Debates of Oct. 23rd, 1997

Violence

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Yellowhead.

Justice

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a letter from a constituent protesting the early release of sex offenders including Michael Chretien and the killer who first raped her teenage daughter and was released early even though a high risk.

Sadly the saga of Liberal justice continues. Serial child killer and rapist Clifford Olson was granted an early parole hearing this summer. Can it get worse, Mr. Speaker? You would think not, but it does.

Recently Albertans were shocked. Larry Takahashi, according to the investigating officer, raped at least 100 Edmonton women. What did he get? Life in jail, a few lashes, the noose? No, he got day passes for heaven's sake.

Canadians are pleading for the justice minister to fix the Criminal Code. Canadians are begging the solicitor general to overhaul the parole board. For God's sake, do something.

Guadeloupe

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval West, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are witnessing today what appears to be an unprecedented conspiracy against our cousin and friend, France.

We have just learned that recently, without its own government knowing it, a foreign separatist movement had one of its experts attend a meeting of the Guadelupian movement, an organization dedicated to withdrawing this West Indian island from French trusteeship.

This truly looks like interference in the domestic policy of one of Canada's friends. In light of the seriousness of this situation, we demand a clear and unequivocal answer to the following question: Did the Quebec separatist movement delegate hand his hosts a note saying that Quebec will be with Guadeloupe on the road it chooses to take, yes or no?

Infrastructure

[Michelle Dockrill, NDP, Bras D'Or, NS]

Mr. Speaker, last month $7.2 million in infrastructure projects were announced for Cape Breton county, creating 214 short term jobs. Good news? Maybe not. When my constituents tried to find out about those jobs no answers were forthcoming.

Even more interesting, there are four byelections going on in Nova Scotia as our seatless premier tries to win a place in the legislature.

Recently when I crossed the border into the premier's sought after riding, I was shocked by the beehive of infrastructure activity.

Why are the only jobs created in Cape Breton always designed to help Liberals win elections? Why do those jobs always disappear when the polls close?

Nova Scotians are fed up with being exploited, fed up with only getting the roads fixed at election time.

Cape Bretoners deserve to know how and when they can get information about these projects regardless of their political affiliation.

As for the byelections, Nova Scotians will not be hoodwinked again. I look forward to congratulating four new NDP MLAs on November 5.

Official Opposition

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, an effective official opposition is the conscience of Parliament. An effective official opposition poses well thought out and researched questions during question period.

The member for Edmonton North is quoted in the Ottawa Sun as having goofed not once but twice in the last three weeks in her campaign to dig up dirt.

Reform has promised to hold bingo fund-raisers at Stornoway to pay down the national debt.

One of the best examples of an oxymoron and government waste in this House is Reform research.

Breast Cancer

[Diane St-Jacques, Progressive Conservative, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with breast cancer awareness month drawing to a close and our attention turning to other causes, it is essential that we not give up the fight.

This illness is devastating for victims, their families and their friends. I myself lost my mother to breast cancer five years ago.

It is estimated that, every 30 minutes, someone is diagnosed with breast cancer, that one million Canadian women are afflicted and that over 5,000 of them die from this illness annually. These statistics are a reminder to us of the importance of prevention.

We must continue to support agencies providing assistance to those with breast cancer, and also to make women aware of the importance of these preventive examinations.

Small Business

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, across Canada small and medium size businesses are helping to power Canada's economic renewal. Their ability to innovate and to respond quickly to changing markets is enabling smaller businesses to create jobs for Canadians in increasing numbers.

It is small business week and I would ask the House to join with me in paying tribute to the achievements of this vital sector of our economy.

I also take this opportunity to salute a company in my riding which exemplifies a very successful small business. Alumicor Limited, located in Rexdale, is a company that manufactures, among other things, architectural aluminium storefronts. Founded in 1959, Alumicor Limited is a great Canadian success story. Currently the company has grown to employ 200 people. It has four offices across the country and generates sales in the $20 million range.

During this small business week Canadian entrepreneurs can celebrate the contribution they make to the Canadian economy and to all Canadians.

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, I would like to give you a few pieces of information. The first is that when you stand to make your statement, many times there is talking going on, but these microphones are very sensitive and you need not raise your voices too loud to have all of us hear you. It will come through. It will be all right.

The second thing has to do with microphones. I would tell all of the front bench on the government side, your lights will not come on. We have a small technical problem.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

We will now go to oral questions.

The Environment

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, we too have noticed that the lights are out. We have asked the environment minister nine times this week to explain the Liberal position on CO2 emissions that she will take to the Kyoto summit and still no answer.

Considering the fact that she has agreed to sign this agreement, we want to know how much her promises are going to cost Canadian taxpayers. The conference board states that it is going to cost thousands of dollars per family.

Does the minister believe that a cost of thousands of dollars per family is an acceptable cost for the Kyoto deal?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, climate change is, no doubt, a very serious issue. The international community agrees with the science on this issue. The cost for Canada will be enormous if we do nothing and that includes the cost in western Canada.

The government is committed to signing on to a legally binding target in Kyoto. The economic fear-mongering on the other side of the House is totally unrealistic. There is much opportunity on this issue, including investments in technology which will help us to meet—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the minister could allay the fears by frankly expressing and telling the House the cost. That is all we are asking. That is the 10th non-answer in a row.

Let us see if the Minister of Natural Resources can help the environment minister out of her dilemma.

Yesterday, outside the House, this minister said that the government was considering new taxes to pay for this emissions treaty. He mused about energy taxes. He mused about fuel taxes. It is a Liberal instinct: if in doubt, tax.

What kind of taxes are the Liberals cooking up now? Is it taxes on the industry? Is it taxes at the pump? Is it taxes on fuel bills in the home?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, there are a variety of ways by which countries around the world can come to grips with climate change. There are self-initiated efforts by the private sector. There are measures to support energy efficiency. There are incentives for science and and technology, technology commercialization and transfer. There are renewable sources of energy. There are joint implementation plans. There are emission credits and trading.

Only the Reform Party is fixated on taxation.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Talk about gaseous emissions, Mr. Speaker.

Since the government is considering new taxes to pay for the Kyoto treaty, surely it is time to hear from the finance department on this subject. Perhaps the finance minister will be the author of the new national energy program.

Is the finance minister prepared to let the government sign a treaty without knowing what it costs? Is he in favour of an energy tax or does he have to wait for his boss to come back from Europe to sort this mess out?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, on this issue of taxation, let me quote the Calgary Sun of October 15, 1994 where this quote appears in relation to certain forms of taxation, not a carbon tax but other forms of taxation related to the environment. It reads: “It is worth consideration. If it is truly an environmental tax then I do not have a serious problem. I think the public is, by and large, willing to pay a reasonable amount to address an environmental problem. I guess our greatest fear was a carbon tax imposed on the wellhead”. That quote is attributed to Premier Ralph Klein.

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the environment minister talks about the inevitable cost of complying with the Kyoto summit and the resource minister says that the Reform Party is only fixated on taxation. A recently produced study by the Canadian Petroleum Producers Association says that those costs could be $180 billion to the Canadian economy and $1 per litre of gasoline.

Is this the minister's idea of reasonable costs?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, our nation together will be looking at how we can address this important issue. In the challenge there are many economic opportunities. I would like to know what Reform is proposing. Is it proposing that we hide our heads in the sand and not go to Kyoto? What is its resolution of this?

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are not talking about arbitrary figures on a piece of paper that mean nothing. We are talking about peoples' lives, thousands of jobs, the ability of people to support their families.

Does the minister really think that $1 a litre gasoline and doubling home heating fuel costs is a reasonable cost today?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the Insurance Bureau of Canada tells us that the cost of losses due to disasters between 1992 and 1996 rose 65% from the previous five-year period as a result of greenhouse gas emissions.

The year 1996 proved to be the industry's worst year in Canada and with the floods in the west this year, I doubt that 1997 will be much better.

What does the Reform Party propose we do as a nation if it is not to work together to resolve and attack these problems?

Quebec-France Agreement On Child Support

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the saga concerning the agreement reached between Quebec and France continues because the federal government systematically refuses to approve this accord.

Will the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs confirm that Ottawa is rejecting the Quebec-France agreement because it includes the expression “contracting party” to designate Quebec, and because it refers to the use of diplomatic channels as a means to solve any dispute?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, there are several problems with the draft agreement, including the suggestion that Quebec is a contracting party to international conventions signed between existing or future states. But this is just one problem.

Another problem is that the draft agreement includes areas not covered by the Canada-France treaty, thus technically preventing it from becoming a formal agreement, both in France and in Canada.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as regards the expression “contracting party”, I remind the minister that it was included in the 1987 agreement signed by Robert Bourassa and Jacques Chirac, yet the federal government did not take exception to it and approved the agreement.

I ask the minister, who is constantly taking cover behind the framework agreement, whether he recognizes that the 1987 agreement signed by Robert Bourassa and Jacques Chirac, that is between Quebec and France, made no reference to the framework agreement of the time but was nevertheless approved by the federal government.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the agreement was approved because it did not contradict in any way the Canada-France treaty at the time.