Debates of April 19th, 2002

Kyoto Protocol

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I realize that this is a very important issue. I will repeat what the Prime Minister told the House this week: our goal is to ratify the Kyoto protocol and we are going to dedicate ourselves to that end. But at the same time, before making a decision we must have discussions and consultations with the provinces and territories, the industry and the public, that is Canadians from all parts of the country.

We must also have a good plan. We are just waiting to hear from the joint federal-provincial-territorial committee before going ahead with these discussions.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian government is trying to evade its international obligations with a new toy, the clean energy export credits.

This idea is so ridiculous that it was flatly rejected by the European Union and by the United States. Yet the Minister of the Environment is defending it.

Does this mean that the minister shares the opinion of the Minister of Finance that Kyoto is not the solution to the problems caused by climate change?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, this is not something new. The Prime Minister even indicated in 1997 that clean energy exports was a very important issue. The position of the Canadian government has not changed since.

This issue has become very important following the changes to the American position, compared to last year and to seven years ago, which were announced in the Bush plan, on February 14 of this year. It will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As far as we are concerned, such is the purpose of the Kyoto protocol. This is why we are expecting a shift in the policy of the European Union.

Agriculture

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

Mr. Speaker, all grain and oilseed farm associations and Agricore United and the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool are publicly calling upon the government to provide a trade injury compensation program. Even the Prime Minister's task force is calling for bridge financing due to the harm caused by foreign subsidies.

Yesterday the agriculture minister sidestepped answering this important question. I will ask it again. Will the agriculture minister immediately implement a trade injury compensation program?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government has shown very clearly in the past that we have taken a number of steps and adjustments to programs that are already there to address, to the best of our financial ability, along with the provinces, the effects of trade injury, the effects of weather and the effects of international markets on production and agriculture.

I can pledge to the House and to the industry that I will continue those efforts on behalf of Canadian farmers.

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

Mr. Speaker, the reason these associations and farm groups are making the request is because nothing has been done, and that is the problem.

The minister's own department has identified a 25% decline in prices due to the foreign subsidies. His only response is to spend $15 million on more consultations across the country, $15 million of waste. He is long on talk and short on action. A trade injury program is needed now. Why will the minister not provide the program?

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

Mr. Speaker, I again express my amazement that the party that talks about grassroots consultation is opposed to consultation. There is a bit of a contradiction there.

I remind the hon. member, as I did yesterday, that program payments through a number of programs, including the spring cash advance, interest free money to farmers, the NISA program, the crop insurance program and other programs, between the federal and provincial governments last year, $3.7 billion went into supporting the primary producers in this country. That is a significant amount of money for that support.

Research and Development

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

Mr. Speaker, as the government advances the innovation strategy to rank Canada among the top five countries in the world for research and development, our country also needs to develop highly qualified people to fuel Canada's innovation performance.

Could the Secretary of State for Science, Research and Development tell the House what the government is doing to help attract young people to careers in science and engineering?

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Secretary of State (Science]

Mr. Speaker, for Canada to reach its R and D potential target, we need to encourage young people to pursue careers in science and technology. That is the reason I recently announced a $1.4 million initiative entitled PromoScience, an investment in 41 organizations that promote science and engineering among Canada's youth.

I also had the pleasure to participate in the launch of a new teacher's guide and new learning materials as well as a website to encourage young people to participate in this very exciting area.

I believe that these are smart investments--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Battlefords--Lloydminster.

Government Expenditures

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, another Liberal ad going there.

The numbers on the new Challenger jets just do not add up and there is a very good reason for that. It is March madness spending at its worst. There is nothing in the budget, nothing in the main estimates, no planning whatsoever.

I am sure the auditor general will have a hoot with this program come the next time she tables her report.

In November 1992, the current minister of public works asked:

--when will this old and tired government learn that the taxpayers' money does not belong to the Tories and that they cannot use it to reward their friends?

What has changed?

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows, the government has placed orders to purchase two new Challenger jets.

What the member does not realize is that these new jets will not only provide a longer range capability, be more fuel efficient, have better and safer avionics and more up to date security and satellite communications but the operating costs of the new Challengers will be 34% less than the current Challengers.

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I will take 34% more holidays.

It is tax time again and Canadian taxpayers have serious doubts about the Liberal government's priorities. When they see $100 million going to upgrade the Prime Minister's flying circus instead of the very real priorities of water treatment plants or highway improvements, they get upset, and rightly so.

Would the minister not agree that newer, faster, more efficient jets should at least carry a newer, faster, more efficient government?

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the points I raised in the previous answer, the member should also know that these particular aircraft will have the capability of landing at more than 50 more airports within Canada than the existing Challenger jets. This is part of the improvement of productivity.

The member should also know that these particular aircraft will be available not only to the Prime Minister, government officials, the Governor General and members of parliament, they will also be available to the military, and the member knows how important that will be.

École de médecine vétérinaire de Saint-Hyacinthe

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

Mr. Speaker, the École de médecine vétérinaire de Saint-Hyacinthe is fighting to keep its accreditation with the American Veterinary Medical Association. Without this recognition, new veterinarians in Quebec will suffer. The school, the only French language veterinary school in North America, will lose its research expertise and will not be able to survive this downgrading. The government of Quebec has already done its part by injecting more than $40 million.

Will the minister of agriculture tell us when the federal government will do its part and come up with the $59 million being requested? The situation is urgent.

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises a very important issue. We know the role veterinary colleges play, not only in the health of the agricultural portion of our industry but to human health in this country. He has raised the issue with me.

I have had discussions with my cabinet colleagues and members of parliament on this side. I can tell the hon. member that we are looking at all ways in which we as a government look at the accreditation of those colleges--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Malpeque.

Trade

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, Mexico is Canada's most important trading partner in Latin America. In fact, last year it was our second most important export market.

However Mexico does not always abide by fair trade. Since the fall of 2000 it has shut out seed potatoes from P.E.I. and New Brunswick on extremely weak grounds.

What action is the minister taking to strengthen our relationship with our NAFTA partner to ensure that it trades fairly and by the rules?

[Pat O'Brien, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, as the member noted, the next ministerial trade trip will go to Mexico from June 3 to June 7. He mentioned the fast growth in trade with Mexico. Mexico is indeed our sixth biggest export market. Since NAFTA, it has more than doubled, to $2.5 billion in 2001.

The member for Malpeque mentioned a trouble spot in our trade with Mexico. It is important that we recognize that. The purpose of this trip is to increase our trade with Mexico and to make sure it becomes even fairer.

Tabling of Documents

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, two days ago, in response to a question from the opposition leader and others, I referred to some figures relevant to the purchase of the two new Challengers.

I would like to table that document, in both official languages, as I indicated I would.

Committees of the House

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Friday March 22, 2002, the committee proceeded with the examination of Bill C-50, an act to amend certain acts as a result of the accession of the People's Republic of China to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, and agreed to report it without amendment.

Petitions

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present in the House a petition in both official languages, signed by the residents of my riding, Ahuntsic, asking parliament to urge the Government of Canada to request that the United Kingdom return the parthenon marbles to Greece.

The petitioners ask that every effort be made to have the Parthenon Marbles, which were removed from Greece almost 200 years ago without the consent of the Greek people, returned to Greece, their country of origin, prior to the 2004 Olympic Games when Greece will host the 28th Olympiad.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to rise to present a substantial petition signed by thousands of first nations citizens in the province of Manitoba.

The signators reject the minister of Indian affairs' first nations governance initiative. They allege that it is nothing more than a repeat of the 1969 white paper. They point out that the consultation process that went with the bill was a sham and was completely inadequate.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Questions Nos. 114, 115, 116 and 119.

Question No. 114—

[Ted White, Canadian Alliance, North Vancouver, BC]

With respect to the government's National Strategy on Community Safety and Crime Prevention: ( a ) what measurement systems have been used in the past, and are presently in place, to determine whether any of the 1,900 crime prevention projects funded since 1998 have produced the intended results, and whether certain types of programs are more effective than others; and ( b ) can the government identify the programs which have resulted in measurably different reductions in crime and improvements in community safety when compared with areas which have not used those programs?