Debates of Feb. 9th, 2001

Government On Line

[Hélène Scherrer, Liberal, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on February 2, the Prime Minister launched the Government of Canada's redesigned website.

The purpose of this site is to help Canadians surf the Net and thus inform and empower themselves.

The site was designed to provide Canadians with easier access to the services and information they need.

Members of the business community, in Canada and elsewhere, will also find the site useful because of the information it contains on Canada's political, economic, social and cultural climate.

As the Prime Minister said, the government on line initiative provides Canadians with electronic access to government services, as reaffirmed in the Speech from the Throne.

The purpose of this project is nothing less than making Canada the most connected nation in the world.

Health

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a recent poll in the Vancouver Sun is yet more evidence that Vancouverites are ready to embrace significant change in drug policy reform. It is long overdue.

When I first rose in the House in 1997, I spoke to the Minister of Health and told him about the devastation, pain and impact on crime and safety that are the result of Canada's drug laws. I also spoke about the health crisis in my riding in Vancouver East.

After nearly four years of stalling and wrangling, it is time to take the volumes of studies and expert opinions and reform Canada's drug policies. The Vancouver agreement and the mayor's framework for action are a start, but I believe we need to go further if we are to save lives, reduce crime and improve the health of the community.

In August 1998, I introduced a motion in the House of Commons calling on the government to set up clinical trials for a heroin prescription program. I implore the Minister of Health and the Minister of Justice to listen to the people of Vancouver and take the lead in changing Canada's drug strategy by bringing in heroin trials, safe injection sites and decriminalization for possession.

Palestinians

[Mark Assad, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago some members of the House met with Professor Halper from Ben-Gurion University in Israel, co-ordinator of the Israeli committee against house demolitions, and with Salim Sharamweh, a Palestinian working alongside Professor Halper. Their description of the occupation in the West Bank and the demolition of Palestinian homes was very poignant and disturbing.

The day prior they had a radio interview with the CBC that was very informative, especially in light of the latest election in Israel.

Many of the media in Ottawa would not grant an interview. The Ottawa Citizen went so far as to say that it was simply not a priority. I say to the Ottawa Citizen , the leading newspaper in this capital, shame. This refusal denotes an attitude of bias by ignoring the plight of the Palestinians. It is the obligation of the Ottawa Citizen to give its readers a complete picture of the crisis in the occupied territory.

Regional Development

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his speech on Tuesday, the Conservative-Independent-Liberal member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord told us that he was looking out for his region and that that was why he had gone over to the Liberal Party, a party he did not hesitate to openly criticize barely six months ago.

He attacked the Government of Quebec, which he accused of stifling regional development in the Saguenay region. This is nothing but demagoguery. Here are a few facts.

In the case of road infrastructures alone, the provincial government collected $37.5 million in gasoline taxes and then turned around and put $30 million of that back into roads in the Saguenay region—a return of 80%.

Last year, the federal government collected $35 million in excise taxes on gasoline and did not reinvest a single cent.

The member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord should know that there is no one blinder than someone who refuses to see. Once again, he has picked the wrong side to sit on. The people of the Saguenay region know who is really looking out for them—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

Speech From The Throne

[Jeannot Castonguay, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate you and wish you good luck in your new duties.

The Liberal Speech from the Throne proposes a project that will make Canada a country rich in possibilities, a country where excellence is acknowledged, a country in which everyone can participate fully in the economy and in society.

We are going to focus our efforts on ensuring that everyone benefits from the fruits of our economy. The unemployment rate is at its lowest, there is strong growth and workers are prepared to respond to the requirements of globalization within the context of a knowledge-based economy.

All Canadians can be proud of the country they have built together. We are going to build a future in which all of us, from the weakest to the strongest, have access to the programs and services they require.

These are some of the salient points of the intentions expressed in the latest Speech from the Throne.

Hockey

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the many dedicated volunteers and sponsors in my riding who organized and hosted the hugely successful world under 17 hockey challenge in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia.

The tournament took place over the Christmas holidays and featured the best players in the world from Russia, Germany, the Czech Republic, the U.S. and Finland. Canada was represented by five regional teams. I make special mention of locals Gary Matheson and Glen Frazee of Pictou County, who played for Team Atlantic.

The success of this tournament was due to the enthusiasm of local volunteers and sponsors and the dedication of the local volunteer organizing committee. I congratulate committee chair Elaine Flynn and vice chairs John Lynn and Stu Rath, as well as the Pictou County Regional Development Commission and Sport Nova Scotia for their support.

The exceptional planning and event management of these individuals and organizations allowed us to host a super event that provided our region with great sporting events and economic spinoffs.

In the championship game, Team U.S.A. captured the gold in a thrilling 5:4 win over Team Pacific before 3,000 fans. I extend a hearty congratulations to those involved. It was a world class tournament hosted by a world class town.

Diabetes

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Sunday, February 11, will be the 79th anniversary of the discovery of insulin by Canadians Frederick Banting, Charles Best, James Collip and James MacLeod.

In 1923 Frederick Banting was awarded the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine and was knighted in 1934 for his discovery.

Insulin is used in the treatment of diabetes and is credited with saving millions of lives. Over two million Canadians live with diabetes. This would not be possible without the discovery made by these great Canadians. To them we extend our thanks.

Human Rights

[Deepak Obhrai, Canadian Alliance, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, trade and investment are great forces for change and prosperity, but these forces alone are not enough. Increasing trade flows to China will do nothing to promote prosperity if its people are not allowed basic human rights.

Canadians from across the country have pleaded with the Prime Minister to use this trade mission to China as an opportunity to raise the issue of human rights. The Netherlands cancelled its participation in an official visit to China in protest over the Falun Gong issue.

Trade and human rights do not have to be mutually exclusive. The Prime Minister has promised to raise human rights issues at every stop on this trade mission. The official opposition will hold him to that promise.

Ethics Counsellor

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the ethics counsellor met with the Prime Minister to discuss changing the federal conflict of interest code to prevent the Prime Minister from lobbying heads of crown corporations.

Under these new suggested rules, the intense pressure that the Prime Minister put on the president of the Business Development Bank in 1997, a person by the way whose job depended on the whim of the Prime Minister, would now clearly be unethical. However, if it is unethical now, why was it not unethical then?

Is this change of heart not really a tacit admission that what the Prime Minister did was wrong?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have to reject the premise of the hon. member's question. As I understand it, the ethics commissioner, Mr. Wilson, made some proposals, only, to the Prime Minister for his consideration.

The Prime Minister has joined with business people from all over Canada on the team Canada mission to China. He has not had a chance to consider these proposals. I am sure he will do so and reach conclusions on them.

As I understand it, the hon. member is completely wrong when he says that Mr. Wilson has stated a final conclusion as to what changes should be made in the rules. The Prime Minister will be considering Mr. Wilson's ideas in this regard.

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

Mr. Speaker, he has not come to a conclusion because the Prime Minister has not told him what to say yet.

During the last election the ethics counsellor claimed that the Prime Minister was not in conflict when he forced the Business Development Bank to lend $600,000 to the Auberge Grand-Mère. The ethics counsellor took as an authority the B.C. conflict commissioner's report, yet he deliberately left out the portion of that report that prohibited ministers from lobbying agencies of the crown. Now he has suddenly had a revelation.

Was the ethics counsellor not simply a convenient political tool used by the Prime Minister during the last federal election campaign?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have to reject the unwarranted slur of the Alliance Party on the ethics counsellor.

The appointment of Mr. Wilson was the subject of consultation with the previous Reform Party and the second opposition party. I understand the opposition members spoke publicly in praise of Mr. Wilson, so there is no basis for that unwarranted slur on him now just because he has not turned into a tame tabby cat for the opposition.

The premise of the question is wrong. The ethics counsellor did not find that the Prime Minister did anything wrong. It was just the opposite. He said the Prime Minister was doing what other people do as MPs in carrying out their jobs.

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

Mr. Speaker, even the so-called ethics counsellor, who is by the way another person who owes his job to the Prime Minister—he is there at the whim of the Prime Minister—is now suggesting changes to the conflict of interest rules that would officially make the Prime Minister's actions improper.

On next Tuesday every member in the House will have an opportunity to fix this mess by voting in favour of an independent ethics commissioner who reports to parliament, not to the Prime Minister. This will be a fulfilment of the red book promise. It is exactly verbatim the promise made by the Liberal Party during the election campaign. It is lifted verbatim. It is exactly what the Liberals promised.

Will the Prime Minister allow his members to vote for a red book promise, lifted from his book, or will he tell them—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The Deputy Prime Minister.

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, back in 1995 the Reform, the party now called the Alliance Party, said about Mr. Wilson: “The person in the position right now is an honourable person. He is a man of integrity. He is a man that can be trusted”.

Nothing has changed in that regard. The nature of the appointment and the reporting mechanism was known at the time these words of praise and endorsement were stated for the ethics counsellor.

This Prime Minister and this government are the first in the history of Canada to appoint an ethics counsellor to give advice to MPs and ministers on matters of ethics connected with their work.

[Scott Reid, Canadian Alliance, Lanark—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, let us go over the facts again. The Prime Minister pressured the president of the Business Development Bank, a man directly dependent upon him for his job, to give a loan to a hotel next to a golf course in which the Prime Minister held an interest.

This is clearly inappropriate. The Prime Minister insists he did nothing wrong, even though the ethics counsellor now says the rules must be changed. Why did the Prime Minister still not recognize that what he was doing was in fact wrong?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's facts are wrong. The Prime Minister did not pressure the president of the Business Development Bank. I understand he made representations equivalent to what members of all parties do in carrying out their work as MPs.

I do not think it is correct to say that the ethics counsellor now says that what the Prime Minister did at the time was wrong. He has made proposals for consideration of changes in the rules eventually. The ethics counsellor categorically ruled. The opposition has said he was a man of integrity when he was appointed, and he is still a man of integrity. This man of integrity ruled that the Prime Minister did nothing wrong.

[Scott Reid, Canadian Alliance, Lanark—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the weakness of the ethics counsellor highlights the ethical weakness of the government.

First the ethics counsellor is forced to exonerate the Prime Minister's inappropriate behaviour, and only when the Prime Minister is ready is the ethics counsellor now allowed to discuss changing the rules.

When will the government create an independent ethics commissioner, like the provinces already have, who can demand a higher standard of behaviour from the Prime Minister and the government?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong when he says that the ethics counsellor was forced to give his ruling. That is totally wrong.

The spokesman for the then Reform Party said “The person in the position right now is an honourable person. He is a man of integrity. He is a man that can be trusted”. That was a fact in 1995 and it is a fact today. On that fact the hon. member on behalf of his party is wrong.

They are casting an unwarranted personal slur on a person of integrity. They should apologize and withdraw that slur.

Trade

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian government has recently imposed an embargo on Brazilian beef, on the grounds that there is a risk of contamination with mad cow disease.

Could the government tell us whether there are scientific grounds for this embargo, and if so, what they are?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I will try to be quick. For over two years North American countries have asked other countries that export beef to provide and fill out a questionnaire on how they monitor animals and feed products that come from the European Union where there is mad cow disease. Brazil had not provided that information to us.

When the information came forward from the FAO on January 25 we raised it again with Brazil. It has provided us with some information. We have not had time yet, but we will review that as quickly as possible to maintain food safety for Canadians.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the government's decision is based on scientific grounds, how can the minister explain that two Health Canada experts state that there are no scientific grounds and that the decision to ban beef imports is in fact nothing more than a reprisal against Brazil?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday and the day before the very same party across the way was asking for greater food safety and pointing out some of the reasons why it thought that should be the case. We will be as cautious as we possibly can.

Brazil will provide us with all the information. As I speak right now, officials from Canada, the United States and Mexico are reviewing the information they have. There will be a team of Canadian food inspection officials in Brazil next week to review that to see if the monitoring and enforcement there ensure that the meat products from that country are safe. If so, we will resume trade immediately.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the dispute opposing Bombardier and Embrair, the WTO largely supported Canada's view, thus allowing our country to implement retaliatory measures against Brazil, while still complying with WTO rules.

Does the government realize that if Canada's decision to ban Brazilian beef is not based on scientific facts, it is tantamount to doing to Brazil what Canada accused that country of doing to Bombardier, that is not to comply with international trade rules?