Debates of Feb. 13th, 2003

Don Boudria Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, this issue is before the Speaker for a ruling. We contend on our side of the House that nothing has been breached.

The hon. member now is contesting that something has been breached. That discussion took place yesterday. We will wait for the Speaker's ruling which we will respect. I only hope that he and his colleagues will as well.

Elinor Caplan Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency has a very long record of integrity and confidentiality provisions when it comes to taxpayer information. Any information on rulings that have been requested by any taxpayer are confidential. I cannot even tell the House whether a ruling has been requested by any taxpayer.

What I can tell the member opposite, as I have previously said and I will say it again because it is extremely important, there is no political inference. As minister I do not interfere in these decisions. They are professional decisions and they apply the law.

Roy H. Bailey Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. When can Canadians expect his department, when handling passports, to return to the 45 day guarantee?

We have had people inquiring about their passports being delayed 60 days. When can he expect to have his department back to normal in order to guarantee Canadians a 45 day return?

Bill Graham Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I tried to answer the question yesterday. I appreciate the member's concern and the concern of Canadians about the service we are trying to give them through the passport office.

As I told the House yesterday, increased security measures together with an unforeseen volume have given us problems. I have addressed this by bringing in more people to get the backlog worked out. I sent all members a statement from the department as to how we can get the backlog down. I expect and hope it will be down to at least a month within the next month, but it is very hard to deal with an issue that is overwhelming by its complexity and nature.

I apologize to members. We are working--

Monique Guay Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, while the labour disputes at Cargill, Vidéotron and Radio-Nord are reducing hundreds of families to poverty, the federal government continues to support the use of scabs. But there is worse still. The Minister of Labour claims that employees do not want antiscab provisions included in the Canada Labour Code, which is totally false.

How can the Minister of Labour make such comments when, in a brief tabled on November 20, 1995, during the review of part I of the Canada Labour Code, the FTQ used four full pages to demonstrate that it is absolutely necessary to have antiscab provisions?

Claudette Bradshaw Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, in the case of Cargill and Vidéotron, I am pleased to say that the two sides are now negotiating.

As for the issue of replacement workers, when part I of the Canada Labour Code was drafted, workers wanted one thing, while employers wanted another. Therefore, a compromise was reached. That compromise satisfies both sides, but it remains a compromise.

Pat Martin Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, in what could only be described as a political death wish, British Columbia's Liberal premier is raising gas taxes by 3.5¢. While the NDP is putting forward meaningful proposals to bring stability to fuel costs, the Alliance-Liberal cabal is assisting Canadians by raising taxes.

Canadians instinctively know they are being gouged by high fuel prices and the Minister of Industry said it is not within the federal jurisdiction. Under the Competition Act, a complaint to the tribunal should be referred to an energy commission with special expertise.

Would he agree that it should be--

Allan Rock Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, the competition bureau has on many occasions in the past examined the activities in the energy sector and is alert to any evidence of collusion or improper conduct. That is one thing.

The other thing is controlling prices, which is something that is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the provinces. That is why I say there is a provincial jurisdiction here. Competition is federal; price control is provincial. Some provinces have already exercised that power. It is up to them to make that decision.

Elsie Wayne Saint John, NB

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister last week stated that changes would be made to SISIP, the flawed insurance program that covers our men and women of the armed forces. This is comforting news to those currently serving, but what about the veterans injured who will still receive no benefits for their injuries because this decision is not retroactive?

Will the defence minister advise the House today what plans are in place to compensate the veterans previously injured who received no benefit from SISIP? Those who lost both legs, both arms, their hearing and their eyes.

Will he tell us today what he plans to do?

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to Major Henwood who, through the media, brought to my attention when I assumed the portfolio as defence minister this issue of people who had lost their legs.

I have been working on this matter and was very pleased to announce the other day that as we move forward it will not be just colonels and generals who will receive this benefit, but members of the Canadian Armed Forces of all ranks. This is a major advance and I am still working on the retroactivity section of this proposal.