Debates of June 10th, 1994

Canadian Radio-Television & Telecommunications Commission

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

The minister, who received a lot of mail this week, apparently received a letter from his Quebec counterpart, the Minister of Culture and Communications, who asked him to intervene through cabinet to obtain a review of the CRTC's decision not to issue a license for pay per view tv in French.

Considering his Quebec counterpart's request and a statement by the chairman of the CRTC who, despite the position taken by anglophone commissioners, also prefers the Chapiteau project from Quebec, will the Minister of Canadian Heritage undertake to act on the request from the Government of Quebec that cabinet review the CRTC's decision?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I already said that I react quickly as soon as I receive a communication with the kind of request mentioned by the hon. member. So far, I have yet to receive such a communication.

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

Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm a statement by Keith Spicer, chairman of the CRTC, that the pay per view decision is already being appealed? Could he indicate who filed this appeal and whether he intends to act on it?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I do not make a habit of commenting on statements by the chairman of the CRTC.

As I said yesterday, yes, an appeal has come from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadiennes du Canada.

If the chairman of the CRTC was referring to this particular appeal, I have already acted on this request. However, I have received no other requests.

Transportation Subsidies

[Allan Kerpan, Reform, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre, SK]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Manitoba legislature the Minister of Transport was quoted as saying that the federal government is selling out to the United States if it scraps the $600 million Crow subsidy and in fact it will shut down the grain industry in western Canada.

Farmers all across Canada are asking themselves a question and they want and need to know the answer. I would ask the Minister of Transport who farmers should believe. Should they believe him when he says that the WGTA of some $600 million will be cut by July 1, 1995 or should they believe the minister of agriculture who says that this has not yet been decided? This is not the kind of double talk that farmers want or need to hear.

Will the Minister of Transport stand in this House today and clearly explain what his plans are for the WGTA?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I think to continue to cast doubt on the capacity of the Government of Canada to participate in supporting Canadian farmers is not terribly helpful.

What we have said and what we want to confirm is that the Department of Transport in the budget document and elsewhere has indicated that we have to change the way we subsidize transportation in this country. We have made that very clear.

The hon. member in his question asked who should you believe. As I indicated in an answer to a question earlier, in dealing with agriculture in this country I do not think there is any doubt that farmers and people interested in the agriculture industry should listen and believe the minister of agriculture.

[Allan Kerpan, Reform, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

The producer payment panel and others studying this matter, including our party, are trying to develop a new program that would ensure that funding to the railways would not simply be cut and lost but reallocated to the agriculture department and paid to farmers as part of a GATT green program.

Will the minister of agriculture assure this House that farmers will still benefit from the $600 million that his colleague is cutting from the Department of Transport?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, in the course of the last several weeks I have been in touch with probably 30 or 35 farm organizations across this country, including a very large number in western Canada, inviting them to join with me in the common cause to develop for the future of our industry in Canada a well thought out, well prepared game plan so that we can approach the turn of the century in Canadian agriculture with confidence that our

industry will be well prepared to tackle not only the domestic marketing opportunities we have but also those internationally.

In the process of that development of the long term vision for Canadian agriculture, including the western Canadian grains industry, I will be looking for the useful, constructive advice of all of the players and all of the stakeholders who want to have a part to play in developing that plan for the future, including not only the farm organizations and the provincial governments across this country which are vitally interested but every member of this House, including the Reform Party if it has constructive observations to offer.

Social Housing

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. The day before yesterday the ministers responsible for housing were meeting in Bathurst. The Minister of Public Works may have a miraculous solution to propose to his counterparts, but we heard only empty rhetoric. He said, among other things: "We have made concrete moves to improve the quality of life of low-income Canadians everywhere".

Could the Deputy Prime Minister tell us, now that the housing conference in Bathurst has ended, whether the federal government and the provinces have agreed to implement new social housing initiatives?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated yesterday on behalf of the minister, certainly progress was made at the meeting in Bathurst.

The Government of Canada has reintroduced the residential rehabilitation assistance program and that is $100 million over two years to assist low income Canadians.

We have also identified $120 million in savings over the next four years to be retained in the social housing envelope. Yes, indeed, considerable progress was made.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the promises just made by the Minister of Transport are not new, they do no represent any input of new money.

How can he seriously and sincerely make such statements when his government has not spent a penny, since January of this year, on social housing and when CMHC tells us that 1,200,000 families have substandard housing?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, everybody in this country agrees that there is much to do to help those in need of decent housing. All members in this House as well as people familiar with the subject know that there are urgent needs.

I can assure my hon. colleague that the minister responsible is trying, in co-operation with his provincial counterparts, to find solutions compatible with the fiscal reality in Canada. He understands the problem fully, but we are not hearing much by way of solutions from our colleagues across the floor.

Fisheries

[Ted McWhinney, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. I would like first to congratulate the minister on the action he took yesterday to safeguard Canada's west coast salmon resource.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Ted McWhinney, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

This has the support of virtually every sector of the B.C. fishing industry. The minister stated that this was but the first step toward resolving the issue.

Could he tell the House what additional measures he has in mind to bring the Americans back to the negotiating table and to resolve the issue without further destruction of this precious Canadian natural resource?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

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

I want to note that the action taken yesterday was on the advice of industry stakeholders in the province of British Columbia. The idea originates with the stakeholders. It has been endorsed and embraced by the government and put into place quickly because of the decisive nature of the industry consultation that has occurred.

The Government of Canada is prepared to consider both fishing and non-fishing measures as a means of demonstrating to our friends south of the border that both our nations' interest is served by having bilateral rather than unilateral fish plans.

We make it clear, in demonstrating that interest on both our parts, that this government will ensure the pressure is put on fishermen and not on the endangered fish.

Social Sciences And Humanities Research Council

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

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

On Wednesday my colleague from Vancouver North demanded that funding for many Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council projects should be eliminated. In her response the Deputy Prime Minister disagreed, suggesting that questioning these decisions is somehow highly unethical.

This program costs the Canadian taxpayers $100 million per year. It is our responsibility to question and scrutinize public spending. Does the minister not agree it is his responsibility to ensure the money is not wasted?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, yes, indeed it is.

The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council appeared before the industry committee on May 24. There was an opportunity at that time for members of all parties to ask questions. Certainly the member for Okanagan Centre, who is on that committee, asked among other things: "Why is the SSHRC funded so much less than the other councils?". He also said: "I am not debating the merits of your research. All of you have made an excellent case for the humanities and social sciences. I would not debate that the need is there. There is absolutely no question about that".

I am very pleased to note that the Reform Party supports the work that is being done by this granting council.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, nobody denies that research into the social sciences is a good thing. The people that are represented at that meeting perhaps are doing a good job as far as questioning social science issues.

However, when we see examples like $33,700 to study parades and demonstrations in 19th century Toronto, or $21,000 to study communication among English country workers in the use of rural song, perhaps the minister would answer the question.

Somebody must be questioning the use of Canadian taxpayers' funds. If he is not going to do it, who is?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, as I say, it is indeed open to all members of the House, particularly members of that committee, to raise questions such as those the member has raised with the council when they come before the committee.

I think that would be well worthwhile. It is unfortunate Reform Party members perhaps did not do their research before the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council appeared before them. That was their chance. Perhaps they will do it next year.

Human Rights

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Mr. Win, democratically elected Prime Minister of the provisional government of the Union of Burma, which is prevented from taking office by a military junta, was the guest of the human rights committee. The committee members learned that Burma has one of the worst human rights records in Asia, and holds hundreds of people prisoner for political reasons, including a Nobel peace prize winner.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Could she tell us whether the Canadian government intends to agree to the main request of the National Democracy League and oppose any form of financial support to the military junta through various UN agencies?

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

Mr. Speaker, if I understand the first part of his question, the member is making a request on behalf of democratic peoples who are fighting for the return of democracy in Burma? Do I understand him correctly?

I met their leaders yesterday, and they asked me just about the opposite of what the member is asking today. They asked that financial support be granted not to the government but to non-governmental agencies. The Canadian government offered the democracy movement the resources of the Human Rights Commission, here in Montreal. We are, of course, aware of their request and are taking it into consideration.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Through you, Mr. Speaker, I must tell the Deputy Prime Minister that she did not understand. There is a military junta in power in Burma, and the league is asking that UN agencies not give it any support. My first question dealt with that request, and we are counting on the Deputy Prime Minister to agree to it.

My supplementary is this: We are told by the Department of International Trade that, in view of Burma's human rights abuse record, Canadian corporations are encouraged not to do business with that country. However, its neighbour, China, which is supplying the junta with arms, is not subject to any trade restriction. How can the Deputy Prime Minister justify her government's ambiguous position? I can say it again if it is not clear enough.

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

Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to personally meet with the leaders of the democracy movement yesterday.

They congratulated the Canadian government and in particular the Department of Foreign Affairs for the work we were doing in assisting them in getting their case brought to the United Nations through the auspices of the human rights commission headed by Mr. Ed Broadbent in Montreal; for the strong stand we have taken in ensuring that no direct government assistance goes to the Government of Burma; and for promoting at the ASEAN meeting that is going to be coming up very shortly a renewed call for the return of democratic government in Burma.

Immigration

[Sharon Hayes, Reform, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

According to a confidential report leaked from the minister's office, the overall acceptance rate for the first quarter of 1994 for inland refugee applicants rose from 49 to 67 per cent, an increase of 18 per cent. The report contains the first statistics available since new board appointments were made by the minister.

On the basis of this increase in the acceptance rate for inland refugee applications, Canada will surpass its stated annual intake for 1994 in less than nine months. Does this increase concern the minister or, if not, is he prepared to revise his refugee estimates for 1994 to reflect this new information?