Debates of Oct. 10th, 2002

Government Contracts

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that with respect to the $235,000 that the hon. member questions, it was actually moneys that were paid by Parks Canada for actual changes that Parks Canada had requested.

Also, as the hon. member knows, if he looks at the total cost of the project and what the additional changes cost, it is less than 5% which is well below what is normal in the construction industry.

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

Mr. Speaker, I guess some fat cat has the minister's tongue.

Last week the ACOA minister said that the Greenwich development project was a very sound economic development. While Banks, the businessman, bargained hard, the regional minister rolled over and doled out.

Whose interests are being served when a who's who Liberal Party president can make $30 million in rent from a $3.5 million investment? Would the minister have us believe that this deal is in the best interests of P.E.I. and the Canadian taxpayers? I suggest the Auditor General join the ethics counsellor on the island this weekend. Answer that one, minister.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Minister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)]

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of good interests being taken care of. Let me read a little piece of correspondence that was sent to several stakeholders. It reads:

--let me acknowledge my pleasure that provincially owned lands transferred to the Federal Government are now part of the National Park system, and that development is occurring to provide the public the opportunity to interpret and appreciate the unique aspects of this landscape.

It goes on to say “we support the federal government”.

It is signed by the Progressive Conservative premier of P.E.I., the hon. Pat Binns.

[Jim Abbott, Canadian Alliance, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister appointed the Minister of Canadian Heritage to her office in 1996, at that time Joe Thornley and his firm had not received one single solitary Canadian heritage contract.

Joe Thornley was and is the heritage minister's campaign manager. Since 1996 Thornley has received over three-quarters of a million dollars in contracts from her department.

Is it not clearly obvious why the Prime Minister needs an independent ethics commissioner to answer to Parliament?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to advise the House that Heritage Canada did indeed follow all the prescribed contracting policies and procedures to acquire the communications services of Thornley Fallis Inc.

In fact, as the hon. member probably already knows, these services are provided via the department via a standing offer agreement which is actually put in place competitively through Public Works and Government Services Canada.

[Jim Abbott, Canadian Alliance, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, what the Prime Minister and the government is saying is that they do not find it a little strange that he had not had one single solitary contract prior to 1996 until this heritage minister took over.

Let us look at his credentials. Thornley was and is the heritage minister's campaign manager. Thornley was former president of the Liberal youth. Thornley is now chair of the federal Liberal agency, which just shows that membership does have its privileges.

Why can the Prime Minister not understand that we need an independent ethics commissioner?

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. member was listening. The contract was obtained through an open competitive process. It was done via Public Works and Government Services Canada, and it was also won on the merits.

Delegations Abroad

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister ridiculed the role of Quebec's general delegations abroad. Yet, his own Minister for International Trade said that when he was in the private sector, he was very pleased when he dealt with Quebec's general delegations.

Before insulting Quebec, should the Prime Minister not ask those cabinet members who know whether what he is about to say makes sense, and should he not refrain from making such statements if they do not make sense?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there was a time when all the provinces had delegations abroad, including British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Ontario, which had many. These provinces decided to reduce their spending and to close their offices. When they need someone to represent them, they use the facilities provided by the federal Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Quebec, however, has maintained its delegations and is spending over $100 million annually for that purpose. It has the right to do so. But that same government spends less than any other government on health.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the hon. member for Verdun—Saint-Henri—Saint-Paul—Pointe Saint-Charles hastened to point out to the Prime Minister that Quebec's delegations are an illustration of Quebec's distinct nature.

Even though the Prime Minister boasts about having recognized Quebec's distinct nature in a resolution adopted by the House of Commons, is he not being blinded again by his contempt for Quebec, to the point where his own members and ministers have to call him to order?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I was in the House when that resolution was passed, and the contempt came from the Bloc Quebecois, because its members refused to vote to support the resolution on a distinct society.

Government Programs

[Charlie Penson, Canadian Alliance, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Toronto Dominion chief economist, Don Drummond, has calculated how much the 22 spending promises from last week's throne speech will cost Canadian taxpayers. He says that it just simply will not work. He says that the government's lofty plans will not fit into the fiscal box the government has to work with.

Could the Prime Minister tell the House whether he has costed out his promises? Has he costed out these programs? Is he prepared to stand in the House today and tell Canadians how much they are going to cost?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first I would say to the hon. member that this is the government that has gone from a $42.5 billion deficit to back in the black. We have had five balanced budgets. When it comes to fiscal management and fiscal prudence, the government needs to take no lessons from the opposition.

I would point out that the Speech from the Throne has outlined a number of key initiatives of the government and we intend, through the budget process, to deliver in a timely and effective manner that Speech from the Throne.

[Charlie Penson, Canadian Alliance, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is just like we thought, there is no plan. It is just like Kyoto, there is no plan. They are just bumbling ahead right into another boondoggle. That is where they are going.

Don Drummond was the assistant deputy minister to the former minister of finance. He says that these promises are too costly. He says that paying for it would risk falling back into a deficit position. He says that it would abandon any further debt payments.

Could the Prime Minister tell us just why the government will not bring down a fall budget to pay for these promises, for the Prime Minister's legacy?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are the only government in 50 years that has paid the national debt. We have reduced the national debt by $45 billion since we have been here. We have balanced our books and we have said that we will do the Speech from the Throne within a balanced budget. We have something to prove that because in the last five years we have shown the Canadian people that we can do these things.

When I listen in the House of Commons there is not one day when members on the other side do not ask for more spending on this and that. Every day they ask us to spend billions of dollars but, happily, we are not listening to them too much.

Delegations Abroad

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last February in Munich, Team Canada, under the leadership of the Prime Minister, enthusiastically opened a trade delegation for Ontario and Alberta, the entire cost of which, including rent, is being borne by those provinces.

Can the Prime Minister explain to us how it was that he was so delighted last February with the opening of the Ontario and Alberta trade delegations, when yesterday in this House he was ridiculing Quebec's general delegations at work all over the world?

Why is there always this double standard when it comes to Quebec?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, what I said is that they work in conjunction with the Department of International Trade and the Department of Foreign Affairs. They make use of our facilities, and they do this to save money. That is not the option Quebec chose. They prefer to have their own delegations with their own buildings and all the rest, and that costs more money, so there is less for health.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister was with Team Canada, the Premier of Ontario stated clearly that those provinces paid all the expenses of their missions, including rent to the Canadian embassies, and this the Prime Minister has never denied. He was there. So let him not try to put another version over on us today.

Since Ontario and Alberta have joined with Quebec in denouncing the fiscal imbalance that works to Ottawa's advantage, is the Prime Minister also going to advise them to close down their offices, as he has Quebec?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have explained that this is a government's choice. Other governments have decided that this was less of a priority and make use of facilities provided by the Canadian government. This is not what Quebec chose to do and they are entitled to their decision.

I am, however, aware that people, those in my riding for example, would like to see more money available for health, for maintaining emergency services that the government is not maintaining in Shawinigan; there are regular reports on this situation on Quebec television and in the Quebec press.

Kyoto Protocol

[Gary Lunn, Canadian Alliance, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the premier of Nova Scotia came out to say that his province's economy would be devastated by Kyoto. The minister knows the truth. It is a bad deal for Nova Scotia and a bad deal for Canada.

Why does the government not come clean and admit that it is planning to stuff Kyoto down our throats no matter how many provinces speak out and no matter how many Canadians it hurts?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the provinces that produce gas, as Nova Scotia does, are substantially advantaged by measures under the Kyoto agreement which encourages the use of low emission fuel over of course the higher emission fuel. The province of Nova Scotia, which is a gas producer and sells, I believe, over 90% of its gas to the United States, will be advantaged by the measures taken to reduce greenhouse gases.

[Gary Lunn, Canadian Alliance, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister continues to babble about trading and all kinds of schemes that no one understands, but the truth is everyone worries about the environment.

Kyoto will not clean the air. It will not clean the water. It will not plant a single tree. With more and more provinces voicing their objections, will the minister simply can the accord? Yes or no.

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member makes no effort to understand the agreement, I do not expect him to support it. That is fair enough, but I do think he should make an effort to understand it. He may not succeed, but I think it is possible.

All I can say is that we expect to have a plan to implement the Kyoto accord as outlined by the Prime Minister. We will have it in place. We will have it before the provinces because we want a made in Canada approach, every province and territory working with the federal government.

Fisheries

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

Given that aquaculture as it is currently practised poses serious threats to wild salmon stocks and the marine environment, and given the ill-advised lifting by the British Columbia government of the seven year moratorium on salmon farming, would the minister have the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans examine in depth the aquaculture industry, its environmental impacts and its economic and social future?

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his interest in this matter and all the good research he has been doing.

Aquaculture holds a lot of potential for economic growth on all the shores of Canada. We have had a lot of very good work done by governments, federal and provincial, along with industry, to make sure we have safe aquaculture practices that are sustainable.

I am very pleased with the work that has been done by the Senate Committee on Fisheries and the House Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. They have worked on this for over three years, helping and participating in formulating our policies. I encourage them to keep up this work, specifically, looking into the regulations.