Debates of April 9th, 2002

Radio-Canada

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Speaker, Radio-Canada employees in eastern Canada have been locked out since March 25. Management of this crown corporation does not want to return to the bargaining table as long as employees refuse to go back to work with what they were offered.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage make a commitment to contact the president of Radio-Canada to convince him that the coporation should return to the bargaining table in good faith and conclude a collective agreement that respects workers' demands as well as the right of the francophone audience to programming services?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the lockout has lasted two weeks, and I know that the francophone audience is really missing its programming.

I encourage both parties to resume productive negotiations immediately.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, a recent Decima poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Canadians support ratifying Kyoto. Even in Alberta there is support of over 65%.

Last week prominent business leaders like Robert Schad and Stephen Bronfman were campaigning to get the government to meet its commitment to Kyoto. The environment minister is still waffling. Even his fellow cabinet colleagues openly question the support.

The Canadian people want the Kyoto protocol. Business leaders want it. Why can we not just ratify it?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member should know, the government's position is clear. We will have consultations with the Canadian public, with industry groups that are affected and with the provinces and territories on ratification and its potential impact on Canada. We will also devise a plan in consultation with those groups, which will not penalize any region of the country or any province. After we have done that, we will make our decision on ratification.

National Defence

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, 54 post-deployment reports on the use of the Sea Kings mention at least one of the following: mission cancelled for aircraft maintenance; mission downgraded by aircraft's lack of serviceability; major snags that cause significant downtime; and aircraft that were grounded.

Why does the government not pull the flying carpet out from under the Prime Minister, cancel the $100 million order for the flying Taj Mahals and buy new helicopters for our troops, or has the little guy from Shawinigan become the sultan of Shawinigan?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we are buying new helicopters. The government has entered into a procurement process.

I indicated that by the end of the year we will be able to announce the new helicopter that will replace the Sea Kings. Meanwhile, the Sea Kings have been given upgrades. They are operating quite effectively in the Arabian Sea in the Afghanistan campaign. They have an over 90% success rate in terms of their missions. Twenty-three countries are flying over 600 of them. They are very good aircraft.

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the answer does not fly any better than the Sea Kings.

The Minister of National Defence says that the new luxury jets are an upgrade to make sure that the government is better able to do its job when it is required to travel. The only thing the cabinet does fast is fly.

Why is the minister not more concerned about providing his troops with the equipment they need to do their jobs than he is about providing the Prime Minister with a Canadian version of Air Force One to feed his imperial-sized ego?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the replacement aircraft, the Challenger, is much the same model except that is an upgraded version. It has better avionics and better fuel efficiency. It can go to more airports. It can do non-stop trips which again will help the government to operate in a more efficient and effective fashion when it comes to travel.

Leadership Campaigns

[Charlie Penson, Canadian Alliance, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance invoked the ethics counsellor's ruling when I asked about Calgary lawyer Jim Palmer, who was raising money for the minister's leadership campaign while working for the Department of Finance. That simply is not good enough.

Will the minister clear the air today by tabling a list of those who Mr. Palmer consulted on behalf of the Department of Finance and a list of firms and individuals who donated to the minister's leadership campaign?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, this matter has been discussed extensively with the ethics counsellor. He has commented on it. Any further questions should be directed to him.

[Charlie Penson, Canadian Alliance, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is interesting. The ethics counsellor has no credibility with Canadians and none with the members of the House, except for those who hide behind his rulings.

The ethics counsellor has a perfect record of never having found anyone in breach of the so-called Liberal code of ethics. He is batting 1,000. However, if the minister is so confident in the ethics counsellor, will he table in its entirety Mr. Wilson's written ruling regarding the investigation into this murky relationship?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics counsellor has commented extensively publicly and has responded to questions on this matter and has not held anything back.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of the Environment said that the government's position on the ratification of the Kyoto protocol will be considered after the introduction of a plan which will be fair for all regions of the country.

But in July, after the Bonn meeting, the Prime Minister said that the government was prepared to ratify the Kyoto protocol in 2002.

It is now 2002. Will the minister confirm that Canada will ratify the Kyoto protocol this year?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is the fourth month of the year. The Prime Minister has not changed his mind. So we are awaiting developments, especially after the joint federal-provincial committee, which will be submitting its report in a few weeks.

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

Mr. Speaker, at the opening of the Conference of the Parties held in Marrakech in November 2001, the Minister of the Environment quoted the Prime Minister as saying “The Bonn accord paves the way for ratification of the Kyoto protocol by Canada next year”.

Does the minister realize that his statements contradict those of the Prime Minister and that he is getting in the way of the entire process of ratifying the Kyoto protocol this year?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

No, Mr. Speaker, there is no contradiction. Last year, the Prime Minister clearly said that the Bonn and Marrakech accords pave the way for ratification, even for 2002.

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, federal officials are now estimating that the Kyoto protocol could cost Canadians as much as $15 billion over the next five years. Last week it was $10 billion; this week it is $15 billion.

The minister is on a cross-country tour selling Kyoto but it is clear that the government really does not know what it will cost. Would the Minister of the Environment tell the House how much the Kyoto protocol will cost? Will it be $40 billion or $50 billion by the time he gets to Calgary?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who is a critic for the Alliance should know that the government's consistent position has been that no figures will be put forward from the government until we have had the report from the federal-provincial-territorial joint working group which is currently analyzing the impact of Kyoto on the economy.

When that occurs all governments, federal, provincial and territorial, will be in a better position to offer comments and a response to the hon. member's question.

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the minister would have asked some of these questions before he signed in Kyoto. Canadians are growing tired of this chicken little forecast from the minister. Yet he continues his cross-country the sky is falling tour, trying to sell Kyoto even though he has no idea what it will cost.

It was this same cavalier attitude of spending that put Canada into the $547 billion debt we are in. Will the government stop trying to rob future generations of Canadians and just admit that it made a mistake when it signed Kyoto?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. member remembers what he said at the Alliance convention not too long ago when he said that the Alliance position on Kyoto would “help our fundraising”.

Education

[Janko Peric, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. In 1998 the federal government established the Canada study grants. Since then tuition fees, rental housing and capital costs for things like computers and books have risen.

Will the minster expand the Canada study grants to make extra funding available for students with the highest needs?

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to be able to answer the member's question. We are pleased to announce that we are expanding the Canada study grants which will provide better post-secondary access for those with disabilities, women in non-traditional doctoral studies, part time students and students with dependants.

In its most recent budget, our government announced investments of $10 million for two measures which will help disabled students pay for the costs of their education. We will be increasing the Canada study grants now awarded to these students from $5,000 to $8,000, and there will be other improvements as well.

Agriculture

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

Mr. Speaker, the farm safety net agreement between the provinces and the federal government expires next February. The minister has tried to impose the one size fits all program. Now backtracking at an Olympic speed, he is spending $15 million on a series of poorly organized meetings with select farm groups. These so-called consultations are only an attempt to force acceptance of his plan.

Why can the agriculture minister find $15 million for this public relations exercise but cannot find $5 million for farm drought in Saskatchewan?

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

Mr. Speaker, here is the critic for a party that says we should talk to the grassroots. We are spending some money to have the widest, broadest and most indepth dialogue with farmers and all Canadians about the future direction of the agriculture and the agri-food industry in Canada.

We think it is the way to go. We want to talk to people. There is no done deal. We do not know all the answers. We do not know all the questions. That is why we want to talk to Canadians about it and work with everyone to do so.

Highway Infrastructure

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has once again told people on the south shore that money was available to go ahead with highway 30, which was promised by the Liberals during the election campaign.

What does the Minister of Finance have to say to the Mayor of Longueuil, Mr. Olivier, who is telling him in no uncertain terms to stop stating that the money is available and to pay up, because the Government of Quebec's share is on the table?