Debates of Oct. 1st, 1997

Fisheries

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased the hon. member has seen fit to point out that the programs of my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, have in fact been very successful in dealing with many of the problems of those displaced due to rationalization of the Pacific salmon industry.

The issue concerning the $20 million that has already been spent by his department in this area was done, as was indicated, in connection with other organizations including the United Fishermen.

If the member will be slightly patient, we will make sure that the continuing programs are in place, as was always intended from the beginning.

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, B.C. fishers have been more than patient. It is their livelihood that is on the line.

The Liberal government has betrayed the people of British Columbia by time and again standing with the United States instead of with the province of British Columbia.

I want to ask the minister a supplementary question. Will he now withdraw his court challenge of the Nanoose shutdown? Will he start standing up for British Columbia instead of Washington, D.C., and will he finally end his treasonous sell-out of B.C. fishers—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

I know question period is very quick and sometimes we use words which are not parliamentary. In this context I find the word treasonous is not parliamentary. With respect, and by not replacing it with any other word, I would ask my hon. colleague from Burnaby—Douglas to please withdraw the word treasonous.

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I was sent here by the province of British Columbia and my constituents to—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

I will deal with this matter after the question period. The hon. member for Burin—St. George's.

[Bill Matthews, Progressive Conservative, Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, many of the problems being experienced with the British Columbia salmon fishery have been caused by the present minister of fisheries and this government.

As the present minister and the former minister know, fishers in B.C. were promised flexibility in the expense of an income restrictive area management licensing system.

Will the minister immediately provide that flexibility to the system so that British Columbia salmon harvesters can achieve financial viability and at the same time protect stock sustainability?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member on his first question in the House and his first question as critic on fisheries.

The Pacific salmon treaty was in fact negotiated and signed in 1985 during the Shamrock summit in between verses of When Irish Eyes are Smiling .

The purpose of it was to get it there in a hurry because the then prime minister wished to have something to show for that meeting. It was defective then because indeed the provisions only lasted for seven years and had to be renegotiated on an annual basis thereafter.

[Bill Matthews, Progressive Conservative, Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the minister missed the question.

My question was pertaining to the area licensing system that is so restrictive to B.C. salmon harvesters that they cannot make a living.

I ask the minister a supplementary question. Will he immediately grant the flexibility that he and the former minister had promised so that British Columbia salmon fishermen can achieve financial viability with their enterprises?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is not from British Columbia and does not know that we cannot achieve financial viability for the industry by having the entire fleet chasing up and down the coast depending on where the fish happen to be.

By breaking up with regions for different gear types we are creating a system where fewer fishers are able to fish for longer periods and be more assured of an income and of a fishery than would otherwise be the case.

The answer to his question is no, we will not change the area licensing system. We will maintain it.

Law Of The Sea

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in 1982 Canada was one of the first nations to sign the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

My question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. When will Canada ratify this convention and thus keep a red book promise and take an important step toward marine and fishery conservation?

[Ted McWhinney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, Canada was one of the leaders and an inspiration to the third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

We have also, however, pushed for a UN agreement on straddling fish stocks. This was opened for signature in December 1995. It is intended to catch those foreign fishermen and flags of convenience that try to catch fish stocks that straddle our 200 mile fishing zone.

Legislation to implement the 1995 straddling convention died on the order paper when the House was dissolved for the election. We are reintroducing—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Kootenay—Columbia on one question.

Crtc

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this summer the CRTC awarded an FM frequency to the CBC after the heritage ministry interfered in the CRTC process. Naturally the other applicants were really upset about this matter.

The plot thickens because Perrin Beatty yesterday announced that he would be making some kind of financial arrangement so that an FM signal could reach the Toronto marketplace from Peterborough.

Could the minister tell us if this is just an effort to rub out her fingerprints on her interference in the CRTC process?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

No, Mr. Speaker.

Policing Of Airports

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

Yesterday, the Minister of Transport once again invoked the work in progress at Dorval as an excuse to maintain an RCMP presence in international airports in Quebec, contrary to the practice elsewhere in Canada.

How can the minister keep using this excuse when we all know that extensive work is under way at other airports, including the one in Vancouver, and that the RCMP has nevertheless been replaced by municipal police forces everywhere except in Quebec?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I have answered this question two or three times.

We made a certain evaluation. It is in our power to make that kind of evaluation and assessment. We believe it is in the interest of the people at Dorval and Mirabel to keep the RCMP at the airport during this period of change.

Csis

[Peter Mancini, NDP, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am from the proud island of Cape Breton. My question is for the solicitor general who has already attempted to address this issue.

The solicitor general has said that CSIS only operates on court ordered warrants and points to the recent federal court ruling as proof of a rigorous method. Yet he himself said yesterday “I am advised this clause has been used and the courts have allowed it in the past”.

Could the solicitor general indicate how many times CSIS has wiretapped individuals in the past without seeking proper judicial authority?

[The Speaker]

I do not know that any minister could be expected to have the very precise and specific figures we are looking for today.

Perhaps an order paper question would be in order. I am going to permit the hon. minister to answer the question but the specifics are getting a little bit tight.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, never.

Health

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

During the election campaign the Liberal government promised a national pharmacare program but obviously had no idea of how it could or would be funded. To add to this, it had virtually no agreement with the provinces or territories with regard to implementation or compliance.

Is the government serious about its commitment to a pharmacare program, or is it just another campaign promise—

[The Speaker]

I would ask all hon. members not to use any props during question period.

I ask the Minister of Health to answer that question.

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we intend to do exactly what we said we would, that is look at the concept of pharmacare as a long term objective with the intention of ensuring that everybody in Canada who needs medication can get medication without price being an impediment.

With my colleague, the minister of health of Saskatchewan, I am co-chairing a conference in January of next year which will bring together provincial ministers and other interested parties to look at all aspects of this issue. I will keep the hon. member posted.

Supreme Court

[John Nunziata, Independent, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the prime minister.

Given the enormous power of the supreme court in setting public policy in Canada and given the fact the court often makes decisions that should be made by the House, will the prime minister agree that the appointment process for supreme court judges should include parliamentary ratification and, if so, will he refer today's appointment to the justice committee?