Debates of June 13th, 2002

Agriculture

[John Duncan, Canadian Alliance, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. farm bill took three years to draft and it attacks Canadian farm families. The Liberals did nothing to stop these attacks and have no effective plan to offset the trade injury. The government expects the provinces to pay for its failures.

Agricultural trade injury was not caused by provincial mistakes. The provinces have zero per cent of the of the responsibility for this disaster, so why should they pay 40% for federal failures?

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

Mr. Speaker, the federal government negotiates as far as trade is concerned. In so doing, when there are benefits of trade the provinces share. When there are challenges from the ends of those negotiations, as a result of those negotiations between countries, the provinces share as well.

[John Duncan, Canadian Alliance, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. farm bill is completely federal and the minister knows it. The president signed that bill a month ago. Parts of the bill breach our trade agreements, yet the Liberal government refuses to act.

The bill has been in the works for three years. The government has no action plan. Now it wants more time to study it. Why has the government failed to keep its promise to Canadian farmers by refusing to launch WTO and NAFTA challenges?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, we have been working with our Cairns partners. We have been working with many countries around the world that precisely object to the U.S. farm bill.

We are extremely disappointed that the United States has adopted the farm bill. We believe it goes contrary to the direction we all adopted in Doha, Qatar last year.

We will continue to work with our partners to see whether the farm bill in its present shape respects the WTO obligations. The Americans pretend it does. What we know is that legally maybe it does but we are not sure. We are checking into it. However, legitimately it was the wrong way to go.

Terrorism

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.

In light of the continuing terrorist threat to North America and many other places in the world, could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue tell the House what Canada is doing to stop weapons of mass destruction from crossing our borders and what we are doing to meet the challenge of high tech smugglers without clogging our border crossing points to the U.S.A.?

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the CCRA will spend $110 million over five years to purchase high tech equipment to enhance protection for all Canadians.

The equipment will include a radiation detector that will seize all nuclear weapons. The government will also purchase a high energy x-ray machine to examine all the containers at sea ports, airports and at land border crossings.

The government strongly believes that the number one priority is the safety and security of all Canadians.

National Defence

[Peter Goldring, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Centre-East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the military ombudsman's report is to be hidden from parliament for months.

It is not a defence minister's main squeeze report that shamefully should never be. It is not a Groupaction Liberal fundraising report that proved to be no report at all. This is a military ombudsman report that should be released with pride immediately to the public unless the Liberal government has something to hide.

Will the minister release it today?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member was not listening when I answered this question.

As I explained before, yesterday I met the ombudsman in my office. I suggested to him that I needed time to read the report before he released it. The rules stipulate that I can have it for 60 days before it is released.

I will not insist on the 60 days but it is not unreasonable that I have a little bit of time to read it.

[Peter Goldring, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Centre-East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, following procedure. This is more like following in Gagliano's footsteps.

This government has a long history of burying information damaging to the government. It tried to bury damaging audits. It tries to stop public inquiries. We had to fight for years to get access to information requests.

The minister states that he needs time to read the report, or is it time to sanitize it? Will the minister commit to the House that he will release the military ombudsman's report before we rise for the summer break?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the report will be released shortly.

Ferry Services

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport is refusing to restore ferry service between Trois-Pistoles and Les Escoumins because the current state of the facilities does not meet existing safety regulations.

But the minister himself mentioned a temporary solution which would cost about $750,000 and which would make it possible to salvage the ferry season for this year.

Yes or no, does the minister intend to take the necessary action to implement this temporary solution now, or any other solution which will make it possible to salvage the 2002 season?

[André Harvey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, our officials are negotiating with community stakeholders to find the most appropriate solution possible. The member does have to understand that there are extremely serious safety issues. In the meantime, two other crossings are available.

Infrastructure Program

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the secretary of state for rural affairs.

I have been discussing the infrastructure program with many of my municipal councils across my riding and I know councils across the country are interested in this for development of roads, sewers and water.

With these discussions, I wonder whether the secretary of state can bring us up to date as to what is happening with the infrastucture program.

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Secretary of State (Rural Development) (Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario)]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to advise the House that to date we have been able to include 291 projects for an investment of almost $400 million. Additional investments will made.

As the member is from a rural area of the province, he will be pleased to know that over $85 million of investments were made in water, sewers and other safety features in rural areas.

This is an example of three levels of government working together for the benefit of the citizens of Ontario.

Parole Board

[Chuck Cadman, Canadian Alliance, Surrey North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, recent news reports confirm some crime victims' worst fears. An audit has revealed that an overwhelming majority of parole offices failed to meet minimum standards for parole monitoring. Most of the cases involved the highest risk offenders, those posing the greatest danger to the public, and the solicitor general has the audacity to stand in the House and say that public safety is his number one priority. Is it any wonder that some victims of violent crime dread the day their offenders will be paroled?

What assurances will the solicitor general give Canadians that not only will the rules be followed but that there will be consequences to management when those rules are not followed?

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, public safety is the number one priority of not only the government but of the solicitor general. We will continue to make that a basic value for Canada and all Canadians.

I am appalled that the members opposite always want to tear down the great institutions that we have instead of supporting and ensuring that they support, as do most Canadians, the institutions that make us a great nation.

That is our priority as a government and that is our priority as a country.

Infrastructure

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday, the Deputy Prime Minister told us it was too soon to indicate the priorities of the Strategic Infrastructure Fund.

Yet, in May he announced that he had some 12 to 15 projects in view. This past Monday, he announced that the bulk of the funds available would be going to the municipalities.

Given the contradictory nature of these statements, can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us which is the right one?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry if I have been the cause of the hon. member's confusion. However, when all the rules for the program are ready and have been adopted by cabinet, I will be announcing them.

We will then start discussions with the other government levels concerning the projects to be included in phase one of this program.

Disability Tax Credit

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the Deputy Prime Minister wishes to have an apology from the Alliance Party but why does he and his party not apologize to the 106,000 Canadians who received that insulting letter on their disability tax credit?

My question is for the veterans affairs minister. Cliff Chadderton of the veterans associations has written to us saying that 34,000 veterans and their families will be seriously affected by the changes to the disability tax credit. These are veterans who are amputees who fought for this country.

What will the minister do to tell his government to stop this attack on those who served this country?

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's concern. As everyone knows, we have to reassess eligibility periodically. We have to examine it very carefully. The government is very sympathetic to the disabled. We share the member's concern and we will do our best.

The hon. member should understand how serious we are about this issue and that we will do our best.

Ethics Counsellor

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knew that the person he appointed as ethics counsellor had on the job training in awarding untendered contracts. The Deputy Prime Minister was minister of industry at the time and would have known Mr. Wilson's record.

Why did the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister appoint an official whose personal history they knew would compromise the counsellor's authority on ethical questions?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the right hon. member is not being fair with the facts. First, the ethics counsellor was appointed only after the leaders of the other parties were consulted. Second, the record shows that Mr. Wilson's career in industry was a distinguished one. He has carried out his responsibilities since his appointment as ethics counsellor with honesty and effectiveness.

Business of the House

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, there has been consultation among political parties and I think if you seek it you would find unanimous consent to adopt immediately government orders, government business No. 29, which are the recommendations to change the rules of the House regarding royal assents.

[The Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to proceed with government order No. 29 now?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.