House of Commons Hansard #14 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was accord.
Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, logically speaking, how can the Government of Canada claim that it should benefit from credits for its efforts to reduce pollution by exporting clean energy, but at the same time, that it should not suffer penalties for exporting energy that pollutes?
Is the government not being terribly naive?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a sensible man. He has made an important point. Yes, if there is an increase in polluting energy, it should be taken into account, not only for Canada, but for all countries around the world.
Ken Epp Canadian Alliance Elk Island, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Deputy Prime Minister stated that there would be an independent ethics commissioner, yet he was ambiguous on the method of the commissioner's appointment. The proposed legislation does not provide for any direct involvement by the House in selecting the appointee.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister admit that the proposed legislation precludes the direct election of the ethics commissioner by members of Parliament?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I refer the hon. member to Standing Order 111 which provides for the election by the House of Commons of officers of Parliament of which the ethics commissioner is one.
Ken Epp Canadian Alliance Elk Island, AB
Mr. Speaker, the proposed legislation says that the commissioner will be appointed by order in council. That is the Prime Minister. Any votes in committees are non-binding, and the votes there as in the House are controlled by the Liberal majority. All members of Parliament should have a real say in the selection of the commissioner.
Will the government commit to an all party selection of the ethics commissioner?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the hon. member review the bill again. It does not say by order in council. In fact, the language is precisely the same as that which is in the Auditor General Act which provides for a similar process for the selection.
I would not recommend that the appointment be capable of being held up by opposition parties. However, I do take very seriously the importance of having credibility in the name of the person to be selected. We heard, for example, suggestions yesterday from the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party that are very useful as to the manner of selection. We--
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, in introducing its draft bill on government ethics, the government has neglected to include any provisions on Parliament's involvement in hiring the ethics counsellor.
Can the Deputy Prime Minister make a firm and precise commitment today to include in the law a mechanism for consultation whereby the members of the House will have a say on this?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, as I have just said in English, there is provision for consultation as part of the selection process. This is exactly the same as for other officers of Parliament, such as the Auditor General of Canada and the Privacy Commissioner.
What has been presented is certainly a draft version and, if there are other suggestions, we are prepared to entertain them.
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, if that is what the government wants, it simply needs to state it clearly in the law.
In its draft bill, the government indicates its intention to make public the opinions of the ethics commissioner on any minister of the government.
Would the minister prove how serious he is about this and how much he really believes in the benefits of this provision by applying it immediately to the case of the former Solicitor General and making public the ethics counsellor's report, currently in the hands of the Prime Minister?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I believe there is sufficient information available in the press or in the Debates . I believe we have presented a draft bill and a draft code of ethics.
There will be plenty of opportunity for all members to express their views and make recommendations, and we are prepared to listen to them.
Leon Benoit Canadian Alliance Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday it was revealed that the Minister of National Defence has known since May that the Canadian Forces have less than half the money they need to maintain the bases and equipment for next year. In fact I have received complaints from military technicians that some bases do not even have enough money to fire up their heating systems during this cold weather.
Our nation is now engaged in a global war against terrorism and faces the prospect of war in Iraq. How can the government expect our troops to fight overseas when they cannot even heat their workshops here at home?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, it is typical of the hon. member to use misguided, apocalyptic language to describe various stresses and strains that we have acknowledged to exist within the Canadian Forces. It is also true that they have never failed to deliver when called upon by our country. It is also true that we are addressing the issues of funding as we speak.
Leon Benoit Canadian Alliance Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, our troops have delivered in spite of what the government has done, not because of it.
Yesterday it was revealed that the minister is planning large scale cuts to the Canadian Forces. The report suggests a yard sale of Canada's destroyers, tanks and supply ships. This is a foolish plan which would deal a fatal blow to Canada's naval task force and army brigade capabilities.
Why is the Minister of National Defence engaging in the secretive plan to break the backs of the Canadian armed forces?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as one of my hon. colleagues just mentioned and with all due respect, the gentleman across the way is speaking absolute nonsense. The idea that I have in mind to sell our submarines, our tanks, et cetera is crazy.
Indeed yesterday I was in one of our submarines and I can say it is a magnificent, strategic new addition to the navy which will produce massive dividends in this post-September 11 world. It is a machine with which our allies are clamouring to do joint operations.
Julian Reed Liberal Halton, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.
According to a recent poll, most Canadians do not know the source of their electricity but they do know how much they must pay for it. Could the Minister of Natural Resources tell the House what his department is doing to promote energy efficiency in Canadian households?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada, through Natural Resources Canada, is helping Canadians make smart decisions about home energy use. For example, through EnerGuide for Houses we help subsidize professional home energy evaluations that show homeowners how they can seriously save money on home heating and cooling.
We support the R-2000 standard for construction of highly energy efficient homes which would save 30%. We are promoting the internationally recognized Energy Star which helps save energy for appliances. In partnership with industry we are also helping Canadians do a better job in energy efficiency and reduce their costs.
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, most Canadians agree that allowing businesses to deduct fines from their income taxes is simply bad public policy. Breaking the law should not be tax deductible and this could be achieved with a simple one line amendment to the Income Tax Act.
Does the Minister of Finance agree that fines and penalties should not be considered business expenses for the purposes of income tax, and will he amend section 18 of the Income Tax Act accordingly?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the member raises an important question. He will know that the Income Tax Act itself does not specifically permit this deduction, but it has been determined by the courts that in certain circumstances fines and penalties that have been incurred are expenses of doing business.
I am prepared to review this as well as any other provision of the act. We would want to consult thoroughly before making a change that may create unforeseen consequences.
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, it was reported on the news, on Radio-Canada, that some private medical clinics in Quebec are renting out operating rooms to health professionals to perform surgeries. A total of 11,000 surgeries have been performed in violation of the Canada Health Act. The Quebec health minister says “If there are no complaints, I am not taking action”. They do not care about the act.
My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Will he immediately look into the matter?
Jeannot Castonguay LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health
Mr. Speaker, at present, all the provinces are required to comply with the Canada Health Act. It is very clear that all the services that are medically necessary must be paid for by the provinces, with the money transferred to them by the federal government to provide these services.
Jeannot Castonguay Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
If members opposite would listen, they might learn something. Of course, sometimes there are people who would rather not listen. It is very hard for me to speak any louder than I am right now. If things were a little quieter, I could share—
HealthOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester.
Bill Casey Progressive Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Mr. Speaker, John Mawdsley received a disability tax credit for 15 years because he was totally disabled. Mr. Mawdsley suffers from a degenerative disease that has no cure and only gets worse.
Under the new review strategy, Revenue Canada recently demanded he get another opinion that confirmed the disability. Then the department overruled that opinion with no meeting, no examination, and no personal contact whatsoever with Mr. Mawdsley. Revenue Canada required the doctor's report. Now it has overruled the doctor's report.
Was it a doctor at Revenue Canada who made that decision?