Debates of Oct. 8th, 2002

Social Insurance Numbers

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

Mr. Speaker, the key word she just used was “today”. The issue of SIN card abuse was raised four full years ago by the Auditor General.

Today's status report tells us 900,000 horses are out of the barn. There is no comprehensive plan in place to protect Canadians' safety and well-being and the HRDC minister is now scrambling to put forward new measures four years after the problem was flagged and a full year after September 11. It is not as if the minister has not experienced a full on disaster in her department before.

My question is simple. Why the delay: incompetence or neglect?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

On the contrary, Mr. Speaker. I would point out to the hon. member that the Auditor General does talk about progress. I would remind the hon. member that in 2000 the then Auditor General said the measures that we were undertaking were the right ones.

We agree that today is a different day. As such, we will no longer accept copies of information, only originals. As of today we will deactivate social insurance numbers that have not been used in the last five years. As of today, I have asked for regulatory authority to put an expiry date on those social insurance numbers that are issued to non-permanent residents and non-Canadian citizens. I believe Canadians are ready for these measures today.

Kyoto Protocol

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, many of us here were involved in the battle against the Charlottetown accord. It has many striking similarities to Kyoto. Both are top down deals made behind closed doors with very little public consultation.

The more Canadians learn about Kyoto, the less they like it. Is that not the real reason the Prime Minister is afraid to release the details?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Kyoto is being debated. We started after Rio talking about the question of climate change. It has been part of the public debate for more than 10 years. After Kyoto we had many discussions. People have raised it. We have been discussing it with the provinces and the private sector for years. There will be meetings with the private sector and the provincial governments in the weeks to come.

However there is a time when Parliament has to make a decision and it will be before the end of the year.

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the one group the Prime Minister has forgotten about is the people of Canada. Canadians are now starting to engage and ask questions about Kyoto and what it means to them. Specifically they are asking why we would spend billions of dollars to buy emissions trading credits from countries like Russia when we could spend the money here in a made in Canada solution.

Why will the Prime Minister not listen to Canadians, scrap Kyoto and develop a made in Canada plan?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing at this time. We are talking with everybody. We think that it is possible in working together that we will have a plan that will meet the needs of Canada and at the same time respect our international obligation to do something about climate change.

I know why the opposition is opposed to that. The very member said a few months ago “I think if we oppose Kyoto it will help our fundraising”.

International Criminal Court

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, during a speech to the American public yesterday, President George W. Bush declared that Iraqi generals could be tried for war crimes if they committed cruel and desperate acts on Saddam Hussein's orders.

Does the Prime Minister agree with President Bush, who would act as judge and jury by determining on his own who should be considered a war criminal?

[Aileen Carroll, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the president has continued to focus on the United Nations Security Council as the proper forum for discussion and debate. He also said and acknowledges as we do that is where the important decision regarding a new resolution will be taken, and it is from that body's actions that decisions will comply.

Our emphasis has always been that it is the Security Council that should be dealing with the Iraqi situation, multilaterally through the United Nations. The obligations of Iraq are to the Security Council. It is that body that should be taking the lead in ensuring the resolution is respected.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the answer should have been as follows: it is not up to the President of the United States to determine who is a war criminal and who is not. That is up to a neutral third party, namely the International Criminal Court.

Will the Prime Minister take advantage of this opportunity to speak to President Bush and ask him to recognize the authority of the International Criminal Court over everyone, including his own generals?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians were one of the main powers behind the creation of this international court. We hope that the court will fulfill the role that it must in the future for all countries.

Right now, the Americans do not want to recognize the court, but I think they should reconsider, do as other countries have done and give us the opportunity to have an international court to settle this type of conflict. I think that the treaty offers sufficient protection to the citizens of a country to allow everyone to safely sign it.

Kyoto Protocol

[David Anderson, Canadian Alliance, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, recent reports indicate that implementing the Kyoto protocol will inflict serious economic damage. Yet after an extensive search we have found that no studies have been completed to determine Kyoto's impact on agriculture in Canada.

Why is the government moving to ratify Kyoto without knowing the effect it will have on Canadian farmers and farm families?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct. The impact of climate change on Canadian farmers will be dramatic. We are seeing this now, in fact, in Alberta where the drought situation has reached crisis proportions and the costs are about $3 billion.

We are seeing it elsewhere where climates are the result of extreme weather events that are impacting Canadian farmers. The member asked what information there is. I suggest that he look at the table discussions which took place with agricultural producers over three full years.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

I remind hon. members that while ministers appreciate help with their answers and other members with their questions, it makes it very difficult for the Chair to hear and I have to be able to hear in case somebody says something out of order. The hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands has the floor. We need a little order, please.

[David Anderson, Canadian Alliance, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, that is rubbish. He would blame the 1930s on climate change.

Four years ago an American study determined that implementing Kyoto would increase farm expenses by up to 32%, depress annual farm income by 24% to 48%, diminish agricultural exports and put farmers out of business. It called the Kyoto protocol the single biggest public policy threat to the agricultural community today.

Why is the government moving to ratify Kyoto when our competitors have determined that it will devastate agricultural economies?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to my feet a little disappointed that the official opposition has been so jeering about the problems being faced by the agriculturalists of Canada at this time by reason of climate change.

True, these effects have been noticeable for some time but it is time they paid some attention to the damage being done to Canadian agriculture by the effects of climate change. I urge the opposition members to take this issue seriously on behalf of their constituents.

Foreign Affairs

[David Price, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, four days ago Pakistan tested surface to air ballistic missiles. That same day India chose to respond by testing a conventional surface to air missile. Today Pakistan has again conducted missile tests.

Could the Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific please tell the House the response to these very disturbing developments?

[David Kilgour, Liberal, Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific)]

Mr. Speaker, after Pakistan's test last Friday, Canada expressed deep regret and urged a halt to nuclear development. Today we reiterate that as tensions in the region remain high, these tests are particularly counterproductive and serve only to undermine efforts by the international community to bring a lasting peace.

In the interests of regional and international security, Canada urges both Pakistan and India to de-escalate and resume dialogue immediately.

Persons with Disabilities

[Reed Elley, Canadian Alliance, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, an all party parliamentary committee came up with unanimous recommendations that would ease the burden on persons with disabilities in claiming the disability tax credit. The finance minister has ignored most of these recommendations and further angered the disability community in Canada by suggesting exactly the opposite.

Will the minister do the right thing and instruct his department to implement the committee's recommendations and help rather than hurt disabled people in Canada?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member is interested in this issue, I am sure he knows that over the period since 1996 the amount of assistance that has been provided to the disabled community in Canada has increased by about 70%.

I am sure that like me he believes the assistance should go to those who are most in need. We look forward to working with him as well as with other members of the House to ensure that as we broaden and deepen access to these funds, in fact those who are most needy receive them.

[Reed Elley, Canadian Alliance, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my physically disabled daughter who spends a lot of her life in a wheelchair, thanks for nothing, Mr. Minister.

By the way, I am absolutely appalled at our skewed tax laws that allow a businessman to write off 50% of a business lunch while disabled people are only allowed to write off less than 20% on the purchase of wheelchairs. And the finance minister wants to get tougher with people with disabilities, people like my own daughter.

Will he do the right thing and instruct his department to change these oppressive tax laws that hinder disabled people?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I personally object to the suggestion that somehow or other we have attacked the hon. member's daughter.

If there are particular rules that he wishes to question, then I would be happy to take them under advisement, but I think it is important in the House that we not try to personalize these issues.

Immigration

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Foreign Affairs is recommending that Canadian citizens avoid travelling to Algeria, “due to continuous terrorist activity in some parts of the country”, his colleague, the Minister of Immigration, is standing by his decision to lift the moratorium on removals of Algerian nationals on the ground that “there is no risk to citizens of Algeria who are removed”.

How can the minister defend the lifting of the moratorium and explain that, in spite of a bloody civil war that has resulted in over 150,000 deaths, the government is allowing the removal of people who have been here for years, while their children, who were born in Canada, could, in principle, remain here?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her very important question.

First, the purpose of lifting the moratorium is to regularize the system. Canada has no plans for a mass deportation, but it also has no plans to grant a general amnesty. Each case is different and must be reviewed with compassion and on humanitarian grounds. We will make decisions so as to properly deal with each case.

However, we also have a duty to implement a sound system that will allow us to strike a balance between vigilance and openness.

Ontario Hydro

[Roger Gallaway, Liberal, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the finance minister.

The finance minister will know that Ontario residents are paying off more than $17 billion of Ontario Hydro's bank loans through a debt retirement charge on their hydro bills.

Why will the finance department collect more than a billion dollars in GST simply because Ontario Hydro went into debt?