House of Commons Hansard #120 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was cost.
Bernard Deshaies Bloc Abitibi, QC
Mr. Speaker, since the Quebec minister made a commitment to pay the first half of the costs, will the federal minister recognize that athletes who reach such a high level of performance and who represent us in the Olympic Games should not have been subjected to this kind of affront?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat the offer I am making to the minister from Quebec. Given that it is the Canadian government, I in particular, that has worked very hard to assume a large portion of the cost of the Paralympics, I am inviting the minister, who obviously has a very sincere interest in this issue, to share with me all the costs associated with the Olympic and Paralympic athletes from the province of Quebec so that we can share this on a 50:50 basis.
I am certainly willing to look at that and I hope to hear from Minister Chevrette to see whether he is really committed to this or whether he would rather, unfortunately, play politics with this issue on the floor of the House of Commons.
Elwin Hermanson Reform Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK
Mr. Speaker, recently the minister of agriculture was publicly criticized by a federal court judge. Justice Muldoon expressed concern that the minister would introduce changes to the Canadian Wheat Board Act while he is presiding over a charter challenge to the existing act.
Why did the minister break with proper protocol and table changes to the Canadian Wheat Board Act while the existing act is being challenged in the court?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman knows, grain marketing in western Canada is a topic of considerable debate among farmers and others.
Farmers have made strong recommendations for changes in legislation. Farmers are anxious for those changes to come forward for their consideration and ultimate enactment by Parliament as rapidly as possible. Indeed the Reform Party has also been urging the government to move in that very direction.
Elwin Hermanson Reform Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK
Mr. Speaker, I did not say this is an urgent issue but perhaps the minister has acted irresponsibly and improperly. So I would ask the justice minister what steps he will take to redress the improper activities of the minister of agriculture, which may be seen as interference by the minister in this case.
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, the Parliament of Canada has responsibility for introducing, considering and ultimately passing legislation. Obviously at any moment in time there can be a whole variety of litigious matters before the courts in every field.
If we were to follow the admonition of the hon. gentleman, we would never consider any piece of legislation in this country if there were matters outstanding under previous legislation at any point in time. Obviously that is a formula for stalemate. Maybe that is what the Reform Party wishes to have but as far as this government is concerned, we want to move forward into the future.
Bob Speller Liberal Haldimand—Norfolk, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade.
Recently the European Union and Canada agreed in principle to an agreement which would eliminate a threatened EU ban on Canadian fur imports. However, now the European Union council of environment ministers has rejected this draft agreement, thereby throwing the whole process up in the air.
We have waited long enough for the Europeans to get their act together. Can the parliamentary secretary tell me if the government is prepared to take this issue to the World Trade Organization so as not to leave our Canadian fur industry out in the cold?
Ron MacDonald LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is quite correct. For one year the Canadian government has been negotiating in good faith with the European commission to conclude an agreement with respect to this industry.
On December 6 we initialled an agreement, and so we were very displeased and rather annoyed when some of the European Union environment ministers made their statements.
However, in the last few days the Minister for International Trade has met with Sir Leon Brittan who told us once again that he fully supports the interim agreement that was signed onDecember 6.
If the European commission does not ratify the agreement, the Canadian government will act very quickly to initiate an action at the WTO to protect access by the Canadian fur industry to European markets.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
Yesterday, the minister introduced in the House Bill C-79, an act amending the Indian Act. However, this same minister, last September 11, stated and I quote: "Changing the Indian Act requires very strong support".
In light of that statement, how can the Minister go ahead with his amendments, whereas I have on my desk letters from 542 aboriginal nations out of 600 in Canada that are opposing his bill? Does he not agree that he should go back to do his homework in co-operation with the aboriginals, as requested in the Erasmus-Dussault report and by most of the stakeholders in Canada?
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, we have not addressed the Indian Act since 1951 and we cannot continue to look at a problem only every 45 years. It has taken is two years to get to this point and the package which is before the hon. member and the committee has three processes.
The first is substance. I am prepared to turn over substantial powers to the aboriginal people, where it should be, that I now exercise and do not want. I am prepared to take those sections that they want to discuss further or which may be controversial and put them before the committee. Its members can use their imagination and move into the future.
Finally, I am prepared to make it optional. I was prepared to go further than that so that no one can ever say that the government was not prepared to transfer these powers. Now it is up to the First Nations to decide whether it wants to exercise these powers.
Most important, a process is finally in place that over a period of years will deal with substantive issues of the Indian Act and get rid of that offensive act once and for all.
Paul Forseth Reform New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.
The Liberal red book promises that the government will promote fairness and opportunity and yet day after day we have more broken promises. Environment Canada is apparently unfairly bidding against small private sector firms for water quality and meteorological services.
Why is the minister's huge department bidding against private firms? How can the public believe that the government is using a level playing field and being ethical when doing this questionable practice?
Sergio Marchi LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting how the Reform Party wants to pretend that it cares about the environment. The last time Reform asked a question was on May 17.
If we look at fresh start the only thing that comes close to mentioning the environment is the green colour. Not one word on the environment is mentioned in their fresh start campaign. Reform members have the audacity to talk about us breaking red book commitments when we have introduced the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the endangered species legislation, MMT which that party is against. We have a harmonization accord in the works with the provinces.
The government is not only keep its commitments on the environment, but also pushing the file as well.
In answer to the specific question from the hon. member, like other departments we are working within Treasury Board guidelines. We have met with the business community. We have joint ventures with those companies. It is something that is sought after. The good name of Environment Canada is very much a viable commodity.
Paul Zed LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the 1995-96 annual report of the Indian Claims Commission.
Stephen Harper Reform Calgary West, AB
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-365, an act to amend an act respecting holidays.
Mr. Speaker, this bill would restore the name Dominion Day to the July 1 holiday. The country founded on July 1, 1867 was not Canada but the Federal State of the Dominion of Canada, still the country's official name.
The word "dominion" has its linguistic roots in the French language and was chosen as the name for this country by the Fathers of Confederation from the 72nd Psalm: "He shall have dominion from sea to sea and from the rivers unto the ends of the earth".
It has been a mistake for this country to try and preserve its future by destroying its past and the name Dominion Day should be restored.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-366, an act to amend the Criminal Code (joy riding).
Mr. Speaker, we have a serious problem in this country, one that touches 160,000 Canadians a year. It is a $1.6 billion problem and that problem is auto theft.
Our loose laws encourage people to break the law, I believe, especially in the view of young male offenders who steal over half of the cars stolen in Canada mostly to joy ride and experience the thrill at somebody else's expense.
The problem is out of control in British Columbia. In my constituency and in the city of Chilliwack, for example, auto theft is up 87 per cent this year over last year.
My bill would strengthen the provisions of section 335 of the Criminal Code, the section under which young offenders are usually charged. It prescribes a minimum and a maximum sentence in terms of a fine, a jail term and restitution to the victim. It also states that the parents of young offenders who have contributed to the delinquency of their child should be held responsible for the payment.
I hope that all members will take note of this serious problem and support this bill.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
Suzanne Tremblay Bloc Rimouski—Témiscouata, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table today, on behalf of nearly 2,000 of my constituents, a petition asking for the abolition of the Senate. It is in addition to the 30,000 petitions already tabled. I hope the government will take abolition of the Senate under serious consideration for its next budget.
Janko Peric Liberal Cambridge, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of presenting to the House petitions from concerned citizens of my riding.
The petitioners pray and request that the Parliament of Canada to introduce amendments to the Criminal Code to ensure that anyone convicted of impaired driving causing death receive a sentence from seven to a maximum of 14 years.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am presenting today another 77 pages of petitions containing 1,700 names. The petitions are signed by people from all across Canada who are very concerned about the serious personal injury crimes and sexual offences involving children and in the way the criminals are treated by our justice system.
The petitioners request that changes be made to the Criminal Code. They want to be notified when a sex offender is released into the community. They want a central registry to be available for people who work with children so they will know who has committed these crimes. They want to prohibit pardons for those convicted of sex offences involving children.
I have now presented approximately 25,000 or 30,000 names on this subject.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am tabling a petition signed by 720 people. Their names are to be added to the 30,000 signatures calling for the abolition of the Senate, that other Chamber which is still holding us, the elected members of the House, hostage.
Eugène Bellemare Liberal Carleton—Gloucester, ON
Mr. Speaker, according to Standing Order 36, allow me to table a
petition signed by 60 constituents from Carleton-Gloucester. The petitioners ask that Parliament not increase the federal taxes on gasoline.
Eugène Bellemare Liberal Carleton—Gloucester, ON
Mr. Speaker, I also have seven petitions signed by 139 of my constituents. The petitioners ask that Parliament not amend the human rights code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and the charter of rights and freedoms in any way which would tend to indicate societal approval of same sex relationships.
Jim Silye Reform Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from 29 Calgary constituents who call on the government to support the immediate initiation of an international convention which will set out a binding timetable for the abolition of all nuclear weapons. They request that the initiative be concluded by the year 2000.
Marlene Cowling Liberal Dauphin—Swan River, MB
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions in the House today.
The first petition is signed by 75 Manitobans. The second is signed by 300 Manitobans, many of whom live in my riding of Dauphin-Swan River.
The petitioners draw the attention of the House to the negative impact pornography has on men, women and children. They urge Parliament to strictly uphold Canada's laws against obscenity.
Osvaldo Nunez Bloc Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition signed by 105 residents of Quebec, who are asking Parliament to intervene to ensure that immigration officials enforce the Immigration Act without discriminating against people connected with the Patriarche. Established in more than 15 countries including Canada, the Patriarche is a not for profit organization assisting addicts, including those from abroad.
Since 1992, immigration officials have denied entry to addicts who cannot prove they have been drug-free for at least two years. This is unjustified, as neither the legislation nor the regulations provide for the enforcement of this two-year criterion.