Debates of Nov. 22nd, 1999

Aboriginal Affairs

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member refers to the referendum on Charlottetown. That referendum under the Referendum Act was basically a consultation. If there were a similar referendum held on the Nisga'a matter, it would also be simply a consultation with the responsibility on the government with parliament to take ultimate decisions.

If my hon. friend is really asking for something that is not going to bring about the results he wants. His colleague already said that there are a lot of informal referenda. Why does he want to have the expense of another one?

[Derrek Konrad, Reform, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, a consultation? Would that not be a change for this government, particularly if it involved an x on a ballot?

When political elites like these dreamed up aboriginal self-government in the Charlottetown accord, it was defeated by a majority of Canadians, including a majority of grassroots aboriginals.

The government of the day received a clear message from Canadians. What has changed since then? Why will the government not conduct a referendum on the Nisga'a treaty in B.C.?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to find out something from the Reform Party members. When they held their townhall meetings, did they ask the people if they understood that the charter applies to the Nisga'a people? I understand they did not. They have been telling the people that it does not.

Did they tell them that the rights of Nisga'a women are unprotected? I understand that is what they have been telling them.

Did they tell them that the treaty provides for taxation without representation? I understand they have been when in fact that is not the case.

They keep telling people in British Columbia that the Nisga'a treaty is part of the Indian Act. In fact, it is not. If they are not going to tell British Columbians what is really in the treaty, what is the point of having this debate?

Amateur Sport

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Valérie Hould-Marchand has just been cut from the national synchronized swim team for standing up for her rights.

Does the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport finally intend to call for an investigation into this, as I suggested in September, in order to finally get to the bottom of the problems raised by Synchro Canada and determine whether they are really so serious and insurmountable as to justify her exclusion from the next Olympics?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Secretary of State (Amateur Sport)]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the Government of Canada has shown its willingness to address this very serious matter right from the start. That is why I initiated a process of mediation right at the beginning, to be followed by arbitration.

I have spoken with Valérie myself, and she said she did not want imposed arbitration. I am in the process of thinking over the possibility of an investigation, but the decision has not been made, and will not be made until such time as I have spoken to both parties.

Millennium Scholarships

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the students of Quebec are still waiting to find out whether they will be able to take advantage of the millennium scholarships in the new year.

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. Can she explain her position in this matter to us, and tell us whether the students of Quebec will finally be able to take advantage of the millennium scholarships in January 2000?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, our position has not changed: students need to be in a better financial position. And even the students agree.

To quote the President of the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec, “Mr. Legault's responsibility is to help the students who are struggling with heavy debt loads, not to promote failure by hiding behind theoretical debates”.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Val Meredith, Reform, South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last week, in rejecting a call for a province-wide referendum on the Nisga'a agreement, the minister of Indian affairs said that British Columbians have a vote in the House.

Does that mean that if the majority of members of parliament from B.C. vote against Bill C-9, the minister will take those results as an indication of lack of support for the agreement and withdraw the bill?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, it would be very helpful if the member was not so silly.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, I ask you to please not use inflammatory terms.

[Val Meredith, Reform, South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad it is very clear to the people of British Columbia what the Minister of aboriginal affairs thinks of them.

We also have the Deputy Prime Minister in the House today saying that a vote in the House would be given to the representatives of the people of British Columbia.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister respect those votes from the representatives of the people of British Columbia in indicating to the government that maybe they should withdraw this bill and try again?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I said that the votes would be by the representatives of the people in British Columbia and all of Canada. Why does the hon. member want division in the country, a division between people of European origin and people of first nations origin, between the people of British Columbia and people in other parts of the country?

Hon. members of the Reform Party should be ashamed of themselves for using the House of Commons to sow division rather than unity. Let us work together for unity for a change.

Health

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister has had ample time to review the Klein proposal which is clearly incompatible with the intent of the Canada Health Act. In fact, it appears that the health minister was given a heads up almost four weeks ago by the Alberta government.

The minister also knows, because he has said so himself, that the best way to ward off the threat of private for profit health care is to ensure that we have the highest quality public health care system. There is clearly a need for that kind of decisive action and urgent attention.

My question again for the minister is what will he do to ward off the destructive Alberta initiative and when will he do it?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member shares my conviction that Canadians support, want and are best served by a system of public health care in this country.

As I said last week, it is the conviction of this government and this minister that we should have a strong public health care system which will guide us in reviewing the Alberta proposal.

Let me also say that this is not to suggest that the status quo is acceptable because it is not. We all know that there are problems in the health care system that have to be resolved. We will examine the proposal against the principles of the public system.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister pretend to be the defender of medicare when it is his government that is the architect of its destruction? This is the government that drastically cut transfer payments. This is the government that signed a deal with the Alberta government in 1996 to open up the doors for private health care delivery.

If the minister is really serious, he would act today by terminating that arrangement with Alberta. He would promise, with the help of his colleague the Minister of Finance, to increase transfer payments. He would take tough decisive action today. Will he do that, yes or no?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, just a few months ago in this very House we tabled a budget which increased the transfers to the provinces over the coming five years. It is the single largest investment the government has ever made, signalling the priority that we put on health and health care. In the case of Alberta, that will mean very significant sums this year and for the next four years. We also said on that occasion that as our balance sheet improves, we will do more and we intend to.

Funding is part of it, but also making sure that we have quality care and access to quality care is the priority.

Pesticides

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's pesticides act is essentially 30 years old.

During committee the multi-stakeholder group advising the minister indicated that draft legislation has been essentially ready for three years. In fact, the executive director of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Dr. Franklin stated “A new bill has been drafted. I believe the bill has been ready since 1997. The minister is actively considering the appropriate time for tabling of the amendments”.

My question is quite simple. Are we going to update a 30 year act today, tomorrow or ever?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, there may have been draft legislation five years ago, but the advisory committee that is made up of environmentalists, people from the industry and consumers was only created by this minister last year.

I asked that advisory committee to look at proposed legislation to make sure that we got it right. We have to respect environmental concerns. We have to keep in mind the point of view of farmers who are competing with Americans who may have access to materials which they do not. We have to keep mind the point of view of the industry that is manufacturing products to bring to the market. All of these—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Fundy—Royal.

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, last year the environment commissioner indicated that Canada and the Slovak Republic are the only two industrialized countries that do not measure domestic pesticide consumption. In fact, in Canada there is no requirement to produce documentation to describe the potential hazards of pesticides to the environment or human health.

Once the minister determines the appropriate time for tabling legislation, if he ever does, will this new legislation require workplace documentation under the workers safety program, WHMIS, as health, labour and environmental groups are advocating?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the member can be assured that after we have concluded our discussions with all the people involved, including environmentalists and others, we will table legislation that will have as its first purpose to protect public health and to balance the interests that are involved.

Francophone Communities

[Réginald Bélair, Liberal, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Western Economic Diversification and for the Francophonie.

Quite recently, Senator Jean-Maurice Simard tabled a report on the development of francophone communities as a basic responsibility of the Government of Canada. In economic matters, Mr. Simard cites the department of the secretary of state as a model of exemplary leadership. Could he explain how he achieved such results?

[Ronald J. Duhamel, Liberal, Secretary of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Francophonie)]

Mr. Speaker, the formula is brilliant in its simplicity.

First, we met with community representatives and got dialogue started. Second, we jointly identified their economic development needs and, third, we gave them the tools, mechanisms and programs that would enable them to take control of their future. It is as simple as that.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure for the last year and a half to travel the country, visit many reserves, see third world conditions of squalor, and to help people with their difficulties. During that time I got to know a great number of aboriginal people.

Those same people from British Columbia are calling me today and asking why they cannot as aboriginals in British Columbia have a say on the Nisga'a agreement. I do not know what to tell them. Maybe the minister could help me. Should it be (a) Liberals are dictators and do not believe in referendums, (b) that they are just ordinary natives and they do not count, or (c) both of the above?