House of Commons Hansard #157 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tax.

Topics

Fisheries
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

Peter MacKay Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS

Mr. Speaker, if the government cannot find the report or an answer maybe it will find a conscience.

Yesterday the minister of fisheries denied the town of Canso quota needed to keep the Seafreez plant operating. Without that plant the town may die. The decision by the minister was a devastating blow to one of the oldest fishing ports in Canada. In his letter the minister said that access to redfish “would be contrary to Canada's international stance that this stock is being overfished”. Yet tonnes of that redfish are still in the water.

How can the Nova Scotia minister and his government deny access to a fish resource to save the very existence of a town, while ignoring the massive overfishing of Canadian fish stocks by foreign vessels?

Fisheries
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the minister and the government are very conscious of the extreme difficulty that the townspeople of Canso are facing at the present time. That said, we cannot revert to Tory policies of destroying the resource, as happened on the cod stocks of the east coast, simply for political reasons.

The hon. member should be ashamed of himself for suggesting that we should ignore the risk to the stock simply to satisfy the short term political considerations which his party and his government, and he supported, did consistently and which led to the complete collapse of the economy of most--

Fisheries
Oral Question Period

11:45 a.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Calgary Southeast.

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

March 15th, 2002 / 11:45 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jason Kenney Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, the government's new $24 air tax is a disaster waiting to happen. The government wrote this policy on the back of a cocktail napkin. For instance, passengers who have to take more than one airline to get to their destination will have to pay the $24 tax more than once.

How can the government justify taking $48 or $72 from someone going from point A to point B? Why does it not have a plan to refund taxpayers from whom it is taking this money unfairly?

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)

Mr. Speaker, as the government has pointed out many times, we feel it is fair that the users pay for $2.5 billion out of the $7.7 billion cost of enhanced security. As we have also pointed out many times, the tax will be--

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Markham, ON

--or the charge will be reviewed in the fall. In the event we find that the projected revenues exceed the expenditure, the charge will be reduced.

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jason Kenney Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, congratulations, he flubbed twice. He admitted it is a tax and he did not answer the question. My question had nothing to do with whether the government would reduce the rate. It has to do with people having to pay it more than once. If a person has to go from Thunder Bay to Vancouver on three different airlines and three different legs, that person will have to pay $72 for only one security check.

Perhaps the minister of revenue can answer this question instead. Why does the government not have any plan to refund people who have to pay the $24 tax for multiple flights on multiple airlines? Will it come up with a plan to refund that money like the Air Transport Association of Canada wants?

Airport Security
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)

Mr. Speaker, I understand the hon. member is referring to the charge rather than a tax, but I will check into this. However it is my understanding that if a person goes from point A to point B and takes three different stages along the way, the charge is only paid once. I will check into it.

Public Service Commission
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Guay Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, the percentage of persons with disabilities has gone down in 19 of the 40 federal departments, and only four of these departments meet the benchmark of 6.5% of the workforce.

In spite of these disturbing facts, the Public Service Commission has decided to shut down its Enabling Resource Centre as of March 31.

How can the President of the Treasury Board justify such a decision, when the Employment Equity Act is being reviewed?

Public Service Commission
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Westmount—Ville-Marie
Québec

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, the government is truly committed to employment equity in the federal public service, and particularly so for persons with disabilities.

Efforts have been made for a number of years and positive measures were taken precisely to promote employment equity within federal departments.

A centre had been set up to provide advice to the departments and create a momentum, so that this would truly become standard practice everywhere. We are now at this stage and will definitely keep pursuing the same objective.

Public Service Commission
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Guay Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister did not understand. The centre is being shut down; it will close on March 31.

The Liberal government's decision is a real insult to the work of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development.

Is the President of the Treasury Board telling witnesses, who travelled from all regions of Canada, and committee members, that the die has already been cast and that their work is not worth the paper that it is written on?

Public Service Commission
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Westmount—Ville-Marie
Québec

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, let us put things in perspective.

When we created that centre, it was for a limited period of time, to provide advice and opinions to the departments. Now, the departments will be responsible and will be guided by a policy.

Let us look at the results: progress has been made year after year for women, aboriginals and persons with disabilities. We still have problems with visible minorities, but we have an action plan that will help us achieve our objectives.

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:50 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Howard Hilstrom Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, tuberculosis is endemic in deer and elk living in Riding Mountain National Park. These animals have transmitted TB to local cattle herds on several occasions. One more case of tuberculosis in cattle before April of 2005 could result in Canada losing its TB free designation. Yet the heritage minister who is responsible for our national parks is doing nothing to control these outbreaks.

Why does the minister of heritage refuse to sign on to the disease control agreement proposed by the province of Manitoba and the Manitoba Cattle Producers Association?

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

11:55 a.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings
Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, we certainly are proud of the record and the fact that we are tuberculosis free in Canada. We are always monitoring the situation to do all we can to ensure that that continues to be the situation.

We are working with Heritage Canada. We are working with all the sectors of the bovine industry in Canada to ensure we have a plan and the surveillance in place so we can continue to have the status that we have.