Debates of March 14th, 2002

Criminal Code

[Rick Casson, Canadian Alliance, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I was a firefighter in my other life for 17 years, albeit a volunteer firefighter. Firefighters are well trained and well equipped to handle every situation, but every fire has the potential to kill a firefighter, to kill a human being. Every time the alarm goes, no matter where it is or what kind of fire it is, fire has the potential to kill.

Certainly the comments of the parliamentary secretary are well taken. However as lawmakers and as an elected body we should, as the member just stated, do all we can to offer the needed support and protection to firefighters.

The recent incidents in the United States have highlighted the value of firefighters, how courageous they are, and the fact that they rush in when others rush out. We should do whatever we can do to help protect them. A lot of arson fires are just lit for greed, to collect insurance. Some are mischief. Some have some vindictiveness to them. No matter what causes a fire, fire has the potential to kill. We must keep that in mind when we are dealing with issues such as this one.

I add my support to the member. I thank him for bringing the matter forward. However, we discuss these issues a lot and nothing seems to be done.

Firefighters across Canada have a great lobby. They come to visit us every year with good reservations. We as an elected body should pay more attention to what they are asking for and start to deliver the protection they have earned.

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank all members of parliament who have spoken to the motion. Most of them have supported the motion except for members on the government side. I take this opportunity to commend all those brave men and women, our firefighters, who are protecting persons and properties while putting their lives at risk. I also take this opportunity to commend them for the good work they do for all of us.

The motion simply asks for a deterrence by changing the criminal code. The idea was that arson fires have been on the rise. Booby traps have been set which injure or kill firefighters. There should be repercussions for that. They should not get away with it. Putting a deterrent in place is a common sense matter. I am surprised that it did not happen.

Certainly this motion would have gone a long way by codifying the intent. After the tragic events of September 11 this would have been an opportunity to protect our firefighters from the risks they are taking.

We heard from government members about the constitutional legal beagles or mens rea. I am a little disappointed. Sometimes we are involved too much in it. We leave our eyes on the broader picture of the real issues. However going into the area of legal beagles creates a problem. I call it constitutional constipation of the charter of rights or charter constipation. It inhibits the real work needed in all they communities they serve and work.

It is purely out of goodness, out of respect, out of courtesy, out of responsibility, out of obligation, or even fiduciary responsibility and duty that we need to protect those people who are putting their lives at risk by protecting persons and properties. I regret the government chose not to support this issue.

I have spoken much more often than any other member in the House on private members' business. I am disappointed that private members' business does not go far enough. It is simply a joke, an affront to democracy. I consider private members' business like a pacifier being given to a baby so that the baby does not cry. The baby keeps on sucking it but nothing comes out of it.

All members of the House work very hard on private members' business. When an item is not votable, it is like a pacifier being given to members to shut them up. It does not go far enough.

I urge members of the House to give unanimous consent and recommend that Motion No. 376, as others members have recommended, go to the justice committee so that the committee can study it.

I ask for unanimous consent that the motion on which I have worked so hard and which I have passionately debated on behalf of thousands of firefighters who are serving our communities at least goes to the justice committee.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos)]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos)]

The time provided for the consideration of private members' business has now expired. As the motion has not been designated as a votable item, the order is dropped from the order paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Madam Speaker, it is another sad day for democracy. There is a sad day and a sad situation unfolding in the town of Canso.

I just spoke with the mayor of Canso, Frank Fraser. I am advised that he has now been contacted by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans by a letter advising him that the redfish proposal the people of Canso had so desperately hung their hopes on and were clinging to for the past number of months has been rejected by that minister. That minister, currently in Boston, at the same time was issuing press releases, pathetic self-congratulatory notices about what a record year it has been for Canada's seafood exports. It is nauseating to think he would be out of the country at the same time as sending this message which by all estimations will literally drive people from the town of Canso. There will be an exodus.

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who is from the province of Nova Scotia and also from a fishing community, has let Canso go through a hole in the ice. This callous and cold hearted act will drive the town to extinction. By refusing to give it an allotment of redfish or access to the resource in any way displays one thing to me, that the minister either has no cabinet clout or is completely callous to the situation that exists for the people of Canso. There is no hope.

There was hope there would be at least a bridge to get them through to the next rotation so they could access their shrimp and crab quota to stay alive, to make a living in the town. If the plant closes, it is game over. Suggesting somehow that there will be other programs that will come into play that will offer assistance to these people is foolhardy and completely insulting.

The reality is that despair is setting in. Schools will close. Businesses have already closed. There is nothing to keep people in the town.

It is also suggested in the letter from the minister that somehow things are worse in other places. I cannot imagine a single place in the country today that has a worse circumstance than Canso has. The people of Canso had a prayer vigil the other night. They were clinging to some hope that there would be good news coming this week. That news today is devastating for the people of Canso and Guysborough county.

Mayor Frank Fraser, the council, MLA Ron Chisholm, the provincial government, the plant workers, the trawlermen's co-op, the fishermen's union, everyone wanted to negotiate some kind of a settlement. There had to be some solution that could be forthcoming but that has been completely dashed by the news that came today from the minister, from a man who comes from a fisheries community.

I do not mean to personalize it but there was great hope with the new minister. For the first time in 40 years the minister is someone who comes from the province of Nova Scotia. It was hoped there might be some compassion, some understanding of the challenges that face the people of Canso. That has completely slipped away by virtue of that letter today.

The government can somehow find $50 million here and there. It can commission reports that go missing. It can cancel programs at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Yet somehow it cannot resolve a problem for thousands of people in a place like Canso where people have only one industry to cling to, only one hope for survival.

This callous disregard, this sending out of a letter with the news and not at least giving the people some options, some hope that there will be another solution or at least something to get them through these dark days is a new low. It hits an absolute new low.

I hope that the spokesperson for the government today will be able to give the people of Canso, Nova Scotia at least some hint as to what their next step is, as to what they might somehow--

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos)]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry.

[Serge Marcil, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Madam Speaker, we understand that the last decade has been a difficult period for fishers and communities that have always counted on abundant groundfish resources to ensure their survival.

Before the collapse of the groundfish stocks in the early 1990s, this fishery was the main source of income in some 1,300 small Atlantic communities. Even though numerous measures have been taken to re-establish groundfish stocks to higher levels, most of them remain very weak.

The collapse of the groundfish stocks and the moratoriums that resulted had a devastating impact on those who depended on them for their survival. However, it also paved the way for change. Indeed, there was a great deal of change in the industry, and the fact that we began to look at other, less traditional species enabled us to continue fishing.

As the minister has indicated on several occasions over the last few weeks, the Canadian industry must be competitive internationally if we want communities that depend on the fishery to be viable in the long term.

Fishermen and fishing communities in Atlantic Canada continue to lobby for increased access to fish stocks. For the most part, we know that, since he was appointed to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans two months ago, the minister has received a number of requests from Atlantic Canada communities for greater access to groundfish, crab and shrimp stocks.

The proposals include the introduction of newcomers to existing fisheries, the transfer of quotas from current holders to new holders and access to experimental fishing. The minister has met with a number of stakeholders and seriously examined their proposals in the meantime.

While we are aware of the crisis faced by communities in Nova Scotia, members have to realize that we also have to deal with the fundamental problems of limited resources, excessive capacity and fish processing plants always asking for more. Since we are aiming for fish conservation, we cannot review the fish quotas even if the prices are going up, because it would put excessive pressure on fish stocks.

The arguments set out in each of the proposals for increased access to the resources in order to increase or maintain the employment levels are not that different from those included in the proposals submitted during the last decade. Most smaller communities in Atlantic Canada, if not all of them, could make the same points when asking for greater access to the resources.

Even though the minister understands the plight of these Nova Scotia communities, he cannot approve the proposals. He has however agreed to work with his colleague, the minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, to find ways to help these municipalities.

He will also continue to use his department's resources to come up with viable long term solutions within a national strategy to maintain the competitiveness of the Canadian fishing industry on the world market.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member opposite. The reality is a long term solution is not going to cut it for Canso.

We have seen in the maritimes for a long time fishermen's interests bargained away for some benefits elsewhere.

The town of Canso is now at the point where it is going to go under. It is the federal government's responsibility to respond in times like these. If the plan is to just cull the fisheries by letting towns like Canso literally starve, that is a pretty sad statement in a country like ours.

This is a diabolical situation. Have not provinces are fighting with one another for scarce resources. When it comes to redfish, there are redfish in the water. The reality is they are there. There is uncaught quota right now on the east coast that has not been allotted. There is an ability for the government to step in right now and for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to do something proactive.

To simply suggest that long term solutions are going to be sought is not good enough. People literally will be packing their bags and leaving. Young people with no future in a small town in Nova Scotia will be forced to pick up and leave the place where their families have been for generations.

The town of Canso was built on fishing. The people there do not have other options. The government knows that. The minister certainly should know that, coming from that province and having, I would hope, more than just a passing interest in seeing towns like Canso survive.

[Serge Marcil, Liberal, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Madam Speaker, I know that Canso is going through some rough times, like other communities in Atlantic Canada and Quebec that rely to a great extent on fishing.

The minister has carefully examined various options to provide assistance to that community. He has determined that he cannot approve the request made by Seafreez for increased access to redfish stocks. Right now, the best option for Seafreez would be to capitalize on its 867 ton competitive offshore quota.

The minister urges Seafreez to consider making arrangements with other companies, which might agree to a temporary transfer of their unused quotas.

Raising the Canadian redfish quota in response to Seafreez's request would go against our conservation principles and against our efforts to prevent foreign overfishing within our 200-mile economic zone.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos)]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.52 p.m.)