House of Commons Hansard #188 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was embryos.

Topics

AgricultureOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Howard Hilstrom Canadian Alliance Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, President Bush signed the protectionist U.S. farm bill into law last Monday. Besides driving down commodity prices it will also act as a non-tariff barrier to our exports of meat, vegetables and fruit.

Mandatory country of origin labelling is a breach of our trade agreements. The agriculture minister promised to initiate trade challenges if the bill violates our trade laws.

Has the agriculture minister kept his promise and filed challenges to the U.S. farm bill under the WTO and NAFTA?

AgricultureOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, I want to inform the hon. member that as much as we are disgusted with the country of origin labelling in the U.S. farm bill, it is at a voluntary stage for two years.

There is considerable opposition to it in the United States. We will continue to pressure the American government so that it will see the reality that what it is doing will hurt not only its industry but ours as well. However, it is not mandatory at this stage.

AgricultureOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Howard Hilstrom Canadian Alliance Selkirk—Interlake, MB

Mr. Speaker, the minister should understand what the government did under softwood lumber. It waited for five years and did nothing. We will be in the same situation in agriculture.

Not only did the cabinet fail to make any changes to the U.S. farm bill, it also failed to develop an immediate action plan if the farm bill passed. Farmers need an immediate trade challenge to the U.S. farm bill and they must have federal help at home.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister support a trade entry compensation program for Canadian farmers?

AgricultureOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, we have indicated, and we have been joined by the rest of the world, our disgust for the U.S. farm bill and the fact that the U.S. has lost its leadership and credibility in negotiating at the WTO and other panels.

Having said that, we are working with the industry and the provinces to put in place an agricultural policy framework which will be a comprehensive, integrated approach that will lead to more profitability in the agricultural sector.

Viandes du BretonOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Claude Duplain Liberal Portneuf, QC

Mr. Speaker, in recent months we have all been concerned by the fate of those who have been laid off in the airline, forestry and high tech sectors.

Now a tragedy has occurred at Notre-Dame-du-Lac. The premises of Les Viandes du Breton Inc. were destroyed in a fire on the night of May 15, 2002. No fewer than 460 employees are now out of work.

Can the Minister of Human Resources indicate to this House what measures her department has in mind to get these workers through this difficult time?

Viandes du BretonOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada understands how devastating this fire has been for workers of Viandes du Breton in Notre-Dame-du-Lac. I can tell the hon. member and the House that within hours of the fire officials from my department were in touch with the employer.

Today a team of HRDC officials has opened an emergency office at Hôtel La Dolce Vita in Notre-Dame-du-Lac because we appreciate how important it is for these workers to have access to income support through employment insurance.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. decision to impose a 27% tariff on softwood lumber will hit hard when it comes into effect on Thursday. The government has made no specific commitment to assist forest workers and their families. Instead, the trade minister continues to insult laid off workers by denying they have been laid off due to this trade dispute.

When will the government announce a comprehensive forest worker assistance package?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

3:10 p.m.

Papineau—Saint-Denis Québec

Liberal

Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, the government is well aware of the difficult conditions that our communities and workers have been subjected to by American protectionism. The problem is south of the border. The government is also well aware that the uncertainties of the last few months have been very detrimental. They have caused harm in many communities and cost jobs across the country.

We know that when the full tariff of 27% is imposed on us next Thursday the impact will be brutal in many of our communities. However saying, as the opposition is saying now, that the $75 million worth of international market development and research and development for the industry is nothing is just wrong.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, the problem is in our forest communities and in cabinet.

Last week's announcement to spend $75 million on the softwood lumber industry was simply a smokescreen to disguise inaction from the government. It does nothing to deal with the 27% tariff starting on Thursday.

The same minister from British Columbia who announced this tired package is backpedaling from earlier support for a government back tariff payment scheme. When will the government announce this tariff payment management scheme?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Papineau—Saint-Denis Québec

Liberal

Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to work with our industry. Our industry has expressed satisfaction for the package we announced last week.

We have said that all options are on the table. We continue to work and consult with the provinces. We continue to talk with the industry systematically. The program of market development has been very welcome. The research and development funding demonstrates that the government continues to believe in the softwood lumber industry and we have eliminated no options whatsoever. We will do our work in continuing this and continuing to focus on American protectionism which is the problem.

Viandes du BretonOral Question Period

May 21st, 2002 / 3:15 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, last Tuesday's fire at the Viandes du Breton plant has triggered a reaction of solidarity. In Quebec City, Bernard Landry has headed a ministerial team to work on getting the plant rebuilt. So far, however, there has been no public reaction by the federal government to help get the company back on its feet.

I am asking the secretary of state with responsibility for the regional development of Quebec whether he can reassure the people of Témiscouata of the federal government's full cooperation in the reconstruction of the plant at Notre-Dame-du-Lac in Témiscouata.

Viandes du BretonOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Liberal

Claude Drouin LiberalSecretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member of the Bloc Quebecois that we have been in contact with Vincent Breton, one of the owners of Les Viandes du Breton, whose 450 employees have been hit by this tragedy, and have assured him of our complete co-operation.

I have, moreover, been in touch with the mayor to inform him of our readiness to co-operate, but this was not done publicly. We are working with them and will be there to support them through this tragedy.

The EconomyOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for International Financial Institutions.

Amid great uncertainty Canadians have worked hard over the past year to weather the volatility of the international world economy. What evidence does the secretary of state have to demonstrate to Canadians that we have been moving in a correct direction for the best interests of Canadians?

The EconomyOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Markham Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent question. It is not at all surprising that we get no questions on the economy from the opposition these days.

For the first time in 30 years we are coming out of the slowdown better than the U.S., we have become unambiguously the most powerful job creator of all industrial countries, we have recently re-achieved our top of the world triple A credit rating, and the Canadian dollar stands at a nine month high as of today. No wonder the opposition never asks us about the economy.

JusticeOral Question Period

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Kevin Sorenson Canadian Alliance Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, on March 12 the solicitor general, responding to a question of mine, stated that first degree murderers served an average of 28.4 years before being released back into the community. However a document recently released by the commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada contradicts the solicitor general. It states:

Offenders convicted of first degree murder are serving an average of 17.6 years prior to their first release.

My question is obvious. Will the solicitor general stand and admit that his numbers are wrong and that his numbers are self-serving?

JusticeOral Question Period

3:20 p.m.

Waterloo—Wellington Ontario

Liberal

Lynn Myers LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud that in Canada we have a system second to none. In fact people from all across the world come to visit Canada to see what we are doing and how we are doing it. We can be very proud that we have the kind of system that we do because it is envied around the world.

Presence in GalleryOral Question Period

3:20 p.m.

The Speaker

I would like to draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Muhammad Jamiruddin Sircar, Speaker of the Parliament of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.

Presence in GalleryOral Question Period

3:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-56, an act respecting assisted human reproduction, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Liberal

Clifford Lincoln Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC

Mr. Speaker, when the debate was interrupted, I was referring to a press release issued in January 2002 by the Quebec minister responsible for research, science and technology, which reads as follows:

In conclusion, minister Cliche reiterated his trust in Quebec's scientists and said, “Researchers are, just like me, convinced that research development must be conducted in a climate of trust and transparency. Research that affects these human embryos and the cells from these embryos involves the fundamental values of dignity and human integrity, while also raising many ethical issues. Quebecers must know that the Government of Quebec is fully aware of the issues raised by this research, and that it intends to ensure that ethical rules are followed to the letter.

Last May 14 an article appeared in the Montreal Gazette under the byline of Peter Hadekel. The article stated:

A small but vocal group of Liberal MPs wants a free vote on the controversial legislation, which would permit medical research on leftover embryos from fertility clinics, as long as donor consent is obtained.

The article went on to state:

Their views deserve respect. Like many Canadians, they're concerned that killing embryos for research purposes is morally wrong, no matter what the purported benefits of genetic manipulation might be in the search for cures to diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancer or diabetes.

The article also cited the report of the Standing Committee on Health which states:

Therefore, we want to encourage research funding in the area of adult stem cells. We are concerned that embryonic stem-cell research commodifies the embryo.

Mr. Hadeker's article continued:

One looks in vain in the McLellan bill for the same spirit or some sign that the government would encourage adult-stem cell research wherever and whenever possible...for many Canadians concerned about this kind of research, a more troubling question is when human life really begins.

That is the issue. When there are alternatives, we must always choose the option for which there is the largest social consensus.

I realize that those who are opposed to research on embryonic cells may be a minority. I do not know what kind of minority. It may even be a small minority, but that is not important. What is important is the fact that there is a significant minority of people with fundamental rights who are saying that to tamper with embryos is to tamper with human life. There are certainly alternatives.

On January 30, 1999 the British Medical Journal stated that the use of embryonic stem cells “may soon be eclipsed by the more readily available and less controversial adult stem cells.”

On August 26, 2000 under the heading “Over excitement on embryo stem cells”, the prestigious medical journal The Lancet stated:

If stem cells do turn out to be a significant source of therapeutic agents they could come not from human embryos but from alternatives such as reprogrammed adult cells.

There is an increasing number of examples of projects which, one after the other, involve practical research, research that has proven successful with adult stem cells.

I will conclude by quoting an article by an eminent Canadian whom I know personally and whom I believe represents the best in what we call ethics. She is the head of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill University, Dr. Margaret A. Somerville. Her research, knowledge, balance, wisdom and judgment have been acclaimed by people not only in Canada but far and wide. In an article entitled “Life Itself in the Balance” which appeared in the April 4, 2001 edition of the National Post she concluded:

If we regard the human embryo as wondrous--because it represents the transmission of human life from one generation to the next, and because it is a genetically unique, living entity--we would not use it for research. Should we refrain from such research in order to maintain for ourselves, society and future generations a sense of profound respect for each human life, human life itself, and its transmission?

To conclude, we must carefully examine whether it is ethically acceptable to proceed with human embryo stem cell research and be aware that our decisions might be affected by a lack of courage to refuse the potential therapeutic benefits it promises. We are in a situation where it is far easier to say yes than no. However if we believe research on stem cells obtained from human embryos is inherently wrong or that its overall risks and harms to societal values and norms outweigh its potential benefits, difficult as it will be, we must have the courage to recognize that it cannot be ethically justified and should not proceed.

The minister would garner a tremendous amount of support in the House from all sides were she to admit that the whole question of the use of embryonic stem cells is not only complex in its scientific impacts but morally and ethically extremely delicate.

Some of us like myself strongly believe that human life starts at conception and that human embryos should not be used for research or in any other manner that detracts from the dignity and integrity of human life. The minister would gain a lot of kudos by recognizing that there are some of us, although perhaps a minority, who believe deeply and with great conviction that we should not use embryonic stem cells, especially when practical, successful alternatives such as adult stem cells are available. Adult stem cells are being used today and have been used for the last two decades in all kinds of successful medical and scientific research.

I ask the minister to reconsider. We should take the path Quebec has courageously adopted and refrain from research on embryonic stem cells. This shows that Quebec, a province where separation of church and state has been the case increasingly since the quiet revolution, is respectful of the ethical dilemma posed to many people who believe human life starts with embryos at conception.

This is a point of view I hold very deeply. I hope the minister will listen to those of us who think this is the right course to take.

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:30 p.m.

Mississauga South Ontario

Liberal

Paul Szabo LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I think Canadians will detect his sincere views on the matter, particularly with regard to the ethical issues which are a significant part.

The hon. member probably will know that Dr. Françoise Baylis, a member of the governing council of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, shares his view. She said before a health committee that an embryo is a human being. She said it is an uncontested biological fact that an embryo is a member of the human species.

Dr. Baylis had an interesting point on which the hon. member may want to comment: the idea that there are surplus embryos from fertility clinics. She said approximately 250 embryos might be available in Canada and that only half those would survive thawing. Of the remaining 125 only 9 would be able to produce any kind of stem cell line. Less than that, approximately 5, would be able to produce the stem cell lines that are adequate for research purposes. This means 5 of 250 embryos would be acceptable for research purposes. That is only 2%.

Would the member like to comment on whether we should be going that way when so few embryos would be available for stem cell research? Some 2% of the existing stock seems a small amount to be worth going through this kind of acrimonious debate.

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Clifford Lincoln Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my hon. colleague from Mississauga South. As members know, he produced the book The Ethics and Science of Stem Cells which took a tremendous amount of research and commitment and for which those of us deeply interested in the issue are extremely grateful.

With regard to the issue he raised, according to many scientific and ethical experts there are not only problems with the supply and availability of embryos to effect significant research. The key issue is that we have one possibility that presents deep ethical and moral problems for many people including those in the scientific and medical world and other segments of society, and an alternative that is surer and safer. The alternative is both potentially and practically more successful because it has been used in many cases already. It presents no risk of tissue rejection. Surely the answer is to avoid the ethical and moral dilemmas and go with the sure thing. That is what we are saying.

We are for stem cell research, positively so. However let us avoid the traps and pitfalls. Let us avoid the moral and ethical issues represented by embryonic stem cells.

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jason Kenney Canadian Alliance Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, I commend the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Louis who is a distinguished and principled member of this place. I would associate myself with his remarks.

Could the member comment on the hon. Minister of Health's assertion that the provisions of Bill C-56 dealing with embryonic stem cell research, namely the delegation of regulation of the area to the new agency, reflect the recommendations of the health committee report? Does the hon. member agree that the special report of the Standing Committee on Health suggests a much higher standard for the approval of applications for embryonic stem cell research?

Would the hon. member share my party's call for at least a three year moratorium on embryonic stem cell research until we can see the full potential of adult stem cell research to which he has referred?

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Clifford Lincoln Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC

Mr. Speaker, I read the committee report again this morning. It is quite clear the committee viewed the use of embryonic stem cells totally as a last resort, after all other possibilities had been researched and employed. The committee said to use adult stem cells in research and that if by any chance there was any possibility they would not be successful, then to use embryonic stem cells as a last resort. I must say that I myself would not agree to that use even as a last resort, but it is a far cry from a positive provision allowing the use to start with, from inception.

Obviously I must be on the side of the committee's findings far more than I am on the side of the present legislation. I hope that the views the committee set out regarding the priority of adult stem cell research will lead to the exclusion altogether of embryonic stem cell research.

Assisted Human Reproduction ActGovernment Orders

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I missed the beginning of the presentation by the member for Lac-Saint-Louis. However, I heard that he was mainly referring to the issue of embryonic stem cells. He is firmly opposed to what the bill is proposing. I respect the fact that my colleague may have this opinion. I hope that he too will respect the fact that others may have a contrary opinion.

My question for the member is this: Can we assume that the rest of the bill is well founded and deserves the support of the majority of members of this House, or does he see other problems he would like to share with us?