Debates of June 14th, 1996

Human Rights

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, first let me make it clear that the judgment that came from the Human Rights Tribunal yesterday was in a case that was commenced long before Bill C-33 was thought of, introduced or passed.

The judgment was based on the law as it stood before Bill C-33 added those words to the Canadian Human Rights Act. The enactment of Bill C-33 was irrelevant to the judgment. The judgment dealt with benefits. Bill C-33 did not. It dealt with discrimination.

My hon. colleague, the President of the Treasury Board, has already told the House that we are going to have to look at the judgment. He will have to consider its implications and a decision will be made on the question of whether an appeal will be brought when we have had that opportunity.

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister can delay the decision all he wants, but for years courts and tribunals have been setting policy for government and even the private sector on this issue with no debate in government. That is an absolute outrage and is unforgivable. Parliament, not the tribunals, is where the laws of Canada should be written.

The justice minister said that he tabled Bill C-33 so this issue would not be left in the hands of the courts and the tribunals. If he was serious about that promise, will he respond to this ruling in such a way to uphold the primacy of this Parliament?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, in view of what happened last month I am astonished to hear that the hon. member would want to have another parliamentary debate on the human rights legislation.

The hon. member suggests that Parliament should be supreme. Indeed Parliament is supreme. Parliament enacted the Constitution of Canada which is the supreme law of the land. That Constitution establishes fundamental principles of justice and rights.

Parliament also enacted the Canadian Human Rights Act which establishes principles and rights. Under our system of government in which there is a legislative branch, the courts and tribunals are called on to apply those principles on the facts of particular cases and to interpret statutes on the basis of those principles.

Parliament is supreme all right, but having laid down principles we then have to turn over to the legislative branch the interpretation and application of those principles. That is what has happened in this case, and that is part of the government of this country.

As to the decision in this case, as we have told the hon. member we will look at it and decide in due course whether an appeal should be brought.

Employability Enhancement

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

In spite of the minister's commitment to provide a transition period made necessary by the implementation of the unemployment insurance reform, 11 of the 50 Quebec groups working to enhance the employability of greatly disadvantaged people just learned that their contract would end on August 31. This means that 2,000 greatly disadvantaged Quebecers will suddenly be without resources to enhance their employability.

Why, in spite of his commitment to give these groups a transition period to adjust and to allow negotiations with Quebec to unfold, has the minister abruptly ended the contracts of these 11 organizations without giving them time to find the necessary resources to continue to provide essential services to greatly disadvantaged people?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, there is a whole slew of organizations working in the area mentioned by the hon. member, including the Government of Quebec, the SQDM, the Government of Canada and various other groups.

This is a difficult issue, since we are being asked to proceed rather quickly, to try to follow up on the Quebec consensus regarding active measures, training and so on. We are trying to ensure the greatest possible flexibility regarding the new management and the new arrangements which we will reach with Quebec and the other provinces.

There is no doubt that some major changes will take place. Since January, when I became responsible for this portfolio, we have been asked to proceed quickly, to avoid getting involved in areas where the province should play a quasi-independent role, and I have agreed to do that.

Now, we are being asked to stay put, to maintain the status quo. Let us not forget that these organizations knew all along there was nothing permanent about their funding. I hope the Government of Quebec, the SQDM and other stakeholders will look at the role played by these groups and will decide accordingly.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I take note of the minister's will to comply with the consensus in Quebec.

Does the minister recognize that several of these groups are unique resources, that they are concentrated in eastern Quebec?

As there is a transition fund expressly for such situations, does he not agree there should be a moratorium and will he impose one, so that the resources and the expertise developed can continue to serve useful purposes after the conclusion of the negotiations with the Government of Quebec?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the transition funds will be managed in co-operation with the other governments. In Quebec, there is indeed a sum of money that will be available to the Government of Canada, in co-operation with the Government of Quebec. If Quebec wants to maintain some system outside its government administration, and certainly outside the federal administration, we can certainly discuss it.

However, neither in Quebec nor elsewhere will we take measures that would force governments or other organizations to take charge of any agreement that we have reached. After all, we are trying to negotiate so that the federal government will, in many cases, withdraw from these activities.

Fisheries

[Derek Wells, Liberal, South Shore, NS]

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

As the minister knows, the fishing industry has been very concerned about the new inspection fees imposed on processing plants. The matter has been reviewed by the standing committee and by the minister's staff.

Will the minister advise the House of the result of that review and what changes he has agreed to make to plant inspection fees?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, in consideration for the concern and comments of the committee, the hon. member and his colleagues, and the industry, a revised fee has been worked out that basically reflects the concern of the smaller industries and the smaller plants.

For example, for a processing plant that would have an area of less than 300 square meters, instead of having a fee of $1,500 plus $500 per operation, which could amount to $4,000 or more, a flat fee of $1,000 has now been invoked. In addition, there is a cap of $10,000 on the annual certificates and a cap of $250 for the import certificates.

We will review the fees after one year. I believe these measures will reflect a high standard of fish processed in Canada, exported and imported.

Justice

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in view of the recent bill tabled by the justice minister, I ask the minister if he would tell the House and the people of Canada what he believes is a fair and just penalty for planned and deliberate murder, the taking of an innocent life.

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the present regime in the Criminal Code, which has been in place for 20 years, is a fair and just regime.

For the last 20 years the penalty in the Criminal Code for first degree murder is life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for 25 years subject to, after 15 years, members of the community coming together on a jury to determine whether the person should be given the opportunity before the 25 years, but after 15, to seek parole, which is up to the parole board.

I have now proposed changes to that regime to make it fairer and more just. It will require that all applications be screened by a judge to determine they have merit. It will require that the jury be unanimous so that the people drawn from the street are unanimous in giving the person a shortening of the period. It says such a break should not be available under any circumstances to multiple and serial murderers.

In short, that is a fair and just approach. As I said in my speech this morning in second reading debate of Bill C-45, the changes we propose will improve the present regime.

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the justice minister has a strong propensity of bringing in contentious bills at the 11th hour. We saw that with the gun registration bill last year and with Bill C-33.

I ask the justice minister why he stretches the ability of members to adequately examine and fully debate these bill. Why is he bringing in these bills at the last hour?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member himself has been calling for changes to section 745; he wants to repeal it.

While I do not agree with that, I agree the matter should be dealt with and I have brought the bill forward. I would have thought the hon. member would have been critical of me for not bringing it forward.

It seems that no matter when I bring the bills forward the hon. member finds them contentious and controversial. We are acting at this time. The House is in session. Let us debate the bill and send it to committee. Let us hear the evidence and let us bring it back and decide. The House should act as soon as possible.

Irving Whale

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

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

Again this week again and for the second time, this government neglected to answer my question about the insurance coverage of the contractor responsible for refloating the Irving Whale .

Are we to understand from the minister's unwillingness to respond that the contractor does indeed lack the coverage required in case PCBs are spilled while lifting the Irving Whale ?

[Karen Kraft Sloan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, one of the conditions for contracting was the insurer would have adequate insurance in the event of a PCB or oil spill.

In this situation the insurer has $10 million in the event of a PCB spill and $100 million in the event of an oil spill. That is over $110 million.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

In that case, Mr. Speaker, will the minister reassure the public by tabling in this House before the end of this session all the insurance contracts covering the contractor responsible for refloating the Irving Whale for both this year and last year, yes or no?

[Karen Kraft Sloan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I will discuss this with the minister.

Taxation

[Bill Gilmour, Reform, Comox—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance spoke about how recent changes to the GST had affected trade-ins on new cars. The vast majority of Canadians simply cannot afford to buy a new car. What what do they do? They buy a used car instead.

By removing the tax credit on used cars, the minister has made it more expensive for the average Canadian to buy a used car. By eliminating the tax credit the government is saying: "We do not care. You already pay tax on the car. We are more interested in getting more people to pay more tax on that car".

How can the minister justify taxing the same good over and over again? Why has he abandoned the red book promise of a revenue neutral tax?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has it wrong again. I know a system that would simplify taxes is not something the Reform Party understands, at least from looking at its tax proposals. This is a system that was put in to simplify.

I would be glad to explain to the hon. member the full notional input tax credit system. It was too complicated. We eliminated it. As a result we will be collecting exactly the same amount of tax as we did before. There is no tax increase in this at all.

Wildlife

[Shaughnessy Cohen, Liberal, Windsor—St. Clair, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources.

In Windsor and Essex County monarch butterflies are a familiar and welcome sight when in the fall they mass together in a spectacular display to migrate south from Point Pelee and Pelee Island. Experts say the habitat loss in the butterflies' wintering area in Mexico is causing their decline.

What is the government doing to ensure the conservation of this beautiful and delicate species?

[Marlene Cowling, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, the government is taking positive action to study sustainable development of forest ecosystems to protect the monarch butterfly.

Natural Resources Canada through the model forest program in Manitoba is working with Mexico to study the migratory patterns of the monarch butterfly, which travels from Mexico to Point Pelee and Pelee Island near the hon. member's riding.

Canada and Mexico take conservation of the monarch butterfly very seriously. Earlier this week President Zedillo of Mexico used monarch butterflies to symbolize diplomatic relations between Mexico and Canada.

Adoptive Parents

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

An Ontario court recently ruled that the Unemployment Insurance Act is discriminatory under the charter of rights and freedoms, as adoptive parents and natural parents are not entitled to the same benefits.

Will the Minister of Human Resources Development concur with this ruling and take the necessary steps in order to realign his legislation?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, aware of the ruling made by the court in this matter. But we still feel that we have a duty to carefully consider this ruling. In due course and in consultation with the Minister of Justice, we will make a decision concerning a possible appeal.

Softwood Lumber

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber issue simply will not go away. The minister's quota system is causing nothing but havoc and chaos in the industry.

Whose interest is this quota system serving anyway? Is it the lumber industry and the mills that are forced to shut down for three weeks or is it the minister, who hoped this problem would simply die?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, we got out of this agreement with the United States secure access for our industry for five years, something we have never had before in any sector, including this one.

The first people on the line who said they wanted this arrangement was the industry. In getting this arrangement we have to sort out how the allocations will occur within the country.

We are listening to everybody. We will come up with a system that will be fair and equitable, on that will maximize our access of that market to the United States.