square this with its professed support for the war against terrorism?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bourassa
Québec

Liberal

Denis Coderre Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, first, the safe third country agreement is one of the major tools that we are using to regulate, and we all know that security is a priority of this government. Not only are we respecting the rule of law of the Supreme Court, but there are also some cases like the Suresh case, where in some issues and some matters, we can, for the sake of the protection of our own security, use those proper tools.

I think that not only are Canadians willing for us to regulate the system, we have that balanced approach between openness and vigilance and we are doing our job.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

November 25th, 2002 / 2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Claude Bachand Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, at the NATO Summit, the Prime Minister announced an increase in military spending in the next budget. Such an announcement is at the very least surprising, given that the defence policy review is not yet complete, the government has yet to set its priorities and there has been no real public debate on the issue.

Does the Prime Minister not think that before he goes announcing that the defence budget will be increased to please his American neighbours, he should at least have the decency to wait until the ongoing review is complete and to launch a public debate on the mandate and role of the Canadian armed forces?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, it would seem that two people took a stand on the defence budget recently. The Prime Minister took a stand in favour, and the hon. member against. Given that choice, I can only be pleased.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Claude Bachand Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is true that there are opposing voices, and the Bloc Quebecois is one. Some question the financial requirements of the armed forces, and others want their mandate defined before any changes are made in favour of the military in the budget.

Is the Prime Minister not adding to the confusion by announcing in advance that the budget of the Canadian armed forces needs to be increased?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, there is no confusion on this side of the House. As we have said on several occasions, there is a lot of tension in the Canadian Forces because of the need to do on an ongoing basis what they are already doing.

This is the objective I have been talking about for months, and that is what the Prime Minister referred to.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:40 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Leon Benoit Lakeland, AB

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister says that he is making the case to cabinet for an increase in funding for the Canadian Forces. However, the finance minister says that in order to increase funding he needs to know exactly where the money is needed, where it is going to go and what its strategic purpose is. Now the opposition has learned from sources inside the Department of National Defence that the minister has halted work on the defence review.

How does the defence minister expect to make the case for more funding to the finance minister when he has halted the process which would provide the information that the finance minister needs?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:40 p.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I must confess to being a little bit perplexed. The government in the throne speech announced that at some point in the future there might be a review of foreign and defence policy. That has not yet been announced, so it is very difficult to halt work on a defence review when that review has not yet been officially announced.