The House resumed from September 26 consideration of the motion that Bill C-94, an act to regulate interprovincial trade in and the importation for commercial purposes of certain manganese based substances, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

I remind the House as we resume debate on Bill C-94 that we are at the stage of debate during which members have a maximum of 10 minutes without questions and comments.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

John Murphy Liberal Annapolis Valley—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to speak on Bill C-94, the manganese based fuel additives act. This bill is intended to prohibit the importation and interprovincial trade of MMT, a manganese based additive to unleaded gasoline. The law will take effect 60 days after royal assent.

Canada is one of the only countries in the world that is using MMT. The United States banned MMT in 1978. Only Bulgaria and Argentina are considering using MMT.

Environment Canada has received and reviewed study after study after study of the effects of MMT on this equipment. I agree with our Deputy Prime Minister and with Ford, Chrysler, General Motors, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, Volkswagen, Volvo, the list goes on, that MMT adversely affects the sophisticated onboard diagnostic systems where the pollution control equipment is found.

These systems are extremely important for the environment. They are responsible for monitoring the vehicle's emission controls and for alerting the driver to malfunctions. They ensure the cleaner burning engines of today and tomorrow operate as designed. They ensure automobiles are properly maintained resulting in decreased tailpipe emissions and improved fuel economy. Therefore this is a very important technology. It is even more important that it works and that it does its job. We will make sure it does.

To ensure this technology works it must be free from MMT. OBD systems are designed to monitor the performance of pollution control systems, in particular the catalysts, and alert the driver to malfunctions. If the OBD system is not functioning because of MMT and if the catalyst is not working at all, tailpipe emissions could be increased up to 40 times.

The third party has suggested that MMT reduces NOx emissions by 20 per cent. However this reduction is based on data collected by Ethyl from test cars. When examined in the context of the

current Canadian fleet, Environment Canada analysis indicates that NOx reduction would only be 5 per cent.

The third party has asked why the minister did not try to negotiate an agreement between the two parties. I can assure the House the government has been working since 1985 to broker a solution. Senior departmental officials from environment, transport, industry and natural resources have worked with senior representatives from the petroleum and automotive industries for several years in an effort to resolve this issue.

More recently the Deputy Prime Minister attempted to negotiate an agreement between these industries. She met with representatives of the petroleum industry on two separate occasions. The Deputy Prime Minister was prepared to support the introduction of a green pump containing MMT free fuel in an effort to resolve this issue. The petroleum industry rejected this approach.

It is now time to act. If we do not act now then the federal government's vehicle emission reduction programs will be in jeopardy. We risk missing out on major reductions in smog, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. If we do not act now, Canadian consumers will be prevented from taking advantage of state of the art emissions reduction technologies simply because they do not have access to MMT free gasoline.

If we do not act now, we could face a situation where automakers will be forced to turn off the diagnostic systems scheduled for 1996 models because of the damage MMT causes. General Motors is already bringing models off the assembly line with some of the onboard diagnostic functions disconnected. GM, like others, is no longer prepared to assume the increased warranty risks for damage caused to pollution control equipment.

In the end Canadian motorists will have to pay more to have their cars maintained because of this kind of industry action. We as a government will not let this happen. We will not allow the buck to be passed to the Canadian consumers. We will not allow anti-pollution equipment in Canada to be less effective than anti-pollution equipment in the United States. We will not allow the competitiveness of our auto industry to be threatened. We will not allow investment and the thousands of Canadian jobs which depend on this investment to be put in jeopardy.

Let us be clear. The job of reducing motor vehicle pollution can no longer be addressed just by the auto industry, the petroleum industry or the government. Progress at reducing vehicle pollution demands action by all.

The petroleum industry needs to keep making improvements in the composition and properties of the fuels the engines burn. The auto industry needs to keep making improvements in vehicle emissions control technologies such as those offered through onboard diagnostic systems.

Preventive action means producing goods more cleanly. It means using less energy and conserving our natural resources. It means developing and using the latest green technologies, like the emissions reduction technologies in today's cars and trucks.

This bill before the House is one measure of prevention. This bill is pro environment, pro consumer, pro business. Eighteen of Canada's automaking companies think we are doing the right thing. Canadians think we are doing the right thing.

MMT can no longer stand in the way of the progress we continue to make on vehicle emissions reduction and environmental protection. Let us protect jobs, protect investment, protect consumers and protect the environment. Let us make Canada the last country in the world to use MMT.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Is the House ready for the question?

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

All those in favour will please say yea.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

All those opposed will please say nay.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more that five members having risen:

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Call in the members.

And the bells having rung:

Manganese Based Fuel Additives ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the division on the question now before the House stands deferred until Monday at 6 p.m. at which time the bells to call in the members will be sounded for not more than 15 minutes.

The House resumed from September 25 consideration of the motion that Bill C-93, an act to amend the Cultural Property Export and Import Act, the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee; and of the amendment.

Cultural Property Export And Import ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Ottawa Centre Ontario

Liberal

Mac Harb LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to speak on Bill C-93. As a background to this legislation, the purpose of the bill is to amend the Cultural Property Export and Import Act with consequential amendments to the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act, to establish an appeal of determination by the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board of the fair market value of certified cultural properties.

Going back a little, in December 1991 the responsibility for determining the fair market value of cultural property donated to designated Canadian museums, art galleries and libraries was transferred from Revenue Canada Taxation to the review board. The review board assumed this new responsibility at a meeting which was held sometime in January 1992.

There was no provision for appeal of review board decisions included in the legislative amendment despite the fact that the right of appeal existed when this responsibility was with Revenue Canada.

Donors and custodial institutions expressed serious concern about the lack of an appeal mechanism. As a result the Department of Canadian Heritage, in co-operation with the review board, undertook a series of consultations with the community about the need for an appeal process. As a result of these consultations it was agreed that a legislative amendment should be prepared to establish the right of appeal to the Tax Court of Canada.

The bill gives a donor or a custodial institution the right to request that the review board reconsider its initial determination of fair market value. If after receiving a redetermination from the board the donor is still not satisfied, he or she may take the second step of appealing the board decision to the Tax Court of Canada.

There are a number of items in the legislation I would like to share with my colleagues. The Cultural Property Export and Import Act provides tax benefits to encourage donations to public institutions of objects and collections of outstanding significance and national importance.

It is the only program of the Government of Canada that provides financial support through tax credits for donations to museums, art galleries, archives and libraries. Museums, art galleries, archives and libraries in every province and territory of Canada will benefit through the receipt of donations of cultural property as a result of the tax credits.

Cultural property valued at approximately $60 million is donated to Canadian institutions each year. The fair market value of cultural property certified by the review board as a result of the legislation will become eligible for a tax credit of 17 per cent on the first $200 and 29 per cent on the balance if it is over $200.

The donor can claim the fair market value of the gift up to the total amount of his or her net income, and there is no tax payable on any capital gain resulting from the gift. There is a cap and the cap is the total income of the individual on an annual basis.

Because a donor receives a tax credit the amount of money realized as a result of the donation is approximately 50 per cent of the fair market value. The donor does not therefore receive a tax refund equivalent to the fair market value of the gift.

Donors, museums, art galleries and professional associations have been lobbying for the right to appeal review board decisions as it was perceived that the lack of an appeal was a denial of natural justice. To that end the government has taken action.

The establishment of an appeal should be viewed as a reinstatement of the right of appeal that was lost when the responsibility for determining fair market value was transferred to the review board back in 1991. The amendments will ensure that donors who disagree with determinations of the review board will have the right of appeal to the court and will not be denied natural justice.

The announcement of the establishment of an appeal process was received positively by donors, museums, art dealers and the media. These amendments therefore enjoy a high level of public support.

The amendments are technical in nature and respond to strong concerns expressed by the heritage community. Their passage into law should be seen as part of the ongoing commitment of the Government of Canada to ensure the preservation of Canadian heritage.

Bill C-93 has dealt with all the concerns in communities and all wishes of different art galleries, museums, libraries and similar institutions. All those concerns have been studied and legislation that responds to them in a positive way has been brought forward.

It is a perfect example that the government is willing to listen to the concerns of the people, that the government is willing to take action, and that the government has taken action on an issue of national importance and of great concern to the art community of Canada.

I congratulate all those who have made representations to the Department of Canadian Heritage, my colleagues in the House of Commons, the committees and the administration through direct communication. I also thank all those who worked tirelessly to ensure the legislation would come before the House in a timely fashion.

I am sure my colleagues on both sides of the House will stand to speak in support of the great initiative taken by the department of heritage. We truly believe that if somebody is willing to do good and give to a national institution such as a gallery, a library or a museum, the individual deserves the right to be recognized and to be given an incentive.

This is why we made provision in the legislation to give a tax credit for any Canadian citizen, or for that matter a landed immigrant in Canada, who might have something of national significance to give as a gift to the crown. The individual will be given a tax credit of up to 17 per cent if the gift is worth less than $200 and up to 29 per cent of his or her annual income. I think that is fair. I call on people from coast to coast to coast who might have valuable items to consider giving them to museums and so forth.

Some of my colleagues might have some points to make. This would be a most opportune time to put their points on the table so that we can deal with the legislation in a timely manner.

Cultural Property Export And Import ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Kingston and the Islands Ontario

Liberal

Peter Milliken LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to support the bill, an act to amend the Cultural Property Export and Import Act.

Cultural Property Export And Import ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

Cultural Property Export And Import ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Milliken Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Hon. members opposite find this act a bit of a joke. I am sorry they think so. It is sad that they have moved amendments to delay adoption of the bill in the House. This surprises me because it shows they really do not care about Canada's cultural community with which the bill deals. If hon. members opposite gave two hoots about Canada's cultural community, they would not have moved all the amendments.

I will read the amendment moved by the hon. member for Medicine Hat. I believe it is the second or third one; I have lost count. The amendment reads:

That this House declines to give second reading to Bill C-93, an act to amend the Cultural Property Export and Import Act, the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act, since it fails to address the issue of the burden the tax credit system places on middle class taxpayers who are asked to pay for a potentially endless stream of donations of questionable cultural and artistic value claimed by wealthy Canadians.

The amendments shows a complete disregard for Canada's cultural community because it says that the work of Canadian artists is worthless, that the acquisitions of art by Canadians are worthless, and that these are "donations of questionable cultural and artistic value". That is what Reform Party members are saying. Those are the very words of their motion. That is what they are saying to Canadian artists and philanthropists involved in supporting Canada's artistic community. It is a disgrace.

My hon. friend for Ottawa Centre will appreciate that I had occasion to go to Alberta in July of this year. One place I visited was the Tyrrell Museum in Drumheller. There are a lot of dinosaurs in that museum and I can say that the resemblance between some of the dinosaurs there and members of the Reform Party was absolutely striking. I could tell where their ancestors came from.

I was very impressed with the Tyrrell Museum. It is one of Canada's cultural centres. It has an excellent collection. I enjoyed my visit immensely. I took a tour of the entire museum and I saw the workings of the very specialized people involved in the digs.

Cultural Property Export And Import ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.