House of Commons Hansard #118 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was amendments.
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, our navy is serving on the front line of the war against terrorism in the Arabian Sea with ancient relics on the decks of modern frigates.
In temperatures over 35 degrees Celsius, a fully mission-loaded Sea King will not lift off the deck of a stationary ship. It is basic boat ballast.
The snoring Liberals must wake up and end this 30 year procurement nightmare.
Is the defence minister still insisting that new replacements will arrive by the 2005 date he told us last year?
Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, yes, that is still our aim. Let me point out though that these are not relics. That was an irresponsible remark by the hon. member.
The captains who fly these say such things as: “I have no concern. I have all the confidence in the world in the aircraft. We would not fly an aircraft that was dangerous. We always err on the side of caution. I have no concern whatsoever with regard to the maintainability and operational ability of the Sea King”.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, have you ever noticed that when the president of the United States takes off in a helicopter he frequently uses a Sea King?
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals first began the process to replace the Sea Kings in 1976. Exhibiting lightning Liberal speed, they are still at the review stage 30 years later.
Our frigates, designed to have new state of the art helicopters, will be more than half way through their own lifespan by the time delivery occurs.
The government does not have a plan B. The boat ballast Sea Kings will have to make do until the government gets its act together.
Will the minister admit that the Sea Kings could be still flying for Canada in 2015?
Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, no, they will not be flying at that time.
I might add, however, that some 23 countries continue to use the Sea King. There are 600 of them in operation, including in the United States, the most sophisticated military power in the world. Recently there was a photograph of the British royal marines, a commando group, standing in front of their Sea King helicopters.
Members should know that the Americans are using a 40 year old B-52 bomber as part of their operation in Afghanistan.
It all goes to prove that it is not so much age as it is how well they are maintained and we maintain them well.
David Price Liberal Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.
Could the minister give the House an update regarding the deployment of Canadian Forces to Afghanistan?
Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to maintain a company of about 150 to 200 personnel from the 3rd battalion of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry on a 48 hour notice to move. The balance of that group will, however, stand down to a level of seven days in accordance with our allies and the request that came from the coalition command. The Hercules aircraft will also stand down for some seven days.
From what we are hearing, we still anticipate that they will be needed but they will not be needed on quite the same notice to move as--
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice who will remember that there was quite a bit of concern and still is about the potential in Bill C-36 to abuse or obstruct legitimate dissent. We see the same possibility in Bill C-42, the public safety act.
As the member in cabinet from Alberta, would the Minister of Justice tell us if this particular bill is intended for Kananaskis next year? Is the hidden agenda here to make sure the whole area can be declared a military security zone and protesters cannot get anywhere near it?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, let me reassure the hon. member that there is no hidden agenda here. In fact, listening to some of the concerns expressed by witnesses and committee members on Bill C-36, we amended the definition of terrorist activity to ensure that demonstrations, lawful or otherwise, would not be unintentionally caught by this legislation.
Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—St. Clair, ON
Mr. Speaker, when NAFTA was signed we were assured that a commission would be established to act as a watchdog to protect national environmental interests. Recently the staff of that commission recommended a full investigation regarding the lack of enforcement of Canadian environmental laws. Subsequently, senior staff in the Department of the Environment in Canada and in the United States overturned that and restricted the investigation.
My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Will he reverse that decision and direct his staff to allow the commission to do its job and allow a full investigation?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Certainly not, Mr. Speaker. It makes sense for the commission, the commission that was established under NAFTA, to take responsibility for what it does and not simply have staff totally uncontrolled and totally independent of any of the structures established by NAFTA.
I wonder whether the NDP really thinks we should have people who work under NAFTA systems totally away from any possible oversight by parliament or the appropriate bodies of the United States or Mexico.
Chuck Strahl Canadian Alliance Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, Norm Greenfield of Calgary downloaded a copy of the anti-terrorist bill on to a computer disk and then took that disk to Office Depot to have it printed. When he tried to pick up the completed document he was asked to produce his driver's licence and give other personal information before Office Depot would turn it over to him, apparently because, surprise, surprise, the word “terrorist” appeared in the document.
Mr. Greenfield is now concerned that this silliness means that his name appears on some list somewhere.
Will the government allow some sort of oversight committee to make sure abuses do not occur to Canadians' civil rights?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what depot or what case my hon. colleague is talking about but if he had any desire for an answer he would have given pre-notice of the question and possibly I could have been able to answer it.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, that is not how question period usually works.
There are some provisions of the anti-terrorism bill that do put Canadians' rights directly at risk. Yes, there is a need for action from police to act quickly at times to prevent terrorism but with discretion and based on solid evidence. Bill C-36 creates the real possibility that individuals can be listed without due process on secret information. A person may not even know that they are listed until it is too late. Their bank account could be frozen. They could lose their job. Their reputations could be blackened.
With all the consequences flowing from a listing, could the minister explain how a person, if wrongly accused and unable to afford a lawyer, can get their name off the list?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member, the House and all Canadians that a decision to put a group or an individual on the list will be made very carefully. If an individual is on the list, he or she is subject to judicial review. The solicitor general has to evaluate the list every two years. The fact is, if there is any new information an individual can take that information to the solicitor general who must evaluate it to see if the person should or should not remain on the list.
Bob Mills Canadian Alliance Red Deer, AB
Mr. Speaker, the government continues to weave its Kyoto story. On the weekend it was reported that the government might even consider energy rationing. However, most experts say that Canada still has no idea how to reach its Kyoto target. There are 47 government web sites, millions of brochures, and hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent to confuse Canadians.
The government now wants to take this mess to Canadians to get their input. It is a little late. How can Canadians comment when the government does not even know what are the facts?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, first I assure the hon. member on the irresponsible press remarks about rationing of energy, that is not the policy of the government. I can assure him also that we have a very good idea of the measures needed to achieve our Kyoto target.
I can assure him that when he reads the excellent speech of my friend, the hon. Minister of Natural Resources, and I might add, another speech of my own earlier today, he will find that all the questions he has asked have been carefully explained.
Bob Mills Canadian Alliance Red Deer, AB
Mr. Speaker, this is a runaway political train. Noted Canadian economists are saying that Kyoto has the potential to shut down Canada's economy.
We are now in an economic slowdown and we are considering ratifying a treaty that we do not even know how to implement. It could send us into another Liberal recession or deeper recession.
The great untold secret of Kyoto is that it would achieve practically nothing to reduce global climate change. It is all pain with no gain.
When will Canadians be told the truth about the Kyoto protocol?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the Alliance Party has made clear its total opposition to any Kyoto measures or any climate change measures, that it rejects the science and accepts these unnamed, unheard of economists. No doubt I will get more information from my hon. friend.
I can assure him that we have in fact entered into negotiations now, spreading over four years, with the private sector. We will intensify that this winter. We will indeed have proposals to bring forward for Canadians some time early next year.
Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC
Mr. Speaker, the closure of Canada 3000 means that this company will never be able to meet Ottawa's conditions for the $75 million loan guarantee offered by the Minister of Transport.
But one of the greatest problems in air transportation is the service to regions such as the Gaspé, the North Shore and Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. The lack of competition creates an important deterioration in service.
Does the Minister of Transport not realize that the creation of a discount subsidiary by Air Canada prevents genuine regional competition?
Airline IndustryOral Question Period
November 26th, 2001 / 2:45 p.m.
Bonavista—Trinity—Conception Newfoundland & Labrador
Liberal
Brian Tobin LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the question the member raises is one which the government is concerned about and indeed, one which the Minister of Transport has spoken on in the last week. That is the question of ensuring that the Competition Act functions in such a way as to ensure that small carriers, regional carriers, are able to successfully compete in the regions and larger carriers, other than Air Canada, like WestJet are able to successfully compete.
The Competition Act is currently before the House. The government is considering whether or not further amendments are required to ensure the continuity of airline competition in Canada.
Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC
Mr. Speaker, should the Minister of Transport not take the $75 million loan guarantee he was going to give Canada 3000 and put it towards regional air transportation so that the public has access to real air transportation service?
Airline IndustryOral Question Period
Bonavista—Trinity—Conception Newfoundland & Labrador
Liberal
Brian Tobin LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the approach of the government is to ensure that competition is able to thrive in Canada.
As I have said, the Competition Act is now before the Standing Committee on Industry. It may indeed be necessary to strengthen its provisions with respect to airlines in this country. That is a matter which, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, the government will consider in the days ahead.
Rick Casson Canadian Alliance Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Speaker, once again North American infrastructure has come under threat of terrorism.
Last week the American petroleum industry received a threat to its facilities from a group claiming loyalty to Osama bin Laden. Canadian firms are members of the API. With winter setting in, this is extremely worrisome. If it were carried out, it would have life-threatening consequences for Canadians.
Is the minister aware of these threats? What is the government doing to protect the North American energy sector?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, the action began on September 11, first at a meeting of federal and provincial energy ministers that was taking place in Quebec City at that time. It was rapidly followed up by action by the National Energy Board in consultation and co-operation with the Office of Critical Infrastructure and in collaboration with the provinces.
Since that time the NEB, on the advice of the RCMP and CSIS, has been fully on top of any real or perceived terrorism threat. All the appropriate action is being taken, including new legislative authority in Bill C-42.