moved that Bill C-31, an act to amend the Export Development Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Export Development ActGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

London—Fanshawe Ontario

Liberal

Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to lead off second reading debate on this important piece of legislation. This legislation results from an extensive review of the existing Export Development Act and of the activities of the corporation it governs, that is the Export Development Corporation or what we commonly call EDC.

The bill contains specific amendments that flow from a comprehensive review process which began in 1998 and brings a balanced approach to change at EDC. This legislation also complements other policy direction from government, as well as changes that have been initiated by EDC since the review process got under way.

It is fair to say that the period leading up to this legislation has seen the most thorough review of Canada's export financing activities that has ever been undertaken. The broad based review included public consultations, parliamentary committee recommendations, and advice and recommendations from many other experts, stakeholders and independent observers.

The bill now before the House is a product of a focused discussion on what is best for Canada in the intensely competitive world of international trade as well as a thorough examination of how best to reflect Canadian values in our dealings with other countries.

A key feature of the bill is a new statutory requirement for the environmental review of projects being considered for EDC support. This is a significant change that positions Canada in the forefront of the international community in efforts to more closely link export credit activities and environmental impacts. The bill also includes other statutory changes that provide the necessary legal basis for a number of operational changes at EDC.

Bill C-31 fulfills a commitment made by the Minister for International Trade last June. At that time the minister announced important policy changes for Canada's export credit agency. He said he would introduce enabling legislation this fall. Bill C-31 completes the package by providing the necessary legal basis for change.

The minister's June announcement was based on conclusions that came out of the review process I mentioned a moment ago. To understand how the amendments we are debating today flow from the review, it is useful to understand something of the process itself.

As members may know the Minister for International Trade, in consultation with the Minister of Finance, is legally required to periodically review the act under the terms of the act itself. This requirement stems from changes that were made to the act in 1993 by the parliament of the day.

Those changes include a significant expansion of the commercial mandate of the Export Development Corporation so that it could fill perceived gaps in the private sector financial services market or more actively support the international financing needs of Canadian exporters.

These changes proved to be very effective. The corporation's financial support to Canadian exporters grew from about $12 billion in 1993 to more than $45 billion last year. In that time Canadian businesses have expanded their market reach all over the world.

Today exports account for over 40% of our GDP. Approximately one-third of our jobs are directly dependent on our success in export markets.

It is clear that the Export Development Corporation is a key part of our country's success in export markets. The EDC has demonstrated its value to Canada by filling gaps in the private sector's financial services, by reaching out to bring more small and medium size businesses into the export marketplace, by providing needed financial support to Canada's customers in developing countries, and overall by ensuring that Canadian exporters have access to the kind of financing that will keep them competitive with exporters from other countries.

Due to the fact that the EDC plays such a key role in our country's trade development strategy, we must ensure that it will continue to meet the competitive financing needs of Canadian exporters, and especially the small and medium size businesses that are the backbone of our economy and the main creators of jobs throughout Canada.

This need has become even more important as economic conditions around the world have tightened and market conditions for Canadian exporters have become even more competitive. At the same time EDC's operating policies and financing activities must reflect Canadian values in areas of corporate social responsibility, the environment, human rights, public accountability and transparency.

As legislators our public policy challenge is to find a balance between the twin priorities of international business competitiveness and corporate social responsibility. Bill C-31 helps to do just that. It also complements other initiatives to bring about a balanced approach to change at EDC.

For example, taken together with earlier policy guidance provided by the Minister for International Trade, the bill builds on a process of change at EDC that has benefited from the extensive public review process which took place over the past three years.

The first step in the process was the commissioning of a consultant study in 1998 undertaken by the well known law firm Gowlings. The Gowlings team undertook a comprehensive study of the Export Development Act as well as the corporation that the EDC governs. Gowlings also assessed Canada's export plans and needs within the international policy environment including extensive stakeholder consultations as well as detailed surveys and independent research.

Gowlings found that EDC enjoyed a very positive reputation in the Canadian export community. EDC is highly regarded as a Canadian success story by both its customers and its competitors.

EDC has gone out of its way in recent times to widely survey its clients. There is a tremendous level of satisfaction with the service that it delivers. I frequently hear from constituents and major companies in my riding about how important is the help and work of EDC.

I cite General Motors Defence of London, Ontario, as a good example. It is very appreciative of the efforts of EDC in the export work that it does. Some 80% of General Motors sales are in the export market.

The Gowlings report also raised concerns. It said that EDC's project financing decisions might not give proper regard to the potential environment in human rights impacts in other countries. Among Gowlings' recommendations were proposals to improve accountability on environmental and human rights matters.

The Gowlings report was tabled in parliament in July 1999 and referred to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, or SCFAIT, as well as to the Senate banking committee. Both committees held hearings, heard from witnesses and produced reports for the government's consideration.

The Senate banking committee focused on the relationship between EDC and other Canadian financial institutions. The committee's report recommended a form of private export credit guarantee that is now being studied. SCFAIT's review was more wide ranging. Through a series of hearings and round tables a broad range of advocates from both business and public interest groups as well as many other experts were heard from. Many written submissions were also received by the committee.

In his report to parliament SCFAIT's chair noted the challenge of addressing and balancing two sets of public policy objectives through EDC. On the one hand he said EDC must be open and accountable so that Canadians can ensure that it reflects their values in its dealings with other countries. On the other hand Canadian exporters must have continued access to the kind of financial services that are vital to their competitive position internationally.

The SCFAIT report offered recommendations to achieve this balance. An overarching recommendation was a proposal to amend the Export Development Act so that EDC supported activities would deliver both economic benefits to Canadians as well as meet Canada's international commitments and obligations, particularly those related to environmentally sustainable development and human rights.

Bill C-31 follows up on the spirit of that key recommendation. The Auditor General for Canada has also provided advice on EDC that the government has found helpful and that is relevant to the bill before us.

Last year, in response to a request from the government, the auditor general studied the environmental review framework that EDC had introduced earlier. EDC brought in its own environmental review process in 1999 but public concerns had been raised about its rigor and clarity. The government wanted the auditor general to examine the suitability of EDC's environmental review framework and to assess its performance in implementing it.

The auditor general delivered her report in May of this year. She concluded that EDC's environmental framework contained “most elements of a suitably designed environmental review process”. This was a useful finding. It indicated that EDC was on the right track with its approach to environmental review.

However, the auditor general also identified a shortcoming when she cited a significant difference between the design of EDC's environmental framework and its operation. Although she concluded EDC was on the right track with its approach to environmental review, she also signalled that its operating policies and procedures needed to be improved.

Following on this report, the Minister for International Trade provided a clear set of guidelines to the corporation for the management of its environmental review practices.

EDC has taken to heart the advice it has received and is currently engaged in wide public consultations aimed at strengthening its environmental review framework. In a related move, the corporation is also bringing in a new disclosure policy as a follow up to stakeholder consultations.

It is important to note that the debate on whether or not an environmental review of EDC projects is needed is over. Everyone feels that it is needed. Representatives of both the business sector and public interest groups agree on the need for environmental review. With this bill, the government is using the Export Development Act to provide a statutory basis for an environmental review process at EDC. The next step is for the corporation's board of directors to develop a directive to make the objectives and the expectations of the review process clear and workable.

EDC is now at work to develop a more rigorous environmental review process, one that will meet both economic and social responsibility objectives and one that will have the force of law as proposed by the bill. This move to a statutory requirement for the environmental review of EDC projects is a significant step forward by Canada on the world stage.

A number of other countries, notably OECD member countries, are now looking at measures that would require their national export credit agencies to carry out environmental reviews of projects being considered for support. With this bill, Canada will be among the first to make environmental review of such projects a matter of law.

At the same time, the statutory approach presented in Bill C-31 does not put Canada out of step with emerging trends and developments in other countries. For example, some Canadian public interest groups have argued in favour of bringing EDC's environmental review activities under the authority of Canada's Environmental Assessment Act. However this approach would be inconsistent with developments that are underway elsewhere within the international community, including in the OECD, where most of our export market competitors are found.

In other words, the bill positions Canada as a leader in the international move to higher standards for the environmental review of export agency finance projects. However, it does it in a way that will not put Canadian businesses at a competitive disadvantage to exporters from other countries. This is a key point. It is a further illustration of the need to find a realistic and practical approach to balanced change at EDC.

The bill also proposes some administrative amendments to the existing act. For example, the bill proposes a change in the corporation's legal name to Export Development Canada in English and Exportation et Développement Canada in French. This means the acronym EDC will be the same in both of our official languages.

This change simply reflects the reality of everyday business usage by EDC's clients. It will also allow the corporation to build on its very positive EDC brand name in Canada and abroad. I might add that by having the name of our nation, Canada, in its title, it obviously would play very successfully on the tremendous goodwill throughout the international community that we as Canadians experience every time we travel anywhere in the world. I know Canadians from all walks of life share that experience.

Other changes include: an amendment to enable the board to delegate powers and duties to committees that it may establish. This reflects modern business management practice and is consistent with practices followed elsewhere in both the public and private sectors.

An amendment to exempt EDC's activities from the provisions of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. This amendment is included to avoid the potential for duplicate environmental reviews in cases when EDC may be involved in partnership with another organization that is subject to CEAA.

An amendment to enable the EDC board to establish a pension plan for officers and employees of the corporation. This amendment speaks for itself.

Finally, I want to comment on the amendment that would require the auditor general to audit the design and implementation of EDC's environmental review process at least once every five years. This too is a key measure. It ensures that EDC will remain publicly accountable for its environmental review performance. I also note that the Minister for International Trade has asked the auditor general if her first audit could take place after only two years. This is not required but the minister has been very proactive in putting forward this proposal, and should be applauded for it. It shows how seriously the minister and the government view this entire initiative in showing environmental accountability.

The amendment to require EDC's board to establish a directive to determine whether a proposed project is likely to have adverse environmental effects should be welcome news for those who want legal force for environmental review at EDC.

The amendment to require the auditor general to audit the design and implementation of that review process should be good news too. It means that EDC's environmental review performance will remain subject to the scrutiny of the auditor general, an officer of parliament who is independent of the board, or for that matter of the government.

To conclude, EDC is a vital part of Canada's export development efforts. Businesses, large and small, all across Canada depend upon the corporation to provide the financial services they need to be successful in the intensely competitive international marketplace. I have cited already the example brought to me repeatedly by my friends at General Motors Defense in London, Ontario.

At the same time, as a crown corporation, EDC must reflect Canadian values in its policies and operations. Environmental review is an essential aspect of that. The bill would provide statutory force to this key area of corporate social responsibility.

To sum up, there are three basic reasons why the House should support the bill. It facilitates the continuing process of change toward a stronger and more effective EDC. It brings the force of law to the environmental review of EDC projects. It ensures that the auditor general, on behalf of the Canadian public, will continue to monitor and report on EDC and its environmental review performance.

I would urge all my colleagues in the House to support the legislation.

Export Development ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Gurmant Grewal Canadian Alliance Surrey Central, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise again on behalf of my constituents of Surrey Central to participate in the debate on Bill C-31, an act to amend the Export Development Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

The parliamentary secretary explained the government's side of the story. Now I have the opportunity to explain the story from the opposition's point of view. However, before I do that, for the folks who are watching and listening to the debate I would like to give a brief background.

Legislation governing EDC, Export Development Corporation, requires ministerial review of the act. A review commenced in 1998 concluded with a report by a law firm. The report was reviewed and reported by the Standing Committee of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The result of that report is the amendment to Bill C-31 which is what we are debating today.

In general, the bill is of a housekeeping nature and simply updates the act. If passed it will enable the board to delegate its powers. It will require the EDC to establish a pension plan for its employees.

The treasury board policy encourages crown corporations to arrange comprehensive, independent pension plans for their employees. However CPP, one of the key pension plans managed by the federal government, is the worst managed pension plan. It has been earning even less than the interest on a savings account. Its surplus funds were grabbed by the Liberal government and the chief actuary of the CPP was fired for being forthright and not yielding to the Liberals' pressure.

Prior to these amendments, there were no legislative environmental review requirements of the EDC.

If the bill is passed, it will require the EDC to determine if a project is likely to have adverse environmental effects and whether it would be justified for the EDC to enter into a transaction.

The previous speaker talked about the environment. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will not apply to the EDC's reviews, so that Canadian environment standards and laws are not imposed on other sovereign nations. How can we do that?

The objective of the substantive environmental amendment is to strike a balance between trade competitiveness and concern for the potential environmental impacts of projects supported by the EDC.

The auditor general recommended that most international financial institutions, including export credit agencies, have environmental policies and procedures. A consensus emerged on the elements of good practice that an international financial institution should adopt, to ensure that the projects it supports are environmentally and socially responsible.

Industrialized G-8 and OECD countries developed common environmental guidelines for export credit agencies. Some of the guidelines include: To strengthen EDC's environmental review process, EDC needs to make changes in both the design and operation of the framework; to close the gaps in the framework's design, the EDC should focus on enhancing transparency through public consultation and disclosure; and, to strengthen the framework's implementation, the EDC should concentrate on the tools that identify environmental risks in the screening process and on monitoring to ensure that the framework is operating efficiently and effectively.

Let me point out that my constituents and I, and members on this side of the House, are for the protection of the environment. Canadian Alliance policy supports sustainable development initiatives.

I would venture to say that on all sides of the House, members want to protect the environment and work on projects related to greenhouse gas reductions and improved air and water quality so that we can hand over the plant to future generations in a better condition.

However, as a government, the Liberals have mismanaged our environment and have failed to provide sustainable development.

They have signed international treaties, including Kyoto, Beijing and Rio, for example, with no intentions whatsoever of carrying out their commitments. They made those commitments without consulting Canadians, parliament and the provinces. They have failed to provide these commitments with the scientific support they required to be attained. They made political decisions about matters that required scientific decisions. They made decisions not based on scientific facts or on what Canadians can do and want but just for political intervention or motives. They have allowed the endangered species legislation to die on the order paper of the House twice.

Another problem with the bill is that EDC is being used more by the Liberal government for political favours than other crown corporations and agencies,such as CIDA, HRDC, Western Economic Diversification, ACOA and many others. These agencies should not be used for political purposes. They should cater to the needs of Canadians.

There are rampant patronage appointments in crown corporations. Most recently, Mr. Bernard Boudreau, a short term senator and cabinet member, who ran unsuccessfully to become a Liberal MP, was appointed to the board of the EDC. The bill does not address the issue of patronage appointments at all. The practice should end. Those appointments should be based on merit, not on who is a friend of the Liberals. They have been giving those positions to friends and failed election candidates who were rejected by Canadians.

The Canadian Alliance recognizes the essential part financial institutions play in the everyday lives of Canadians. We will protect the best interests of consumers by fostering competition and ensuring that the financial services sector is adequately regulated, without impairing stability or opportunity for success and growth in these institutions.

Most of the services provided by the EDC, such as short and medium term export insurance and financing, should be privatized. The rest of the EDC would have to become a division of DFAIT, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and be directly accountable to parliament. This division could provide occasional loan guarantees and other services which are beyond the scope of private sector, such as long term insurance, political risk reassurance and projects that are not commercially viable but may be deemed to be in the interest of the nation.

We understand that the organization can get involved in those areas but not to provide political favours for the weak, arrogant, Liberal government's friends.

In 1991 the United Kingdom privatized its equivalent export agency, called export credits guarantee department, to ensure that there were no implied trade subsidies in the EU from one country to another. The United Kingdom government provided the political risk reassurance to the private company which took over the ECGD.

To serve the exporters better, there should be true competition in the export and financing business. They should have free market and competition. That is what the government should encourage. They should have the opportunity to directly deal with their own banks or insurance brokers to have their exports financed and insured. That is what businesses need. If the banks got into the business, exporters may receive 100% financing in addition to speedier and personalized efficient services.

In conclusion, the bill does not address the concerns that I have just highlighted. I ask the government to address these issues and make appropriate amendments to the act. Otherwise, I will be left with no choice but to vote against the bill.

Members on this side of the House recognize that while the EDC enjoys a high level of support in certain segments of the business community, it is being used by the Liberal government for political purposes, including recent television advertising.

We should and we must oppose the bill due to the lack of action on the patronage aspect alone, among the other things I mentioned. Therefore, I will oppose the bill.

Export Development ActGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Bloc

Robert Lanctôt Bloc Châteauguay, QC

Mr. Speaker, such a bill would have made it possible to support and implement several recommendations from the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade but my speech will show how this bill has sidestepped the question.

The Export Development Corporation is a crown corporation, with special status. It is not subject to the Access to Information Act nor to the Environmental Assessment Act. This could have afforded an opportunity to apply it.

It is not regulated by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. It pays no income tax. It is not required to pay dividends and may borrow at preferential rates because of the credit enjoyed by the Government of Canada.

What is this bill all about? What can be seen first, and is immediately obvious, is that there is an environmental problem. This bill is trying to establish an environmental frame of reference that is created by the EDC itself, by its managers.

We had the option of including the Environmental Assessment Act. The government sidestepped an opportunity to do something very simple and to establish criteria and not so-called international standards set by leaders based on things that do or do not exist. We could have had really well established criteria.

The auditor general was given the mandate to assess the environmental frames of reference of the EDC. During this assessment, 25 projects were considered. Of these, 23 were badly done or had not anticipated their impact on the environmental process. Later, I will give examples relating to these projects.

Let us look at the first report criticized, which we looked at in committee in 1999. At that time, following meetings between the various parties in committee, we said this corporation was not transparent, open or accountable to the people of Canada and Quebec. In addition, there had been sustainable environmental development, which we will see more precisely during the course of my speech on this bill later and this afternoon.

In addition, there was reference to human rights. We see no sign of them in the bill. What should we think of a corporation that has as its objective to fund exports and to help companies without regard for human rights? There are a number of places on earth where there are problems with this issue. There may be very specific places where there are human rights problems. Why did the government not comply with our international commitments on this?

The bill does not even make any mention of this issue. Yet, that was one of the committee's recommendations in its conclusions. The auditor general, who tabled her report in May 2001, also referred to this issue. Here are some of the elements included in the conclusions and recommendations of that report:

There are important gaps in public consultation and disclosure. There are significant differences between the framework's design and its operation. The framework's objectives are not clear. The framework's environmental standards are not specified.

There are gaps at each stage of the environmental review process. Screening tools are not applied adequately to identify potential environmental risk. There is no methodology to determine if adverse environmental risks can be justified.

The report of the auditor general tabled in May 2001 highlights some very important elements, particularly as regards transparency, disclosure, the environment and, of course, human rights. If we look at the environment, what is the framework? The objective would be to have specific criteria or standards to apply.

Regarding the framework, the auditor general says that there is none, which creates a grey area. Why? Because instead of having a framework based on an act such as the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, instead of having criteria to conduct impact studies and develop processes from the beginning before approving a financial project, so far we have relied on a review by the host country. As we know, there are a number of host countries whose environmental standards or criteria are really lower than those in Quebec and in Canada.

If we have no methodology, no implementation criteria, what are our chances of getting something reliable? Let us not forget that the lack of disclosure and transparency raises the following question: Is the EDC truly credible? Is it doing its homework properly? If we cannot have access to this information under the Access to Information Act, as we know—

Export Development ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but we must proceed to statements by members. The hon. member for Châteauguay can continue his presentation after Oral Question Period.

TerrorismStatements By Members

1:55 p.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin, ON

Mr. Speaker, I commend and thank our Prime Minister for his leadership and wisdom during these difficult times for the world. He has made me feel proud as a Canadian. In so doing I call upon my colleagues in this place and all Canadians to unite behind him. He deserves it.

This has been a time of deep sorrow and a time of great change but indeed a time of epochal opportunity for world co-operation. We have witnessed horrible acts of terrorism and wonderful acts of heroism. We have also witnessed a coming together in the face of adversity.

There is a lesson in observing the U.S. congress united behind its president. They stand together and we should do the same. Canada will continue to stand with our American friends, but we must first stand together here as an example to the Canadian people. Yes, let us debate the details but let us move forward together.

I agree with U.S. President Bush that now is not a time for politics. Now is a time for leadership, wisdom, co-operation and concerted action. Again, let us all unite behind the Prime Minister and his cabinet. Working together Canada will be stronger as we face the challenges ahead.

Private EnterpriseStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Betty Hinton Canadian Alliance Kamloops, Thompson And Highland Valleys, BC

Mr. Speaker, I recently learned of a 150 year old house in Kincardine, Ontario, that is being restored by local volunteers. By the time the house is completely restored the volunteers will have raised over $350,000 privately. They will have spent many thousands of hours working to preserve the heritage building. One board member of the non-profit heritage society doing the work said he thinks the reason behind the phenomenal success of the voluntary venture is that government is not involved.

For years the Canadian Alliance has advocated letting Canadians go about their business without government interference. The Canadian people are far better judges than any government when it comes to being creative and picking successes.

As elected members of the federal parliament it is not our job to dream up business ventures for people to pursue. It is our job to foster an environment that will allow Canadians to initiate their own endeavours without being shackled by government regulation.

National SecurityStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Savoy Liberal Tobique—Mactaquac, NB

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by commending the Prime Minister on his skilful handling of the terrorist crisis and for keeping trade on the agenda during a recent meeting with President Bush. With $1.4 billion in ongoing trade between Canada and the U.S. every day the Prime Minister knows that the success of our businesses in the global market depends on the free flow of goods, people and services.

In my riding of Tobique--Mactaquac which borders the state of Maine constituents are acutely aware of the importance of an open border. For centuries we have enjoyed a unique friendship with our southern neighbours. It is a border that has united rather than divided us.

In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks the open character of our border has been called into question. Maintaining a balance between our security and our economy is vital. Effective border management cannot be achieved in isolation. We need joint initiatives to encourage the flow of people and goods across the border while at the same time protecting public health and safety. Simply put, we need to build bridges, not walls, between our two countries.

John F. Kennedy, speaking to parliament in May 1961, stated:

Geography has made us neighbours, history has made us friends, economics has made us partners, necessity has made us allies.

Never have these words rung so true as now.

International Music DayStatements By Members

October 1st, 2001 / 2 p.m.

Liberal

Sarmite Bulte Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, today, October 1, marks International Music Day. It was first proclaimed right here in Ottawa 26 years ago by the famous musician Yehudi Menuhin. Since then, this day has been celebrated in many countries, including Canada.

This event brings together people throughout the world to highlight the universal importance of music. Music embodies the ideals of peace and friendship between peoples, the evolution of their cultures and the reciprocal exchange and appreciation of their aesthetic values. Music knows no borders and transcends language barriers. It touches each and everyone of us.

At the invitation of the International Music Council our Minister of Canadian Heritage was asked to serve as the international co-ordinator of International Music Day until 2005.

Canada invites the world to join us in emphasizing the importance of the message of peace and friendship that this International Music Day brings and in recognizing the talent of our Canadian artists.

International Day of Older PersonsStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Tirabassi Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that today is the International Day of Older Persons. This day is an opportunity for all Canadians to reflect on the valuable contributions seniors make to our society and the meaning they add to each of our lives.

In Niagara Centre groups such as the Rose City Seniors in Welland and the Thorold Seniors Association are organized, functioning clubs making important contributions to their respective communities.

Seniors volunteer more of their time than any other age group. They are the foundation of many families and they provide wisdom, knowledge and experience when we often need it most.

As the world enters the age of aging it is vital to recognize the diversity and vitality of older persons. I encourage all Canadians to take the opportunity to promote understanding and respect among people of all ages.

National Family WeekStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Carol Skelton Canadian Alliance Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in recognition of National Family Week, October 1 to 7. The theme of this week is “Volunteering is a family affair”.

Families have many strengths, gifts and abilities. I encourage families to consider where they could use their skills and abilities this week. They could bake cookies and take them to a soup kitchen or seniors home. They could gather toys and donate them to a local hospital. They could collect good, usable clothing and furniture and take them to a shelter. Families could volunteer at local cultural, social or sporting centres.

Families working as a team will not only help improve the lives of those around them. They will also strengthen their families. The connections made between family members as they work together for the good of others will certainly improve their family unit.

I wish a happy National Family Week to everyone in the Chamber. We must always remember that our family comes first.

World Habitat DayStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ben Serré Liberal Timiskaming—Cochrane, ON

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations declared the first Monday in October World Habitat Day, an opportunity to reflect on our communities and their importance in our lives. This year's theme “Cities without Slums” offers people everywhere the opportunity to examine the current state of their cities and to think of ways to make them safer, healthier and more sustainable.

Canadians are lucky to be among the best housed people in the world. This enviable situation is due in large part to the efforts of organizations such as the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation and its different partners.

Working closely with industry, government and non-governmental organizations, as well as local community groups, CMHC strives to foster the development of affordable housing within safe, healthy and sustainable communities.

I encourage all members and all Canadians to join the United Nations in celebrating World Habitat Day, October 1, 2001.

Gemini Awards GalaStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, last night's Gemini awards for achievement in television production were an eloquent testimony to the vitality of Quebec's culture. Forty-four broadcasts received awards, a tribute to the creativity and variety of the television industry in Quebec.

At the crossroads of song, visual and theatre arts, literature and news, television reflects who we are; it transports us around the world, and it brings the world to us.

To Fabienne Larouche, Marc Labrèche, Pierre Nadeau, Céline Bonnier, Luc Guérin and all the other artists, producers and technicians who worked in the spotlight or behind the scenes, we say bravo.

It is because of the calibre of your work that Quebecers continue to watch their own channels, the ones which draw them in, the ones which reflect their image and their vision of the world.

With its seven million inhabitants, Quebec has reason to be proud of its creators, its entrepreneurs and its television artists.

Gemini Awards GalaStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Carole-Marie Allard Liberal Laval East, QC

Mr. Speaker, I too wish to pay tribute to the excellence of the Gemini Awards Gala, which I attended yesterday evening in Montreal's Théâtre Saint-Denis.

Many of French Canada's television artists and creators were honoured. The small screen's most popular francophone artists received numerous awards.

It was in 1986 that the Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television introduced a category for television and created the Gemini awards. The Geminis honour the excellence of the work done both by those in front of and those behind the camera.

Let us pay tribute to the passion and commitment of the organizers, the artists, the creators and the enthusiastic audience for without them there would be no gala.

On behalf of the entire House, I congratulate the Gemini winners.