Debates of Nov. 5th, 2002

Softwood Lumber Industry

[Herb Dhaliwal, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, it is in the best interests of both Canada and the U.S. to resolve this issue.

We have taken a very strong stand. We have said we are going to fight it at the WTO and at NAFTA. We will fight it all the way because we are right.

At the same time, we have said if we need to do more, and that includes loan guarantees, if we do not get an agreement, we will make sure we protect our industries and we will do more. However, it is in our best interests to make sure that we resolve the issue because that will help us in the long term to protect our markets.

Budget Surpluses

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, looking over the finance minister's forecast, one realizes that not only is he using the same strategy as his predecessor, but he is also finding new ways to better hide surpluses, by establishing a new “economic prudence” reserve.

Will the Minister of Finance explain to us in simple terms what the difference is between a contingency reserve and an economic prudence reserve?

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

Mr. Speaker, the figures are all transparent. They are found in the forecast we submitted. Perhaps I could help the member study them. Simply put, we have before us the experience of the United States, which forecast a large surplus and is now running a large deficit. I would not want that to happen here in Canada.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think many of us did not hear the minister's answer. I will therefore put exactly the same question to him.

What is the difference between a contingency reserve and a prudence reserve?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member can look at our numbers. The prudence reserve is based mainly on the risk that interest rates might change. The closer the end of the period, the lower the prudence reserve. The other reserve, however, remains unchanged until the end of the year, in spite of economic or other changes. That is all very clear and transparent.

Softwood Lumber Industry

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the human resources minister promised a piddly $71 million to workers affected by the softwood lumber dispute. That money is nowhere to be seen and EI officials in the field are telling displaced workers that they should just go on welfare.

Can the minister tell workers when the money will be released, who qualifies for it, how much they will get, and why they are getting this runaround from the government?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to tell the hon. member that there will be an additional $30 million for work sharing while learning, $14.5 million for increased referrals to training and $15 million for older worker pilot projects. This will be available in areas where the unemployment level is over 10% because we want to make sure the additional measures reach those most in need.

I also want to remind the hon. member that every year $450 million in employment insurance benefits goes to workers in the forestry industry.

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have known for five years that we might run into this. The government still does not have the money available for workers, so maybe they need to obtain one of those five million missing SIN numbers and that is how they will get their benefits.

We are talking about 13,500 people who have been laid off. Another 2,000 are probably going to be laid off. Most of these people are now seeing their EI benefits run out.

Instead of holding another press conference, instead of announcing all the things the government wants to do at some point in the future, when is the minister actually going to deliver the cash to these displaced workers?

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

Mr. Speaker, I want the hon. member to appreciate that the money is already there. For any who find themselves without work as a result of the trade dispute and who are eligible for employment insurance, they are now receiving benefits and they have access to EI, part II. The hon. member should take the time to understand the system fully before he pontificates in such a way.

Airport Security

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport has said in the House that aviation security is being assessed on an ongoing basis.

Could the minister please tell the House today what further action the Government of Canada has taken to ensure that security matters are indeed being addressed?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member raised that question because today I have assigned two additional duties to the Canadian Aviation Transportation Security Authority, known as CATSA.

The first initiative is the implementation of an enhanced restricted area pass system at major airports across the country, which will include the use of centralized data banks supporting the issuance, verification, cancellation and tracking of restricted area passes. The second is the random screening of non-passengers entering restricted areas at major Canadian airports. This will build on the existing security requirement for people who have access to restricted areas at airports.

We had the safest system at our airports before the September 11. We have built on that and we are building on it again today.

Kyoto Protocol

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—St. Clair, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to Kyoto there is one area of unanimous agreement. Ratification will bring about a change in the Canadian workforce. The NDP and the labour movement believe it can be a positive transition, but we must have a component in the implementation plan that will include adequate funding.

Given the substantial and maybe even illegal accumulation of surplus in the EI fund, will the Minister of Human Resources Development commit to a fund to a just transition program for displaced workers?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, in a speech in the House on an opposition motion dealing with the issue of ratification of Kyoto, I pointed out to hon. members that we do have connection with labour unions and we will be forming a committee to look at any adjustments that may need to take place in the workforce. I have had discussions with my hon. colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, and we fully expect to be with labour, with the labour movement, to be on top of this issue as time goes on.

Human Resources Development

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, on October 18, 2002, it was decided nationally that term employees within HRDC would be made indeterminate after five continuous years of service. What a coincidence, right after the employees of the Miramichi investigation centre were advised that they will be terminated as of November 29, 2002, two months before their five years of continuous service.

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. What does the minister intend to do to stop these cruel terminations?

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

Mr. Speaker, from time to time to deal with the ebbs and flows of the work of the department we do have to hire term employees. There are requirements that need to be followed and are established by Treasury Board, and my department does that.

Nuclear Industry

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, after September 11, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission directed all nuclear facilities to establish an on site armed response force.

The two RCMP officers protecting the Point Lepreau facility in New Brunswick work 24 hours a day seven days a week and are physically and mentally burnt out. As of March 31 there will be no RCMP present because of RCMP financial constraints.

Will the Prime Minister immediately provide the necessary funding for the RCMP to protect not only Point Lepreau but all nuclear stations in Canada, as well as all--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Natural Resources.

[Herb Dhaliwal, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, after September 11, at all our nuclear plants security was enhanced to ensure that we have armed guards. In some cases they are provided by the local police and in others they are provided by the security at the plants. This was a measure to respond immediately to the security enhancement. We are looking at some long term measures so that we have consistency across many, but we are responding fully under the international guidelines for protection of all our nuclear plants.

Aboriginal Affairs

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the government's record for protecting drinking water is poor, especially on native lands.

Last spring the minister stated to the House that the government was dealing with 22 out of a total of 140 inefficient water plants on reserves, yet Health Canada's own internal audit confirms the number to be 103 plants that pose serious health risks. The internal report also says that the government has committed only $215 million out of the $790 million needed.

Why does the minister think it is acceptable to have third world drinking water conditions that put the lives of natives at risk?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, last spring when I answered a question from the leader of the fifth party I gave him assurances that the government took its interests and responsibilities very seriously as they relate to water on reserves.

We have put together a comprehensive plan. That plan will be rolled out. We are looking at all the risks and making sure that no first nations citizen is put at risk in this country.

Agriculture

[Howard Hilstrom, Canadian Alliance, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister publicly claims to support the end of all agriculture subsidies and tariffs in order to level the playing field for our farm families.

At the same time, the agriculture minister--

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Howard Hilstrom, Canadian Alliance, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, let them continue clapping, because the agriculture minister rejects the position of the Cairns group, which is calling for reductions of subsidies and tariffs.

The government cannot be on both sides of this issue. Would the trade minister tell the House what Canada's official position is on agricultural trade?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I signed with pleasure the communiqué at the end of the Cairns group meeting in Bolivia two weeks ago.

What we did reject was the desire of some Cairns group members to eliminate all de minimis support to agriculture, which would mean, if the hon. member wants that approach, that we could not provide programs such as crop insurance, NISA or ad hoc payments such as we just made to Canadian farmers. I will not agree to that.

[Howard Hilstrom, Canadian Alliance, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, clearly that is not the case. We can have support programs for our farmers if want.

My next question is also for the agriculture minister, seeing as he is speaking for the trade minister.

Our supply management sector is very concerned that the government will trade off supply management. In the 1995 agreement the government committed 100% to reducing those tariffs that protect supply management. Is the government going to stand here today and tell supply management that it is not going to reduce tariffs?