Debates of May 12th, 1995

Auditor General's Report

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear this praise for the auditor general because we accept his report. I think his report has given some very useful suggestions.

He has pointed out that when it comes to our public service, when it comes to our government, we take a back seat to nobody when it comes to the ethical standards that are practised by the government and its public service. It is comparable very favourably, as he pointed out, to other governments and to the private sector.

The amendments that they apparently want to the motion that my colleague, the House leader, has put before us are to exempt a whole body from any kind of code of conduct. The other House I believe is the proper phrase. I think it is time they showed some good faith in trying to get the matter through so that we can further deal with the matter of ethics.

[Michel Daviault, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment, and I add that this is not our first question on the environment.

Yesterday, the Auditor General of Canada painted a very sorry picture of the federal government's management of dangerous waste. The government has reallocated over a third of the budget of $150 million intended for pollution management. It has dumped 24 highly contaminated sites onto the provinces. The minister may well speak of orphan sites, but the provinces will be the ones ending up with them. Furthermore, the federal government has provided for no additional funds to clean up the contaminated federal sites that remain.

How does the Minister of the Environment explain that, for lack of new agreements, she in fact unilaterally dumped total responsibility for 24 highly contaminated sites onto the shoulders of the provinces, when human health and the environment are at risk, according to the auditor general.

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

Mr. Speaker, first, funding for the Green Plan was extended at the request of the provinces, which asked for more time to clean up.

Second, two years ago we unanimously adopted the policy to put an end to orphan sites because of a request by the Province of Quebec, through its Minister of the Environment, Pierre Paradis, who, at the time, felt that creating a fund for orphan sites would enable companies to avoid their responsibilities-something environmental groups know very well.

We have paid and will continue to pay for the clean up of federal sites. This year, my colleague, the Minister of National Defence, has already paid out over $100 million for clean up. My colleague, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, has just paid out a significant sum. We have invested more than a quarter of a billion dollars in a sewer infrastructure program for the Vancouver area. These are joint programs with the provinces.

But we adopted our policy on orphan sites at the request of the Province of Quebec.

[Michel Daviault, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, provincial Ministers of the Environment come and go and are not all the same. The current minister in Quebec is much more demanding. However, let us move on to PCBs.

The auditor general also informs us that the federal government will fail to honour its commitments in the Green Plan regarding its own PCBs. The minister is doubtless the only person who believes in the 1996 timetable.

How does the minister explain that the matter of federal PCBs will still be unresolved next year and that, moreover, she will be running the risk of new environmental accidents, again according to the auditor general.

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

Mr. Speaker, the auditor general mentioned the Green Plan in connection with the sites. As I explained to my hon. colleague from the Reform Party, the federal government has spent more than $20 million without finding a site, as the Government of Quebec did with the BAPE.

Last month, I decided to order federal Department of the Environment to have all federal PCBs destroyed at a site set up and licensed in Alberta. We will meet our deadline. We are working, and I have corresponded with the Minister of Public Works. PCBs will be destroyed starting this month, and we hope to have all of the work completed, not by the end, but by the beginning of 1996.

Atlantic Fishery

[Francis Leblanc, Liberal, Cape Breton Highlands—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

Yesterday the leader of the third party was in Atlantic Canada spreading doom. I quote: "All you can do is say it's over, particularly in Newfoundland. It's best to take 15 seconds and say the fishery is finished."

Is this true? Are Atlantic fishermen holding onto false hopes, as the leader of the Reform Party has stated? Can the minister give this House a true assessment of the Atlantic fishery?

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

Mr. Speaker, regrettably I have to inform my colleague it is true that the hon. leader of the third party, after 15 seconds of deep contemplation and thought about the future of the fishery, did say-here it is on the front page-"it's over".

After his spending this valuable 15 seconds reflecting upon the problem and coming to the conclusion that it is over, I want to inform the people of Canada that indeed the Atlantic fishery still represents a $1.6 billion export industry employing tens of thousands of people in 1995.

James Bay And Northern Quebec Agreement

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it came to light earlier this week that the Minister of Justice did not consult with the James Bay Cree, as is prescribed in the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. As the Minister of Indian Affairs knows, they must be consulted on any legislation that will affect traditional hunting rights.

I ask the Minister of Indian Affairs, did his colleague violate the constitutional rights of the James Bay Cree, yes or no?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

I am pleased the hon. member raised the issue of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, because we were rather proud of that. It was the former Prime Minister Trudeau and the present Prime Minister, who had this job at the time, who actually implemented the James Bay and Hudson Bay and northern Quebec agreement. It is part of our culture, part of our policy, part of our tradition.

I am really pleased that the hon. member has now taken up the issue of treaty rights. I hope I see that in the future when we bring forth these things, and not not what I hear outside of the House with the Reform saying let's get rid of treaty rights, let's not have any more treaty process.

The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement talks about fishing and hunting rights. The bill of the Minister of Justice talks about guns and regulation. They are two distinct things. There are rights under treaty to hunt and fish. To take the logic of the Reform, he is saying that the Cree can go out and hunt with a Sherman tank and the Government of Canada would have no

recourse. We are talking about gun registration, not rights of hunting and fishing.

Maybe I should not be so pleased. Perhaps it is just a sign of desperation of how far the Reform Party has gone in trying to save what is now a losing position.

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a sign of desperation is when a minister cannot answer yes or no. Did he violate the constitutional rights, yes or no?

According to Peter Hogg, a leading constitutional lawyer, "Any law that had the effect of impairing an existing aboriginal right would be subject to judicial review to determine whether it was justified impairment".

My supplementary question is for the minister of Indian affairs, who hopefully understands the crown's fiduciary obligation: Is Bill C-68 a justified impairment of aboriginal rights, yes or no?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said on numerous occasions about the right to gather food as a broad right-not necessarily an aboriginal right but an aboriginal and non-aboriginal right-that these rights will be facilitated.

Let us take the logic of the hon. member to the extreme. He is saying that it is okay for Cree to go there and hunt seal or caribou with an AK-47, with an assault weapon, with a Sherman tank. This defies logic; it is incorrect.

What the Minister of Justice is doing does not break the spirit or intent of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

Royal Military College In Kingston

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.

Since the Collège militaire royal in Saint-Jean was closed, the Minister of National Defence and the Prime Minister have repeatedly stressed their intention of making the Royal Military College in Kingston the showcase of Canadian bilingualism.

How does the defence minister explain that the information about the Kingston college on Internet is available in English only?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that during my week's absence when I was in Europe the hon. members of the Bloc Quebecois missed me. I certainly did not miss them.

I said several times in the House of Commons that the Royal Military College of Canada we established in Kingston is fully bilingual. We put in place all the procedures required to make the college fully bilingual. Most courses are given in both official languages, French and English.

In the future, most of the teachers will speak both official languages, and I think that if the hon. member paid a visit to the city of Kingston, he would see for himself that the Royal Military College of Canada is a truly bilingual institution.

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

Mr. Speaker, my question was on Internet and not on the college itself.

Can the Minister of National Defence promise in this House-although it seems difficult to extract a commitment from him-that corrective measures will be taken and that, from now on, the information about the Kingston college on Internet will be available in both official languages?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, all the promotions for the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston are in both official languages. If for some reason what the hon. member has said is true, I will certainly look into it.

I have to underscore the fact that all the promotional material and all the required documentation in training is in both languages. In fact, I think I will invite the member to watch a film we have prepared to attract French language students. I think it is something he will want to watch for his own edification.

Indian Affairs

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, just to clarify, the Reform Party does recognize treaty rights as solemn and binding obligations on the part of government.

The minister of Indian affairs has negotiated a draft co-management agreement for three million acres with the Montreal Lake Band near Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, without the participation of the province and without consulting rural municipalities. These are vigorously opposing the draft because it tramples on their responsibilities.

The minister stated on Monday on the CBC that he would not back up "one G- inch" on this issue. Why is the minister being so pig-headed on this issue?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, this assertion on the position of the federal government is so patently incorrect that I am almost encouraged to call it false. But I would not do that because it might get me thrown out of the House.

A year ago January the province of Saskatchewan, the Government of Canada and the FSIN sat down to try co-management in Saskatchewan. At the invitation of the province of Saskatchewan we funded nine areas where we could possibly do co-management, co-jurisdiction in Saskatchewan. We put a draft proposal on the table, the FSIN put a draft proposal on the table, and we are still waiting for the province of Saskatchewan to put a draft proposal on the table.

I have met at least twice with the minister from Saskatchewan in the last two or three weeks, and on Thursday I met with the premier of Saskatchewan. We may be of different parties, but we share the same feeling on the aspirations of aboriginal people.

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

We know that.

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

You know that, good. I am glad you know it because you may learn something from that.

We share the same aspirations for the aboriginal people of the country. There has to be adequate sharing of resources if we are truly to get self-government and self-determination, on paper, in the House, something the Reform Party says at the press scrums it supports.

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Prince Albert was adopted by binding aboriginal ceremony into the Bird family of the Montreal Lake Band in a powwow about two years ago. Roy Bird, the chief of the band, is an important player in this family. The member for Prince Albert has been co-opted by the minister and is defending these negotiations with his adopted family.

Will the minister not agree that he has placed this member, knowingly or unknowingly, in a conflict of interest situation?

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. minister may reply.

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, if this is an allegation against Chief Roy Bird, it smacks of the usual allegations made by the Reform Party.

I have been working with Chief Roy Bird-

[An hon. member]

No, the member of Parliament.

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

You never pay attention.

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Then perhaps if the member would clarify-