Debates of May 3rd, 2002

Agriculture

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, those are policies that will absolutely devastate Canadian agriculture. The Liberal government is made up of a bunch of trade powder-puffs.

Neither the Minister for International Trade nor the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food have backbones, or maybe they just do not care.

I will quote Larry Combest, republican U.S. ag committee chair, who yesterday said that the farm bill “is for rural America. It's not for rural Mexico. It's not for rural Canada. It's not for rural Europe”.

When will the government and the minister stand up for rural Canada. Why does he not care?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government has shown very clearly that it cares. We have taken the lead at the WTO. I think we stand with every other country in the world today in condemning the policies and the direction of the United States farm bill that in the long run will not help American farmers. Their own research has shown that it gets incorporated into the cost of their inputs and they are already well above the least cost producers.

We will assist our farmers in bridging into a profitable industry in Canada so that our farmers will succeed.

Lumber Industry

[Betty Hinton, Canadian Alliance, Kamloops, Thompson And Highland Valleys, BC]

Mr. Speaker, some of the large lumber companies that have interests in the U.S., like Canfor and Weyerhaeuser, are going to sue the U.S. under NAFTA for injuries suffered because of the countervail and anti-dumping lawsuits decided in the U.S. yesterday.

Is the government doing anything to make the smaller Canadian lumber companies, who might have U.S. interests, aware of their legal rights to sue under NAFTA?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are pursuing all legal avenues available to the Government of Canada. We are taking all these actions by the Americans to the appropriate tribunals and we are seeking redress.

We are working with the provincial government in B.C. and others across the country. If we can make individual companies aware of the rights they have we will be happy to work with provincial partners in doing so.

[Betty Hinton, Canadian Alliance, Kamloops, Thompson And Highland Valleys, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have scar tissue on my tongue from biting it so often. I am trying to co-operate here.

Now that Canada has lost in the lumber lawsuit at the U.S. international trade commission, the minister must be aware that fear will threaten to split the solidarity of the provinces and the industry.

Divide and conquer is what the U.S. used last time with the softwood lumber agreement in 1996 and this could happen again if the different interest groups go off to try to fight this on their own.

What is the minister doing to keep the industry and Canada together?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, for one thing, the Minister for International Trade was in British Columbia on Monday of this week to meet with industry and provincial representatives.

I think one of the real achievements of the Minister for International Trade in this whole matter has been the solidarity he has achieved among all Canadian interests so there is one Canadian voice speaking on the issue.

The problem is not in Canada. The problem is in the United States of America with a protectionist congress and an administration that is not listening to all the voices that favour free trade.

Urban Affairs

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to media reports, the Prime Minister has apparently commented on recent statements by the Minister of Finance, who is seeking a way of getting funding to the municipalities by going over the heads of the provinces, by saying that there was no question of the government's taking such an approach.

Given the contradictions between these statements by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance and Prime Minister in waiting, may we know the official government position?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the official position of the government may be found in the Speech from the Throne. It contains the statement that we are seeking solutions to help municipalities throughout the country, with the consent of the provinces.

The Prime Minister was the one who gave the hon. member for York West the mandate to develop some ideas, and these were contained in the report she tabled yesterday. This is an excellent report and one that will guide us with future policies.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when this government is incapable of assuming its own responsibilities in such areas as employment insurance, softwood lumber and help for seniors, would it not be better off minding its own business and not creating expectations in areas that do not fall under its jurisdiction in any way, and opening up new areas of confrontation with the provinces?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, 80% of the population lives in major urban centres, and it is in the federal government's interests to provide them with help and assistance.

We are going to work in conjunction with the provinces to seek solutions. This is clear. Our government will be the one to provide the leadership in this matter, because of our concern for the major centres in our country and the people who live in those centres.

Agriculture

[Brian Pallister, Canadian Alliance, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, instead of standing in the farmers' corner and fighting for our farmers and ranchers, it seems that the minister of agriculture is content to remain silent. He was silent while his colleagues in cabinet drafted species at risk legislation without compensation for landowners. He was silent while a cruelty to animals bill was drafted that will leave the men and women who produce our food open to lawsuits from animal rights activists who believe that rats should have the same rights as children.

When will the minister of agriculture start placing the needs and the concerns of Canadian farmers and ranchers first instead of last?

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

Mr. Speaker, there is no stronger group in Canada that recognizes the support for species at risk than our primary producers, our ranchers and our farmers across the country. There is no stronger group of people in providing the proper care and treatment of animals and the management of that.

Those producers, through the rural caucus and through members of this caucus here, have made those views very clear to the appropriate ministers. I am confident that as we go forward in this the concerns of everyone in the House will be addressed.

[Brian Pallister, Canadian Alliance, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, those are lovely platitudes but farmers are not interested in the minister's platitudes or his claims to care. They are interested in his support. They are interested in the results that they should be receiving from him and from the government.

Where are the sections in Bill C-5 that provide mandatory compensation for landowners who happen to have endangered species on their land? Why does the government's animal cruelty legislation not protect the tried and true animal husbandry practices of Canadian farmers from attack by animal rights' activists?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I thought I answered this question for the Alliance earlier this week. The section is section 64 of Bill C-5. If the Alliance members would care to read it they will find the phrase “provide fair and reasonable compensation to any person for losses suffered as a result of any extraordinary impact”. If they have difficulty with the long words we will help them.

Immigration

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, even though he claims to want to respect Canada's international obligations, the minister of immigration has suspended the implementation of the refugee appeal division for one year.

He is thus leaving the fate of refugees in the hands of one person, knowing very well that a removal decision can mean torture, imprisonment and even death.

Will the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration commit to maintaining two members until the appeal division is implemented in order to give refugees the assurance that their applications will be processed fairly?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question. I think that we must make one thing clear. As it now stands, already 55% of all applications that are handled by the board are reviewed by one member. This is the first point.

Second, there is already a process in place. If applicants are not satisfied, they can appeal to the federal court and, before removal, there is also another step to protect them.

Not only is Canada a signatory to the international convention, but I believe we also have a reputation for protecting people who may be tortured.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal court cannot rule on the facts on which the Immigration and Refugee Board bases its decisions, nor can it reverse the board's decisions.

The appeal division, however, would have this power. Will the minister make a commitment to ensure that there are at least two members in place during the period when the appeal division is suspended?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, what is important is that we ensure that for the next phase, we have a system that works.

We are fulfilling our obligations under the Geneva convention to ensure that there is a swift, fair and equitable process for refugees. That is what we are doing right now.

This government's priority is clear: to ensure that we have a system that protects refugees while fulfilling our international obligations.

Canada Customs and Revenue Agency

[Jim Gouk, Canadian Alliance, Kootenay—Boundary—Okanagan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general recently said that Bill C-55 would help make authorities aware of individuals “like murderers or whatever that could be entering the country and we would be able to arrest them”.

Perhaps he should have talked to the revenue minister who recently compared Canada customs agents to bank tellers, and supports the position that armed and dangerous individuals should not be detained at the border.

Why is the government tabling bills that give it powers that even the federal privacy commissioner says should alarm law-abiding citizens when we are not even providing the tools to Canada Customs to do the job of protecting our border?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that my hon. colleague would criticize the government for giving the police the tools it needs to do the job. That is what the government will do. It will make sure the police force has the tools, the legislation and the finances to make sure this country remains one of the safest countries if not the safest country in the world

[Jim Gouk, Canadian Alliance, Kootenay—Boundary—Okanagan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it sounds like a case of tweedledum and tweedledumber. The government wants to give the police more power so it can do the job that has been unloaded on it because the government did not give customs the job.

Before we pass legislation with non-accountable powers for Liberal ministers, and most certainly before the government spends over $100 million in unneeded new jets for the Prime Minister, will the government at least provide the tools Canada customs agents need to do the job of protecting our borders? Will the government stop treating them like bank tellers and tax collectors?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, our priority is security. Our priority is ensuring a balance between openness and diligence.

What we really need is a partnership between all of the departments to ensure that we can do our job. That is exactly what this bill will accomplish.

Canada-U.S. Border

[John Bryden, Liberal, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister.

One-quarter of all of Canada's trade crosses the border at Windsor to Detroit across the Ambassador bridge, 13,000 commercial vehicles a day. Since September 11 there have been delays at the crossing because of security concerns.

What is the government doing to consult the Canadian businesses that are affected by the delays in order to resolve the problem?

[Joe Jordan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member may be aware, the Deputy Prime Minister has been working very closely with his U.S. counterpart Tom Ridge on implementing the smart border action plan.

Since the very beginning of this process the Deputy Prime Minister and his cabinet colleagues have received very constructive insights from a variety of sources, including the business community. This input is crucial to ensure that the action plan supports the initiatives of Canadians and Canadian businesses. In fact, on Monday the Deputy Prime Minister, along with the hon. Minister for International Cooperation, will be participating in another of the ongoing dialogues with border stakeholders in Windsor.

Agriculture

[Dick Proctor, NDP, Palliser, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the minister of agriculture will tell his American counterpart today that the Bush administration is wrong in signing the insidious U.S. farm bill. We agree. They are wrong, we are right; another moral victory. However at the end of the day after all the huffing and puffing, the U.S. farmers have the dough and Canadian farmers have Doha.

What besides rhetoric does the government have to assist Canadian farmers?