Debates of March 25th, 1998

The Atlantic Groundfish Strategy

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, TAGS will continue until the end of August 1998. As for the other recommendations of the report, my officials are looking into them right now and are taking them into consideration.

We will be addressing the post-TAGS environment in eastern Canada in a responsible way.

Youth Employment

[Jean Dubé, Progressive Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, a study done by the CIBC bank states that more than 200,000 youth out of school have dropped out of the labour market. When combined with those who are registered, the figure jumps to 450,000 unemployed youth in this country.

What is the Minister of Human Resources Development prepared to do to prevent our youth from being caught in the cycle of no experience, no job?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, we are very preoccupied by the situation of the young unemployed in Canada. Even though the situation has improved substantially in the last few months, it is still much too high at over 15%.

This is why we have brought forward our youth employment strategy which has the precise aim of eliminating the conundrum of no experience, no job, no job, no experience. It will provide thousands of young Canadians through Youth Service Canada and Youth Internship Canada with summer jobs and good advice in order for them to have something on their CVs to break the conundrum.

Calgary Declaration

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Calgary declaration was adopted on September 14, 1997 by the premiers and leaders of nine provinces and the territories. Since then a copy of the declaration has been provided to every single Manitoba home and an extensive consultation has been undertaken.

I wonder if the Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs could tell us the results of that consultation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the premier and Manitoba's legislature for their contribution to the Calgary process.

On Thursday, March 20 the Manitoba legislature unanimously adopted a resolution which reflected a wide consensus among Manitobans with regard to the Calgary declaration.

The Calgary declaration reflects the support of Canadians for a federation that always seeks to ensure greater fairness and equality, as well as respect for our country's diversity, which includes the unique character of Quebec society.

Fisheries

[Gurmant Grewal, Reform, Surrey Central, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am from B.C. Let us look at how the fisheries minister handled the problem of fish in B.C. creeks.

There was a conservation initiative called the habitat mapping and inventory program. The government spent $115,000 on the program. It was ready to go but last month some members of the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union criticized the minister. To punish them he cancelled the program, throwing 45 workers out of work and endangering the fish habitat.

Why does the minister always put politics ahead of what is best for the fishery?

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

Mr. Speaker, I take a certain satisfaction in having Reform members in British Columbia, goaded of course by earlier questions, demonstrate why we do not need another Reform member from British Columbia.

With respect to the project in question, we have funded 48 projects of that organization, totalling $14.7 million. On this particular one, yes $115,000 came from my department but after consultation with my department and human resources, we did not think it was one of the very top ones we should fund at this time. The reason is that we have four times as many projects come to us as we are able to finance.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

I wish to draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of a number of distinguished visitors.

I present His Excellency Eduardo Ferrero Costa, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Peru.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[The Speaker]

Mr. Zlatko Dominikovic, Minister of Agriculture and Forestry of the Republic of Croatia.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[The Speaker]

Parliamentarians from the United Kingdom branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association led by Mr. Andrew Macinlay, MP.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Points Of Order

[The Speaker]

I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on Tuesday, March 24, 1998 by the House leader of the official opposition. I would like to thank the opposition House leader and the member for Windsor—St. Clair, who chairs the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, for their contributions on this matter.

The House leader of the official opposition argued that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights was not complying with the terms of an order of reference of the House contained in two motions adopted on October 30, 1997.

The first motion was presented as part of the business of supply. He called on the government to present a motion under Standing Order 68(4), instructing the committee to prepare and bring in a bill concerning penalties for impaired driving. The motion further stipulated that once the committee was so instructed, it should report by May 15, 1998. That motion was adopted by the House.

Following the adoption of that motion, a second motion, introduced by the Minister of Human Resources Development pursuant to Standing Order 68(4), instructed the committee to prepare and bring in such a bill.

The hon. member for Windsor—St. Clair, as chair of the justice committee, argued that there was no deadline contained in the motion supplied to the committee as its order of reference by Journals branch. She further maintained that while the committee had every intention of complying with the order of reference, pressure of other business referred to the committee by this House would prevent it's dealing with it immediately.

Having looked into the matter, it appears that the basic confusion arises from an original misunderstanding about the order of reference given to the committee. I understand that the text of orders of reference to committees are duly noted within the Committees and Legislative Services Directorate and that each committee is advised accordingly of any new order of reference it receives.

Reference is simply an extract from the actual Journals published by the House which are the official minutes of our proceedings and the record of our decisions. Ordinarily an order of reference is contained within a single motion, and this may be where the confusion has arisen. I understand that only the minister's motion was originally communicated to the committee through the usual channels within the directorate.

I have reviewed the two motions carefully. It is clear to me that these motions must be read in conjunction one with the other. The first motion presented as part of the business of supply contains two parts. The first part calls on the government to move a motion of instruction to the committee pursuant to Standing Order 68(4). The second part sets out a deadline to apply once such a motion of instruction has been adopted by the House. The second of the two motions is of course the motion of instruction itself presented by the minister and unanimously adopted by the House.

Once the motion of instruction presented by the minister was adopted, the deadline contained in the earlier motion adopted by the House became applicable, as this had already been agreed to by the House in adopting the supply motion as amended.

It is therefore my decision that the instructions to the justice committee adopted by the House October 30, 1997 do include a reporting deadline of May 15, 1998.

That said, it appears that the committee has been operating in good faith on the understanding that its instructions did not contain a deadline for reporting back a draft bill on impaired driving.

I realize that in a matter as serious and complex as the preparation of legislation, the time which remains for the committee to carry out this work is short, particularly given its other responsibilities on other fronts.

If the committee deems that more time is necessary to deal with this matter, then it may by way of report request the House to grant an extension to the original time frame.

Main Estimates, Part Iii

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues, I table part III of the main estimates consisting of 80 departmental reports on plans and priorities.

These documents will be distributed to the members of the standing committees to facilitate their consideration of the spending authority requested in part II of the main estimates.

Report On Plans And Priorities, 1998-1999

[The Speaker]

I have the honour to lay upon the table the report on plans and priorities in relation to the main estimates for the House of Commons.

Order In Council Appointments

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table, in both official languages, a number of order in council appointments which were made by the government. Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 110(1), these are deemed referred to the appropriate standing committees, a list of which is attached.

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary 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 18 petitions.

Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-385, an act to amend the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act (marriage between persons of the same sex).

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this enactment is to confirm that a marriage is not invalid by reason solely of the fact that the parties are of the same gender. While federal statute law is silent on the capacity of gay and lesbian people to enter into marriage with their partners, a Liberal MP has tabled a bill that would deny gay and lesbian couples who wish to marry the right to do so.

I believe our relationships should be celebrated and affirmed as just as loving, just as committed, just as strong as heterosexual relationships, and federal statutes should reflect that equality.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Income Tax Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-386, an act to amend the Income Tax Act and the Canada Pension Plan (definition of spouse).

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this enactment is to amend the definition of the term spouse in the Income Tax Act and the Canada pension plan to ensure that the same financial and fiscal benefits relating to pensions are available to both heterosexual and homosexual couples. The current law which is being challenged in the courts denies equality to gay and lesbian people. We pay income tax and make contributions to the Canada pension plan and our partners should be entitled to equal benefits and other equal responsibilities as heterosexual couples.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

National Agricultural Relief Coordination Act

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-387, an act to establish a national committee to develop policies and procedures to ensure co-ordination in the delivery of programs by governments in the case of agricultural losses or disasters created by weather or pests, the co-ordination of the delivery of information, assistance, relief and compensation and study the compliance of such programs with World Trade Organization requirements.

Mr. Speaker, as indicated in the preamble, this particular piece of legislation is to deal with the consistency of programs that are available to agriculturists throughout Canada, particularly the inconsistency with respect to programs that deal with disasters, not unlike what happened with the ice storm of 1998 and the floods of 1997.

It suggests that a national committee be struck made up of 21 members and that it look at these national programs to deal with consistency as well as to deal with the requirements of the World Trade Organization.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Depository Bills And Notes Act

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, for the Minister of Finance]

moved that Bill S-9, an act respecting depository bills and depository notes and to amend the Financial Administration Act, be read the first time.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

Petitions

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 36 I wish to present a petition signed by several Albertans.

They say that they want to draw the attention of the House to the following:

That as deeply concerned citizens they believe that the provocation defence, as it is currently used in femicide and wife slaughter cases, inappropriately and unjustly changes the focus of the criminal trial from the behaviour of the accused and his intention to murder to the behaviour of the victim who from then on is identified as the one responsible for the accused violence.

Therefore the undersigned request that Parliament review and change relevant provisions of the Criminal Code to ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present a petition containing hundreds of names of Canadians from all across Canada who are concerned about the multilateral agreement on investment.

They see it as the latest in a series of regional and global agreements which, in the name of liberalizing trade and investment, expand the powers of multinational corporations at the expense of the power of governments to intervene in the marketplace on behalf or our social, cultural, environmental and health care goals.

They see this agreement as being flawed in so far as it seeks to protect the rights of investors without seeking similar protection for workers through binding core labour standards. They see it as being anti-democratic.

They therefore call upon Parliament to reject the current framework of MAI negotiations and instruct the government to seek an entirely different agreement by which the world might achieve a rules based global trading regime that protects workers, the environment and the ability of governments to act in the public interest.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present to this House a petition on national unity.

Petitioners in my riding are saying that they want a Canada with Quebec. The Quebec issue is causing political and economic instability in Quebec and throughout Canada. Therefore they encourage our government to strenuously continue its efforts at national reconciliation.