Debates of June 4th, 1999

Millennium Scholarships

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

Mr. Speaker, when there are technicalities and administrative standards it is absolutely clear that we trust our officials to come up with solutions and ways to harmonize the systems.

Once the issue becomes political, it is clear that the ministers must speak to each other. I can assure the hon. member that minister Legault and myself are on the very same wavelength. We are equally impatient.

For myself, I count on reaching an agreement so that Quebec students may benefit from something to which they are entitled. The Government of Canada wants to help them finance their studies more easily.

Trade

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is a bill before the Michigan legislature that if passed would impose a tax of over 2% on Canadian companies selling into Michigan. Should this legislation go ahead, the cost to Canadian companies, especially the automotive sector would be more than $100 million per year.

What is the trade minister doing to ensure that this legislation which flies in the face of the principle of national treatment never gets passed?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the member is correct in raising a very serious issue which I think is going to be equally negative for companies from Canada doing business in Michigan and for the state of Michigan. I think it is going to discourage and scare away trade and investment in that state.

We have for the last number of months been dealing directly with the office of Governor Engler. We have been able to persuade him to take away the retroactivity going back 10 years. The fact remains that for companies doing business in the state of Michigan he is still contemplating at this time imposing a 2% tax.

Fisheries

[Gary Lunn, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we know the government's spin doctors are working overtime selling the Pacific salmon treaty and we now see that the parliamentary secretary is becoming part of that spin machine.

Let us look at the facts. We know the minister is afraid to bring this treaty before the House of Commons. We know the minister has and will spend millions of dollars buying prime time media to sell this deal to the Canadian people. We know the minister announced this deal in a room full of Americans and hired armed police to keep Canadian fishermen out of the room.

If this is such a good deal for Canada, why the armed police? Why does he have to spend taxpayers' money to sell this deal? Whose side is he on? The Americans, obviously not ours.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, we have seen from past action that the kind of tactics the hon. member opposite takes on does nothing for the negotiations. When we want to get a good message out there, we have to get it out.

Had this new arrangement been in place between 1985 and 1996 there would have been 4.1 million more fish available to Canadian fishermen. That is a good deal. The hon. member, as the Vancouver Sun did this morning, should be congratulating the minister. It said that the minister certainly deserves—

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The hon. member for Laval Centre.

Francophonie

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in her little summer kit for MPs, the Minister of Canadian Heritage suggests some very interesting activities to help anglophone senators and MPs celebrate, as she puts it, Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day.

Suggested activities include reading a French Canadian book in translation, viewing a sub-titled French Canadian film, and—get this—learning Canada's national anthem in French.

With such a caricature of the French fact in this Year of the Francophonie, can the minister tell the House why she did not think of suggesting wearing a traditional French Canadian Assomption sash for a swim, or sampling a bowl of pea soup?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot see why the Bloc Quebecois would be afraid of francophiles.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in her crusade to save the French language from coast to coast, can the minister confirm that, again this year, Quebec will be getting 60% of federal funding for Canada Day celebrations, while her constituents in Hamilton East will have to be happy with eight times less money than that set aside for the constituents of the member for Bourassa?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the most pitiful thing about the Bloc Quebecois is that it claims to support the French fact in Canada, but that same Bloc Quebecois found nothing to say when the Government of Quebec refused to recognize this year as the Year of the Francophonie in Canada.

For people who claim to be the defenders of the francophonie in Canada their track record with respect to the French fact in this country is pathetic, and they owe an apology to French Canadians from Nova Scotia to British Columbia.

Trade

[Deepak Obhrai, Reform, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in April the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for International Trade said there would a 120 day moratorium on U.S. export regulations targeting Canadian defence and aerospace industries. We now know there has been no moratorium as Canadian companies have been forced to acquire export permits. It is obvious the intervention by the foreign affairs minister has produced nothing. We are talking about $5 billion in trade and 50,000 Canadian jobs.

Will the Prime Minister personally intervene on behalf of the Canadian defence and aerospace industries?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfair to suggest that the involvement of the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been absolutely ineffective, far from it.

Through his actions in talking with his counterpart, the secretary of state in the United States, they have been able to put in the four month review. In this respect industries are talking. We have made it abundantly clear to the Americans that this is as negative for Canadian firms as it is for American firms. If they have been integrated for the last 40 years, our message is do not fix something that clearly is not broken.

Pesticides

[Gurmant Grewal, Reform, Surrey Central, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the amount of pesticides on fresh fruit and vegetables sold in Canada has more than doubled since 1994. The amount of illegal pesticides on our domestic produce has tripled since 1990.

Canadians want to know that their food is safe. Why will the health minister not allow the pesticide management agency to release pesticide ingredients lists to Canadians? Why is there the secrecy?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the hon. member was good enough to mention before question period that he was going to raise this issue.

I will provide a more detailed written response. For the present, let me point out that while the numbers quoted by the member are accurate, it should also be observed that none of the levels comes up to the point where the experts consider there is any danger. In other words, the amounts have doubled but the total concentration is still within safe limits of the total maximum allowable.

When we created the pest management regulatory agency some years ago, it was for the purpose of examining all pesticides before approval. They are looked at from the point of view of safety in advance of going onto the market. We will continue doing that.

Canadian Heritage

[Maurice Dumas, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a Canadian heritage website which offers Canadians the opportunity to vote for a hero.

This site was funded by Heritage Canada, yet it operates only in English, right at this midpoint in the Année de la Francophonie.

Can the minister explain how this site is unilingual English when it is her responsibility to protect both official languages of this country?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, this is not the website of Heritage Canada. Second, it is a bilingual site.

What I find pitiful is to see the Bloc Quebecois shedding big crocodile tears for francophones outside Quebec while, when the time comes for a concrete gesture in support of French Canadians, the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois want nothing to do with francophones outside Quebec. That is pretty pitiful during the Année de la Francophonie canadienne.

Canadian Armed Forces

[John Richardson, Liberal, Perth—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as NATO prepares to deploy a peace implementation force, there is a great deal of speculation about the level of resistance our troops will meet. How prepared are our Canadian forces troops for deployment to this region, and how capable is our equipment?

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by saying how proud we are of the job our military is doing in the Balkans, in Aviano and on other missions.

Our people and our equipment are up to the task. They will be using the Coyote reconnaissance vehicle, which is very highly mobile, well armed and well protected; the Bison armoured personnel carrier; the Griffon military helicopter; and, let us not forget, the CF-18s in Aviano.

We have no doubt that our professional soldiers have the training, the leadership and the equipment they need to do a good job.

Endangered Species

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

Mr. Speaker, we hear the government is drafting new endangered species legislation. Let us hope it gets it right this time. Rural Canadians are insisting that the bill include three fundamental principles: First, there must be equity. All Canadians must bear an equal cost of protection, not just rural Canadians.

Second, it must be incentive based. Landowners should be compensated not punished for compliance.

Third, there must be consultation. Rural Canadians must have a say in how the legislation impacts on their lives.

Will the environment minister and the Government of Canada commit today to these principles, yes or no?

[Paddy Torsney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see that the member opposite is interested in this legislation.

The minister has been consulting across the country with her provincial and territorial counterparts and is prepared to table legislation in the near future. I attended some of those meetings and I can tell the House that some of the various issues were considered and possible solutions were raised. We will continue to work on the right solution.

Athabasca River

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last year the government discontinued the marking and dredging of the Athabasca River from Fort McMurray to Fort Chipewyan. This is a service that has been provided for as long as anybody in the area can remember.

As a result, the federal and provincial governments had to spend $1 million on an emergency airlift of supplies to Fort Chipewyan last spring. Right now the barges are aground, making the likelihood of another emergency airlift of crucial supplies, such as food and fuel, very possible.

My question is for the Minister of Transport. This historic trade route is a lifeline for the people of Fort Chipewyan. Why is the government abandoning the people of Fort Chipewyan?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I will take that question under advisement and get back to the hon. member with an answer.

Bill C-32

[Rick Laliberte, NDP, Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

Environment Week of 1999 will be remembered as a lost opportunity. Canadians will remember when the Liberal and Reform Parties picked polluters as their priority and not our environment or our health by weakening Bill C-32.

The environment commissioner states that there is confusion between departments for taking immediate action against toxic substances, and that it is now common knowledge that the government buckled and sold out to industry's polluter's.

Can the Minister of Industry explain why strict environmental laws are a nightmare for his department?

[Paddy Torsney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, that is a complete misinterpretation of the legislation we passed this week.

The legislation puts in place a strict enforcement mechanism reflecting the commissioner's report and what the committee wanted. It sets in place a toxic management review policy. It forces the government to do research on endocrine disrupters. It forces the government to evaluate 23,000 substances in Canada.

It is a good bill and an important bill for the country. It is a win for the environment of the country.

[Rick Laliberte, NDP, Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my second question is for the Minister of Health.

At a televised committee hearing on Wednesday of this week on pesticides, the pest management regulatory agency and various government departments explained regulatory actions for banned pesticides. In response to a NDP question to the director general of the DFO on the use of non-registered pesticides in fish pens in Canadians waters, he stated this was illegal.

This illegal use of pesticides was reported last year. Can the Minister of Health explain why he is ignoring the illegal use of pesticides in Canadian waters?