Debates of Feb. 14th, 2001

Veterans Affairs

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the veterans affairs minister. Merchant mariners in Canada have been fighting for over 55 years for proper compensation. In fact prior to the last election the government tried to ram through a bill, but it died on the order paper.

Could the Minister of Veterans Affairs tell the House and all Canadians, especially our beloved merchant mariners, when they could expect to see the final instalment of their compensation, which is so duly owed to those brave men and women?

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

Mr. Speaker, over 14,000 applications have been received and processed. Roughly one-half or a little fewer than 7,000 cheques have been sent out as the first payment.

We will review roughly 2,500 applications. Once we know what the numbers are, we will then know how much we need in order to make a second payment. It is at that point in time that I promise to go back to see if there is any more money.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of Her Excellency Karen Moustgaard Jespersen, Minister of the Interior of Denmark.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Points Of Order

[Chuck Strahl, Canadian Alliance, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during question period today the Minister of Industry referred to a document he had in his hands that contained the names of the executive search firms retained by the Business Development Bank.

He again went on to say that the search firms had been referred to in the questions that had been asked over the last couple of days about who had done what searches on behalf of the bank to fill those executive positions.

I would ask if the minister would table those lists for us today.

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, as the list of names has already been made available to the media, I would be very happy to make it available to the House.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, something I consider very serious happened in question period.

The member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, in putting a question to the government House leader, the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, knowingly altered remarks I had made in this House yesterday, remarks I could read back to you in their entirety, if I may, since they were made pursuant to Standing Order 31.

I will then insist that these remarks, in which I am made to say that the region did not deserve to hold the Games of La Francophonie, be withdrawn from Hansard . I also insist on an apology from the two members who interpreted remarks I never made.

Here is the statement that I made yesterday under Standing Order 31:

In 2001 Canada will be hosting the IVth Games of la Francophonie. They will be held in Ottawa, the capital and a unilingual English city.

This is true. These games will be held in Hull and also in Ottawa, which is unilingual.

First, according to Statistics Canada, 91% of the population of the city of Ottawa speak English only—

This is from Statistics Canada. Furthermore, again according to Statistics Canada, less than 10% of the population of the city of Ottawa is francophone.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. Obviously, there is a disagreement concerning the facts in this case, but the hon. member raised a point of order. I wonder what part of the standing orders is at issue here. I still have not figured it out.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what is at issue here is simply that the House was misled by members who attributed to me comments that I never made by targeting the statement that I made under Standing Order 31, which is found on page 598 of yesterday's Hansard , dated Tuesday, February 13, 2001.

Mr. Speaker, you will be able to see that what was said in the House was inaccurate and that my integrity and honesty have been impugned. I ask these two members of parliament to withdraw their comments and to apologize.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member has made his point. Unfortunately, in the House there are often times when one member quotes another but notfully. We had several examples during Oral Question Period today. Often, in questions and answers, different portions of the same letter or article are quoted.

I do not consider it a point of order when a member makes a statement in the House concerning something that was said elsewhere or even here in the House. There may be disagreement among the members concerning the interpretation of remarks but it is not up to the Speaker to rule that this is a point of order or to require members to rephrase.

If the two members who spoke on this topic wish to withdraw what they said, that is a decision for them to make, but this is not, in my view, a point of order.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while I bow to the wisdom of your ruling, I would just like to raise one point not mentioned by my colleague.

The member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac attributed to my colleague something he never said, to the effect that the francophones in Ottawa were unworthy of hosting the Games of la Francophonie.

Mr. Speaker, this is an extremely serious accusation which could mislead all those now listening, and which did not arise from anything my colleague said but solely from the desire of the member and of the government House leader to twist our words, to make us look bad to francophones in the rest of Canada, when it is absolutely false, unfair and wrong, and they must apologize.

[The Speaker]

The Speaker does not recall a reference to a particular member during the question or during the answer.

I will look at the blues today, and if I have anything to add, I will get back to the House tomorrow or the next day.

Privilege

[The Speaker]

Since a few members have indicated to me that the ruling I delivered yesterday on the question of privilege raised by the member for Sarnia—Lambton had led to some confusion, I wish to provide clarification immediately.

At page 609 of Debates I stated:

In addressing this most unfortunate situation the board has been guided by the usual principles of human resource management—

The text should go on to read:

—and in seeking a solution the administration of the House has made every effort to reach a fair and equitable settlement with the parties.

I thank hon. members for their attention.

Sustainable Development

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to subsection 24(2) of the Auditor General Act, I have the honour to present 28 sustainable development strategies, in both official languages, on behalf of the government.

These strategies are one of the means through which departments and agencies of government are taking decisive action to ensure that the environment, the economy and society are considered in policy and program decisions in an integrated manner. This is a clear demonstration of the government's strong support for the advancement of sustainable development in Canada and abroad.

In the spirit of sustainable development I have decided not to have paper distribution of these strategies to members of the House and senators unless requested. Members and senators will receive an information pamphlet on how to obtain them from the Internet if they need that assistance or, if they wish, they may ask for a hard copy.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34, I have the honour to present to the House reports from the Canadian branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association concerning the 46th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference, which was held in London and Edinburgh from September 20 to September 29; the 12th Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar, which was held in Bermuda from October 14 to October 22; and the 23rd Canadian Regional Seminar which was held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, from October 19 to October 26, 2000.

Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-264, an act to amend the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act (marriage between persons of the same sex).

Mr. Speaker, today being Valentine's Day, the day that we celebrate love and romance, it is timely that I table the bill that would amend federal law to clearly recognize same sex marriages, the right of gay and lesbian people to marry their partners if they choose to do so.

The bill reflects the inclusive spirit of the charter of rights as well as recent Supreme Court of Canada rulings, and celebrates the diversity of Canadian families. It in no way threatens traditional heterosexual marriage or religious traditions. Rather, it acknowledges that our relationships as gay and lesbian people are just as strong, just as loving, just as committed as any others. Canada should follow the lead of the Netherlands in recognizing same sex civil marriages.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I hope you will indulge me on this special Valentine's Day by allowing me to wish Happy Valentine's Day to my partner Max across the land in Burnaby, British Columbia.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

A Day For Hearts

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-265, an act establishing A Day for Hearts: Congenital Heart Defect Awareness Day.

Mr. Speaker, it being St. Valentine's Day, I think it is most appropriate to introduce the bill today. A Day for Hearts is the short title. The purpose of the bill is to raise awareness. Hopefully that will focus on the problem of congenital heart disease, which affects approximately 4,200 newborn children every year, one in every one hundred children born.

The purpose of the bill is to raise awareness. Throughout Canada in each and every year beginning in the year 2002, the 14th day of February shall be known under the name of A Day for Hearts: Congenital Heart Defect Awareness Day.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Canada Marriage Act

[Jim Pankiw, Canadian Alliance, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-266, an act to amend the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act in order to protect the legal definition of marriage by invoking section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Mr. Speaker, today being St. Valentine's Day, it is my pleasure to introduce a bill to amend the Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act in order to protect the legal definition of marriage by invoking section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The bill is consistent with a motion passed by the House on June 8, 1999, confirming the definition of marriage as a union of a man and woman, although not consistent with official NDP policy, nor the publicly stated policy of the member for Burnaby—Douglas, nor in fact the leader of the New Democratic Party.

It is my hope that the bill will eventually be voted on and passed in the House in order to entrench in law the definition of marriage.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Pest Control Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-267, an act to prohibit the use of chemical pesticides for non-essential purposes.

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill, titled an act to prohibit the use of chemical pesticides for non-essential purposes, is to place a moratorium on the cosmetic use of chemical pesticides in the home and garden and on recreational facilities, until scientific evidence that shows such use is safe has been presented to parliament and concurred in by a parliamentary committee.

The bill aims to shift the dangerous burden of proof. As things actually stand, the public good bears the burden of proof. We abundantly spray the pesticides in our yards and playgrounds, which are chemicals designed to kill. Yet, we have no evidence, scientific or medical, that accurately demonstrates their safety. Thus we spray these pesticides at the expense of the health of Canadians.

The bill would reverse this situation by requiring proof of pesticide safety, which would have to be submitted to parliament and approved in committee before allowing their use.

I strongly urge this House to consider this bill, the basic purpose of which is to put the health of Canadians before anything else.

Let us, as parliamentarians, give a valentine to all Canadians by adopting the bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Canada Well-Being Measurement Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-268, an act to develop and provide for the publication of measures to inform Canadians about the health and well-being of people, communities and ecosystems in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise today on St. Valentine's Day to present to the House a bill entitled the Canada well-being measurement act. The greatest testimony to love is giving the next generation the protection, education and the necessary assets so that it may take its flight into the world.

It is significant, therefore, that the Canada well-being measurement bill is being introduced in the House on Valentine's Day.

The purpose of the bill is to expand the way we measure the well-being of the country, so that it will encompass social, economic and environmental factors. These factors affect the health of Canada's people, communities and ecosystems.

Such factors will increase awareness of challenges and successes facing our country and will thereby enable the people of Canada and the House to steer more carefully toward a secure and satisfying future.

I offer this bill as a Valentine's Day gift to our beloved young people and to all future generations.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Petitions

[Janko Peric, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the privilege to present to the House a petition from close to 500 concerned citizens in my riding of Cambridge.

They wish to draw to the attention of the House that the chemical RU-486 kills the human fetus in the first two months of pregnancy and is now being tested in Canada. There are a number of dangerous side effects to this drug and it poses a serious threat to the health of the mother.

The petitioners pray and request that the Parliament of Canada not introduce changes to the current legislation or protocol that would allow the RU-486 method of abortion to be licensed in Canada.

I wish a happy Valentine's Day to my wife, my daughter and my granddaughter.

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

Mr. Speaker, once again it is my honour to table two petitions in the House calling for a moratorium on the cosmetic use of pesticides, one of which was actually taken by an elector in my riding.

As with my private member's bill, the issue of the non-essential use of pesticides, or what we like to call cosmetic use of pesticides, is a significant danger to the health of Canadians.

We do not have the science or the medical proof to show that it is not dangerous. We are putting our children's lives and pregnant mothers in danger. We are calling for a moratorium on the cosmetic use of pesticides.

It is with great honour that I table these two petitions that support my private member's bill. I call on the House to adopt the legislation and to do it quickly.

[Rose-Marie Ur, Liberal, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am honoured to present a petition on behalf of the citizens of Grand Bend in the London area.

They urge the government to eliminate the gas additive MMT, as it has a negative impact both on the health of people and on our ecosystem at large.

Questions On The Order Paper

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.