House of Commons Hansard #117 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was wheat.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, it is assuming that the minister would defend this lack of due diligence on the part of the government in this matter. The other problem is the growing appearance of Canada as a hypocrite when it comes to the whole question.
Foreign AffairsOral Question Period
The Speaker
I encourage the hon. member not to use that word.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that we have this group called the Candu owners groups which is now doing in India, Pakistan and other countries what the government self-righteously claims it is no longer doing.
When will the government recall this Candu owners group that is aiding and abetting the nuclear arms race and not just recall our ambassadors? When will we get these people out of these nuclear arms programs in those countries?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the premise of the hon. member's question is totally wrong. Canada is not aiding and abetting in any way the military use of atomic power.
After the Chernobyl disaster it was agreed that it would be wise, in the interest of safety of the civilian populations in the countries involved, to make available non-proprietary publicly known information with respect to nuclear safety to help ensure that the reactors originally supplied for peaceful purposes would be safe. The lessons from the Chernobyl situation would be applied in these circumstances.
We are not supporting military uses or expansion of nuclear power in these countries or—
David Price Progressive Conservative Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, last week my party asked the government whether Canadian foreign policy was for sale.
According to media reports, Canadian nuclear technicians were still at work in India and Pakistan. This is clear proof that Canadian foreign policy is indeed up for sale.
When will these technicians be called back home to lessen the tensions?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as I have just said, we made the decision, after the Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine, to make available to countries such as India and Pakistan public information to help them maintain these reactors and other equipment in a safe manner.
The exchange of such information is in the best interests of the population of these countries, but we do not have any program of co-operation to assist in the expansion of use of these powers in any way—
Foreign AffairsOral Question Period
The Speaker
I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. Deputy Prime Minister. The hon. member for Compton—Stanstead.
David Price Progressive Conservative Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government deludes itself that Canada did not help India and Pakistan make nuclear bombs. The facts clearly indicate that Canadian technology did and continues to help make nuclear bombs for India, Pakistan and China.
Will the government continue to pretend that Canada played no part in last month's nuclear tests or will it haul our technicians out of that region immediately?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has made insinuations that are not supported by any facts so far available.
Canada has not played any role in assisting India and Pakistan in carrying out their recent nuclear tests. We have not had a program with respect to nuclear co-operation with India and Pakistan since 1976.
The only thing that has happened is that to help maintain the safety of the power reactors for peaceful purposes, we have made available publicly known non-proprietary information. It is to help ensure the maintenance from a safety point of view of the reactors we supplied. I do not know why the hon. member would want to oppose that and put at risk—
Philip Mayfield Reform Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Delgamuukw decision is wreaking economic havoc in Cariboo—Chilcotin. In Williams Lake an approved development is being shut down in mid-construction. In the Seton Valley provincially approved logging sites are being told to close. In Lillooet a veneer plant employing nearly 200 people is seriously threatened with closure. Ranchers are being told by aboriginal people that they do not own the lands they have deeds to.
What is the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development doing now to defuse this powder keg?
Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear that there is nothing being recommended by the opposition that will bring certainty to the issues in British Columbia. Rather, its suggestion that there is some unilateral legislation that will solve issues of aboriginal rights is preposterous. It is a recipe for confrontation which is not what we need in British Columbia.
Philip Mayfield Reform Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC
Mr. Speaker, the minister does not get it. The supreme court makes decisions in Ottawa but the effects are felt back home. Some First Nations have told ranchers that they no longer own their ranches and that they had better turn over the property without a fight. Investors are being told not to invest a nickel in British Columbia. The situation is getting tense.
My constituents demand a straight answer. What is she going to do to stop the uncertainty before B.C. faces the long summer of unrest?
Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary it is the opposition members that just do not get it. Perhaps they should read the supreme court decision which said that the solution to reconciling aboriginal rights in modern times is found at the negotiation table. What Reformers do is focus on fearmongering, on scaremongering, on looking for a scapegoat.
The answer is found at the table where all the parties, the First Nations, the province, the federal government, business and the people of British Columbia, support peaceful negotiated resolutions.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has just told two giant whoppers.
The first is that health was a shared jurisdiction. As far as I know, it has always come exclusively under provincial jurisdiction. The second is that the federal government never cut transfer payments. He has just said it increased them.
How does the Minister of Health expect to maintain any credibility with such nonsense, when transfer payments, which were $678 per person—
HealthOral Question Period
The Speaker
I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member. The Minister of Health has the floor.
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, first, the federal government is responsible for interpreting and strengthening the Canada Health Act. That is the first thing. We intend to honour federal jurisdiction and federal responsibility.
Second, the national forum on health, a body independent of the government, suggested the government increase transfers, and we did.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, this Minister of Health has no compassion.
Does he realize that the cuts the government imposes every year on Quebec in the area of health represent double the budget of all the CLSCs in Quebec combined?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the fact is we increased the transfers, but the Government of Quebec must face the consequences of its own health policies. It is the policies of the Bouchard government that have had this effect on Quebec hospitals.
Allan Rock Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
We did our part. We fulfilled our responsibilities, as always, with regard to transfers.
