Madam Speaker, I did not intend to speak to this group of amendments, but in response to the comments by my colleague from Jonquière, for whom I have a great deal of respect for his work in committee, I would like to point out that the pulp and paper statistics I quoted the other day for Quebec came from the report by the environment commissioner himself, which was tabled last week here in parliament.
These figures speak volumes. They show that in 1995, 1996, and 1997, if memory serves, there were deficient or problematical mills in 1995, 15 mills in 1996 and, I think, 27 in 1997. The figures may vary from year to year. Problematical mills for these three years add up to a total of 45. There was only one prosecution over those three years, according to the commissioner.
He also reported that Quebec had said that corrective action would be taken. In fact, this is a report to the federal government, stating something along the following “You sign agreements, make certain arrangements, but if the others who have signed these agreements—in this case, the province of Quebec—do not manage to get anything done under these agreements, what do you do?”
The commissioner pointed out that the federal government had not been able to produce the remedial reports it was supposed to in connection with the problems found in these plants. His report makes this very clear.
I am not the one saying this, the commissioner is in his official report. If the Government of Quebec does not agree with the commissioner, let it settle things with him.
The commissioner also indicated that the Government of Quebec was not the only one involved, as I also pointed out in my speech. In the case of the governments of Saskatchewan and Alberta, there had never been reports produced on the delegation of the Fisheries Act which, under section 36, as hon. members are aware, is administered by the Department of the Environment. There is a delegation of powers here as well, and the Alberta and Saskatchewan departments of the environment are not even required to table the reports to the federal government demanded by this section. The commissioner said that also.
This does not come from me. If the figures are incorrect, the governments of Quebec, Alberta or Saskatchewan just have to blame the environment commissioner.
Personally, I am willing to accept the figures and the statistics made public by the environment commissioner because he would not have made them public without making a thorough investigation. The figures are clear, and that is what is happening.
What I wanted to show is that many members of the Bloc Quebecois have been saying that everything is always wonderful in Quebec and that all the problems are at the federal level. I admit there are problems at the federal level. It is clear from our comments in the Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development that we are not trying to hide the problems that exist at the federal level. That is what the commissioner did, which is what I wanted to point out. But, at the same time, we cannot say everything is fine at the provincial level and everything is bad at the federal level. We always hear the same tune.
The commissioner wanted to say very clearly, with regard to the delegation of powers, that we delegate to the provinces, which, in turn, delegate to everybody else. Budget cuts are being made on top of the ones made by Environment Canada, and the big losers are the environment and human health because, as I said, the fox is in charge of the chicken coop. That is what is happening with this hasty and excessive delegation of powers, and that is all I wanted to point out.