Madam Speaker, we are starting the adjournment debate 10 minutes early, and although I cannot make any assumptions about the absence of members from this House, I would nevertheless appreciate it if a member of the government would respond to this motion.
On Tuesday, I put a question to the Minister of the Environment about Phase I of the St. Lawrence Action Plan. I protested the fact that Industry Canada spent only $5 million in Quebec on Phase I to clean up a river which flows mainly through Quebec.
I suggest we look at the figures that were given initially. I will round off the figures for the sake of convenience. Initially, Industry Canada had budgeted $20 million. Because of the recession, the government cut $2 million, which leaves $18 million. More than $6 million was spent on projects which, in the end, did not make the grade, so that Industry Canada actually invested a mere $11.3 million of the initial $20 million that was to be used to clean up the river. However, the worst part is that Industry Canada spent only $5 million in Quebec.
Madam Speaker, the St. Lawrence River flows mostly in Quebec. Consequently, I find it hard to understand why an amount close to $6 million was used to subsidize an Ontario pulp and paper company located in Miramichi, in New Brunswick, several hundred kilometres from the St. Lawrence River. After all, there are dozens of plants like that one along the river. Why choose the Miramichi facility?
I also find it hard to understand the $450,000 subsidy to Marsh Engineering, from Port Colborne, on Lake Ontario, for the treatment of oil discharged by ships which could some day navigate on the St. Lawrence River. Again, there are many ports along the St. Lawrence in Quebec, including Montreal, Quebec City, Trois-Rivières, Sept-Îles and quite a few more.
So, why was only $5 million of the $12 million spent in Quebec during Phase I of the St. Lawrence Action Plan? After all, as I said, the river flows mostly in that province.
I remember clearly that, in the 1980s, there was a serious problem with maple trees in Quebec. The Government of Quebec did not buy a plantation of evergreens or oaks to study the problem, It bought an enormous sugar bush, and its officials conducted tests and soil analysis, and found solutions to the problem.
To clean up the river, it would have made sense to concentrate efforts where the river flows. I find the attitude of the Department of Industry unjustified.
In conclusion, the report on this issue states clearly that the partnership between Environment Canada and the Department of Industry is a failure. The two departments went in opposite directions as regards technology.
Last Tuesday, the Minister of the Environment made a formal commitment to the effect that all monies allocated to the St. Lawrence Action Plan would be spent in Quebec. Can she tell us now how she will control the monies invested by other departments during Phase II of the Action Plan, in order to avoid a repeat of what happened during Phase I?