Debates of April 24th, 2002

Petitions

[John M. Cummins, Canadian Alliance, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to present a petition from my constituents and others. They remind the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans that he has a constitutional obligation to protect wild fish and their habitat.

They call on the minister to put in place regulations which would protect wild fish and their habitat from the effects of salmon farming.

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I have three petitions I will introduce in the House.

The first is on labelling.

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my second petition is an amendment to the Employment Insurance Act.

The petition calls for children under the age of 18 attending full time secondary school and working part time to be exempt from payroll deductions of employment insurance.

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my third petition is the one of a continuing series of petitions I have been presenting to the House regarding the census.

The petitioners ask he government to release the 1911 census information. I have presented over 3,000 names in the House and over 14,000 names have been presented across the country.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Dana Fair is dead. He was beaten to death by three men with boards on September 1, 2001 in Lloydminster. There were several eyewitnesses to Dana's death. Three men, Raymond Cannepotatoe, David Harper and Cody Littlewolf, have been charged with second degree murder.

The undersigned petitioners call on parliament to ensure there is no bail for accused murderers caught in the act of committing their crimes and that only maximum sentences for those convicted be put in place.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—St. Clair, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I rise to present a petition from the constituents of my riding in the city of Windsor and the county of Essex asking the federal government to be of assistance in establishing a regional public transit system. I estimate there are several hundred if not a thousand signatures on the petition.

[Randy White, Canadian Alliance, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition to the House from my constituents which says that by making abortion illegal the government would restore human rights to unborn babies and protect living, growing fetuses from painful abortion procedures.

The petitioners therefore ask that the citizens of Canada call on parliament to make abortion illegal in Canada unless the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to present two petitions to the House.

The first petition is signed by practitioners in accountancy and taxation from across Canada. These citizens call on the federal government to formally recognize professional compilers who have met an agreed minimum standard. This would allow the public to distinguish qualified practitioners from those who have no proven competency in the profession of taxation.

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

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by Canadians from Edmonton and the surrounding area. They call on parliament to pass legislation to provide for the taking of samples of blood for the benefit of good samaritans and persons who administer and enforce the law. The law would protect good samaritans, health professionals and security and emergency professionals.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to present a petition which contains literally thousands of names of first nations citizens in the province of Manitoba. The petitioners reject the first nations governance initiative put forward by the minister of Indian affairs. They believe it to be nothing more than a thinly veiled guise to diminish or even put out their treaty rights.

The petitioners point out that the so-called consultative process has been a sham. They point out that they intend to submit more signatures of people who oppose the initiative than of people who were involved in the consultative process.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 120, 123, 124, and 131.

Question No. 120—

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Why is the definition of “disabled” used in the Canada pension plan disability benefit program not also used for applications for the disability tax credit with Canada Customs and Revenue Agency?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

The fact that a person is unable to work due to medical reasons or is receiving Canada pension plan, CPP, benefits or payments from other types of disability or insurance plans does not necessarily mean the person qualifies for the disability tax credit, DTC.

The CPP disability program is intended to provide benefits to individuals who are no longer able to work because of a “disability”. Criteria for the DTC, however, do not consider an individual’s ability to work. The issue is whether an individual is affected in a “basic activity of daily living”, e.g. walking, hearing, et cetera.

For example, an individual who was born “legally blind” would qualify for the DTC, but might not be eligible to receive CPP disability payments. Conversely, an individual who was no longer able to work because of a bad back might qualify for a CPP disability pension, but may not qualify for the DTC if he or she could perform all of the “basic activities of daily living”.

The role of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency is to administer the Income Tax Act as enacted by parliament. The policy rationale behind the legislation falls under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Finance.

Question No. 123—

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

How many people are affected by the court decision that Treaty 8 members are exempt from federal taxes, and how much money was received from federal taxation of Treaty 8 members in 2000, 1999, and 1998?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

With respect to the March 7, 2002, decision of the federal court, trial division, in Benoit v The Queen, it is not possible for the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, CCRA, to answer the hon. member’s question with precision. There are approximately 40,000 status Indian members of Treaty 8 bands. Of these, about 22,500 live off reserve and would likely be affected by the court decision. Those Treaty 8 members with income or property on reserves already benefit from the Indian Act tax exemption. However, the right described in the Benoit case is potentially broader than the Indian Act tax exemption.

The CCRA does not maintain statistics with regard to the amount of money received from federal taxation of Treaty 8 members. There is no requirement under federal tax legislation to indicate one’s treaty affiliation or band membership.

Question No. 124—

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

What were the translation costs associated with the production of the report entitled “Canadian Environmental Asssessment Act, CEAA, Screening Report for the OMYA (Canada) Inc.--Tay River Water Intake Project”, dated March 2002 and disseminated by habitat chief, Ontario-Great Lakes area, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Edwin R. DeBruyn?

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

The costs associated with the translation of the document “Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, CEAA, Screening Report for the OMYA (Canada) Inc.--Tay River Water Intake Project” were as follows:

Total as of 22/03/02: $10, 538

$2,017--English/French public notice of comment period on screening report (10/10/01)

$4,675--English/French screening report and revisions from public comment (23/10/01)

$3,846--English/French translation, amendments, editorial revisions of screening report (11/03/02)

Outstanding payable(s) for translation, amendment and editorial revision to the screening report of March 2002 should be received in the Burlington District Office within the next month.

Question No. 131

[Garry Breitkreuz, Canadian Alliance, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

With regard to the Canadian Firearms Program: ( a ) what is the proposed budget allocation for fiscal year 2002-03; ( b ) what are the line-item cost projections for fiscal year 2002-03; ( c ) what are the cost projections by department and agency for 2002-03; ( d ) what is the total cost of the program since its inception in 1995; and ( e ) what is the projected annual cost for each of the next 10 years?

[Paul MacKlin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

(a) The Canadian Firearms Centre’s, CFC, proposed budget allocation for fiscal year 2002-03 is $113.5 million.

(b) The CFC line item cost projections for 2002-03 are as follows:

Vote 1--Operating Expenditures: $97.3 million

Vote 5--Contributions: $10.4 million

Statutory--Employee Benefits: $5.8 million

(c) The cost projections by department and agency that will receive funding through the Canadian Firearms Centre in 2002-03 are as follows:

Department of Justice--CFC: $109.5 million

Solicitor General--RCMP: $3.0 million

Canada Customs and Revenue Agency: $1.0 million

(d) The total cost of the program since inception in 1995 is:

From 1995-96 to 2000-01 the net cost of the program incurred by the Department of Justice--CFC is $484.1 million. This consists of $551.5 million in gross expenditures minus $23.1 million in C-17 expenditures minus $44.3 million in net revenue.

As of March 31, 2002, period 12, the net cost of the program incurred by the Department of Justice--CFC for fiscal year 2001-02 is $88.6 million. This consists of $102.9 million in gross expenditures minus $14.3 million in revenue.

(e) The projected annual costs for the next 10 years are as follows:

i. For 2002-03 the net costs are projected to be $101.2 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $113.5 million minus $12.3 million in revenue);

ii. For 2003-04 the net costs are projected to be $59.8 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $95.0 million minus $35.2 million in revenue);

iii. For 2004-05 the net costs are projected to be $44.8 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $80.0 million minus $35.2 in revenue);

iv. Funding has not yet been finalized for fiscal years 2005-06 through 2011-12, but is expected to continue to decrease.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, if Question No. 118 could be made an order for return, the return would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 118—

[Grant McNally, Canadian Alliance, Dewdney—Alouette, BC]

With regard to instances of environmental or other damage at the National Library: ( a ) how many instances have occurred; ( b ) what was the type of damage and the date of each occurrence; ( c ) how many documents, artifacts or other stored items have been damaged; ( d ) what specific costs for repair, restoration or replacement are associated with those damaged items; ( e ) how many items have been permanently lost as a result of this damage including the type of item, the date it was damaged, and the value in dollars associated with its loss; ( f ) how much money has been spent on repairs, renovations or maintenance to the National Library and when did this work take place; ( g ) what is the current value of the inventory and all holdings of the National Library; and ( h ) has the government completed a cost analysis of the repairs necessary to maintain the current library as compared to the costs of constructing a new National Library?

Return tabled.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?