Debates of March 11th, 2002

Budget Implementation Act, 2001

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to members of the opposition this morning. There is a far greater challenge that we have in the House in dealing with the budget implementation bill.

I will speak a little about how the public perceived the work of the House over the last few months and I will specifically limit my remarks to the greater Toronto area.

The budget asked us to approve spending in the neighbourhood of some $150 billion. The greater Toronto area would receive about $28 billion from the budget approval process that we are talking about in the House today. It would include transfers to the provinces, municipalities, grants from various government departments, from agriculture right through to veterans affairs, environment, and heritage.

This amount of government expenditure has been going on in the greater Toronto area for the last four years. To put it all in perspective, the taxpayers of the greater Toronto area send close to $35 billion to the treasury. That means there is close to $7 billion that is used for interest payments, debt reduction, and equalization to those regions of the country that do not have the economic opportunity of the greater Toronto area.

My point today that I think is extremely relevant for all members of parliament has to do with the communications that flow from the budget exercise. Over the last three months we have heard repeatedly in the Toronto media that the Government of Canada presence in the Toronto area was marginal. Headlines in our largest newspaper, the Toronto Star were saying that members of parliament in the greater Toronto area were missing in action and that there was no federal support for activities in the GTA. The mayor of our city, on radio, television and print, publicly called for the defeat of all Toronto members because he believed that there was very little Government of Canada activity happening in the greater Toronto area.

Toronto would receive $28 billion of appropriations from the budget. I believe this is a problem not just in the greater Toronto area. Most government grants and allocations of funds that flow from the budget are essentially handled in a way where there is little communication with the people in the community.

It has come to a point where we now have a crisis in the country. More and more people are asking, and I have heard this in other regions of the country as well, “What do you do when you go to Ottawa?”

The reality is there is not a member of parliament, whether a government member or an opposition member, that is outside the loop of receiving from some department or another government support to help stimulate the economic activity in his or her community.

My own view is that 99% and maybe even more of this money is essentially managed and allocated through the bureaucratic process in government. Many times MPs do not know how that money is being disbursed. The only people who really know are the few people receiving it because the federal presence around this money is not there.

By contrast, in the province of Ontario which I come from, people can go to any radio station or read any newspaper and they will see SuperBuild ads everywhere. These ads indicate what the province of Ontario would do through SuperBuild in the province and in communities in Ontario. People cannot drive down a new piece of paved road without seeing half a dozen SuperBuild signs educating the public on where their provincial tax dollars are going.

I seek unanimous consent of the House to propose an amendment to Bill C-49, the budget implementation bill, before us today by adding a new clause after line 22 on page 112 that the governor in council shall allocate one-half of 1% of all moneys appropriated by this act for the purpose of disseminating information concerning the provision of programs and services by the Government of Canada under this act to ensure that the people of Canada are properly informed as to those programs and services.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the hon. member for Toronto--Danforth have unanimous consent of the House to propose the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I rise to speak to the first group of amendments, most of which were put forward by the Canadian Alliance members.

One of the motions moved by a Canadian Alliance member is particularly interesting. It moves that there be periodic reviews of the impact of the new tax proposed to pay for airline security.

When I listened to the evidence of public servants during the hearings of the Standing Committee on Finance, I was surprised to learn that there had never been any sort of study done of the impact of introducing a new air travel tax.

At the time, I moved a motion that all impact studies and analyses related to the introduction of this new tax be made available to committee members. To my great surprise, the General Director of the Tax Policy Branch, Mr. Dupont, candidly admitted that he had done no analysis of the impact on air travel demand, on the survival of small regional airports—those in Baie-Comeau, Sept-Îles and elsewhere—and on the implications of this new tax for the Canadian tourism industry. No questions had been asked about the impact such a tax would have on the development of the regions. I was flabbergasted.

Analyses and impact studies are often done for much less significant measures. In a sector such as the airlines, which has been sorely tested since September 11, and even before because of the economic downturn, such a tax can be fatal. It can make it impossible for small airports and small carriers to continue to operate.

What does this mean? It means that in this country there are two kinds of citizens: those who have access to services because they live in major centres and will still have access to these services at fairly competitive rates; and those who live in remote areas, who will be cut off from major centres—such a trend is already apparent—who will not have access to adequate air services, and who will not have access to frequent flights between so-called remote areas and major centres.

Even before the minister had such a stupid idea as to introduce a new tax in the airline industry, we were hearing warning bells in the regions. When the Bloc Quebecois held prebudget consultations in the regions, we were told that because of the increase in ticket prices since 1983, it was already getting difficult to keep regional carriers afloat and maintain connections with large centres.

Despite their natural beauty, some areas such as Abitibi-Témiscamingue, the Gaspé Peninsula, the Magdalen Islands, and others, are unable to set up a tourism development plan, due to the lack of flights—my colleague from Sept-Îles can confirm this—since this is often the only efficient means of transportation to link a large centre or part of a remote area with another even more remote area.

The Minister of Finance comes up with this stupid idea of imposing a tax on air transportation that will add to the already very expensive ticket prices in Canada. For example, since 1983, there has been a 10% increase in airline ticket prices in Canada. Some may say that since 1983, 10% is not much, but during this same time in the United States, ticket prices have dropped 43%.

So we find ourselves in a situation where the airline industry is having problems, aggravated by the events of September 11, when it was already suffering from a lack of competition that did not allow it to take advantage of profit margins as much as Americans or others could. It is important to understand that our population density is not comparable to that of the United States, Asia or Europe. How then can such a new tax be justified?

Over the weekend, our brilliant Minister of Transport said that carriers should lower airfares. How can they lower airfares when they are having difficulties ensuring their survival?

Also, what is being replaced right now are expenditures for which airports, in particular, were responsible, to the tune of $120 million annually. Now, they are being asked to fund a new $2.5 billion tax. This is more than triple what they were asked before, and the Minister of Transport is telling us “There is no problem. Carriers can absorb these new costs, because they no longer absorb the previous security related expenditures. These are assumed by the government. Moreover, carriers have enough flexibility to hide this tax in the airfares without increasing them and get away with it.»

To present things in that fashion is really not to know the industry at all. I remind those who are listening to us that all members of the Standing Committee on Finance, including government members, were stunned to learn that no impact study had been done before deciding to impose such a tax. This morning the secretary of state tried to justify somewhat the government's actions by saying “As you know, we have had to act quickly since September 11. We had to act quickly and propose such a tax”. To act quickly is one thing, but to do things intelligently is another matter.

This government is not acting properly when it is considering imposing this tax as of April 1. It is time the government got into a better frame of mind. It has had time to do some thinking over the past six months, since September 11. Then why, in spite of the unanimity among the airline and tourism industries, among stakeholders involved in regional development, among people who manage air transportation and tourism services, as well as small airports on a daily basis, does the government not listen to the arguments of all these stakeholders, who unanimously condemn such a tax? Why did the Minister of Finance, who believes that there is no fiscal imbalance—people are again making fun of him—with his huge hidden surpluses, not show some flexibility and provide $2.5 billion over a five year period—it is not much—to fund all these security initiatives?

Security concerns everyone, not just those who fly, particularly when such a measure could jeopardize air connections between major centres and so-called remote regions. The development of these regions is being jeopardized.

This is why I will support the Canadian Alliance motion. The Bloc Quebecois will continue to condemn this tax, which does not make any sense.

Terrorism

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, six months from September 11, the foundational principles of counterterrorism law and policy bear recall and reaffirmation, particularly in light of the horrific terrorist assaults on civilians in Jerusalem this past weekend.

First, terrorism, the deliberate maiming, murder and terrorizing of innocents, can never be justified. Canada, as the Prime Minister put it, condemns without equivocation this use of terrorist violence for political objectives.

Second, the transnational networks of super-terrorists, with access to weapons of mass destruction, constitute an existential threat to the right to life, liberty and the security of the person.

Third, freedom from acts of terror and freedom of fear of terror constitute a cornerstone from human security.

Fourth, there can be no moral equivalence or similitude between terrorism and counterterrorism.

Fifth, support and sanctuary for groups responsible for terrorism, as the Prime Minister put it, is unacceptable.

Sixth, counterterrorism must always comport with human rights and humanitarian norms.

Canada extends its deepest sympathies and condolences to the families of the victims of terror on this six month anniversary of September 11.

Firearms

[Philip Mayfield, Canadian Alliance, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the safety course the government has forced law-abiding responsible firearms owners in British Columbia to take is no more than a Liberal anti-gun re-education exercise.

There was no need for the federal government to spend over $7 million on yet another level of bureaucracy of firearms instruction. The British Columbia conservation outdoor recreation education course offers students the ability to shoot a gun and learn with firsthand experience the proper way to handle a firearm, including the significance of safety concerns and the difficulties of hitting a target. The federal course does not even do that.

My constituents compare the federal course to teaching individuals to drive a car without ever allowing them behind the wheel. The RCMP has backed away from the Liberal gun registry. Public safety and fighting crime have not been the priorities of the government's firearms laws. These laws are causing great hardship to hunters and families who need firearms to protect themselves and live safely in remote areas of our country.

Sixty-eight years of handgun registration did nothing for public safety and neither does this firearms safety course.

Kids Help Phone

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, every day there are some 1,000 Canadian children who pick up the phone because they need to call someone to talk about their problems. Kids Help Phone is there to answer these calls.

Kids Help Phone is provided to children by way of a toll-free number 24 hours a day and with no worries of confidentiality. Calls to Kids Help Phone are answered by professional counsellors who talk with children, help them to define their problems, figure out what is important in their lives, and what they can do next.

In 2000 12% of calls received by Kids Help Phone dealt with problems related to abusive behaviours or violence, making abusive behaviours and violence the third most common call placed to Kids Help Phone. During this week of violence and bullying prevention it is important we remember this fact and acknowledge that we can work toward finding a solution to this problem.

Kids Help Phone is part of that solution. I congratulate it on its continuing outstanding work.

2002 Winter Paralympic Games

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute today to the members of Canada's paralympic team which presently is in Salt Lake City participating in the 2002 Winter Paralympic Games from March 7 to 16.

The games opened on March 7 with Mr. Mark Ludbrook as Canada's flag bearer. Mr. Ludbrook, who is participating in his fifth paralympics, led a proud Canadian team consisting of 29 athletes and 30 coaches and staff. Over the weekend the accomplishments were stellar. The team brought home four medals and nine top eight finishes.

In nordic skiing Shauna Maria Whyte placed fourth in the women's 7.5 km biathlon on March 8 and placed fifth in women's cross country short distance on March 10. Brian McKeever, with guide Robin McKeever, placed sixth in the men's biathlon on March 8 and also won Canada's first gold medal in men's cross country short distance on March 10. Colette Bourgonje placed fourth in women's cross country short distance on March 10. Karolina Wisniewska brought home the bronze medal in women's downhill.

Rendez-vous de la Francophonie

[Claude Duplain, Liberal, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, from March 11 to 24, everyone is invited to the Rendez-Vous de la Francophonie, which takes place around the Semaine nationale de la Francophonie. The Journée internationale de la Francophonie will be on March 20.

This is the ideal opportunity for those who love the French language to come together and celebrate it. Let us all demonstrate that our language is very much alive here in Canada, and that it is important for it to remain so.

Over 9 million Canadians speak French, including 6.6 million for whom French is their mother tongue. Their contribution to Canadian culture is both incredible and beyond compare.

Throughout the country there will be many activities around the Rendez-vous de la Francophonie, and I invite all Canadians to take part.

Gala des Olivier

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last evening, TVA broadcast the Olivier awards ceremonies, showcasing the exceptional talent of Quebec humorists. Lise Dion was belle of the ball, with four of the nine Oliviers: best comedian, best comic performance, best stage performance and best comedy number of the year.

The public also honoured Lise Dion with the people's award for best comedian of the year.

Among the other honourees were Sylvain Larocque, Louis-José Houde and François Léveillé, writers of the year for Tueurs à gags ; Louis-José Houde, discovery of the year; Jean-Michel Anctil, most popular performance of the year; Gilbert Rozon, who was awarded an Olivier in special recognition for his Just for Laughs Festival and the former group Rock et Belles Oreilles, who were awarded a special Olivier.

The Bloc Quebecois extends warm congratulations to all these artists and thanks them for their extraordinary contribution to bringing laughter to Quebecers.

2002 Winter Paralympic Games

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate all Canadian paralympians participating in the 2002 Salt Lake City Paralympic Games currently underway.

I congratulate Brian McKeever of Canmore, Alberta, who teamed up with his brother and guide Robin and won the gold in the five kilometre cross country classic ski race; Daniel Wesley of New Westminster, British Columbia, who became Canada's first multiple medallist by winning a silver medal in the sit-ski Super G to add to the bronze medal he won on Saturday; and Karolina Wisniewska of Calgary who captured bronze in the standing downhill. Once again the CBC has provided superb coverage of our athletes and all the excitement that is unfolding as these games go into full gear.

The country is behind team Canada and it makes us all proud today.

Research and Development

[Janko Peric, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, recently the NSERC-COM DEV industrial research chair in filter and switch technologies was established at the University of Waterloo.

COM DEV International Ltd. of Cambridge and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada each put up $1 million over five years to establish this research chair. This is an investment in the future. It will help develop the next generation of filters and switches for the wireless and satellite technology fields and will keep Canada on the cutting edge of telecommunications research. COM DEV is a leader in Canada's aerospace electronics industry and has once again shown its outstanding community leadership.

I welcome the positive role played by the federal government in supporting leading edge R and D in Canada.

Softwood Lumber

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, there is talk that Canada may accept an export tax in the softwood lumber dispute. This would be a reversal of Canadian policy and could have been done a year ago. It may be portrayed by the Liberal government as a success story but at what cost to Canadian lumber producers?

Although a self-administered export tax would allow Canada to retain the tax revenue, it would send the wrong message about who controls Canada's forests. Canadians have the right to establish prices that reflect market conditions in Canada. This must be a short term measure and the government's real interest must be to negotiate a permanent softwood lumber solution.

What the Americans really want is increased access to Canadian round logs. Can the Liberal government tell us why Canadians should not benefit from all the value added revenue?

The lesson to be learned here is that the Prime Minister and the Minister for International Trade talk about being favoured trading partners of the United States, yet they have completely failed to negotiate a fair trade deal on softwood lumber.

We need a solution that is fair. Will the Liberal government show backbone and deliver a fair deal?

Aboriginal Affairs

[Andy Burton, Canadian Alliance, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the recent writ filed in the B.C. supreme court by the Council of the Haida Nation brings to the forefront the uncertainty that unsettled land claims foster.

The future of resource based industries in B.C. is in jeopardy. No doubt this case will ultimately proceed to the Supreme Court of Canada effectively tying up economic development until it is resolved. Without certainty of tenure, companies in the mining, logging, oil and gas, even agriculture and fishing industries will not proceed with new development or expansion plans.

While we do not necessarily agree with the Haida claim we can understand the frustration over the failed treaty process. It is a process that does not bring finality, affordability, respect and agreement with rights supported under the Canadian constitution, nor does it respect the protection of private property rights for all Canadians.

This is a prime example of the failure of the treaty process in B.C., a process in which the federal government does play a significant role.

Commonwealth Day

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, today is Commonwealth Day. This day originated with a Canadian proposal in 1976 to set aside the second Monday in March as a day of observance to promote global understanding.

Over one billion people will acknowledge their common bonds and celebrate the contribution of the Commonwealth of Nations to democracy, human rights and global harmony.

Particularly today, as we monitor elections in Zimbabwe and share concerns about other regions where democracy may be threatened, Canada is committed to the principles that unite all Commonwealth countries and transcend national, ethnic, cultural and economic differences that they have.

I ask all members of the House to join with me today to celebrate Commonwealth Day in the spirit of international co-operation.

Terrorism

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

Mr. Speaker, six months ago today, terrorists hijacked planes that would strike the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, thereby committing an unprecedented act of terror that caused the death of more than 3,000 people.

These attacks started a shock wave that was felt around the world and led to an immense mobilization of countries wanting to eradicate terrorism and defend the very democratic values that the terrorists attacked.

With these same democratic values in mind, the Bloc Quebecois wanted to ensure that the measures taken following the attacks did not limit our freedoms. Our approach was to criticize these measures, in particular, Bills C-26 and C-42, which violate the just balance between security and the freedom that we so dearly want to protect.

Today more than ever, we must continue to defend these values in order to affirm that the terrorists will not win.

Commonwealth Day

[Gérard Binet, Liberal, Frontenac—Mégantic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today is Commonwealth Day. Known as a model of multiculturalism, the Commonwealth provides Canada with the opportunity to considerably strengthen its ties with other member countries and promote our foreign policy interests.

The ties that bind peoples together through traditions, cultures, and diverse values are numerous, and they are present in every sector of activity.

Our country benefits enormously from its membership in the Commonwealth and Canada, in turn, brings its unwavering support to this venerable institution.

Benoît Lécuyer

[Scott Reid, Canadian Alliance, Lanark—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is with sorrow that I rise in the House today to pay tribute to a brave man who gave his life to protect our roads and our freedom. Constable Benoît Lécuyer, who was shot down in cold blood on February 28 during a routine arrest for speeding, will not be forgotten.

On behalf of the Canadian Alliance and all Canadians, I offer my deepest condolences to Mr. Lécuyer's family, especially his wife, Anick Royer, his children, Joël and Marianne, his brother Éric, also a police officer, and his mother, Micheline.

We thank you for your courage. The country is indebted to you for your sacrifice.

Terrorism

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

Mr. Speaker, six months ago today the people of the world were left in shock and horror by the series of cowardly attacks on the great American cities of New York and Washington.

While the targets were found on American soil the victims of September 11 were the sons and daughters of many nations. That fact has already been recognized today in memorials on both sides of the Atlantic in Great Britain and in the United States.

If ever we begin to feel that the tragedy of September 11 was not an attack on Canada, if ever we begin to think that the war on terrorism is not Canada's fight, let us always remember that 25 innocent Canadian lives were taken from us.

Today we will pause and reflect each in our own way on the meaning of that day. We will think of all who died, both the fallen heroes and the innocent victims. We will pause in silence to renew our vigour, renew our courage and renew our resolve. Above all else, let us pause to renew our vow to fight this campaign against terrorism until it is won.

Radio Music Awards

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Bras D'Or—Cape Breton, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to congratulate the winners of the Canadian Radio Music Awards. The awards were presented during Canadian Music Week in Toronto on March 2. Created and funded by Canada's private radio broadcasters the CRMA profiles and recognizes Canada's emerging English language music stars.

Among the awards presented it was announced that The Guess Who will be inducted into the Canadian music industry hall of fame. It has recorded several hit songs and was among the first Canadian rock groups to become famous across North America. Other winners announced on March 2 included Wave, the Ennis Sisters, Nellie Furtado and my fellow Cape Bretoner Jimmy Rankin.

Since 1970 the government has worked with broadcasters in the sound recording industry to bring Canadian voices to our airwaves. Most recently the government announced a comprehensive Canada music fund to ensure that the music industry is equipped to succeed in the new economy and that Canadians and the world have access to diverse choices in Canada music.

I ask the House to join me in congratulating this year's winners of the Canadian Radio Music Awards.

Research and Development

[James Rajotte, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the recent announcement that embryonic stem cell research will be given public funding has never been discussed in parliament. This causes the Canadian Alliance a great deal of concern.

Embryonic stem cells and the rights of the fetus are difficult issues for many individuals to debate, but there will always be situations where what is scientifically possible and what is ethically acceptable conflict. Therefore this issue should not be avoided as the government is doing. We should never be afraid to debate new science and the ethical implications of that science in the House.

Research into embryonic stem cells is a topic of concern to all parliamentarians because the results of that research will substantially impact the entire human race.

I urge the Liberal government to table legislation on assisted human reproduction, cloning and stem cells immediately. I would further recommend because of the difficult moral and ethical dimensions of legislation dealing with assisted human reproduction and related research that all parties permit a free vote on this issue when legislation is finally tabled.

Events of September 11

[The Speaker]

Before proceeding with oral question period, I believe that there is consensus that the House observe one minute of silence in memory of the tragic events that took place on September 11 in the United States.

I therefore invite all members to rise to observe one minute of silence.

[Editor's Note: The House stood in silence.]

Softwood Lumber

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, in Ottawa today we have over 30 people from British Columbia: the minister of forests from the government of British Columbia, MLAs from British Columbia, mayors from British Columbia, industry leaders from British Columbia and the first nations from British Columbia. They are all as concerned about the softwood file as we are in the House.

There is one question they would all like to ask the government. Will the government assure the House and Canadians that any deal Canada reaches will include the establishment of a binding binational panel for softwood dispute resolutions?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the Leader of the Opposition's question. It is a very pertinent one. I thank Minister Michael de Jong and the British Columbia delegation who are in Ottawa today expressing support for the Canadian approach in the negotiations we are having. This is very welcome at this time.

We have 10 more days before the final determination. We are working extremely energetically at finding a long term policy based solution to the softwood lumber dispute.