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 plan.

Topics

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, in his budget, the hon. Minister of Finance has included measures to assist the renewable energy sector. If this is insufficient, I trust that the hon. member will raise the point during the debate on the ratification of the Kyoto protocol, and indicate the policy he wants. This is a good opportunity for a good debate on renewable energy, as well as on our credits for other forms of energy.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse Windsor West, ON

Mr. Speaker, earlier today the parliamentary secretary to the government House Leader pointed out that parliament cannot ratify the Kyoto accord and that only the government can do so.

It appears even he recognized that the Prime Minister's commitments in Johannesburg to have the Canadian parliament vote on ratification and statements in the Speech from the Throne to bring a resolution before the House this year are meaningless. Perhaps he could explain that to the Prime Minister.

Now that his government understands that, will the Deputy Prime Minister tell us today in the House on what specific date his government will ratify the Kyoto accord?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, let me repeat for the third time in the last 10 minutes, before the end of this year. Is that understandable to the hon. member, or should I go slower?

There are many things that we bring to the House for advice and consultation which are not within the purview of parliament to make a final decision. They are within the purview of the executive.

We frequently however, at the request of the opposition and of other members of the House on the government side, bring items to the House so a full debate can take place. That I think is desirable.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse Windsor West, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of understanding; it is a question of believing in the government.

The auto industry continues to lose jobs and the future critical investment in this country is at risk. Labour, industry and 20-plus Ontario cities have repeatedly asked the industry minister to do something.

Will the minister come out of his slumber and finally work on a strategy to make Canada a leader in the development of environmentally sustainable technology for the auto industry? This will ensure we meet our Kyoto targets and defend our vital auto industry.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Etobicoke Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Allan Rock Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in our history the government has brought together all the interests to the same table: auto manufacturers, parts suppliers, labour unions, different levels of government, and auto dealers.

We are working together to develop a strategy to ensure that investment in the auto sector in Canada continues to grow. We are looking 10 years out to ensure that we continue to get our share of global investment. We continue to produce quality automobiles for the world.

Canada-U.S. Relations
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the acting Prime Minister. The comments of the Prime Minister's official spokesperson about the President of the United States threw Canada off our agenda at the Prague Summit and Paris. Now they are being used by the Iraq dictator in his war of words with Washington.

The Prime Minister's director of communications has done the honourable thing and submitted her resignation. When will the Prime Minister do the honourable thing and accept it?

Canada-U.S. Relations
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, it is time that we turned our attention to some of the accomplishments that took place in Prague, including ones with which Canada is directly identified, especially the addition of seven new members to the NATO alliance and the expression of united support by members of NATO for UN Security Council resolution 1441.

Canada-U.S. Relations
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, let us be serious about this. The problem is precisely that we cannot turn attention to the international priorities that are important to Canada because the only thing that gets reported is President Chirac protecting the Prime Minister against his own bad judgment and the dictator in Iraq using the Ducros controversy as a means to further deepen tensions between Iraq and the United States.

Why does the government not put Canada first and accept the resignation of a director of communications who has become--

Canada-U.S. Relations
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. Deputy Prime Minister.

Canada-U.S. Relations
Oral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I do believe that it is time for the hon. member to move on and to begin to discuss some of the issues that were important as a result of the Prague Summit, including the expansion of NATO and the strong resolution on the issues in Iraq.

The individual in question indicated that indeed if the statement were made, it was one for which she apologized. I think that should be the end of the matter for now.

Health
Oral Question Period

November 25th, 2002 / 2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, Justice Horace Krever studied the whole issue of tainted blood and on compensation he said:

Compensating some needy sufferers and not others cannot, in my opinion, be justified

Top federal bureaucrats have now been charged with criminal negligence for the 1980-90 events. Why did HIV sufferers of tainted blood receive compensation when 6,000 sufferers of hepatitis C from exactly the same federal bureaucratic mistake receive nothing?

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Edmonton West
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, as I have said before in the House the government did respond to the recommendations of Mr. Justice Krever. That is why the government put $1.4 billion toward compensating and assisting those infected with hepatitis C.

As I have already indicated in the House there was a settlement reached among those victims who suffer from hepatitis C for the period 1986-90. That settlement, which was court managed, constitutes some $885 million and we have an additional $525 million to assist--

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Macleod.

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant Hill Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, the tainted blood tragedy is Canada's worst public health disaster and the minister can be very precise with her words if she will.

I will ask her to be precise as I ask a precise question. The federal government compensated every single victim of HIV from tainted blood. Some 6,000 victims of hepatitis C received no compensation. Why is that?

Health
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Edmonton West
Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated in the House before, for those pre-1986 and post-1990, the government has provided $525 million to assist in the care of those people.

I find it incredible that the opposition would suggest that the government has not dealt in a compassionate fashion with those who tragically suffer from hepatitis C, pre-1986 and post-1990.