House of Commons Hansard #151 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was industry.

Topics

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I heard the hon. member across the way talk about the issue of these appointments to the board. He indicated these appointments should be reviewed by a parliamentary committee.

I am wondering if he is familiar with the fact that the present House rules provide that any parliamentary committee can review orders in council that are referred to it. All orders in council are referred to a parliamentary committee which has 30 days to make such a review.

Perhaps he could tell us how many times he has availed himself of that process.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Reform

Allan Kerpan Reform Moose Jaw—Lake Centre, SK

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's comments. As a member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, I would like to have the opportunity to review these appointments at the nomination stage rather than at the appointment stage. I will keep that in mind the next time we do have orders in council. As a member of the standing committee I can ask for that.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Dianne Brushett Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I intend to support Bill C-61 in the name of my hon. colleague the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

Bill C-61 introduces an administrative monetary penalty system that should result in a higher rate of compliance with the regulations respecting imported or domestic agri-food products. It would also enable employees of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to more effectively enforce federal regulations.

Under the current system the only options available to regional inspectors are to give warnings, to seize or detain products that are not in compliance with standards, and to prosecute alleged violations in the courts. Although recourse to the courts is sometimes necessary, in most cases it is preferable not to proceed through the criminal justice system. This saves time and money.

We all know how costly the criminal justice process can be both to government and the private sector. Moreover criminal prosecution is usually considered an excessive reaction to regulatory violations as it can lead to a criminal record and imprisonment. As a result we had to find effective mechanisms that were as non-coercive as possible to bring firms into compliance with our regulations.

In my view the administrative monetary penalty system is the best approach for decriminalizing violations of the regulations. It brings these regulations into the 21st century for higher efficiency.

As the name suggests, the administrative monetary penalty system provides for a broad range of monetary penalties for enforcing Canadian regulations respecting agriculture and agri-food products. For instance, small fines would be issued for minor violations while larger penalties would be issued for more serious offences. That being said, Bill C-61 precludes criminal prosecution in cases of serious and repeated violations. However the criminal justice system would only be used as a last resort when all other options have failed.

The centrepiece of Bill C-61 is the compliance agreements that can be negotiated under AMPS. Officials representing Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada would have the authority to negotiate the terms of compliance agreements with offenders. In addition, inspectors would be able to reduce or waive fines if the offender takes the necessary steps to ensure future compliance. Inspectors would obtain assurances that corrective action would be made at the source.

In some cases this might involve upgrading a plant, replacing obsolete equipment, making changes to manufacturing processes or implementing a more stringent quality control system. In other cases proper employee training at the plant might remedy the situation. In brief the inspectors would have credible indicators that the problem would be resolved in the very short term.

The objective of Bill C-61 is not to punish offenders. In fact offenders can completely avoid penalties by taking immediate corrective action. It is clear this is the best way to achieve co-operation from violators without delays in a very precious time frame.

A monetary penalty system similar to that proposed by Bill C-61 is already being used successfully by Transport Canada and several departments in the United States. In their experience nine out of ten offenders pay their fines outright. As a result very few cases go before a review tribunal or court of appeal.

On the basis of this experience it looks in the future like Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada would be in a much better position to carry out its broader control activities.

As we know, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food must inspect plants and animal products imported into Canada by the travelling public. Among other things, plants, skins, live animals and meat products must be declared to protect the agri-food sector and consumers against the potential risks of exotic disease.

In addition, inspectors are permanently assigned to most ports of entry to control the safety of food products and to ensure compliance with regulations. This aspect is of critical importance for Canadian firms that compete directly with imported products.

The program review currently under way at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is clearly favourable to the implementation of the administrative monetary penalty system. It is felt that inspectors need this tool to improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of the regulatory system.

Canadian agri-food organizations feel that the new system is essential given the current context of the liberalization of trade. I should also mention that the United States, Mexico and a number of countries of the European community have already implemented monetary penalty systems. The implementation of Bill C-61 would ensure a level playing field for everyone.

To conclude, the administrative monetary penalty system would facilitate the job of inspectors and give them the tools they need to be more effective in enforcing regulations. This would improve our business relations with foreign firms and would ensure compliance of both domestic and imported agri-food products with Canada's regulatory system.

The bill ensures the fundamental controls and regulations are in place to take Canada into the 21st century. At the same time it ensures a quality and safe supply of food to Canadians.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Reform

Grant Hill Reform Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, we had an interesting interchange a few moments ago on the issue of appointments to boards and how those appointments are reviewed in committee.

I would be quite interested in the member's comments. When those appointments are reviewed, would she think it was better to review them at the nomination stage or at the appointment stage? If the member feels it is okay to nominate at the appointment stage, how many times have board appointments been turned down in the history of Canadian Parliament?

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Liberal

Dianne Brushett Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I understand the system has been in place probably as long as the House of Commons, the Parliament of Canada.

As the hon. member recognizes, from community and municipal governments to provincial and federal governments it is necessary that citizens become involved. They should take part in the process of government. The names of those citizens come from throughout society. It has been my experience to keep a resume, as I have at the municipal and provincial levels of government, of citizens in the community who are prepared to give their time, energy and commitment to the process of fair and equitable government and to give their intelligence, which is what is required in managing the regulations and boards in our government process.

The government is prepared to receive names at any time from all citizens in society who may be prepared to participate in the democratic process.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Reform

Art Hanger Reform Calgary Northeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of the board and how it is going to resolve disputes or complaints is very important.

Let us look at the parole board. It is an appointed body. The Immigration and Refugee Board is another appointed body. I believe the CRTC falls in the same category. There are numerous other ad hoc appointments, crown prosecutors for one. Now we are looking at an agricultural board. Each one has a similar problem.

How much more accountable is the minister without the board than the board having no accountability to the minister? The ministers across the way time and time again have stated that they cannot intervene or interfere with a quasi-judicial body and the matters are never resolved.

What makes the hon. member think this board will not suffer from the same problem that all other quasi-judicial bodies under the government suffer?

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Dianne Brushett Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member is missing a fundamental point in the bill. The bill is classified in specific violations: a minor violation, a serious violation or a very serious violation. These violations will be classified according to regulatory personnel, the public servants of Canada. The minister, the bill and the process today which you are part of-

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Order. When whoever is in the Chair rises, I would ask your co-operation in giving up the floor. Obviously I rise for a reason.

I want to remind colleagues once again that when addressing any issue all interventions should be made through the Speaker. As debates sometimes take on greater emotion and more passion it becomes even more important to our parliamentary process.

I would like to verify if the member for Cumberland-Colchester had concluded her remarks.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Dianne Brushett Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Reform

John Williams Reform St. Albert, AB

Mr. Speaker, I heard a couple of comments and I would ask for some clarification from the previous speaker.

The member said that civil servants and bureaucrats would have the opportunity to reduce and waive fines. That to me seems to destroy the whole system of credibility, trustworthiness and fairness.

If we are to allow people who break the regulations, break the law, to be able to negotiate with public servants about whether or

not they will be fined for doing so opens a whole situation for bribery, corruption and puts the whole regulatory process into question.

I wanted the member to comment on another point. She said small fines for small offences. Last year a I saw bill passed in the House that required a book publisher to send two books to the national library. Failure to do so used to account for a fine of up to $200. That was changed to a fine of $25,000 for failure to send two books to the national library.

When the member says small fines for small offences, could she clarify what she means?

Agriculture And Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

The Speaker

We are running a bit tight. Perhaps the hon. member could think about the response and give it after question period. I hope I never borrow those two books at that price; it is a bit up there.

It being 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House will now proceed to Statements by Members pursuant to Standing Order 31.

Black Creek Orphans' ProjectStatements By Members

February 13th, 1995 / 1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma, ON

Mr. Speaker, I draw to the attention of the House the Black Creek Orphans' Project in Mbiko, Uganda. This impressive international development initiative was started by Billy Vlaad and Kristi Taylor, two of my constituents in their early twenties from Espanola, Ontario. Theirs is an example of the good news the new Governor General asked us to speak about.

While Billy and Kristi were participating in a university sponsored development project in Uganda a couple of years ago, local residents expressed a desire to see the development of a program that would instil pride and self-sufficiency among the residents and many orphans in the village of Mbiko. The Black Creek Orphans' Project assists the guardians of local orphans in setting up business ventures through a capital loans system and access to technical and business skills training. The profits from these business ventures will be used to fund educational opportunities for orphans under their care.

Mr. Vlaad and Ms. Taylor returned to Canada from the site of their project in Uganda several months ago to work on the Canadian portion of their organization. Since that time they have obtained charitable status designation from Revenue Canada. We should applaud their worthy efforts on behalf of the orphans of Uganda.

Referendum On Quebec SovereigntyStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Bloc

Gilbert Fillion Bloc Chicoutimi, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw your attention and that of all Quebecers to additional moneys in the amount of $5.9 million granted to the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs last autumn.

We now know what this taxpayers' money is being used for: to fund the federal government group on the referendum.

We understand why these civil servants shun the cameras, why their offices are all unmarked and why their names do not appear in the government telephone directory. They do not want people to know that they are working on federal strategy for the no side.

Yes, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs prefers to have his civil servants engage in a partisan struggle against the official opposition rather than work on eliminating costly duplication and overlap and on restructuring the federal public service.

JusticeStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Reform

Myron Thompson Reform Wild Rose, AB

Mr. Speaker, a year ago I asked the Solicitor General why we were not able to kick Mr. Colin Wood, a non-resident, out of Canada after he committed his first serious offence. At that time the Solicitor General responded that it was a policy that somebody convicted of an offence should serve the sentence imposed by law. He stated: "If my hon. friend's proposal were followed we would be doing the convicted foreigner a favour by getting him out of the country before he paid the penalty required by Canadian law".

Why is it that suddenly out of the blue the chairman of the standing committee on justice asked: "Why spend any money on them at all? Let us kick them out right away". Is this another example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing? Is the Solicitor General now prepared to support getting rid of non-citizen criminals as suggested by the committee chairman?

When will this government get its act together and tell us what it intends to do with foreign criminals? Now is the time to act. Let us get them out of here. We do not need them. Let us make Canadians safe.

Porcupine CaribouStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, between the Yukon and Alaska the Porcupine caribou herd regularly migrates across the Canada-U.S. border. As they have for centuries, the Gwich'in people rely on the caribou for food. However, this resource is threatened by a recent Alaska legislature resolution encouraging oil and gas exploration on the calving grounds of the Porcupine herd. Thus, the herd is in serious danger.

The Prime Minister and President Clinton are on record favouring the protection of the calving grounds. When they meet next week in Ottawa they could make a strong statement of support for the protection of the Porcupine caribou herd and the survival of the Gwich'in people.

Many of us in this House urge them to do so.

Vera ClykeStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Dianne Brushett Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, in honouring Black History Month and the contribution made by blacks in Nova Scotia, I wish to bring to the attention of this honourable House the name Vera Clyke. Mrs. Clyke's family came to Canada from the United States in 1860, seeking freedom from slavery and discrimination.

As choir director and organist for Zion Baptist Church in Truro, she has served faithfully since 1927, some 68 years. In 1965 she represented Nova Scotia in the Dominion Day celebrations on Parliament Hill.

On February 4 Vera Clyke was honoured by her church and community and I presented certificates on behalf of the Prime Minister, the hon. Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and the Status of Women, the hon. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and myself, duly recognizing her leadership, her community participation and model citizenship.

By all community standards Vera Clyke is an outstanding Canadian, and at the age of 86 she continues to play the church organ.

Today I salute Vera Clyke and other Canadians like her who have laboured a lifetime to make their community richer just for living there.

Financial InstitutionsStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Mitchell Liberal Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate my hon. colleague, the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions, for the proposals released in his white paper.

By ensuring that supervisory and regulatory systems governing financial institutions are brought up to date, the Government of Canada will ensure the system is more effective. We will continue to have the confidence of the Canadian people as they will have greater access to information and a fiscally responsible method of ensuring that their rights as financial consumers are protected.

By addressing those elements of our financial system that need closer scrutiny and by preserving those aspects that have served Canadians well, the proposals outlined in the white paper will build on the positives and minimize the negatives.

I applaud the call for enhanced disclosure of financial information, earlier intervention in problem institutions, increased protection for policy holders and a stronger framework within which systemic risk will be controlled.

These proposals will work to strengthen Canada's financial system and demonstrate our government's commitment to the financial security and well-being of its citizens.

Quebec SovereigntyStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, in stating that a sovereign Quebec would not be part of GATT and NAFTA, the Prime Minister has once again, for lack of other arguments, resorted to scare tactics. With his remarks, the Prime Minister is increasing the risk that his own people of Saint-Maurice will be isolated.

The Prime Minister is also going against the interests of the rest of Canada for which maintaining trade with Quebec will continue to be an unavoidable necessity. The most recent poll by Léger & Léger indicates that nearly 60 per cent of English Canadians would want to maintain economic ties with a sovereign Quebec.

Nor is there any doubt that provisions under GATT and NAFTA will effectively apply to a sovereign Quebec, the second most important trading partner for the rest of Canada and the eighth most important for the United States.

Would the Prime Minister care to explain why he so prefers Valparaiso, Chili to Shawinigan, Quebec?

Electronic Town Hall MeetingStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Reform

Hugh Hanrahan Reform Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, Reformers have done it again. Last night marked our third cross-Canada live interactive electronic town hall meeting which generated more than 10,000 calls.

Ninety-four per cent of all callers favoured spending cuts over tax increases. Ninety-six per cent favoured legislation to cap federal tax levels. Ninety-five per cent stated unequivocally that taxes are too high.

This echoes what the Reform Party has been saying in this House for more than a year and we have been continuously ignored by this government.

I hope, as do all Canadians, that the Prime Minister and the finance minister take their heads out of the sand and start paying

attention to what real Canadians want. Canadians are fed up with taxes and with government mismanagement.

I challenge the finance minister to-

Electronic Town Hall MeetingStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for The Battlefords-Meadow Lake.

Aboriginal AffairsStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

NDP

Len Taylor NDP The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK

Mr. Speaker, the federal government, particularly the Minister of Health and the minister of Indian affairs, has an obligation to respond quickly to the recommendations made by the royal commission on aboriginal peoples in its special report on suicide among aboriginal people released last week.

The royal commission argues that there has been a steady stream of studies and reports by aboriginal and non-aboriginal analysts over at least 20 years which has called attention to the problem of suicide among aboriginal people but there has been little result. The studies and reports have presented a long march of compelling evidence that aboriginal people have been dying by their own hands much too often and for far too long. Yet Canadian governments have never made suicide prevention a high priority issue for themselves.

The royal commission's recommendations stress the urgency of this significant matter. This time the federal government must respond quickly and adequately to ensure that the long process of healing can finally begin.

Border CrossingsStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Harold Culbert Liberal Carleton—Charlotte, NB

Mr. Speaker, the majority of my Carleton-Charlotte constituency lies along the 49th parallel between New Brunswick and the state of Maine. There are ten regular border crossing points in Carleton-Charlotte. As I am sure you can appreciate, Mr. Speaker, there are many family ties on both sides of the border.

The citizens of Campobello Island, who are Canadians, must cross the U.S. border twice, first at Lubec, Maine and then drive an hour through the American state and cross again at Calais to arrive at major services in St. Stephen and Milltown, New Brunswick.

The recent proposal by President Clinton suggesting a fee be charged per person and per vehicle entering the United States is both unreasonable and unwarranted.

This proposal would foster unfriendly relations between the two countries which have enjoyed friendly relations for many years. I encourage the Prime Minister and the Ministers for International Trade and Foreign Affairs to address this proposal at once and if necessary again during the President's upcoming visit to Ottawa.

JapanStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

John Maloney Liberal Erie, ON

Mr. Speaker, on January 17 of this year a massive earthquake ripped through central Japan, killing nearly 5,000 people, leaving 25,000 injured and 300,000 people homeless. This is a tragedy of unimaginable proportions.

I would like to offer the sympathy and support of the people of the Erie riding to the people of the Hyogo Prefecture.

Like all Canadians I was glad to hear that Canada was sending assistance and I commend the Prime Minister for acting quickly to lend support to Japan, a good friend and trading partner.

Canada has helped to set up short term housing and provide basic necessities. Canadian engineers are aiding in the assessment of damaged buildings to help the Japanese and other governments to put forward building codes and regulations which might ensure the survival of buildings and structures during future earthquakes.

I believe the Canadian government has shown the true heart of Canada in its quick response to this disaster. This true and honest desire by all Canadians to help those in real need is something that we as parliamentarians should never forget.

Canadian FlagStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Liberal

Jesse Flis Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago on February 15, 1965 the national flag with the distinctive maple leaf was first raised on Parliament Hill by the then Prime Minister, Lester B. Pearson.

Since that time our nation has grown to become one of the world's leading democracies. Canadians are known as a compassionate people, ready to respond when natural disaster strikes or war torn regions need help to keep the peace.

Our flag is a symbol of Canada. I encourage all members of this House to support the official federal proclamation of February 15 as Canadian Flag Day, not as an official holiday but as an annual day of recognition.

The Canadian flag is more than just a piece of cloth. It stands for peace, harmony and freedom. It stands for you, Mr. Speaker. It stands for me. It stands on guard for thee.

Social Program ReformStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC

Mr. Speaker, at the very moment the Minister of Human Resources Development was confirming his reform would follow its course, thousands of students, workers and individuals from social groups in Quebec were vigorously demonstrating, despite the perishing cold, their opposition to his reform of social programs. With one voice, they told the minister they had had enough cuts in social programs and they would not let young people be the main victims of the battle with the federal deficit.

They denounced the minister's double talk about wanting to provide Canadians with training and education, while raising educational costs, thereby limiting access to higher education.

The students warned the federal government, finally, that, by always cutting in the same spot and by always targeting the same people, it was confirming the belief widely held among ordinary people that there is no tax equity in Canada.