Debates of Nov. 28th, 1997

Gun Control

[Philip Mayfield, Reform, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, two things happened this week to indicate that the wheels are falling off the Liberals' gun control scheme.

In a brief presented to the justice committee, the Canadian Police Association said the Liberal government misled them into believing that police could get into the firearms computer system when making emergency calls. After hearing this criticism the Liberals now say that the police on call will have computer access to the system.

We also learned this week that the justice department's mail-in registration system will be so unreliable and unsafe that it will actually endanger policemen into providing inaccurate information. For example, justice officials claim that any firearms serial number incorrectly recorded on a mail-in application and then put on a registration certificate will still make the certificate valid. This is ridiculous. This means police will be unable to count on the accuracy of vital information entered into the system.

Why do the Liberals not face it? Their gun registration system is falling apart and must be scrapped immediately. It is becoming obvious that this sloppy gun registration system gives police no security but instead greater risk.

Bloc Quebecois

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary wing of the Bloc Quebecois recently published a booklet entitled “Quebec—on the road to nationhood”.

This booklet is designed to be a credible and intelligent response to the world-wide disinformation campaign led by the federal government and its henchmen around the world.

It sets out in factual, non partisan terms the real political situation of Quebec and Canada, thereby giving its full meaning to the unaltered commitment of many Quebeckers to taking their destiny into their own hands.

On behalf of Quebec's sovereignists, I wish to congratulate my colleagues from the Bloc Quebecois who sit on the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade on a job well done. They have advanced Quebec's project to build a country of its own by the year 2000.

Apec

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister for International Trade and the Secretary of State for the Asia Pacific on their important work during the APEC summit in Vancouver.

Their leadership has brought together the heads of state and senior officials of 18 countries to share their common concerns and their financial goals.

Some have accused the government of dismissing human rights issues. This is simply not true. Canada remains committed to human rights. This commitment was demonstrated in the government's support for the people's summit.

We make our voice heard through dialogue and co-operation, not through confrontation and accusation.

Joe Beelen

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Joe Beelen, a resident of my riding of Pierrefonds—Dollard returning from a voluntary assignment to Thailand for the Canadian Executive Service Organization, CESO.

The purpose of this assignment was to provide assistance to a pharmaceutical products laboratory. Joe Beelen used his skills and experience to develop an exhaustive index of all standing operating procedures as well as to provide technical information and assistance in preparing the products.

Later, he developed a personnel training program and designed a system for setting production standards to meet government requirements. This first class volunteer is one of the many Canadians who go on assignments outside the country for CESO.

We can be proud of the work accomplished by these volunteers who represent Canada so well abroad.

Thank you, Mr. Beelen, and congratulations on your involvement in this important project.

Justice

[Peter Goldring, Reform, Edmonton East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Edmonton was shocked this week by yet another failure of our justice system. A man with a long history of abuse, including a recent arrest for assault with a weapon and death threats against his wife, was jailed and then released on bail. He then proceeded to do exactly what he was arrested for threatening to do. He killed his wife.

A victim of abuse in life, a victim of justice failure in death, Jennifer's calls for help went unanswered. Two tragic deaths and one orphaned child is the legacy of the failure of our justice system. The law must ensure jail until trial for such obvious threats to society.

A two year old girl now cries out alone.

Taxation

[Susan Whelan, Liberal, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, during our November constituency week I held a very successful pre-budget consultation meeting in my riding of Essex. Interestingly my constituents did not find that a tax cut was desired or needed.

I say “interestingly” because it was reported in today's Globe and Mail that a C. D. Howe Institute report, authored by economist William Robson of the institute and William Searth of McMaster University, recommends that the government hold off on any tax cuts in favour of using budgetary surpluses to aggressively pay down the national debt.

Although my constituents acknowledged our national debt as a problem, and some felt it was a priority, they also have basic concerns for our social programs, pension plans, health care and education. Our 50:50 election promise is what they want.

I urge the finance minister to make careful consideration of the advice being offered through the pre-budget consultation process. I congratulate those Canadians who took the time and effort to participate in the process.

Canadian Federalism

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are supposedly living in an brand new Canada that bears no relation with the centralizing and domineering Canada of old. As evidence of that, we are often told that the issues relating to forestry, tourism, mining and social housing have been settled.

However, in the last 60 days, the Liberal government announced that it will develop a plan to ensure Canadians get appropriate education. It also announced programs that will deal with young people, health, rural communities, school adjustment, not to mention the social union, and centralizing bills such as the legislation on drinking water.

In spite of the rhetoric, the Liberal government's attitude remains the same. It is more centralizing and domineering than ever. When the federal government takes a step forward, provincial governments take a step backward. The only way for Quebeckers to move forward is to achieve sovereignty and they will do so.

Child & Youth Friendly Ottawa

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Child & Youth Friendly Ottawa is an organization dedicated to promoting children and youth issues. By developing partnerships among young people, business groups and political leaders, local youth are able to experience a sense of citizenship and responsibility.

Founded by an outstanding community leader, Max Keeping, Child & Youth Friendly Ottawa is run in partnership with young people. Its successful work includes inspecting and assisting local businesses in the area to become child and youth friendly. It also promotes student arts, advises regional government on civic issues affecting youth, and has established a youth volunteer corps.

Children in every part of our country are Canada's promise for the future. With the millennium just around the corner, Child & Youth Friendly Ottawa is calling on all members of Parliament to help organize their constituencies so that Canada will become the first child and youth friendly country in the world.

I support its call and congratulate Max Keeping and everyone at Child & Youth Friendly Ottawa on a job well done. Keep up the excellent work.

Correctional Service Canada

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let me read a little shopping list: over 6,000 bags of Humpty Dumpty cheese popcorn, 12,600 bags of Hostess Cheezies, and 57,540 bags of potato chips.

Some would think this is for the Reform snack pack caucus meeting but it is not. Correctional Service Canada has ordered 89,493 bags of snacks for Canadian criminals from coast to coast to coast. That is a convict snack bill of $45,000 that we are sending to the Canadian taxpayers. Never mind stopping patronage pork; we have to stop prison pork rinds.

It is time for the government to get the message. Prisons are not convenience stores and taxpayers do not want to pick up the tab for convicts' snacks. No more chips at the convict snack shack while taxpayers take the dip.

Institut De Pharmacologie

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to mention another initiative of our government that will promote the economic development of a strategic sector of the Canadian economy.

On November 25, the Secretary of State responsible for the federal office of regional development in Quebec inaugurated the new offices of the Institut de pharmacologie, in Sherbrooke. This high-tech centre, which specializes in medical chemistry and pharmacology, is the only one of its kind in Canada.

Through its contribution of close to $4 million, the federal government has recognized the expertise of the Eastern Townships in the area of medical research. It has also shown the confidence it has in partnerships with the private sector and with educational institutions to develop a promising sector for Canada.

Seal Hunt

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks my riding and others across Canada have been contacted by very concerned Canadians about the seal hunt. There are a couple of comments I would like to put on record because I know there has been a lot of misinformation about the seal hunt.

There has been a televised advertising campaign put on by Canadians Against the Commercial Seal Hunt. It has launched an advertising campaign against Canadian sealers loaded with inaccurate and misleading allegations.

CATCSH alleges that Canadians are subsidizing an industry that kills baby seals. That is absolutely false.

CATCSH alleges that the seal harvest provides few economic benefits. That is also false.

CATCSH alleges that Canadians paid $3.4 million in subsidies and administrative costs in 1996 for a seal harvest that is uneconomic. That is absolutely false.

Contrary to the impression conveyed by this organization and other anti-sealing zealots, the commercial harvesting of seals in Canada is more tightly regulated now than at any other time in our history.

Reform Party Of Canada

[Bev Desjarlais, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it has been quite a week in parliament. Reform members supported record bank profits made from the service charges paid by Canadians.

Reform told Canadians that despite mounting evidence Canada need not join the rest of the world to fight global warming.

Reform showed no respect for working men and women or for the collective bargaining process.

Perhaps most disappointing, Reform spoiled its motion on the future of Canada and the process of reaching a national consensus through the Calgary declaration, a process we in the New Democratic Party support, especially the idea of Canadians finding common ground on unity, by moving an amendment that could be interpreted to stand in the way of aboriginal treaty rights and self-government.

The New Democratic Party supports the process which began in Calgary. Shame on the official opposition.

The Late John Sopinka

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to pay tribute to one of Canada's greatest legal minds, the late Supreme Court Justice John Sopinka.

Much has been said this week to describe the life and accomplishments of Justice Sopinka. From modest beginnings he attained stature as a professional football player, respected criminal litigator and a member of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Whether catching a football or writing a thoughtful dissenting judgment, he did so with a class and unique style all his own. In his 64 years John Sopinka demonstrated numerous personal qualities that one could not help but admire and wish to emulate.

He was passionate about his vision for the law, often able to forge consensus over difficult issues at the Supreme Court of Canada level. Justice Sopinka had the ability to build coalition without watering down principles. He was unafraid to stand up to the changing winds of public opinion in making a decision if he felt that it was consistent with legal and social principles.

As an athlete, attorney, judge and family man, Justice Sopinka set new standards for greatness. If the magnitude of one's loss is the measure of life's gifts, this loss seems immeasurable.

His family and Canada mourn his departure for a higher court. Our sincere condolences to Mrs. Sopinka and the Sopinka family.

Christmas Basket Campaign

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval West, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as in previous years, the Laval Volunteer Centre is organizing again this year the 13th edition of its Christmas Basket Campaign, and has set as its goal to collect 500 tonnes of food.

The purpose of this operation is to provide assistance to families who are going through serious economic difficulties because, of illness, bankruptcy or job loss, for example.

By enlisting the co-operation of 600 businesses and with the commitment of 1,400 volunteers and the contributions of the population of Laval, the centre expects to distribute 1,300 food baskets to about 4,000 persons on Sunday, December 21.

There are also in these families children and young people who, unfortunately, cannot enjoy some of the simple pleasures they so justly deserve.

Therefore, the Laval Volunteer Centre also organizes a large campaign to collect new toys so that these children too can enjoy Christmas.

In conclusion, I congratulate the organizers of this important charitable event and I encourage Canadians everywhere in Canada to also become involved in their own community.

Tfo Television Network

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to be negative, but I would like to point out that there seems to be a contradiction between what our Bloc colleagues are preaching and what their PQ counterparts in Quebec are doing.

Presently, TVO, the English language educational television network in Ontario, is broadcast to certain regions in Quebec based on a monthly wholesale pass-through rate. But in the case of TFO, the French channel of that network, Télé Québec and the Government of Quebec refuse to allow its broadcasting based on such a rate.

Instead of feeling sorry for French Canadians and throwing up their hands in despair, as they unfortunately have a tendency to do sometimes, my colleagues in the Bloc should pick up the phone, describe to their PQ counterparts how great TFO is, and remind them of their own policy on French Canadians outside Quebec.

The Environment

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this government has had months to prepare for the Kyoto conference. The environment minister has over 4,000 bureaucrats at her disposal and a budget of $.5 billion. The conference starts on Monday and she still does not even know what position she will be arguing for or against.

For months this minister has said that she is taking the matter very seriously. Canadians do not believe her any more. If she really did take this seriously she would have released Canada's position long ago.

What possible excuse does this minister have for not having a position ready to take to Kyoto?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member said, Canada's position will be stated publicly on Monday, but this will still be timely in terms of discussions at the official level and it will be very timely in terms of when the decisions are made by ministers. This will be at the end of the conference and the ministerial portion does not even begin until December 8.

Canada's position will be known well before that time. It will be a clear position. It will be a good position, unlike the Reform which has stated they do not know what they are talking about at all on this subject.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this gets more and more curious.

When the Liberal government cancelled its announcement planned for today it needed a pretty big excuse. It had already used up all the little excuses along the way. What excuse did it tell us all?

It said that a small detail had to be ironed out, an extremely minor point. What could that detail be? Could it be perhaps how much would this Kyoto deal cost Canadians or was it how much would it cost and who would pay or perhaps how would this deal be forced down the provinces' throats?

Just which minor point was it that caused such a cabinet split and cancelled the announcement for today? What went wrong on the way to Kyoto?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, what has gone wrong with the Reform Party? When they were asked their position they said our position does not count. So what details are holding up the Reform Party in stating their position?

They are the Official Opposition. They are there, they claim, to be some day, and it will never happen, an alternative government. They have just proven why they will never be a government and they will not even be a party after the next election.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, obviously there is a hot air problem within cabinet at least.

We have asked this government nearly 100 times to detail its position for Canadians. I think that is reasonable. One hundred times it has said that Canadians are going to have to wait just a little longer. We are sick of waiting.

The government promised again to release its position. Again, today it failed to do so but it has not cancelled its trip to Kyoto. Of course not, the government is going to go. It does not have a position. Nobody knows what it is going to cost, but it is going to go off and sign a deal, whatever the deal might be.

My question is for the Minister of the Environment, if she would care to answer this. How can she leave for Kyoto this weekend when the government still does not have a made in Canada position? Will the Minister of the Environment—

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The hon. Deputy Prime Minister.

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

My friend is totally wrong. The minister is leaving at the end of next week as scheduled because the ministerial portion of the meeting does not begin until December 8. Our position will be known publicly well before that time and yet there will still be no Reform position. They do not count. They do not care. Why do they not take responsibility to come to the table with a consensus to help Canada have a good deal? Where is the Reform Party? Absolutely nowhere.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we just have to keep going. This Liberal saga on Kyoto just continues. The Liberals have painted themselves into a corner. For months they have been saying they would sign a deal in Kyoto, before they had decided what Canada's position would be.

They agreed to a deal before they had seen it and worse still, before they had even come up with their own policy. Now they have fallen victim to those rash promises. They are boarding planes and they are still writing their position.

How can this minister board the plane for Kyoto? How can she sign a deal when she does not even know what the national position is?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, guess what, this government does have a position. We have been articulating it for months. The Reform Party refuses to listen that this is a real and serious issue, that this government is committed to legally binding targets in Kyoto that are realistic, achievable, that will be applied equitably in this country.

On Monday we will let Canadians know what the targets and time lines are in order to go to Kyoto.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, delay after delay.

My question now is on behalf of the people that have been shut out of this insane process. Two weeks ago the provinces agreed in principle to emission deadlines by the year 2010, but last week the federal government said it had unilaterally changed that to 2007.

Why has the government reneged on this deal with the provinces? How can it possibly come up with a nationally agreed to plan in the next 48 hours? This is too incredible.

Will the Minister of the Environment really get on that plane without getting provincial agreement first?