House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Canada National Parks Act April 30th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I have listened with great interest to the problems of Quebec as described by the hon. member, particularly the problems his party will have in the coming election.
Nonetheless, I thought we were talking about transferring a small piece on land in a park on Vancouver Island from Parks Canada to Indian Affairs. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Is Bill C-28 about Quebec referendum issues or is it about Pacific Rim and Riding Mountain parks?
Canada National Parks Act April 30th, 2004
moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.
Canada National Parks Act April 30th, 2004
moved that the bill be concurred in.
The Environment April 23rd, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I do not know exactly where the question lies in this. I can assure the hon. member that public health is the most important thing. Also, we are certainly going to take into consideration the natural resources of the region, including the fishery.
The Environment April 23rd, 2004
Mr. Speaker, it is incorrect to say that we are not examining this situation closely. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency has looked into it. I have yet to receive the report, but if there are cross-border problems between New Brunswick and Quebec, then the federal government may have certain responsibilities. However, New Brunswick, not the federal government, has most of the responsibility in this.
The Environment April 20th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I indicated to the hon. member yesterday that our consultations have just been completed.
The departments of the Environment, Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and Natural Resources now have the information available to them, and we will review it and make the appropriate decision soon.
Canada National Parks Act April 19th, 2004
moved that Bill C-28, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act, be read the second time and sent to a committee.
The Environment April 19th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, my department, like the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, has now completed its consultation process. I can assure the hon. member that we will now review all the information available, while taking into account our domestic and international policies regarding chrysotile asbestos and our objectives under the Rotterdam Convention.
The Environment March 30th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the situation is not at all out of hand. The fact is that we have a very complicated and sophisticated transportation system for grains in this country and for other agricultural products. Labelling of each individual shipment is next to impossible under our current system.
We do have the voluntary measures that are in place, an opportunity for those who wish to avoid genetically modified organisms to in fact take advantage of that labelling. They can in fact do that, but overall we have a system that works effectively and well and we are going to continue with it.
The Environment March 29th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the essence of those many statements made by the hon. member is that there was not money in the budget for Kyoto. What he forgets is that the Kyoto financing cycle is about every two years, the 2001 budget and the 2003 budget.
There remains some $690 million unspent from the 2003 budget. We will deal with that in due course. I am quite sure the Minister of Finance in due course will make sure that we have enough to continue the programs.