House of Commons Hansard #10 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was riding.

Topics

National DefenceOral Question Period

11:55 a.m.

Bloc

Gaston Leroux Bloc Richmond—Wolfe, QC

Mr. Speaker, a little earlier during Question Period the Prime Minister referred to two debates.

In fact, last Tuesday there was a constructive debate in this House on the situation in Bosnia. However, the government did not take advantage of this debate to put forward its own position, and we still do not know whether the government is in favour of maintaining Canadian troops in Bosnia or endorses a unilateral

withdrawal, as the Prime Minister suggested just before he left for Europe two weeks ago.

My question is directed to the Minister of National Defence: Can the minister tell us in the House today what the government's position is on our peacekeepers in Bosnia?

National DefenceOral Question Period

Noon

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we had a debate on the subject in the House. We listened to the views of hon. members, and we are to make a decision by the end of March, when we will have to renew our mandates. We have two mandates, one expiring in March and the other in April, and we have to make a decision.

In light of this debate, which was very useful and demonstrated the problems that exist, the government will analyse the situation and we will make our decision in due time, but there is no hurry for the time being.

We are monitoring the situation very closely. In fact, thanks to the progress made since our visit to Brussels, Canadian troops stationed in the Srebrenica enclave are about to be replaced by Danish troops. Everything is all right for the time being, and a decision will be made at the appropriate time.

National DefenceOral Question Period

Noon

Bloc

Gaston Leroux Bloc Richmond—Wolfe, QC

Mr. Speaker, from the newspapers we can see that Canadian troops in Bosnia are experiencing serious problems. However, during the debate, the Bloc Quebecois and the Reform Party made their positions clear. I would like to ask the Prime Minister why he is reluctant to adopt a clear and unambiguous position on this matter.

National DefenceOral Question Period

Noon

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I just informed the hon. member that the debate ended this week and that it was a useful debate. Before making this kind of decision, we also have to consult with our allies who are over there. The hon. member's party supported maintaining troops in Bosnia, and we appreciate their position. One thing is clear: we intend to finish our mandates, one of which expires at the end of March and the other in April. This means we have plenty of time to make a decision. We are in touch daily with our allies who also have troops stationed in that troubled part of the world, and we intend to make a decision at the appropriate time, by the end of March.

Housing SubsidiesOral Question Period

Noon

Reform

Val Meredith Reform Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General.

In the mid-1980s, in response to spiralling house costs in the greater Toronto area, both the RCMP and CSIS introduced a housing subsidy or commuting allowance for its employees. These subsidies are still being paid today. However for the past two or three years the cost of housing in the Toronto area has been considerably less than in the greater Vancouver region. Yet neither the RCMP nor CSIS employees in Vancouver are eligible for any subsidies.

Will the minister either eliminate the subsidy if it is no longer needed or at least ensure that all employees of these agencies are treated in a fair and equitable manner?

Housing SubsidiesOral Question Period

Noon

Windsor West Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question. I will be happy to take it as notice, get further information and get back to her about it as quickly as possible.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

Noon

Hull—Aylmer Québec

Liberal

Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday last during Question Period, as reported at page 300 of Hansard , in response to a question from the hon. member for Wild Rose I stated:

-I was asked to give a conference at Harvard University-on very short notice.

What I should have said was that the events surrounding the planning of trips were unfolding rapidly and made it necessary to adjust my travel arrangements very quickly.

It was never my intention to mislead the House and I regret any inaccuracy in my previous answer.

The Late Jean-Louis LeducOral Question Period

Noon

Bloc

Louis Plamondon Bloc Richelieu, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few moments in this House to pay tribute to Jean-Louis Leduc, who was the member for Richelieu from 1979 to 1984. Mr. Leduc was a close friend and an unconditional supporter of the present Prime Minister. I recall that he was a zealous participant in my riding in the leadership races involving the Prime Minister.

Mr. Leduc was my main opponent in 1984. I must admit that it was a tough fight, but a battle of ideas, with a man who had the greatest respect for others. He had political opponents but no enemies. He died during the last election campaign following a long illness.

I also knew him well as a teacher. We both taught at the Fernand Lefebvre Comprehensive School. He was a wonderful communicator and a matchless storyteller. He knew how to give his teaching a regional touch and to convey to his students his affection for the beautiful Sorel-Tracy region and the whole

Richelieu constituency. Jean-Louis had his own style and always found a way to deal humorously with a serious subject.

I remember meeting him before the election. He had been in the opposition for nine months and then he was campaigning again. He came to say hello to us at the school and I asked him, since we were great friends: "Well, Jean-Louis, will you have a special strategy for this election campaign, since it is taking place in winter, in February?" He said: "Yes, I will put on long underwear". That answer shows his style, always humorous. He was also an outstanding communicator with his friends and with his students.

I will never forget my last visit to him, during the referendum on the Charlottetown accord. I had a chance to spend nearly half an hour with him and his wife and I greatly admired his courage and determination in going to vote. Even though he had trouble moving, he insisted on doing his duty as a voter, and that referendum was the last time he was able to vote.

I would like to offer my sincerest condolences to the Right Hon. Prime Minister, to his colleagues in the Liberal Party, to his wife and to his son.

The Late Jean-Louis LeducOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Leduc was a member here, for a few months in the opposition and then on the government side. He was a wise man and, as his successor said, a most pleasant companion. I doubt that many members in this House were as friendly with everyone. He was not very partisan. He was a good supporter but not the kind to pick a fight. He was very dedicated and had a particular wisdom. He was perhaps a little more mature than some, and every time he spoke, both in this House and in caucus, he was always wise, thoughtful and reasonable. I think that he served well the people of the Sorel region, the hon. member's riding, and also that he served his community well both as an elected member and before. When he passed on I am sure that those who knew him very well had the feeling that a gentleman had just left this world.

The Late Jean-Louis LeducOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

The Late Jean-Louis LeducOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Reform

Bob Ringma Reform Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC

Mr. Speaker, in recognition of Mr. Leduc's service to Parliament, we would like to send our regrets and extend our deepest sympathies to Mrs. Leduc, their son Michel and the entire family.

The Late Jean-Louis LeducOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Robert Gauthier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, I knew Jean-Louis when he served in this House from 1979 to 1984 and I would like to remember him briefly.

He was a great believer in oral tradition, someone who liked to recount the history not only of his region but of his country. He had a rather difficult childhood. He was orphaned at an early age and had to work very hard. Jean-Louis had one ambition in life, namely to become a member of this House, and he fulfilled this goal in 1979.

Like the Prime Minister, I too remember very well that he was a great storyteller. His stories related to everyday events and could be told in public. He could capture an audience's attention because he was a great communicator and had a great ability to convey ideas.

A staunch federalist and Liberal supporter, Jean-Louis was always ready to espouse the federalist cause. I recall that during the 1980 referendum he was very active in his riding and worked hard here in caucus for the no side.

He had been a teacher once and had been actively involved in the church, in his region and in his community. I remember that he was criticized once for securing the funding needed to paint some of the churches in his riding. He was criticized, mainly by those in opposition at the time, for using federal funds for this purpose. I wondered if Jean-Louis should really have been criticized for creating jobs in his region, jobs involving renovations and church repairs.

In conclusion, I would like to convey my deepest sympathies to his wife Réjeanne and to their son Michel. On behalf of my colleagues in the Liberal caucus and all those who knew him, I wish his family well. May they find comfort in the knowledge that their lives have been enriched by this great man who served as the member for Richelieu.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Bloc

Roger Pomerleau Bloc Anjou—Rivière-Des-Prairies, QC

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a petition signed by people from my riding and particularly by residents of the Pierre-Bernard Tower and 6400 Duquesne Street.

The petition states: "The undersigned ask Parliament to forego any social housing rent increases and to lift the freeze on the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's budget to allow for the building of new social and co-op housing."

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Kingston and the Islands Ontario

Liberal

Peter Milliken LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I would request that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

The Speaker

Shall all questions stand?

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his Speech at the opening of the session.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

The Speaker

The member for Comox-Alberni has the floor with seven minutes remaining.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Reform

Bill Gilmour Reform Comox—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would request that I be allowed the full 10 minutes to carry on with my debate as the first portion of my debate will have been forgotten by all the members in the House.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

The Speaker

I believe we are going to remember the first three minutes as they were excellently presented. I know the hon. member will just take his seven minutes as allocated.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Reform

Bill Gilmour Reform Comox—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address some concerns shared by many Canadians of anticipated actions by this government regarding natural resources. In particular, there are the issues concerning forestry and the environment.

Forest products are not only British Columbia's main export but Canada's as well. Forestry is Canada's number one industry to which many members here will be able to attest. For example in British Columbia the forest sector provided 270,000 jobs, paid $2.4 billion in taxes and exported $11 billion of products in 1992.

However, the forest sector is facing losses both in jobs and in profits and will continue to do so until a balance is struck between forest conservation and forest preservation.

In the throne speech the government stated its commitment to jobs and to sustainable development. The government is to be commended for this initiative. However, I have some difficulty with statements made prior to and during the election campaign regarding these issues.

To give some background, on April 13, 1993 the government of British Columbia announced the long awaited land use decision for the Clayoquot Sound area on the west coast of Vancouver Island, an area within my riding.

The provincial government made a very difficult but well balanced decision that enhances environmental, economic and social values for the area. However, I find it disturbing that before and during the election campaign last fall the Liberal government on several occasions stated that if elected it may expand the boundaries of Pacific Rim National Park to include the Clayoquot.

I find this disturbing from a number of points of view. The first is the lengthy and involved process utilized to arrive at the Clayoquot decision itself.

During the 1980s it was recognized by many that the level of logging in and around the Clayoquot was too high and was not sustainable. In an attempt to balance all resource uses in the Clayoquot, a community based steering committee was established and charged with formulating a sustainable development plan for the area. The steering committee had a broad base. It included mayors of the three communities involved, native groups, environmentalists, logging companies, unions and several provincial ministries.

When the three-year Clayoquot Sound process ended there was general agreement on most aspects of the strategy. On the contentious issue of land allocation, namely the creation of new parks with a subsequent reduction in area available for logging, 10 of the 13 groups at the table reached a consensus.

This consensus allowed for a doubling of the area to be set aside or to be preserved. It is a reduction of the area available for logging from the previous 81 per cent to less than 45 per cent. This consensus now ensures that 55 per cent or more than half of the old growth forest in the sound will remain unlogged forever.

This is a made in B.C. decision. It is a decision made by British Columbians about resources that are clearly under the jurisdiction of British Columbia. I ask the Liberal government now to respect that decision.

This issue extends beyond regional concerns and as such I strongly encourage the hon. Minister of the Environment to familiarize herself with the process that was used to arrive at a decision because I firmly believe the same open and public process can be used in other contentious areas to arrive at a consensual decision.

I request that the government give credence and support toward such a balanced process when considering controversial land use for environmental issues.

Another point that I find disturbing concerns jobs. In the Clayoquot, as a result of the compromise decision, there has already been a loss of over 600 forest sector direct and indirect jobs. During the recent election the government ran a very successful campaign built around the issue of jobs and it is to be congratulated.

However, my concern now is whether this government should proceed on a path of including the Clayoquot within Pacific Rim National Park. The impact on the forest sector alone would amount to a loss of 4,200 direct and indirect forest sector jobs.

On October 25 the Canadian public made it abundantly clear what action it will take collectively toward governments that do not live up to their promises and in this case jobs. I would suggest that the Canadian public and in particular the constituents within my riding of Comox-Alberni would be more than upset with a government that campaigned on a platform of creation of jobs and then once elected immediately did a complete about face and put 4,200 people out of work. Frankly this would be a most unwise decision on the part of the government.

Another area requiring consideration should this government proceed with expanding Pacific Rim National Park is one of compensation to the province of British Columbia. I am sure we are aware that natural resources, in this case timber, belong not to the federal government but to the province.

Therefore should this government proceed with what would amount to expropriation of the timber resource within the Clayoquot, while at the same time bearing in mind that the provincial government would be most unlikely to enter into an agreement that would cost the government lost revenue, the federal government would then owe the provincial government compensation. Lost stumpage revenue in the Clayoquot will be substantial. It would be roughly $2 billion. That is not $2 million but $2 billion.

At a time when the federal government is deeply in debt I believe that Canadians would have great difficulty in understanding the wisdom and logic of a government that commits an additional $2 billion to expand an already existing and large national park.

Finally I would like to address the subject of forest practices within the Clayoquot. There is no question that the Clayoquot decision involves the nature and extent of logging. The way logging was carried out a decade ago is no longer acceptable to many people. As a result the province of British Columbia is currently in the process of implementing a new forest practices code which will change the way that logging is carried out in British Columbia.

This new code will substantially reduce the size and extent of clear cuts, allow for green up before adjacent areas can be logged, ensure reforestation is promptly carried out, monitor road building practices and ensure that streams are not-

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)

Your time has expired. I open the session to questions and comments.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:20 p.m.

Bloc

Philippe Paré Bloc Louis-Hébert, QC

Madam Speaker, I am glad that some things the hon. member for Comox-Alberni said give me an opportunity to participate in the debate.

Quite rightly, he invited the government to try to maintain a balance between the protection of forested areas and economic development. In theory, I think, we recognize that some forested areas must be preserved because of the very important regulating role that forests play in our environment.

However, on a more local basis, we sometimes forget the principles put forward in our theoretical debates. It is always difficult to find the right balance between forest preservation and economic growth. We tend to give up hope and to get emotional when we talk about deforestation in the Amazon. We blame Brazil for not protecting its forests, but here in Canada, we also put aside environmental considerations when faced with economic problems. I invite the government to always try to keep the right balance between forest conservation and economic development.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:20 p.m.

Reform

Bill Gilmour Reform Comox—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, I can only agree with the member. I believe the biggest thing that this country faces is how we do a land use allocation of our many resources. I believe this is paramount. We should be finding out which areas are the best to preserve, which are the best for urban development and which are the best for agriculture. If we do not have this land use allocation and decisions then we get these piecemeal environmental debates that tend to tear this country apart. This is a wonderful country and across it are many different ecosystems. We need to have an allocation that puts a priority on each area so that this country is all protected.

Speech From The ThroneGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

John Finlay Liberal Oxford, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the speech of the hon. member and his concern for a balanced approach to forest resources.

However at one point he said that timber resources belong to B.C. and not the federal government which obviously represents the people of this country. Technically under the British North America Act my hon. friend is correct.

The facts of the concerns raised by groups in this country with respect to Clayoquot would indicate that a great many people in Canada share the idea of our aboriginal peoples that the land does not belong to anybody. It belongs to all of us.

I think my hon. friend cannot have it both ways. He cannot reserve the timber resources of B.C. and ask for compensation if we consider that the mines and factories of Ontario and so on, as have other industries in B.C., contributed to the federal treasury and contributed to the well being of all Canadians