Debates of March 1st, 2002

Douglas Miller Award

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate provincial court Judge Nancy Orr for being this year's recipient of the Canadian Bar Association's prestigious Douglas Miller Award. The award is given to members who have demonstrated outstanding dedication and team spirit in their ongoing involvement with the Canadian Bar Association.

Judge Orr has demonstrated that dedication in a number of ways. She has served on the CBA's national council for more than 20 years and was co-founder of the Canadian Judges Forum. She has been a longstanding and active member of the P.E.I. branch executive, serving as president in 1987-88, and received the branch's Distinguished Service Award.

Judge Orr has also been active at the community level, particularly in the promotion of junior hockey, and remains actively involved throughout the maritimes with the Canadian Hockey Association and the Junior A Hockey League.

All Islanders are proud of the work and the contribution that Nancy has made to our community and to the cause of justice in Canada. Congratulations.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago the department of Indian affairs determined that Amherst, Nova Scotia was the very best location for the regional office for the Atlantic Canadian region, not by coincidence but because its location was exactly in the centre of the Atlantic region.

The office employs 140 well-trained and qualified people who serve the native community with dedication and commitment, yet a few months ago the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development hired a consultant to determine the best location for this regional office. The minister explained this in the media by saying that there were complaints from the staff because they were on the road a lot.

The staff are more than happy to stay exactly where they are, and several native organizations reminded me that just a few years ago the chiefs in the Atlantic region voted in favour of keeping the office in the Amherst area. The regional office of Indian affairs was located in Amherst because it was the very best location. Nothing has changed. It is still the very best location.

I call on the minister to call off this study and listen to the voices of the 140 people who live and work in Amherst. I call on him to respect the vote of the native chiefs and not to listen to a couple of--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Nunavut.

The Ladies of Nunavut

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

Mr. Speaker, with International Women's Day being celebrated on March 8, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the Cambridge Bay women's group called The Ladies of Nunavut, which is working hard in preparation for the grand opening of the Kitikmeot Heritage Centre scheduled for May.

The members of The Ladies of Nunavut are sewing the caribou clothing for the mannequin displays for the heritage centre as well as using traditional skins for mitts, parkas, dolls and wall hangings.

The members of The Ladies of Nunavut are women of all ages and share their experience and skills. They not only sew but are famous throughout Nunavut for catering their traditional food and dishes.

Women's groups like this are the cornerstones of communities throughout Nunavut and are good examples of the difference we can make in the lives of others.

I wish The Ladies of Nunavut continued success in all of its endeavours.

Customs Officers

[Dick Harris, Canadian Alliance, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the call for arming our border guards has fallen on deaf ears with this Liberal government. Once again customs officers are in the line of fire. They were called to detain a suspect at the Rainbow Bridge who tried to get into Canada using a fake passport. When the suspect became violent, Niagara police had to be called to physically remove this person from this country to be placed in custody with the American authorities.

The Americans arm their customs officers. One has to ask: how can our customs officers feel safe when the Liberal government refuses to acknowledge the security of our border and ports and the safety concerns of our customs officials? It is no wonder the Americans are putting troops on border checkpoints with Canada when the Liberal government refuses to give our custom officers the tools to do the job.

Will it take a customs officer being injured or killed in the line of duty before the government will take action to secure their safety? What will it take?

Kyoto Protocol

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if Canada ratifies the Kyoto protocol, it will raise the cost of fossil fuels and electricity produced by Canada by those means. Yet cost and production of these fuels will be cheaper in countries such as India, China and the United States that are outside of the protocol.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. If we raise the cost of fossil fuels or the electricity produced by them in the name of environmental protection, yet the Americans, Indians and Chinese do not, where does he think Canadian jobs will end up?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, climate change is one of the most difficult and complex environmental and economic challenges of our time, not just for Canada but for the entire world.

To deal with this issue sensibly and responsibly, the Government of Canada is consulting with all stakeholders, including provincial governments and the private sector, to develop a good, solid, sound plan that will ensure that we meet our environmental obligations and do so in a way that also meets all of the economic imperatives that we would want to see for Canada.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, then they should start being upfront with Canadians on the costs of those type of things.

The government can continue to play the part of an ostrich, to bury its head in the sand, but its own statistics demonstrate that the costs of the Kyoto protocol will be astronomical for the country.

One government study predicts that if our NAFTA partners do not ratify the treaty, our GDP will drop by 2% to 3% permanently.

Instead of deliberately misleading the public, as it often does, why does this government not tell the truth about the costs involved with Kyoto?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, going back to a first ministers meeting in December 1997 shortly after the original Kyoto protocol was initialled in Kyoto, a process was started involving the Government of Canada, the provinces, the private sector and a whole variety of non-governmental organizations to find the answers to the question to which the hon. gentleman has referred.

At the moment, a very elaborate federal-provincial-territorial working group is working very hard to determine what those cost issues are and how they can properly be addressed.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government started that process over five years ago and we still have seen nothing when it comes to the cost. The numbers it is putting out are completely across the board and it is obvious that the Kyoto protocol is flawed. It excludes developing countries and will likely exclude the U.S. It could cost Canadians billions, hurt our national competitiveness and do nothing to reduce emissions.

Given all these things and the fact that the United States signed a climate pact with Australia yesterday, will the Deputy Prime Minister consider Canada's participation in a similar agreement with the U.S. in lieu of the Kyoto accord?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, all factors are being taken into account in the federal-provincial-territorial consultations and in our consultations with stakeholders. We want to be sure that when it comes to making a ratification decision with respect to Kyoto that all Canadians, most especially government authorities and the stakeholders in the private sector, are fully informed about all the ramifications. We intend to make a responsible decision.

[Jason Kenney, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that we have been getting the same answer from the government for five years with respect to Kyoto. Now the environment minister tells us he wants to ratify this agreement in June and the government still does not have a specific answer to a specific question.

Provinces are against this, including the Liberal government of Newfoundland. The government's own studies now show a potential cost of 2% to 3% of our gross domestic product.

How can the environment minister propose ratifying an accord when even the House leader admits the government does not know where it is headed on this?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that we have had a national implementation strategy and a business plan with respect to the principles of Kyoto for the last two years. The government has invested a total of $1.5 billion in an active search for climate change solutions.

We are now engaged in further consultations with the provinces and territories and the private sector as they have requested. We want to have all of that knowledge and information before us so that when we make a decision with respect to ratification, it is fully informed, intelligent and in the best interests of all Canadians.

[Jason Kenney, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister could understand if we are just a little bit skeptical about consultation given the last time the provinces were consulted prior to Kyoto, their consultation was completely ignored and the government went ahead and signed an agreement that the provinces had not signed onto.

How can the government continue down this road of spending money on studies which show a potential cost to our economy of 2% to 3% of GDP? How can it do that without telling Canadians how many jobs we will lose, how much lower our standard of living will be and how this will or will not improve the environment? How can it continue to do that?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the consultation process that we are now engaged in is to ensure that all Canadians, not just members of any particular government, can fully understand the details of what is involved here.

This is the single most complex environmental and economic problem of our time. It is global in scope. It needs an intelligent response. The government is determined to provide that intelligent response based upon meaningful consultations with other governments and the private sector and non-governmental organizations.

Employment Insurance

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Human Resources Development trivialized the whole issue of women in Quebec who take preventive withdrawal under Quebec's legislation, by denying them many weeks of employment insurance benefits.

Instead of playing down the number of women, the minister needs to realize that behind what she considers to be statistics, there are women and men, young families in Quebec, who need this money.

Will the minister show that she can be open, sensitive and flexible and finally realize that her employment insurance program unfairly penalizes women in Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, this is a very important issue for us. Ensuring that all mothers have full access to the benefits through the employment insurance system is a priority for the government. As I said yesterday, officials in the department are working diligently to find the quickest way of resolving this issue.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for months the minister has been singing the same tune.

If the minister is serious about wanting to solve the problem, she first needs to understand that parental leave should not come under an employment insurance program, but should be part of a real family policy, like the one proposed by Quebec.

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

Mr. Speaker, the track record of the Government of Canada in supporting Canadian mothers and their children is strong. For 30 years we have been providing maternity benefits to Canadian moms, and 10 years ago we introduced parental benefits. Last year we doubled those benefits.

We have a problem here that is affecting a small number of mothers in the province of Quebec, but it is important that they have full access to the benefits. That is why officials are working diligently to fix the problem.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources Development always answers with statistics, like a true technocrat.

She trivializes issues by saying that only a “small minority” is affected: a minority of pregnant female workers, a minority of parents who do not qualify for parental leave, a minority of self-employed workers.

Could the minister set her technocratic approach aside and realize that these “small minorities”, as she calls them, are people, human beings who expect her to transfer the necessary moneys that will allow Quebec to take charge—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Human Resources Development.

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

Mr. Speaker, what Canadian mothers want and what these mothers in the province of Quebec want is full access to the benefits, and that is what we will ensure.

I remind the House again that it is this government that doubled parental benefits. It is this government that reduced the number of hours required to receive those benefits. It is this government that ensures that for those in low income circumstances, particularly single parent families led by women, 80% of benefits are provided.

Our track record is clear and we will continue to support Canadian parents.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the minister that what we expect from her is to transfer the necessary moneys, so that Quebec can take control of its whole family policy, including the parental leave.

Does the minister realize that, through her attitude and in spite of the nice rhetoric, the only message that she is sending to these workers is that she is totally indifferent to their plight?

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

I see now, Mr. Speaker, that this really is not about mothers, it is something political. On this side of the House we are not interested in playing politics. We want to ensure that these mothers have full access to benefits and that is what we will do.

National Defence

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. Last month at a conference in Ottawa, Canadian Lieutenant General George Macdonald stated that if Greenland would not co-operate with the United States in its proposed national missile defence system, that Canada would consider offering the U.S. use of Canadian bases in the north to support the NMD.

Will the minister now tell Canadians precisely what discussions have taken place to date with the United States on the possible use of Canadian territory as part of the U.S. national missile defence system?