Debates of June 21st, 1995

Petitions

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have another petition, signed by people primarily from Ontario. It indicates that deep cuts to Canada's social programs will hurt all Canadians and have a profoundly negative impact on the four million adults and children living below the poverty line.

The petitioners point out that 50 per cent of the debt of Canada is the result of monetary policy, 44 per cent is the result of tax policy and less than 6 per cent is a result of all government programs.

Therefore they point out that social programs ought not to be severely limited, in that they are our right and heritage.

Questions On The Order Paper

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 183 and 196.

Question No. 183-

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

What portion of the announced $300 million adjustment payment following cancellation of the WGTA will be directed toward enhancing infrastructure for the port of Churchill?

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

No final decisions have yet been made on the precise allocation of the $300 million multiyear WGTA adjustment fund. Discussions with private sector stakeholders, including farm organizations, and provincial governments are underway to solicit advice as to priorities. The fund first becomes available on April 1, 1996.

To date, the advice received by the government has emphasized the use of this fund to: offset some of the impact of changes in the Canadian Wheat Board's freight cost pooling system; provide transitional support for the alfalfa dehydration industry; and build or upgrade agricultural infrastructure on the prairies, and especially the road system.

Final allocation decisions will take all relevant interests into account, recognizing that a $300 million fund cannot address every expectation. The objective is to assist the prairies agricultural sector to make the necessary transition to an economic environment without transportation subsidization.

Question No. 196-

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

With respect to the UN New York preparatory conference in March 1995, ( a ) what was the total amount spent by all federal departments and agencies as well as the breakdown of those costs by department and agency, ( b ) who were the representatives that comprised the Canadian delegation and what were the guidelines utilized in the selection of those delegates?

[Sheila Finestone, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)]

I am informed by Status of Women Canada (SWC) as follows:

The four week New York preparatory meeting for the World Conference on Women March 15 to April 7, 1995 was held concurrently with the regular session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

(a) Cost to the federal government for participation at these meetings were as follows:

Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)-$973

Status of Women Canada (three officials)-$19,677

Foreign Affairs (one official)-$5,000

Canadian International Development Agency (one official)-$8,055

Non-governmental organizations (two representatives)-$16,215 Funded by Status of Women Canada

Total Cost:-$49,920

(b) Representatives on the Canadian Delegation included:

Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women); Status of Women Canada, Valérie Raymond, executive director, world conference secretariat; Status of Women Canada, Rhonda Ferderber, director, external relations and communications; Status of Women Canada, Sheila Regehr, senior policy analyst; Foreign Affairs, Adèle Dion, co-ordinator, international women's equality; Canadian International Development Agency, Diana Rivington, senior policy adviser, women in development directorate; NGOs, Madeleine Gilchrist and Gulzar Samji; and two representatives of the government of Quebec, costs covered by the government of Quebec.

The appointment of a delegation to represent Canada at world conferences and/or preparatory meetings leading to those conferences is the responsibility of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In selecting members, the minister ensures that the expertise is well matched to the issues to be addressed and that the delegation is representative of the diversity of Canadian interests at play in the conference.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is it agreed?

[An hon. member]

Agreed.

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. For the second time I am asking about Question No. 117, which I placed on the Order Paper on December 1, 1994.

I understand that the government normally takes 45 days to answer these questions. It has now been seven months. I thought it was a fairly simple question, asking about the taxable liability of civil servants who have travel allowances and chauffeured limousines to move around the country.

I hope the government will see fit to answer this question forthwith, after seven months.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I said the other day in responding to a similar point of order raised by the same hon. member, the question asked involves a tremendous amount of detail from all parliamentary agents, crown corporations, every department and agency of the government, all governor in council appointees, armed forces personnel and RCMP personnel. He has asked for a tremendously detailed answer. Frankly, I am not surprised that it has taken so long to answer. I am sorry it has taken so long.

I should advise the hon. member and he will be interested to know that of the 209 questions on the Order Paper to date, 166 have been answered and 43 are outstanding. That will be less the ones that have been answered this week. I think there have been four answered already this week.

In fact, 80 per cent of the questions that have been placed on the Order Paper during this session of Parliament have been answered. The government has been assiduous in attending to its duties. I know the hon. member will agree, having heard those figures.

Motions For Papers

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to suggest that all notices of motions for the production of papers stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Ways And Means

[Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Liberal, for the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

moved that a ways and means motion to amend the Customs Act and the Customs Tariff and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts be concurred in.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Pursuant to an order made earlier today the motion is deemed adopted on division.

(Motion agreed to.)

[Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Liberal, for the Minister of National Revenue]

moved that a ways and means motion to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Income Tax Act be concurred in.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Pursuant to an order made earlier today, a recorded division is deemed demanded and deemed deferred until 11.30 p.m. this evening.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-91, an act to continue the Federal Business Development Bank under the name Business Development Bank of Canada, as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

Business Development Bank Of Canada Act

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

There are 33 motions in amendment standing on the Notice Paper for the report stage of Bill C-91, an act to continue the Federal Business Development Bank under the name Business Development Bank of Canada.

Motions Nos. 1 to 6 and 26 to 33 will be grouped for debate but voted on as follows. A vote on Motion No. 1 applies to Motions Nos. 3, 4, 6 and 26 to 33.

An affirmative vote on Motion No. 1 obviates the necessity of the question being put on Motions Nos. 2 and 5. On the other hand, a negative vote on Motion No. 1 necessitates the question being put on Motion No. 2.

A vote on Motion No. 2 applies to Motion No. 5

Motions Nos. 7 to 11, 14, 15 and 19 to 25 will be grouped for the purposes of debate but voted on separately.

Motions Nos. 12 and 13 will be grouped for the purposes of debate. A vote on Motion No. 12 will apply to Motion No. 13.

Motions Nos. 16, 17 and 18 will be grouped for debate but voted on as follows. A vote on Motion No. 16 applies to Motion No. 17. Motion No. 18 will be voted on separately.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

I shall now propose Motions Nos. 1 to 6 and 26 to 33 to the House.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think you would find unanimous consent on the part of the House to consider that when you call a group, all the motions in the group would be deemed put to the House without your having to read them or have them moved. I think there is a disposition throughout the House in that regard today.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think you might find unanimous agreement to start with Group No. 4. I understand that is the wish of the House.