House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was vote.
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, we are consulting with our partners. We are in the process of preparing a program to support communities and help them adjust to the softwood lumber crisis, not just in Quebec but in B.C. and other affected regions of Canada as well.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister's fine words need to be followed up with some concrete actions. Companies are losing their market share and investment is slowing down. A number of companies are at risk of disappearing, as the AMBSQ has confirmed. Because of the Minister of Industry's lack of leadership, precious time is being wasted.
What is he waiting for to help out these companies? More company closures?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, we are not waiting. We are in the process at this time of preparing programs and approaches to assist the affected communities.
In fact, last week I visited two communities, Saint-Fulgence and Saint-Honoré, in the Saguenay--Lac-Saint-Jean region, which is greatly affected by the crisis.
I spoke with the workers, and with the mayors. I assured them, and reassured them, that very soon we will be there with funds to help them turn their economy around.
Gary Lunn Canadian Alliance Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government's latest Kyoto presentation provides even fewer cost estimates than the first one.
While the government would have us believe that there will be no ill effects on Canada's economy, Industry Canada's own report says that the government has underestimated the costs of Kyoto by up to 30%. The report also shows an investment decline of up to 55% and employment dropping by up to 27% in certain sectors.
Why is the government forging ahead when it clearly has failed to tell Canadians the true costs of Kyoto?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member made an error in his preamble. This is not a new report. It is in fact quite an old report. It occurred before the discussions 18 months ago in Bonn and also those a year ago in Marrakesh. It does not take into account either the sinks issue or the clean development mechanisms issue negotiated at those two meetings. It does not, for example, take into account the emissions trading system.
It essentially was an academic exercise of two people within that department. It was not expected to be or designed to be a modelling of the plan that we have before us now.
Gary Lunn Canadian Alliance Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I think it is time we had the truth of what is in the report.
Let me tell the House what is not in there. There is no clear target. There are no specific actions. There are no comprehensive cost estimates. The government still has no implementation plan. There is no planned legislation.
If we are lacking a clear plan, could the government tell us how it expects to get the provinces on board, or is it still intent on just steamrolling ahead without the provinces' consent and just doing its own thing?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, we certainly want to have continuous discussions with the provinces as we have had for the last five years, in fact 10 years with the five years before the Kyoto agreement.
We want to continue to have that cooperative approach of 14 governments which has essentially marked this whole debate over the last few years. We think that is important.
We regret the fact that Alberta pulled out from co-chairing. Alberta and the federal government were co-chairing up to this summer. We regret that but we hope we can bring Alberta back in.
Certainly I am willing and my colleague the Minister of Natural Resources is willing to meet with our provincial counterparts at any time, anywhere.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question I asked him on the advisability of debating and voting on Canada's participation in an attack against Iraq, the government House leader fell back on the weekly meetings of House leaders to dodge the question.
Here is my question for him today. Will the government House leader demonstrate that he is taking this issue a little more seriously and tell us that the government plans on agreeing to both a debate and a vote in the House on this important issue?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I refuse to accept the hon. member's suggestion that the meetings between House leaders, which include her party, are not taken seriously.
I feel that her party's House leader takes his job very seriously as do all the other House leaders. Referring an issue that comes under the joint responsibility of the House leaders to these meetings is not taking the matter lightly, but very seriously indeed, and her House leader takes it seriously as well.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is not the House leaders who will decide if there will be a vote in the House, it is the government.
If Kyoto deserves to be debated and voted on, then a war, which would mean hundreds of thousands of soldiers possibly risking their lives in a conflict, most certainly deserves the same treatment. Even Mr. Blair understands this. There will be a vote on it in the British Parliament.
Will the federal government commit today to doing the same, holding a debate and a vote in the House before taking part in any war in Iraq?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the procedure that was used in the past has always been to give the House an opportunity to debate potential military action. This has been done maybe ten times since 1993. It is part of a new mechanism used by the House, that of take note debates. We have always held such debates, after consultations with House leaders. I repeat what I said earlier.
Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the revenue minister bragged about the prosecutions and convictions in the GST scandal and suggested that we ask those who are in jail if they think the government is doing a good job.
That is a very interesting response considering that one of the many fraud scams uncovered was operating out of the Kingston Penitentiary. Those GST rebate cheques went directly to the Kingston Penitentiary.
Canadians are outraged at the Liberal government's careless treatment of their hard-earned tax dollars. When will the minister finally act to fix this system?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, here are the facts again. We have had 13 successful prosecutions out of the 13 cases that we took to court. Of those 13 prosecutions, 5 resulted in jail terms for a total of 11 years. There are people behind bars because of the fraud that has been committed.
There are 14 additional cases before the courts now and there are 20 that are still under investigation. We take this extremely seriously. Our enforcement unit is working with police to identify anyone who would defraud Canadians.
Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is a little bit like closing the barn door after the horses are already out. Instead of fixing the system, cheques are mailed to anyone with a postal box and a cellphone. Some criminals may get caught but by that time the lion's share of the money is already gone, in some cases offshore.
I ask the minister again: When is the Liberal government going to take concrete action to stop the flow of free money to convicts, criminals and con artists?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, as I said before, we are not dealing with loopholes. We are dealing with fraud. We are dealing with people who improperly apply for a tax refund that they are not entitled to. That is a criminal offence. We have succeeded with prosecutions and people are in jail because of that.
We have taken significant action. We have an enhanced registration review of applications to ensure that wherever there is a flag, risk management techniques are used to identify those who should be audited or investigated, and we are doing that.
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Mr. Speaker, the threat of a strike or a lockout with regard to the ongoing grain dispute at the port of Prince Rupert has rested heavily on the minds of many members of the House.
I would like to ask the Minister of Labour what is being done to bring the parties to this dispute back to the bargaining table, and when can we expect a settlement?
Claudette Bradshaw LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that Prince Rupert Grain Limited and the grain workers union reached a tentative settlement early this morning with the help of the conciliation officers I appointed to help them through the negotiations.
The tentative settlement, which is being fully recommended by the union, is subject to ratification by the union membership. Not only does this agreement speak to the importance of the collective bargaining system, but it will also ensure the continued movement of grain through the port of Prince Rupert.
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, it is reported in today's newspapers that Ottawa is considering shutting down what is left of the cod fishery in the Atlantic. It is also said that according to some sources, Ottawa does not anticipate compensating the thousands of workers who will be affected by this measure.
Can the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans tell us if it is true that there will be no compensation? If that is the case, is he prepared to present a plan and table it in the House of Commons, for the thousands of workers who will become unemployed and for fishers?
Robert Thibault LiberalMinister of Fisheries and Oceans
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for asking a most important question for the Atlantic regions.
These media reports are referring to a decision that has not yet been made regarding the harvesting levels for certain stocks of cod. These stocks are the gulf stock and the northern cod stock. The other Atlantic stocks are not affected.
We are waiting for the report of the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council to get its advice on the harvesting levels that we should have. We should receive this report in late winter or early spring, and we will then advise the House accordingly.
Svend Robinson NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the embattled Minister of Natural Resources.
Recently the government announced a package aimed at helping workers in communities in British Columbia and elsewhere who have been hit hard by U.S. softwood lumber tariffs. The package, however, does not include a pension bridging proposal to help older workers retire with dignity and open up jobs for younger workers.
When will the government listen to the IWA and to other unions, to industry and to provincial governments, and add pension bridging to the federal softwood lumber package?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, we delivered a package on a variety of issues. One is the diversified markets. In addition to that, we announced $240 million in terms of providing community adjustment as well as retraining and as well as making sure that we have more employment opportunities. This adds up to more than $340 million.
We have also said that if more needs to be done if we do not get an agreement we will do more for the industry and we are committed to that.
Greg Thompson Progressive Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the health minister rejected any plan to compensate all victims of hepatitis C outside the original package, but then she went on to lecture the House on how inappropriate it would be to prejudge the outcome of a criminal trial.
The question would be, is that still a no? Or is she in fact awaiting the outcome of those criminal trials to determine whether these victims are going to be compensated?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, let me again reiterate for the hon. member that the government has put in place $1.4 billion not only in terms of money for compensation but money for care in relation to hep C victims, not only between 1986 and 1990, but in fact pre-1986 and post-1990.
People should remember that in fact we put on the table some $525 million for those hep C victims pre-1986 and post-1990. That money is going to the care of those people in the provinces and communities where they live.
Greg Thompson Progressive Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Mr. Speaker, the minister should answer the question. There is $1 billion left in that compensation fund, which would more than take care of those people outside those predetermined dates. If the minister checked with her actuary, she would know that.
The question is, is she going to help them or not? Is she going to be compassionate?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, we have been helping them, as I have just outlined.
I wish the hon. member would appreciate the fact that we had a court agreed to settlement fund that is administered by a fund administrator. In fact, there are no surplus funds in that fund. In fact, we know full well that those dollars will be dispensed to victims between the period of 1986 and 1990, over a considerable period of time, conceivably up to 70 years. There are no surplus funds.