Debates of April 4th, 2005

The Environment

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of the Environment has already said, it is our intention to submit a plan that will enable us to take a position of leadership, not only in Canada but in the world.

I must say that what is important is not only our plan for Kyoto, but also the international leadership we will demonstrate in Montreal at the United Nations meetings. Canada, in the person of the Minister of the Environment, will chair that convention.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

That is not very reassuring, Mr. Speaker.

The Prime Minister's dithering will end up costing Quebec and Canadian taxpayers and businesses very dearly. The cost of green credits is rising swiftly and polluting businesses are hesitant to purchase them because they do not know what to expect from the government. That is the reality.

Will the Prime Minister finally make a decision so that the comprehensive plan for the implementation of the Kyoto protocol can be made public by Friday? There must be no further delays, since Canada's ability to reach its goals is already compromised. When can we expect the plan to be announced?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the plan will be made public very soon. It will be an excellent plan that takes into account Canada's strengths in all fields, in all forms of energy, in all the kinds of skills we have in Quebec and all the other provinces.

Here at home, Canada will be in a good position to do its part for the planet, not only by reaching the Kyoto target, but also by playing a leadership role in the world, as the Prime Minister said.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government is under heavy criticism from environmentalists for its months of delay in tabling its action plan for implementation of the Kyoto protocol.

Instead of dithering, as the key environmental groups accuse him of doing, what is keeping the Prime Minister from putting an end to the squabble between the ministers of environment and natural resources and at last tabling a plan in favour of the Kyoto protocol without further delay?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I am tempted to reply, “Same question, same answer”.

The only thing I would add, however, is that when we target the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, we are also ensuring that the Canadian economy will be more competitive because of the energy savings. We will select leading edge technologies and, as a result, will be in a position to be far more competitive as far as a sustainable economy is concerned.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the environmental groups claim the ball is definitely in the government's court and in favour of the Kyoto protocol.

Can we ask the Prime Minister to show a modicum of leadership and put his environment minister in his place by asking him to table a plan for application of the Kyoto protocol in Canada without further delay?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, same question, same answer. This does, however, afford me the opportunity to state that the plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada will, perhaps, be an opportunity to undertake major projects in this country that will do a great deal toward bolstering its economy and quality of life.

We are thinking for instance—and a number of provinces have called for this—of an east-west hydro-electric transmission line linking Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland. That would be a very large undertaking.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we were very touched moments ago by the very public shedding of crocodile tears by the Prime Minister for the Liberal Party. We can only hope that the Liberal promises to pay back the dirty money are promises that are kept a little better than their promises to clean up the dirty air in this country.

Eight leading environmental groups say that they do not support the games being played with the budget and the amendments to CEPA. They criticize the Liberal failure to stand up for mandatory fuel efficiency in cars. They are asking, where is the Kyoto plan? That is my question.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the Kyoto plan is going to be revealed.

What really amazes me is that the leader of the NDP does not seem to understand the actions that have already been taken in this country by the government. He does not understand that progress has been made. He does not seem to understand the thesis that has been put forth by the Minister of the Environment in which he said that we will clean up the environment and at the same time develop the kinds of technologies that will boost our economy and enable other countries such as China, India and Russia to clean up their economies.

I would suggest to the hon. member that he ought to get out of this House occasionally and go across the country. He might want to go to Saskatchewan where he would--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Toronto—Danforth.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. We have been hearing those kinds of comments from the Prime Minister for 16 years since he began promising to clean up the air for Canadians and instead we have worse pollution than ever. He makes Neville Chamberlain look like a stalwart in standing up to a crisis.

Smog is sending people to emergency wards at unprecedented levels. The prairies are drying up. We have forest fires like we have never had before. All we get are promises of plans to be brought forward some day. Will he bring forward a plan, yes or no?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I think the leader of the NDP is just jealous because elsewhere in this federation never has an NDP government delivered a plan as green as the one delivered by the Minister of Finance a couple of weeks ago.

About the Kyoto plan, we are all on board. We all agree. When it comes I am sure the NDP will say it is a great plan.

Air-India

[Gurmant Grewal, Conservative, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want closure to the sad story of the Air-India bombing. We must have final and clear answers to the issues surrounding this tragedy, including what went wrong in the investigative process.

A public inquiry would ensure this gross injustice never happened again. This case has been an absolute farce from the beginning with the judicial system and the families of the victims the clear losers.

When will the government allow justice to be served? When will it call a public inquiry into the Air-India fiasco?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, the next step in the process on behalf of the government is me sitting down with family members and representatives of the families. I want to talk to the families about the questions they would like to see answered and what process we are able to pursue together to provide those answers.

[Gurmant Grewal, Conservative, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a public inquiry is needed to answer the serious questions raised about the investigation into the Air-India bombing. After the worst Canadian terrorist disaster, 20 years later and $120 million, Canadians deserve more than a shrug of the shoulders and a claim that things have changed.

There is no justice in what the Liberals are offering. What more will it take to convince the Deputy Prime Minister that a public inquiry is needed into the whole fiasco?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, the next step in the process is that senior government officials representing CSIS, the RCMP and myself will sit down with family members and representatives of the families. We will determine, based on my conversations with them, what questions can usefully be answered and how we might be able to provide those answers.

Immigration

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government's false promises hide a dark underbelly of unsavoury activities. The Prime Minister promised to establish a new climate in which whistleblowers would be welcomed. Just last week the immigration minister tore a strip off a whistleblower. He actually told a Sikh audience that the person who exposed abuse of temporary resident permits should be ashamed.

What exactly is the minister so anxious to hide?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I guess what I should have done is I should have repeated what I said in the House to a colleague of her party as well, that those who cast aspersions and make allegations without foundation should be embarrassed by the kind of damage that they bring onto people.

She will probably recall also that I gave an indication that there were some 16 people in question and not a single one of them was found to be in contravention of the permit that he had received. I said those who would make damage by casting aspersions on them ought to be embarrassed.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, then why was a Liberal MP under criminal investigation in the matter? Instead of welcoming whistleblowers as the Prime Minister promised, the immigration minister slammed a whistleblower for airing dirty laundry and warned ominously of risk to the community.

The minister clearly has warned a respected cultural community that it cannot raise concerns about abuses of the immigration system. Why is the minister trying to pressure and intimidate Sikh Canadians into hiding wrongdoing?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member ought to read the rest of that article. Nobody was pressured into anything. No information was being suppressed. On the question of disseminating falsehoods, maybe the member would like to explain to the House, even outside, who the member is that is under criminal investigation. You should be ashamed of yourself for actually suggesting that it happens.

[The Speaker]

Hon. members will, of course, always want to address the Chair.

The hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

St. Lawrence River

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Rivière-Du-Loup—Montmagny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today the Bloc Québécois launched a broad consultation on the future of the St. Lawrence and its preservation, use and development. In the past, the federal government's decisions have not reflected much interest in the protection and enhancement of the St. Lawrence.

For example, how does the federal government explain that, in the last budget, it allocated $40 million to protecting the Great Lakes and nothing for most of the St. Lawrence?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member is unaware but the Great Lakes flow into the St. Lawrence. In any event, they share the same ecosystem, and this $40 million will be used to develop a strategy applicable from the Great Lakes to the gulf. Some 19 million Canadians live around this giant ecosystem, which we are determined to better protect, in collaboration with the provinces and our neighbour, the United States.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Rivière-Du-Loup—Montmagny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Great Lakes have needs but so does the St. Lawrence.

The abandonment of the shoreline stabilization program and maintenance of numerous wharfs, the contamination of Lac St Pierre with Canadian forces munitions, excessive fees for ice-breaking and aids to navigation, and the collaboration with the Americans on the study to widen and deepen the seaway are all signs of the federal government's lack of interest in the St. Lawrence.

How can the federal government deny the fact that all its most recent decisions are negative and compromise the future of the St. Lawrence?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, despite the good news about the quality of water in the St. Lawrence—improvements were made—there are also fears that must be put to rest.

As for deepening the St. Lawrence Seaway, the Government of Canada opposes this idea, and it is out of the question.