Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to address the House today at third reading of Bill C-17, an act to amend the Budget Implementation Act, 1997, including the provision of additional funding to the Canada foundation for innovation, and to amend the Financial Administration Act.

I will begin by discussing the increased funding for the Canada foundation for innovation. The CFI was established in the 1997 budget and remains high on the government's list of funding priorities for university research.

Hon. members will recall that the foundation, an independent corporation operating at arm's length from government, was established to provide support for modernizing research infrastructure at universities, research hospitals and not for profit research institutions in the areas of health, environment, science and engineering.

The 1997 budget provided for an initial upfront federal investment of $800 million. An additional $200 million followed in the 1999 budget. Without the extra funding, the foundation's awards would have ended in 2001.

A further $900 million was subsequently announced in the 2000 budget and support for the CFI was extended until 2005. To date the foundation's activities have been well received by its partners, groups like universities, research hospitals, business, the voluntary sector, individuals and provincial governments also provide funding.

The provinces, for example, strongly support the participation of their research institutions in CFI programs, either by contributing to CFI supported projects or by establishing complementary funding programs of their own. Quebec and Ontario, for example, provide matching funds for CFI awards.

The CFI provides up to 40% of funding to support research infrastructure projects, all of which helps universities and research hospitals acquire the laboratories and equipment they need for state of the art research.

So far the CFI has supported 95 research organizations across Canada, including 65 universities, 18 colleges and 12 research hospitals. Bill C-17 legislates an additional $1.25 billion in funding in 2000-01 to the Canada foundation for innovation and extends its activities to the year 2010. The amount includes $500 million from the October 2000 economic statement and budget update, and a further $750 million that was announced on March 6 by the Ministers of Finance and Industry.

The $500 million announced in last October's economic statement will be invested in two ways. First, $400 million will allow the foundation to contribute to the operating costs of new awards. The remaining $100 million will help support the participation of Canadian researchers in leading edge international research projects and facilities that offer significant research benefits to Canada.

The additional $750 million announced in March for the CFI will build on this funding by providing additional stability to universities as they plan their future research priorities.

The CFI needs the additional funding to help it support the operating costs of new awards and the participation of Canadian researchers in international research projects. Further, additional funding for the CFI would help the federal government to reach its goal of at least doubling its current investment in R and D by the year 2010, a commitment that was made in the Speech from the Throne in January.

Bill C-17 also amends the Financial Administration Act. It is a statute that encompasses the financial administration of the Government of Canada, the establishment and maintenance of its accounts, and the control of crown corporations. The act also sets out the statutory framework under which the government can borrow money.

Bill C-17 would improve the operation of the Financial Administration Act. It would reinstate the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board as one of the crown corporations exempted from divisions I to IV of part X of the Financial Administration Act. The exemption would protect the independence of the board while the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board legislation would provide a strong accountability regime.

Amendments to the Canadian Wheat Board Act in 1998 inadvertently deleted the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board from subsection 85(1) of the Financial Administration Act, meaning that the board was subject to various crown corporation control provisions under the Financial Administration Act, which put it in conflict with its own mandate. Clearly it was neither wanted nor intended and Bill C-17 would correct that error. This change would be retroactive to December 1998 to ensure that the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board had always operated within the laws of Canada.

The second amendment reinforces the authority of parliament over any borrowing by or on behalf of the crown. It provides for greater certainty that it is parliament that must specifically authorize borrowings made on behalf of Canada.

The measure would also provide clarification and consistency respecting the role of the Minister of Finance ensuring appropriate management of government indebtedness. Bill C-17 would ensure that all borrowings, not just the borrowing of money, are subject to the supervision by the Minister of Finance.

In closing, the amendments to the Financial Administration Act would improve its operation. The changes to the Budget Implementation Act, 1997 that would provide additional funding to the Canada foundation for innovation and extend its activities to the year 2010 are consistent with the government's commitment to at least doubling its current investment in R and D by the year 2010.

The Canada foundation for innovation is deserving of this increased funding so that it can continue to promote research in Canada and inspire young new Canadian researchers.

I know that my colleagues in the House support investment in education, research and innovation. I encourage them to pass the legislation later this day.

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

1:40 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jason Kenney Canadian Alliance Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to split the balance of my time with my hon. colleague from St. Albert.

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

1:40 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

In this case the second party to get the floor in this debate would have 40 minutes. Does the member from Calgary Southeast have the consent of the House?

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

1:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

1:40 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jason Kenney Canadian Alliance Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise at third reading of Bill C-17, an act to amend the Budget Implementation Act, 1997 and the Financial Administration Act.

There are two parts to the bill. I will emphasize the aspects related to the Budget Implementation Act, 1997. My colleague, the chair of the public accounts committee and chief critic for the treasury board, will address the amendments to the Financial Administration Act.

The bill seeks to increase funding for research and development through the Canada foundation for innovation by some $750 million over an undefined period of 10 years. This follows quite logically the remarks I just delivered on Bill C-22 when I discussed at length the irresponsible approach the government was taking to program spending.

I spoke about how in the fiscal year just ended program spending had grown by 7.1%, how the government had overspent its budgeted amount every fiscal year, and how for the next four years the government was estimated to average spending increases of about 5%. I expect it would be substantially more than that.

I also talked about the phenomenon known as March madness where ministers make spending announcements without proper authorization. I talked about how in April 2001, the last month of the fiscal year, we spent some $16 billion or 70% more than the average monthly amount.

This is of relevance to the bill before us. The government is proposing that we authorize an additional $750 million for the Canada foundation for innovation. Let me say at the outset that the official opposition, the Canadian Alliance, supports in principle an appropriate and responsible level of funding for research, development and innovation in academia which can be of economic value to the country. We believe government can play an appropriate role in that respect.

However such funding must be limited by the available resources. We are concerned that the $750 million funding envelope has no defined time period or parameters. It is not limited. The government says it may be spent over the next 10 years or so, or perhaps not. That is not a responsible approach. For a spending program like this the government has an obligation to come before us and detail where it expects to come up with the money and in which years and to book the money as spent in each of those fiscal years.

The auditor general has not only criticized the ongoing practice of March madness as inherently inefficient. He has repeatedly criticized the practice of booking future expenditures in one year as the government did with the famous millennium scholarship program and as it is doing now with the Canada foundation for innovation.

This accounting practice would not be accepted in the private sector. The government is ignoring its own rules and the recommendations of the auditor general in the way it is managing the moneys it seeks to authorize through the bill.

Another concern is that the government does not have a clear framework for financing science or research and development. We are dealing with major scientific and R and D projects on a case by case, piecemeal basis. My colleague from Calgary Southwest, our science and technology critic, has made and will continue to make important remarks on the subject. We need very clear criteria for the allocation of money for science, technology, research and development. Throwing the money into a big envelope and saying it will somehow be distributed on an equitable and meaningful basis is not good enough.

How do we adjudicate the relative economic and social value of a cyclotron project in British Columbia versus a nuclear research facility in Ontario versus a research program for astronomy? All these things come before us. Each has merits in and of itself but parliamentarians have no overall objective criteria by which to judge the value of competing R and D demands.

For that reason our party platform proposes that parliament appoint a chief scientist, a position which exists in many other national governments. Such a person would be the principal adviser to both the government and the legislature on scientific questions. He or she could help develop a clear framework to priorize the many competing demands related to R and D, science and technology. This would not require a large or expensive bureaucracy and it would be helpful to have such objective, external advice.

Those are our concerns regarding the first part of the bill. I will briefly outline our concerns regarding the amendments to the Financial Administration Act, concerns my colleague for St. Albert will elaborate further.

The clause seeks to clarify that parliament must provide explicit authority to departments, agencies, boards and commissions of the government in order to incur debt. That is very interesting.

I was briefed on the bill by officials from the Department of Finance who explained that the clause came about because of one of the government's innumerable legislative drafting errors. The error allows the Financial Administration Act to be interpreted in a way that permits departments and agencies to incur debt on their own authority without explicit authorization from parliament delegated to the Minister of Finance.

Over the past couple of years the Department of National Defence has been in a pitched quasi-legal battle with the Department of Finance over this question. The DND has sought independent borrowing authority not delegated by parliament which of course has the power of the purse.

We therefore support the aspect of the amendment regarding borrowing authority. However it begs the question: How can the government consistently bring forth legislation with such significant drafting errors which parliament must then spend valuable legislative time rectifying? That is a serious concern.

In bill after bill, as finance critic, I deal with all sorts of tax amendments which seek to amend errors in bills originally presented by the government. We must accept to a certain extent the bona fides of departmental officials and the government, the ministers who bring these bills to parliament, that they are technically correct. However too often they are not, as in this instance.

The amendment also deals with certain regulations surrounding the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board because of another drafting error. When the government made amendments to the Canadian Wheat Board Act it forgot to include the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. The CPP investment board is therefore subject to intervention by the finance minister. He can go into the CPP investment fund and strip cash out of it, contrary to assurances given at the time of passage of Bill C-2 in the last parliament which created the CPP investment board.

However because of a drafting error the finance minister, contrary to every assurance granted us, can go into the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and fire personnel, trash or write his own business plan, and strip cash out of the fund. This loophole needs to be plugged. It should never have occurred in the first place.

We will therefore be opposing the legislation. We will urge the government to take a much closer look at bills of this nature to ensure they do not create future problems which we must then go back and solve.

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

1:50 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

John Williams Canadian Alliance St. Albert, AB

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague from Calgary Southeast indicated, I will be speaking to certain aspects of the bill. One aspect on which I will focus is the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and the fact that it is retroactively being exempted from large sections of the Financial Administration Act.

The Financial Administration Act is a very thick document that governs and dictates how the government manages its internal finances. A large number of agencies, boards and so on must conform to the Financial Administration Act to ensure their finances are handled appropriately. Why would they not be? However this clause would exempt the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board from the FAA.

Also it is backdated to December 31, 1998. I understand from the government it is the old housekeeping rule that somewhere along the line it was originally exempt from the Financial Administration Act. When somebody was doing some drafting of another piece of legislation they inadvertently omitted to keep the exemption there, but it slipped back in, that they were subject to it.

We know there is a fundamental principle that legislation cannot be backdated. It is never retroactive. Why is it in this case? If we go to some particular piece of legislation and read some fine arcane little rule, it says that where the government makes a mistake it can backdate it if it so desires. Do we live in a real democratic country or do we not? That is what it is coming to.

As I mentioned earlier, when we were discussing Bill C-22 and the $125 grant to all Canadians who qualified for the GST tax credit, I questioned the legality of the information being taken from the Income Tax Act. The act guarantees the confidentiality of income tax returns. The government dipped into it just so it could send out cheques for $125. The Income Tax Act does not give the government the legal authority to get the information.

Here again we are having legislation backdated a couple or three years just because somebody did not do their homework properly or inadvertently made a mistake. The net result is that the Liberals are imposing it in the House. They will use their majority. They will bring out the whip. They will lash people into submission, to say this is good stuff. In a democratic country it is not good stuff when they have to backdate legislation. It cannot be.

What is the government actually doing with the backdating of legislation? It is exempting the board from being examined by the Auditor General of Canada, the watchdog of Canadians. What is the AG being prevented from examining? He is being prevented from looking at the $40 billion or more of money Canadians have set aside for their retirement. It is being held in trust by the government and being managed by the particular board. The auditor general cannot, by virtue of the legislation, go in there to take a look and assure Canadians that all is well. The government does not want that. It does not want these kind of questions to be asked.

I say as a Canadian that the people in my riding of St. Albert, and I am sure I speak for all Canadians, would like to know that the pension plan is being managed properly, securely, safely, prudently and so on. They will never know that. They will never be allowed to ask that question because the auditor general will never be allowed to ask that question by virtue of clause 6 in Bill C-17. It is absolutely despicable. Therefore I move:

That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following therefor:

“Bill C-17, an act to amend the Budget Implementation Act, 1997 and the Financial Administration Act, be not now read a third time, but be referred back to the Standing Committee on Finance for the purpose of reconsidering clause 6 and to consider the desirability of hearing from the Auditor General relating to his concern about the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board”.

Budget Implementation Act, 1997Government Orders

2 p.m.

The Speaker

I know all hon. members were looking forward to another 15 minutes of speech from the hon. member for St. Albert but, unfortunately, by moving his amendment now he has lost his time. When the House resumes consideration of this matter later this day, the debate will be on the amendment.

Missing ChildrenStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Assad Liberal Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, last week, a father kidnapped one of his children in the daycare's yard, took the child to Dorval airport and left Canada for his country of origin.

Thanks to a concerted effort involving the resources of the federal program “Our Missing Children”, involving the RCMP, and the Montreal Urban Community Police Department in partnership with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Immigration Canada, the kidnapper was arrested as he was boarding the plane for New York City.

I congratulate all those who took part in this effort for having quickly foiled this kidnapping attempt, and I am proud of the program “Our Missing Children”, which has helped find over 500 children over the past 15 years.

St. George's Anglican ChurchStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Scott Reid Canadian Alliance Lanark—Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the parishioners of St. George's Anglican Church in Clayton, Ontario, who are celebrating the 100th anniversary of their church this year.

I am happy to welcome the most Rev. Michael Peers, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, who visited St. George's this past Saturday, May 12, to begin the anniversary celebrations.

St. George's Church enjoys a proud and distinguished heritage. In 1899, the decision was made by the local congregation to erect a new structure to replace the original Grace Church in Clayton.

With almost all the labour and money donated by the parishioners, the cornerstone was laid on Victoria Day, 1901, and the church was officially opened by the bishop on October 23 of the same year. It is an architectural marvel that is admired, and it impresses engineers and artists to this day.

Today St. George's Church plays the same important role that it has served for four generations. Under its current rector, Father David Andrew, the congregation of St. George's is growing.

To all the congregation of St. George's, I wish a happy 100th anniversary and God bless them.

Cannes International Film FestivalStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Claude Drouin Liberal Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I inform the House of the participation of Quebecers at Cannes international film festival.

First, the French-Quebec production La répétition is in official competition. Actress Pascale Bussières is extremely popular, and all of Quebec and Canada is proud of her. We already knew that Ms. Bussières was extraordinarily talented. It is an honour to have that talent recognized on the international cultural scene.

Then there is a Quebec production from Bernard Émond entitled La femme qui boit , featuring actors Elyse Guilbault and Luc Picard. This film is not in official competition, but it is a magnificent reflection of the excellent movies that are produced here in Canada.

Good luck to the film La répétition and to Pascale Bussières during this prestigious competition.

Brenda BuryStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON

Mr. Speaker, last week we paid homage to a great Canadian prime minister by unveiling his portrait. Today I rise to pay homage to the great Canadian artist who painted this portrait.

Brenda Bury was born, educated and trained in England. She took an honours degree in fine art at the University of Reading where she studied under Anthony Betts.

Ms. Bury travelled to Canada for just over a year where she painted portraits, beginning with the then prime minister, John Diefenbaker. She left Canada after a short period and returned to England where she thought England's strong tradition for portraiture would improve her skills. In 1964 she painted Lord Mountbatten of Burma and it was he who later arranged for her to paint the Queen herself.

Ms. Bury returned to Canada in the 1980s and set up a studio in Toronto. Very shortly after her return, she found herself back in England at number 10 Downing Street to paint a lifesize portrait of Prime Minister Thatcher and her advisors in the Falklands conflict. Ms. Bury has also painted the Right Hon. Jeanne Sauvé, a speaker of this House.

I myself have had the privilege of sitting for Brenda Bury. I will never forget the magic and amazement the first time I saw my likeness revealed on the canvass. I am thrilled that her talent and skills are being recognized by the people of Canada.

Huntington's DiseaseStatements By Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

Alan Tonks Liberal York South—Weston, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House and all Canadians that May has been proclaimed Huntington's Disease Awareness Month by the Huntington Society of Canada.

Huntington's Disease is a hereditary brain disorder, with devastating mental and physical effects. One in every 10,000 Canadians has Huntington's Disease. Unfortunately there is still no cure for the disease and no preventative treatments are currently available.

The Huntington Society of Canada is a national network of volunteers and professionals united in the fight against Huntington's Disease. They are focused on finding new treatments toward a cure.

I ask my hon. colleagues to please join me in extending best wishes for a successful public awareness campaign to the Huntington Society of Canada.

Police Officer Of The Year AwardStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Chuck Cadman Canadian Alliance Surrey North, BC

Mr. Speaker, May 1 marked the 50th anniversary of the RCMP in Surrey. Many of the detachment's original members attended the ceremonies. On May 1, 1951, there was only one traffic light in Surrey. The detachment now numbers nearly 400 serving a population approaching 350,000.

Last Wednesday the Surrey chamber of commerce hosted the fifth annual Police Officer of the Year awards dinner. Award recipients were: the Arnold Silzer Community Policing Initiative Award to the Surrey Minor Hockey Association; the Police and Business Partnership Award to the Lark Group; the Policing Volunteer of the Year Award to Bill Brand; the Police Municipal Employee of the Year Award to Vivian Thompson; the Police Officer of the Year Award, as nominated by members, employees and volunteers of the Surrey detachment, to Corporal Al Bouchard; and the Police Office of the Year Award, as nominated by the community at large, to Corporal Greg Roche.

Congratulations to this year's award recipients and a sincere thanks to those who have served Surrey with distinction over the past half century.

International TradeStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Diane Marleau Liberal Sudbury, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government can be justifiably proud of Canada's exceptional performance throughout the year 2000 in the area of international trade and investment.

These are the motive forces behind our economy and prosperity. The figures cannot lie: 319,000 full time jobs were created, taking the unemployment figures to the lowest level since 1974. We also attracted $93 billion in direct foreign investments, which indicates a massive vote of confidence in our economic future.

Canadian trade and investment have attained new record levels in 2000 for the ninth consecutive year of economic growth; this is the longest and most stable period of expansion since the 1960s.

Given all these successes, I believe we can have confidence in the Government of Canada to negotiate international agreements that will serve the interests of all Canadians.

Young OffendersStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Bloc Quebecois, through its justice critic and member of parliament for Berthier—Montcalm, along with actor Marc Beaupré, launched a tour of Quebec with the theme “At least give us a chance”.

The main objective of this undertaking is to express aloud what everyone in Quebec is thinking. All stakeholders in Quebec are opposed to this reform, judging it to be pointless and even dangerous, as far as its anticipated effects on reducing crime in the long term are concerned.

The present young offender legislation works very well in Quebec. Proof of this is that the youth crime rate in Quebec has dropped 23% and this legislation has made it possible for Quebec to record the lowest rate in Canada.

This is why Quebec says no to a piece of legislation that is focused more on repression than rehabilitation. It says no to Bill C-7. Consequently, we are asking the federal government to allow Quebec to opt out of application of Bill C-7 and to allow us to continue to apply the current legislation.

National Police WeekStatements By Members

May 14th, 2001 / 2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON

Mr. Speaker, May 13 to 19 is National Police Week. The purpose is to raise public awareness and forge stronger ties between police forces and the communities they serve.

Police week results from a collaborative effort between the Government of Canada and the provincial solicitors general. This week will be marked by special activities and displays that promote the idea of co-operation and interaction between police and their communities to promote public safety and well-being. We invite Canadians to participate in these activities.

Our police are extremely devoted, courageous and vigilant. We are proud to take this opportunity to recognize their hard work in ensuring that our communities are safe and secure.

Keith MannStatements By Members

2:05 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Bob Mills Canadian Alliance Red Deer, AB

Mr. Speaker, today I want to give one of the hardest tributes I will ever have to make in the House.

Last Friday evening, Red Deer, Alberta and Canada lost one of the most dedicated volunteers any city, province or country could have. Keith Mann was killed in a tragic traffic accident in Red Deer. He was the head of the music program at Red Deer College, leader of the Red Deer Royals Band, proud member of the Rotary Club and, when it came to music, the number one promoter of Red Deer, Alberta and Canada.

Keith taught music in Hawaii, across Canada, the United States and Europe.

He was loved by our community and all the families whose lives were literally moulded by this great Canadian.

Keith's motto was leave Canada a better place than he found it. Keith was a true Canadian hero. I ask all members to remember their volunteers. We have just lost one of our very best.

I send our condolences and prayers to his wife Marilyn, to his family and to the community who have lost the very best.

HealthStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Liberal

Hélène Scherrer Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity afforded me to congratulate the Government of Canada on its commitment to reducing tobacco consumption.

Smoking kills 45,000 people every year. This is more than accidents, suicides, homicides and alcoholism combined. It is one of our most pressing public health problems.

Over the next five years, over $480 million will be spent on the tobacco control strategy. Taxation of tobacco products will be reformed and additional funding given to law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with the laws.

These actions combine with the objectives set by the Government of Canada. Action already undertaken and these new measures are important milestones in improving public health.

The EnvironmentStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

NDP

Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, the Sydney Tar Ponds are North America's largest toxic waste site. The area contains over 700,000 tonnes of toxic sludge. Toxins include arsenic, lead, tar, benzene, kerosene, polyaromatic hydrocarbons and the list goes on.

Stomach cancer is 78% higher than the rest of Nova Scotia, cervical cancer is 134% higher and brain cancer is 68% to 72% higher.

Instead of taking action, the government is awaiting yet another study. This time it is a computer analysis based on incomplete information, using hypothetical exposures to healthy people to calculate acute health risks. In other words, another stalling tactic. People are sick and dying while the government stalls.

It is very important for the government today to commit to an immediate permanent move for those families living in unsafe neighbourhoods adjacent to the tar ponds in Sydney, Nova Scotia.

Montfort HospitalStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Bloc

Benoît Sauvageau Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, today, the fight for the survival of the Montfort hospital resumes, as the Ontario court of appeal hears the appeal by the province's attorney general.

However, three judges of the divisional court unanimously decided in November 1999 that the Montfort was necessary to the advancement and improvement of the Franco-Ontarian identity as a cultural minority in Ontario and to this culture's protection against assimilation.

The problem here is not just linguistic, but is also and primarily a brutal attack on the social contract between all minorities in this country and the majority. This is perhaps much less a legal issue than a moral one.

The government of Ontario must respect the rights of Franco-Ontarians and immediately take all the means necessary to ensure that the only francophone hospital between Hull and Victoria will continue to fulfill its mandate.

National Drinking Water StandardsStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, for Canadians to regain confidence in the water they drink, we need to invest in water quality. At present there is no charge when we draw water from wells, when industries discharge polluted water and when we use water at home we pay very little.

Until now we have managed water mostly to ensure an adequate supply. From now on we should shift the focus to preventing water pollution from harmful agricultural and industrial activities as well as using water more efficiently.

In addition, governments should, instead of reducing, raise taxes so as to be able to modernize and improve many waterworks, plants and infrastructures in villages, towns, reserves and urban centres.

The current water crisis is man-made and therefore can be resolved. We all can regain confidence in tap water, provided we learn to respect the value of water.

HeritageStatements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Gerald Keddy Progressive Conservative South Shore, NS

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister wants to leave a legacy of his tenure that involves the bulldozing of three blocks of properties and moving two heritage buildings. This would free up the view of the parliament buildings. All this is apparently being done in secrecy.

The Progressive Conservative Party supports heritage, but it should be noted that before the grandiose project becomes a reality, or even comes close to becoming a reality, parliament should be consulted.

Canadians want a legacy of jobs and opportunities, safe water and clean air, not a secret plan to erect a monument to the Prime Minister's vanity. The Prime Minister should end this buying spree now and quash the plans for Champs de Chrétien.