Debates of March 16th, 1994

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

Business Of The House

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions between the parties, and I believe you will find unanimous consent in the House for the following motion:

That the deferred division on the motion on the Budget scheduled for Tuesday, March 22, 1994, be further deferred untill Wednesday, March 23, 1994, at the end of the time provided for the consideration of Government Orders.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if I may continue. The reason for the motion is to accommodate the minister and the opposition critics, some of whom were unable to be here on the previous dates for deferral of this vote. I may say that while this is not the first time it has been deferred-members of the public may be wondering why this is happening so often-it is to accommodate these people and I am seeking the unanimous consent of the House on that basis. However, if it is refused it is refused.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Bearing in mind that we have just heard a reason, is there unanimous consent based on the explanation we have just heard?

[An hon. member]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

There is no unanimous consent.

International Water Day

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased on the National Capital's Celebration of International Water Day to be

able to rise to inform the House that another red book commitment of the government is being kept. It proves that as a government we mean what we say and we are serious about governing in a new and sustainable way. It is particularly significant on the National Capital's Celebration of International Water Day because water is the basic form of sustenance that each human being needs to live.

Earlier today I wrote to the able chair of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to ask that the committee study the ways in which the concept of an environmental auditor general might be instituted to ensure that our government's actions are carried out in a sustainable manner. In doing so the government keeps several of the Prime Minister's commitments. By seeking the advice of the standing committee we recognize in a non-partisan manner the importance of consulting members of Parliament before we introduce legislation. By asking the committee to hold hearings we recognize the importance of consulting Canadians.

[Translation]

In Creating Opportunity , we stated clearly that the environmental agenda can no longer be ignored and that government needs to recognize the fundamental link between a healthy economy and a healthy environment. We said that all government departments need to adopt economic and environmental principles that converge, integrate, are accountable and show leadership.

On February 22 my colleague, the Minister of Finance, kept our first red book promise. He announced a task force of government, industry and non-governmental organizations to carry out a review of the barriers and disincentives that currently exist in the tax system to sound environmental government practices, and to find effective ways to use economic instruments to support sustainable development.

Canadians are justifiably proud to have a Minister of Finance who recognizes that economics and the environment are not competing agendas but complementary realities. I congratulate him and I know that the members of this House feel as I do.

"Creating Opportunity" laid out our plan for an environmental auditor general as the second task of the government's move toward sustainability. That is why I have asked the committee to look at what the focus of an environmental auditor general might be. Members of the committee will consider how an assessment of current government practices and policies and departmental policies and practices should be incorporated into the functions of an environmental auditor general.

I have asked the committee to consider means by which we can achieve our objective properly, keeping in mind the government's commitment to budgetary restraint. In particular, I want to avoid duplication and overlap.

The committee might consider whether we can learn from the experiences of provinces or other countries which have created similar offices.

It is the government's hope that the committee will be able to report to the House of Commons by the end of May.

The point is simple. The government under the leadership of the Prime Minister is determined to place environment at the top of Canada's agenda, determined on this National Capital's Celebration of International Water Day to make our country a leader in sustainable development.

If we are serious then our government must show leadership in getting our own house in order. We cannot expect high standards of others, whether they be business, labour or other countries, unless we impose and demand high standards from ourselves.

I am continually grateful for the serious and non-partisan manner in which all members of this House approach the important environmental issues facing our country.

I am sure it is in that non-partisan spirit that the standing committee will examine the role of an environmental auditor general. I look forward to the wisdom of all the members of the committee and indeed all the members of the House of Commons on this serious initiative which will start the government on the road to putting sustainable development into action, not only by our words but also by our deeds.

[Jean-Guy Chrétien, Bloc, Frontenac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of the Environment for sending us a copy of her ministerial statement this morning, and I urge her to keep doing so.

As vice-chairman of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, I am pleased to be able to discuss in a non-partisan manner the role of a future environmental auditor general.

I believe that the announcement made this afternoon by the Minister of the Environment clearly demonstrates her desire to keep the commitments made in the red book. So, the government

promises it will consult us, as well as Canadians and Quebecers through public hearings.

It is a good thing to consult, but the recent budget tabled by the Minister of Finance was a very concrete opportunity where the government could have demonstrated its will to do something about the environment.

Of course, the Department of the Environment is one of the few whose budget was increased. We can only be thankful for this 4.1 per cent increase. However, some measures go against sustainable development, even if the minister alluded to a committee which will try to promote it. The best example of this short-term vision, which is the opposite of the objective of sustainable development, is the fact that the government increases-listen to this-the government increases by $18.4 million the budget to clean up the St. Lawrence River, but reduces by $5 million the budget to clean up the Great Lakes, when we know that 40 per cent of the pollution in the St. Lawrence River comes from the Great Lakes. So much for sustainable development. On the one hand, the government increases the budget to clean up the river, while on the other hand it reduces the one for the polluted waters which flow into that river. Whatever happened to cohesion and co-operation between departments?

The Minister of the Environment says that she wants to put an end to overlapping. Right now, the most obvious overlapping is the one blocking any action concerning the Irving Whale . Transport Canada commissions study after study that Environment Canada never sees and they keep sending the ball back and forth. In the end, nothing concrete comes of it. When you see two federal departments get in each other's way like that, thus delaying concrete action, it is easy to understand that the people of Quebec want to have in their own hands the power to make decisions.

In her speech, the hon. minister stated, and I quote: "The government is also determined to make our country a leader in sustainable development. The government will be able to show leadership in getting our own house in order". The Official Opposition is prepared to believe these fine words except that, when we hear from Statistics Canada that this country exported 200,000 tons of hazardous waste to Asia and Latin America from 1990 to 1993, we wonder if that is the kind of house cleaning involved in the ministers plans.

The minister told us that the government and the Prime Minister must recognize the fundamental link between economic health and a healthy environment. She also praised the Minister of Finance for recognizing that economy and environment are not competing, but complementary.

It is true that environmental considerations are prominent is the red book. It is also true that it conveys the importance of integrating the economy, and thus the industry, with the environment. This spirit of co-operation was made manifest by organizing consultations on the environmental industry last January.

Why is there nothing then to that effect in Growing Small Businesses , the information booklet on new programs and guidelines for small business?

I was quite surprised, Mr. Speaker, to see there is no mention of environmental concerns anywhere in the document's 52 pages.

The government must give its support to this sector, either by implementing programs or by promoting initiatives to encourage the private sector to adopt a sustainable development approach.

It makes good sense, politically, to table a budget allocating more money to the Department of the Environment. Unfortunately, these inconsistencies show that it is only a smoke screen.

In closing, the Bloc Quebecois draws a parallel between the Auditor General of Canada and the environmental auditor general. Before rejoicing and showing off, we should know what kind of follow-up the government will give to the recommendations made by the environmental auditor general. If they are treated the same way as those made by the Auditor General of Canada, the situation is not very encouraging.

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I compliment the Minister of the Environment on the initiatives announced today.

The Reform Party looks forward to assisting the minister and Canadians in achieving her well intentioned objectives. I compliment the minister on asking advice from the standing committee because it is a non-partisan manner of consulting with members of Parliament and through them, Canadians.

She has spoken about her government's commitment to budgetary restraint. I applaud her efforts to avoid overlap and duplication of environmental standards and enforcement between jurisdictions. Completing the process by May 31 will minimize the costs and frustration of a long drawn-out process.

The Reform Party supports ensuring that all Canadians and their descendants dwell in a clean and healthy environment. The party supports sustainable development because without economic development and the income generated therefrom the environment will not be protected or enjoyed.

The Reform Party supports the view that environmental considerations must carry equal weight with economic, social and technical considerations in the development of a project.

The Liberal Party's red book statement on the environment closely parallels ours. On page 64 of the red book it states: "It is past time for the federal government to act on this understanding by adopting economic and environmental agendas that converge". However in appointing an auditor general the red book also states: "Individuals could petition the environmental auditor general to conduct special investigations when they see environmental policies or laws being ignored or violated".

I acknowledge that in the minister's statement she said she wants the standing committee to look at the focus of an environmental auditor general. I believe this is exceptionally important because as a result of over eager activities of some extreme protectionists, some businesses are beginning to express concern about the potential of what I call green tape. Green tape is rules and regulations that could unnecessarily tie up reasonable, productive economic activity. They have expressed concern that the office of an environmental auditor general could easily become the captive of narrow interest groups.

Members of the Reform Party will be active participants in the process of examining the role of an environmental auditor general. As stated, we support sustainable development, recognizing that without economic development and the income generated therefrom the environment will not be protected or enjoyed.

I agree with the statement the minister made about two months ago in this House that we all want to guarantee a prosperous economy, a healthy environment and a bright future for Canada.

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. With your permission I would like to seek consent of the House to make a brief statement as chair of the committee of the environment and sustainable development.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Colleagues, is there unanimous consent for the hon. member to speak briefly on this matter?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Hearing no nays, the hon. member for Davenport.

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like briefly to thank the minister for her kind words and for the statement that she made earlier. I would like to thank also the colleagues who have spoken before me.

On behalf of the members of the committee, namely the member for York-Simcoe, the member for Simcoe North, the member for Lincoln, the member for Lachine-Lac-Saint-Louis, the member for Thunder Bay-Atikokan, the member for Oxford, the member for Frontenac, the member for Terrebonne, the member for Kootenay East and the member for Comox-Alberni, I would like to assure the House that we are looking forward very much to completing this assignment.

We will put our efforts into completing it in the spirit that has been expressed in this House in recent minutes. We will certainly endeavour to report to the House within the time limitation indicated by the minister. We look forward to implementing this promise contained in the red book of the last election campaign.

We also look forward to the fact that in future Canada will have either an auditor general for the environment or a commissioner for the environment. We look forward very much to keeping other promises we made in the last campaign.

Committees Of The House

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 11th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of the Standing Committee on Transport.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the 11th report later this day.

Business Of The House

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet, I would like to move:

That the deferred division on the motion on the budget scheduled for Tuesday, March 22, 1994, be further deferred untill Wednesday, March 23, 1994, at the end of the time provided for the consideration of Government Orders.

Mr. Speaker, this motion had been moved by an hon. member earlier today.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to.)

Budget Implementation Act, 1994

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, for the Minister of Finance]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-17, an act to amend certain statutes to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 22, 1994.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

Language Jurisdiction Act

[Darrel Stinson, Reform, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-225, an act to amend the transfer of language rights to provincial jurisdiction.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce my private member's bill, an act respecting the transfer of language rights to provincial jurisdiction.

Its purpose is to add the words "freedom of speech" to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and to transfer all questions of language out of federal jurisdiction into the control of the provinces.

My bill recognizes that the courts will be obliged to provide services in the language of those bringing matters before them and that Parliament will still be free to choose bilingualism.

I hope my bill will spark debate on the socially divisive, multibillion dollar boondoggle of official languages so that residents of B.C., Quebec and all provinces of Canada come closer to being masters in their house on the vital question of language.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

Committees Of The House

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I move that the 11th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.

(Motion agreed to.)

Petitions

[Yves Rocheleau, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the honour to present a petition initiated by several Quebec organizations and signed by 628 people in the riding of Trois-Rivières.

These petitioners ask the Parliament of Canada to refrain from any rent increases for low-cost housing, housing co-operatives and non-profit housing and that it reverse the freeze on the budget of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, to provide for the construction of new social and co-operative housing.

The situation is becoming increasingly difficult for tenants in social housing, and the answer to our problem is not to attack them but to review tax shelters that allow Canadians who are better off to get rich at the expense of people on low incomes.

[Vic Althouse, NDP, Mackenzie, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have about 1,300 more names on a petition to add to the several thousand that have already been presented from my riding.

These petitioners draw to the attention of the House of Commons that sections 41 and 42 of the Constitution Act, 1982 provide that an amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to certain matters may be initiated by a resolution of the House of Commons.

The petitioners therefore call upon the House to urge the government to abolish the Senate.