House of Commons Hansard #145 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was compensation.
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, we sit here enjoying our third majority government in a row. One wonders whether the Alliance might want to give up on democracy.
John Williams Canadian Alliance St. Albert, AB
Mr. Speaker, I do not want to get into a debate on that one.
The government arbitrarily changed its interpretation of the Access to Information Act to hide the expense accounts of ministers and their political staff based on the flimsiest excuse: based on a court decision in 1997, four years late but right in the middle of the shawinigate scandal.
Is the Prime Minister hiding something in his expense accounts?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member is talking about is the interpretation of the Access to Information Act. The interpretation is based on the DAGG case of the Supreme Court of Canada.
Of course we need a balanced approach regarding the Access to Information Act, as well as the privacy issue. When we look at what we are doing, we are meeting the exact criteria of the DAGG case of the Supreme Court of Canada .
Ghislain Lebel Bloc Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister stated that our questions concerning Robert Charest were ridiculous. However, we just learned that the RCMP has launched an investigation into the matter.
Could the Deputy Prime Minister tell us what duties were performed by Robert Charest for the Canada Lands Company?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, the real question is; what action was taken regarding Mr. Charest? The answer is clear; his contract was terminated by the corporation.
Ghislain Lebel Bloc Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, still on the issue of the Canada Lands Company, the media reported in January that, in 1999, the corporation sold a property belonging to the Department of National Defence which was located at the intersection of Atwater and Sherbrooke streets in Montreal. That property was sold for $4 million, while the municipal assessment was $9 million and the market value somewhere around $15 million.
How could a lot valued at $9 million be sold for $4 million, if not because the buyer, Mr. Lépine, was a close friend of the Liberal Party of Canada?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, we can certainly sell lots at the best available price. It is impossible to always find someone who is prepared to pay exactly the assessed value, particularly on the municipal assessment.
John Manley Liberal Ottawa South, ON
So, I do not know if there is other information, but it is necessary to get an offer that is accepted.
Canada Lands CompanyOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Vancouver Island North.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, last week the minister of trade said that softwood talks were not on unless the U.S. came with a written proposal. Now it has come without a proposal and he is making excuses for them.
Meanwhile, continuing U.S. harassment is taking a toll on Canadian forest companies. Covering tariff requirements until we can repeal them is essential.
When will the government fight this continuing harassment by backstopping exporters with an affective program?
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the highest level of talks among officials took place here in Ottawa at the deputy level. The deputy minister has indicated that there was progress made. He now wants to reflect on and continue the team Canada approach, consult widely, as he has been doing, with the minister, with the provinces and with industry. More than likely we will re-engage with the Americans next week.
Progress has been made but there is no doubt that we are not at a solution yet.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, that is at least the third time I have asked that question and not received an answer.
U.S. trade officials are asking for unrestricted market access to Canadian raw logs but they are not willing to offer unrestricted access to U.S. lumber markets.
Will the minister tell the U.S. an unequivocal no?
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member is finally tuning into this issue.
The minister has said repeatedly in the House and in the media, and it was made crystal clear yesterday that unless we have guaranteed market access we will not reach a deal.
That is a sine qua non for the government. It has been said repeatedly. I do not know why the member has not got the message yet.
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, given the ongoing humanitarian and education needs in Afghanistan, could the Minister for International Cooperation please update the House of Commons on Canada's continued efforts to assist Afghan women?
Susan Whelan LiberalMinister for International Cooperation
Mr. Speaker, Canada has pledged $100 million toward the reconstruction and humanitarian efforts in Afghanistan. While we continue to investigate ways to provide program support to Dr. Sima Samar, the minister of women's affairs in Afghanistan, we are also contributing here at home. We are providing $25,000 to the Afghan women's leadership and governance training program to be implemented by the University of York. It is a project that will enhance leadership skills among women of Afghan origin in Canada and link them with Canadian women parliamentarians when they visit Ottawa on Monday.
Rob Merrifield Canadian Alliance Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, in 1997 the federal government ordered the backbenchers to vote against compensating all Canadians who had contracted hepatitis C through tainted blood.
For four years the former health minister stubbornly refused to change his mind. He said that the country could not afford it. He said “It will be the end of publicly financed health care”.
Will the minister right the wrong of her predecessor and compensate every victim of hep C through tainted blood?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, no we will not. The policy of the government has been clear and is clear.
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold Bloc Jonquière, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Justice said that the commitments made by his colleagues to improve Quebec's highways would be respected.
Since the Minister of Justice has given his word, why does the Deputy Prime Minister not sign the memoranda of agreement submitted by the government of Quebec for highways 175, 185, 30, 35 and 50 immediately?
He should stop evading the question and sign.
David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, we have an infrastructure program, and unfortunately the government of Quebec does not agree with the current agreement. On Thursday I am going to meet with Mr. Ménard, my counterpart in Quebec, and perhaps there will be some progress on this issue.
John Herron Progressive Conservative Fundy Royal, NB
Mr. Speaker, the government has no respect for parliament nor parliamentary committees. Yesterday the government whip hijacked the election of the finance committee chair. Now the environment minister is gutting the environment committee's amendments to the species at risk bill.
The minister never had the provinces or landowners on side prior to tabling Bill C-5 and has now gutted provisions that they support. Worse still, he shamelessly ignored a consensus that was reached in advance by environmentalists and industry.
Why is it we had to wait eight years for such a poor bill, and why is the minister showing such arrogance for the committee process?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, let me repeat again that lobbyists, whether they are environmentalists or they are from industry, are not the people who run this country, nor should they be. It should be people elected by the people of Canada, namely the people in this Chamber. That is the critical factor which the hon. member does not understand.
He should also understand that committees of the House are enormously valuable to us but ultimate decision making is made by the members. If a committee for any reason does not reflect the views of the House, it is appropriate that the House take measures to make sure that the decisions are brought in accord with the House.
Diane St-Jacques Liberal Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the act in respect of criminal justice for young persons received royal assent. This act is a key component of the measures which allow the government to deliver on its commitment to renew the justice system for young people in order to make it fairer and more effective. It is my understanding that the government wants to have the legislation take effect in April 2003.
Will the minister tell the House what lay behind such a decision?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the hon. member for her excellent question.
Bill C-7 did indeed receive royal assent yesterday. It is normal for a certain period of time to go by before legislation takes effect.
I would simply like to say that the bill was the subject of many discussions, particularly last week at a federal-provincial-territorial meeting. Because of the broad consensus for more time, which has been repeatedly expressed for quite a while now, all the provinces and territories have agreed with me to postpone the coming into force of this legislation until April 2003, so that they can make the necessary preparations and go ahead with an excellent bill.