Joe Volpe

[Citizenship Act, November 21st, 1996]

Madam Speaker, it is with some regret that I hear the information given by the member because he takes a position that is negative from the very beginning and continues that way. I am sorry because the member opposite is showing a lack of confidence in the ability of Canadian Airlines to carry out a successful operational reorganization.

The company has already identified the ingredients it needs to go forward successfully. The company plan does not include any government assistance. It also does not include any request for changes in the regulations. This company wants to make it on its own.

Those, like the member, who are calling for re-regulation of the air services sector fail to see how counterproductive such action would be. Turning back the clock would not be in the interests of the travelling public. Outlawing seat sales and shutting down discount carriers will not ultimately save a single job at Canadian Airlines.

Government policy is serving the interests of the travelling public. Look at what it has already accomplished. First, an increase in new routes and services into about 100 transborder markets, making air travel more accessible for more Canadians. Second, low discount fares, thanks to the arrival of new air carriers and increased competition. Third, Canadians are travelling in increasing number. Domestic travel this year will be up some 10 per cent.

The government continues to follow the situation closely and we have all the confidence that the management, the employees and the shareholders will take the action necessary and required for this company to turn in the right direction.

[Constitution Act, 1867, November 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to further respond to the question posed to the Minister of Health by the hon. member for Davenport on October 24 which has repeated again this evening.

As my hon. colleague knows, the reform of the pest management regulatory system was a campaign promise of the government. In February 1995 the government announced the creation of a new agency, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency.

This new agency is mandated to protect the health of Canadians, their environment, and at the same time to provide the necessary pest management tools needed by farmers and other users. The agency has steadily made progress in implementing these reforms. Let me cite some examples. International harmonizations have been put in place to reduce costs to manufacturers and to save time. Operations have been streamlined. The agency has spearheaded federal-provincial working groups to find creative solutions to persistent pest problems.

As to the other question, the minister intends to introduce legislation during this mandate to provide the statutory basis for the reformed system. This step will usher in the final chapter of the reform process. The new legislation will modernize, clarify and strengthen the law and the regulation of pesticides, and it will provide the basis for a system in which we can all have confidence.

[Constitution Act, 1867, November 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a couple of the questions the member wanted to have answered.

He will know that Canada must maintain a multi-purpose combat capable force that can operate alongside modern forces of our allies and like minded nations.

He will know as well that last November 6 the minister announced the government's plan to spend to some $500 million on six projects over the next five years. I would like to list the projects for him.

First, there is the $187 million clothe the soldier project to provide Canadian forces soldiers with 24 items of weatherproof clothing and personal equipment from combat boots and gloves to rucksacks and protective eye wear.

Second, a $13.4 million contract has been awarded for 60,000 helmets to Gallet Sécurité du Québec.

Third, the department is proceeding with a $27 million project to acquire six modern land mine detection systems.

Next, the Canadian forces will proceed with a $180 million project to equip the army with a modern command and control system that provides timely and accurate information which will allow the commanders to better plan, direct and monitor missions.

We are also moving ahead with a $145 million project to replace the turrets on our Leopard tanks.

Finally, we are moving ahead with a $15.3 million project to purchase 2,524 grenade launchers.

The Canadian forces must maintain the combat capability if they are to perform their missions effectively. These equipment purchases will help them to do so.

As for the second question, decisions regarding military equipment acquisitions are made in accordance with the guidelines provided in the 1994 defence white paper. In that vein, we will continue to function in an open and transparent way while ensuring that we balance the needs of our domestic and international security with our financial realities.

[Health, November 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the member ignores the fact that the government has co-operated completely with the investigation being conducted currently by the Krever commission.

The government has put all of its cards on the table in a very serious way to resolve a problem which has been ongoing and which preceded this particular administration.

The member will also recognize that in the interim report the recommendations that related to the federal jurisdiction were immediately addressed. The Government of Canada is doing its very best to co-ordinate all factors that come into play in ensuring that such a tragedy will not happen again.

[Tobacco, November 7th, 1996]

But the solution is already there, madam.

Mr. Speaker, pardon me.

The solution is already there. The legislation will follow the indications that I offered to the House a moment ago and it will in no way inhibit any Canadian, whether they be individual or corporate, from making decisions about how they will contribute to and fund any cultural, sporting or recreational activities that contribute to the common good. There will be no indication that anyone will be impeded from so doing.

I ask the member and all members of the House to be patient and wait until the legislation comes forward. Then she and others will see the details.

[Tobacco, November 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the member is right about one thing and that is the minister has made an unequivocal statement that there will be legislation and that it will follow all the parameters that he has indicated up to this point: the Supreme Court decision, the priority of the health of Canadians, and all the consultations that have followed as a result of the blueprint document.

As to everything else, because we live in a democratic society, people are welcome to present their views, but there is no deviation from the issue that the minister has put forward. The legislation will come and it will be definitive.

[Tobacco Legislation, November 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is clearly mistaken. There is no hold up.

He already knows that the consideration that is impacting on the legislation is dictated largely by the Supreme Court decision of last year, by the blueprint document, the consultations that have taken place, the 2,300 submissions that have followed and the desire to put forward legislation that will be effective, that will not end up in court and that will do what the minister and this government has promised: to look after the health of Canadians and to ensure the prevention of disease.

Those are the only considerations. We have indicated before and we will repeat it again today, as I did in committee, it will happen soon.

[The Tobacco Industry, November 4th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite ignores the singular intent of the legislation that is being prepared by the department. The concern always has to be the health and the protection of Canadians. It is not going to be dictated by considerations of sponsorship, nor is it going to be dictated by advertising considerations.

The member will know there is a blueprint document out and that blueprint document solicited consultations everywhere. Over 2,300 submissions were presented to us as a result. Legislation will follow on the basis of what has already been outlined for the public's consideration.

[Health Care, October 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we would take the member a little more seriously if he was not so interested in making light of the affair. If he had looked at what we have done in the last two budgets, he would already have seen that there is a provision for increasing spending by 1998. I wonder which page is taken out of whose book.

I do not know how we are going to go on from the point that the member opposite is suggesting that first we slash the system so it cannot function and then we give it an injection of cash. We prefer a more responsible approach, the one we have outlined in budgets past and in the current budget. That is the right way and we are going to continue with that.

[Health Care, October 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member ignores the fact that the health ministers of the provinces and territories of Canada had asked for a commitment from this government, a commitment which it made and lived up to, to stabilize funding and to give funding that people could address on a secured basis. They asked for a cash floor which is over $11 billion and with which they are extremely happy. They have stable funding for the next five years at an average of $26.1 billion, gradually to go higher by 1998.

I think that is what the provinces and the territories were looking for in order to stabilize health care expenditures and health care systems. We delivered on that promise.