Mr. Speaker, as of November 26, 2002, the Government of Canada had spent approximately $9,700,000 on advertising for the Kyoto protocol.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 43% of the vote.
Question No. 83 January 28th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, as of November 26, 2002, the Government of Canada had spent approximately $9,700,000 on advertising for the Kyoto protocol.
Natural Resources December 13th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the federal government is always willing to move forward but it was the Quebec government that rejected the federal framework that already existed. If it were truly interested in moving forward a lot more quickly it would have accepted the existing federal regulatory framework. It rejected that. As a result, we could not move forward.
If the Quebec government would have focused more on economic development instead of being focused on its separatist agenda, a lot more jobs would have been created in Quebec.
Natural Resources December 13th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, we are working with the Quebec government just as we are working with the B.C. government or Prince Edward Island or New Brunswick, which have all expressed interest in taking advantage of oil and gas resources, but we will want to make sure that we move forward in a way that respects the sustainable development principles and the environment.
If the hon. member thinks it is not important to protect the environment or make sure we move forward in a socially responsible way, he should stand up and say that, because we think it is important to protect the environment and it is important to have a regulatory framework that does this. That is the way we are going to follow through.
Natural Resources December 12th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, we are very happy to move forward on this. If the Quebec government really wants to move as quickly as it says it does, all it has to do is accept the federal regulatory framework that already exists. If it wants to do that, it would help us. If it wants to get involved and play a role, all these things take time.
We have to be responsible. I can assure the House and Canadians that we will be very responsible as we move forward on looking at new opportunities for economic development whether it is on offshore British Columbia or whether it is in the St. Lawrence.
Natural Resources December 12th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member obviously had a misunderstanding in terms of his information. There is no agreement that exists. Our officials have been meeting to look forward as to how we can cooperate on this request by the Quebec government.
We will move forward but we will move forward in a responsible way that Canadians expect. We will make sure that we have the appropriate regulatory framework, that we protect the environment and that we do it in a socially responsible way. That is the way we are going to operate.
Natural Resources December 12th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to meet with the minister of energy from Quebec on two occasions. Our officials have been meeting regularly.
We are dealing with Quebec on this issue in the same way as we deal with any other province that wants offshore development but we have to be responsible both environmentally and socially. The hon. member should know that all Canadians, including Quebeckers, want to make sure we have the proper regulatory framework and that we respect the environment and do it in a socially responsible way.
Natural Resources December 12th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, both Quebec and B.C. have indicated their interest in taking advantage of offshore development in both areas.
As Minister of Natural Resources, I am happy to work with them. I think all members and Canadians will want to ensure that we look at the environmental concerns, that we do it in a socially responsible way and that we have an appropriate regulatory framework. Once we are able to do that, we can move forward, both for B.C. and for Quebec to take advantage of the economic opportunities that may be there in oil and gas exploration.
Softwood Lumber December 11th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I guess the hon. member does not think that $340 million is a lot of money. Three hundred and forty million dollars is a lot of money to help the softwood lumber industry.
What we are working on is to make sure we have a long term agreement. The Minister for International Trade is working to make sure we have an agreement which allows us free access to the U.S. market, which is best for us. We want to make sure we have a long term agreement and that is what we are focused on. If further measures are needed, everyone can be assured that we will be there to support the industry and workers.
Softwood Lumber December 11th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member is saying is simply not true. All he has to do is look at the program that we have.
First we provided a $100 million program to make sure that we work on research and development and look for new markets for our softwood lumber products. Then in the second phase we announced $240 million. That is a total of $340 million to help the forestry workers.
We have also said if we do not get an agreement in the next four to five months, we are willing to look at more. We would certainly want to work with the hon. member to see what more would need to be done.
Softwood Lumber December 10th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, when we announced the $240 million package, we said that it is extremely important for Canada and the U.S. to resolve this issue and we did not want anything to jeopardize that. We still feel there is a window of opportunity.
As I said earlier, the loan guarantee and other programs are still being considered. If we do not get an agreement with the U.S., which we hope there will be, we will ensure that we support the workers and industry. That door is still open and both those instruments are still on the table for us to make sure we do everything we can to protect the industry and the workers in the forest sector.