Debates of April 20th, 1994

Flu Vaccine

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

The fact is that the Government of Canada, as I have said repeatedly in the House, purchases approximately 1 per cent of the total amount. Ninety-nine per cent of the vaccine is purchased by the provinces. This is done through the auspices of a co-operative committee by federal but primarily provincial governments across the country. They are the ones that purchase the vaccine.

As a result, there was an agreement reached by that committee where 50 per cent would be purchased from the province of Quebec, namely BioVac, and the other 50 per cent purchased from Connaught.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the minister not realize that the direct result of his Canadian solution is to export high-tech jobs from Quebec to the United States and that it jeopardizes the development of BioVac on international markets?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, I will take the House into my confidence and respond to the hon. member very clearly, very directly.

This member and that party have been pushing this government to be involved in the process. The hon. member should know that BioVac's price to the Canadian taxpayers, primarily the provinces, was $1.85. Connaught's was $1.69. A compromise was reached whereby it would be $1.77.

If that is not a measure of fairness reached by provincial governments across the country, I do not know what is. The real thing here is that member and that party wish to sabotage this deal in order that they can create political havoc in the province of Quebec.

[The Speaker]

I know that all hon. members, both in their questions and in their answers, will want to ensure that we never impute a motive to any hon. member.

St. Lawrence Seaway

[Joe Comuzzi, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Nipigon, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the parliamentary secretary for transport.

The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence seaway is a viable economic route. It is economic and it is friendly to the environment. Unfortunately there is predatory and very unfair pricing by the railroads of Canada when competing against commodities being shipped by the St. Lawrence seaway and into the St. Lawrence seaway system.

The railways in the country do that by and large by the almost one billion dollars a year they receive in subsidy.

When will the government stop this abuse of this transportation subsidy? When will it maximize the return to the farmer where it should be? When will it create a level playing field for all modes of transportation in the country in which to compete?

[Joe Fontana, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, first let me congratulate the member for Thunder Bay-Nipigon on becoming chairman of the subcommittee that is reviewing and will bring forward recommendations on the seaway.

I want to thank the people from the mid-Canada port survival task force that I met with yesterday. The National Transportation Agency did make a ruling last year, for the most part exonerating the railways but that decision has been appealed and will be reviewed by the government.

At the same time, my hon. friend will know that the whole question of western grain transportation reform is undergoing an intensive review.

The Minister of Transport and the government are determined to build a national, integrated, efficient transportation system, one that is affordable to the user and to the taxpayer of the country.

Gun Control

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

There are many law-abiding, decent Canadians who choose to own guns. They comply with the letter of the law respecting handguns. Yet the government is considering taking away their choice of responsible ownership of those guns.

Does the minister respect Canadians who have acted responsibly? If so, why is he considering a ban on handgun ownership?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, time and again studies have demonstrated and our experience shows that guns inherently dangerous fall into the hands of criminals either because they are lost or they are stolen. There is a need for gun control in the country.

Bill C-17 recently adopted by this Parliament and now in place across the country constitutes an important measure toward achieving that safety. However, more steps must be taken. We campaigned for office on a platform that included specific proposals for increased and stricter gun control.

I do not quarrel at all with the assertion by the hon. member that there are honest and law-abiding people who are entitled to the use of rifles for the purpose of hunting or other legitimate purposes. However I say that we have an obligation to the public and its protection to ensure that these inherently dangerous weapons are under control so they do not fall into the hands of criminals.

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, with the greatest of respect to the Minister of Justice, I suggest that he is continuing to target those who choose to obey the law, the law-abiding gun owners.

The minister should be focusing his concerns on those who are breaking the law. The focus should not be on the gun owners but on the criminals who are misusing them.

Why does the minister not enforce the law, stop the illegal gun trade, get guns out of the hands of criminals and stop harassing legal gun owners?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has just read from the list of priorities in the Department of Justice to act effective-

ly to deal with those guns that are being smuggled illegally into the country.

I am meeting shortly with the Solicitor General and the Minister of National Revenue with that very objective in mind to ensure that the laws that are on the books at present providing penalties for those who possess firearms in the commission of offences are enforced and are effective and to take other steps to ensure that the use of firearms in criminal activity is properly punished.

However, the integrated approach to gun control and the enforcement of the criminal law must happen at the same time and that is precisely what we are going to do.

Refugees

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

The dramatic situation persisting in Rwanda could bring many refugees from that country to Canada. We know that 800 Rwandans from the Tutsi minority already live in Canada, most of them in Quebec.

Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us what the Canadian government's policy on Rwandan refugee claims will be and can she promise that every case will be carefully examined so that the people responsible for the massacres cannot seek asylum in Canada to escape justice?

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

I think that the hon. member shows a good knowledge of the very difficult situation in Rwanda.

Clearly, our government has always had a very open policy regarding the warm welcome extended to those who are forced to flee their country, but we will also have to be very efficient at turning away the people who contributed to terrorism.

I think we will take his suggestion and refer it to the minister of immigration who has already done some work on this very important issue for Canadians.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given the terrible situation now prevailing in Rwanda, can the Deputy Prime Minister promise to put in place special family reunification measures, as was done in 1992 for nationals of Somalia and the former Yugoslavia?

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

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of my colleague, the minister of immigration, I am happy to inform the House that one of the main points of the new immigration policy recently announced by the minister was an increase in the family class.

Our red book recognizes that it is important for families to be reunited here in this country, both for their integration and for the good of Canada. I am sure that the minister will consider the suggestions of the hon. member opposite and act accordingly.

Tobacco Products

[Margaret Bridgman, Reform, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

Recently, after having asked the House Standing Committee on Health to study the issue of plain packaging of tobacco products, the hon. minister publicly stated: "I would like to see us move on that as quickly as we possibly can" and "I feel that it would do a lot to discourage young people especially from taking up smoking".

Could the minister tell the House why she has requested both her department and the health committee to study this issue, at considerable expense to the taxpayer, when it is apparent from her statements that she has already decided to go ahead with the plain packaging?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question.

In January 1994 the Canadian Cancer Society released a report "The Effects of Smoking on Young People". This report concluded that it would discourage young people from taking up this terrible habit of smoking.

In February 1994 when we released our anti-smuggling strategy, the Prime Minister announced in the House that we would look at the issue of plain packaging. The Standing Committee on Health is looking at that at this time. I await with great anxiety and I am anxious to hear the results of what the committee is doing. I am sure it will have some very valuable information to give to all of us.

In the meantime, I have asked the Department of Health to undertake a research project, a very specific marketing project, to look into allegations that it would discourage young people from smoking. As the member knows, if we can prevent just one death it is very worthwhile. In this case every year 38,000 Canadians die as a direct result of smoking.

[Margaret Bridgman, Reform, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister's answer. Considering that the Department of Health has publicly stated that its study would take until the end of the year and that the committee on health care was also looking at this, is it fair to assume that the government will not make a decision on this issue until those reports are in?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member that no legislation has been drafted at this time. I must add that when I met with provincial ministers of health there was a great deal of interest on their part to look into the matter of plain packaging. It is not just the federal jurisdiction that is interested in doing some work in that area. We will continue this as I truly believe that plain packaging will

have an effect in influencing young people not to take up this habit.

Transport Canada

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Dartmouth, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport.

Transport Canada has just issued a notice to airmen and the marine industry advising of the possibility of space debris re-entering the atmosphere and crashing off the east coast of Canada, specifically the east coast of Nova Scotia.

What information could the parliamentary secretary give the House concerning this matter, more particularly whether it is the view of the government that this re-entry poses any threat to the safety of Canadians on the east coast of Canada?

[Joe Fontana, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for giving me this opportunity of advising the House that Transport Canada has been advised by Cape Canaveral that there is a possibility that some space debris may re-enter the atmosphere and crash into the ocean off Nova Scotia and Newfoundland on Thursday, April 21, 1994, between 1200 and 1500 hours, eastern daylight time.

This is a serious and important issue and Transport Canada is working with the departments of National Defence, Foreign Affairs and our respective American counterparts to monitor the path of this debris. As the member mentioned, notice has already gone out to the marine and aviation industries.

I also advise the House that it is intended that the departmental satellite re-entry contingency plan, which provides for Transport Canada emergency staff, will give the authority to take whatever action within its sphere of competence to-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

One would hope that contingency plans are also in place to protect us here in Ottawa.

Points Of Order

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order under Standing Order 18 to bring to the attention of the House a very serious matter with respect to statements made by the hon. member for Carleton-Gloucester both in and outside the Chamber.

Standing Order 18 states in part that no member shall use offensive words against either House or any member thereof.

I refer to Hansard of Monday, April 18, 1994, page 3175:

The Reform Party proposes a form of ethnic cleansing.

Also, in response to a question I had asked the hon. member, I refer to page 3176 of Hansard :

I think you are a bunch of bigots.

The hon. member later withdrew this but only after the Deputy Speaker insisted.

Also, in response to my colleague, the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan, the hon. member for Carleton-Gloucester stated: "The Reform member should not have worn a dark suit to address the House today but rather a white sheet". Erskine May 21st edition of parliamentary practice also states that insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder is unparliamentary.

The only reason that these remarks did not create disorder which has been seen so often in the House is that the Reform Party has too much respect for Parliament and for the Canadians who elected us. However, the words spoken by the member for Carleton-Gloucester are offensive in the extreme. This type of language has no place in the parliamentary forum or anywhere else.

I would also like to draw to the attention of the House that today outside the House the member for Carleton-Gloucester once again-

[The Speaker]

As to the remarks outside the House, whatever is said outside the House as a general rule we do not deal with in here.

Does the member have something to add to the primary?

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with what you said. What I was saying was that while these remarks were made outside the House they were similar to those remarks made in the House.

While I recognize, Mr. Speaker, that you cannot rule on comments made outside the House, the repetition of remarks made in the Chamber does nothing for the level of decorum that Canadians expect from their parliamentarians.

Finally I would ask that you make a ruling on this unacceptable language in the House.