House of Commons Hansard #68 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was fish.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, what the Bloc Quebecois wants, to make it perfectly clear, is for no Canadian troops to be sent to fight in Iraq without the House having voted on it first.
Since we will be on vacation for two weeks, I am asking the government whether it can guarantee that this House—
IraqOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. It is hard to hear the hon. member for Roberval. All hon. members will need to be a little quieter so that we can hear.
The hon. member for Roberval.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, this Parliament will not be sitting for two weeks. Instead of cracking bad jokes, could the government commit with the greatest possible seriousness to allowing Parliament to have a say before our soldiers are sent off to war? That is what we want to know.
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has made a commitment. I will not trivialize this matter by questioning the hon. member's reference to vacation in his question. We all know that is not what a recess is all about.
The hon. member is well aware that a commitment has been made for a debate to be held as soon as possible when the House returns. If there are developments during the recess, House leaders will consult, as is always the case. That is what happened after the events of September 11, and there was unprecedented cooperation. It has always been done that way. Consultations are held.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, the softwood negotiations in Washington broke down because the U.S. lumber lobby has not reduced its demands for 11 months. In addition, it is calling for a border tax and U.S. retention of the billion dollars in Canadian cash deposits. It is insisting that the WTO and NAFTA legal challenges be dropped by Canada.
In pursuit of free trade in lumber, I again ask the minister, will he pledge not to withdraw Canada's legal challenges?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I can be absolutely clear that as long as the Americans will have that punitive 27% tax against Canadian exporters of softwood lumber, we will be going both to the WTO and NAFTA. We are there with six cases. We have a good chance of winning.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade has not answered my question. By refusing to answer my question he is sending the opposite message.
The only reason the Americans entered the negotiations was that they lost at the World Trade Organization last year. Important softwood rulings from WTO and NAFTA are expected in three months.
In pursuit of free trade in lumber I ask again, will the minister pledge not to withdraw Canada's legal challenges?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I have answered exactly that question. This has been at the heart of our strategy, gaining leverage against the American administration with our strong cases before NAFTA and the WTO.
We will maintain our action both at the WTO and at NAFTA as long as the Americans are harming our exports. We want free trade in softwood lumber and unfettered access for Canadian exporters to the American market.
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of the Environment said that appointing a negotiator to reach a bilateral agreement with Quebec for implementing the Kyoto protocol was not urgent. Yet, the federal government is exempting the automobile industry, and has reached an agreement with the oil and gas industry on its reduction requirements.
How can it be urgent to reach agreements with certain industries active in the rest of Canada but not with Quebec?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I had very productive phone conversations with the Quebec minister just last night. Of course we will hold meetings with Quebec. As the Prime Minister said himself on November 27, we hope to reach an agreement with the Province of Quebec.
But there is no need for this to be done yesterday or the day before yesterday or today. This is not necessary. No, we have to hold discussions with all the provinces before agreements can be reached with any one province. It is very important to have input from all the provinces before signing any agreements.
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Speaker, by reducing the requirements for the oil and gas industry and the automobile industry, is the Minister of the Environment not getting ready to increase the greenhouse gas reduction requirements for other industries, especially industries in Quebec that have done more than their share so far?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, there are several sectors in the Canadian economy; at least 25. Discussions have to be held with all the sectors.
We do not have hundreds of officials who are in possession of all the necessary information. We must speak to everyone in turn. There will be a series of discussions. It is not a question of favouring one or another, by any stretch of the imagination.
Garry Breitkreuz Canadian Alliance Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, today the justice minister is going to come to Parliament and ask for another $170 million for the gun registry. That is unbelievable. Just yesterday for the umpteenth time the justice minister refused to tell us the total cost of the gun registry for all federal departments.
How can he possibly expect any parliamentarian to approve more money when he has no idea as to what the total cost will be? In fact, he cannot even tell us what has been spent so far.
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the question is interesting knowing that I spent two hours at the beginning of the week at the public accounts committee and I do not remember the hon. member asking the question.
One thing is for sure. If members look at the support that we have had from the Canadian population since the tabling of our plan of action, people know that we are going exactly in the right direction. People know as well that gun control does make a difference in our society. People know that the program has already delivered some very good benefits for the Canadian population.
Garry Breitkreuz Canadian Alliance Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, we now know what the minister means by cash management and running the registry at minimum levels. It has been spending $1 million per day since Parliament pulled the $72 million out of the gun registry budget in December. That is what it is, $1 million per day.
Why does the minister have nothing but contempt for the House and Canadian taxpayers?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, Canadian taxpayers know exactly that we are doing the right thing for Canadian society.
How could we convince the member of Parliament knowing what he said in a press release back in 1995? I will repeat it. The member said:
Gun controls will not improve public safety, it will put the public at more risk. Gun control will not reduce violent crime, it will increase violence.
He should talk to the victims associations from across Canada and to police associations that are supporting gun control. We are doing what is right for our Canadian society.
John Maloney Liberal Erie—Lincoln, ON
Mr. Speaker, the face of Canada is changing. According to the recently released Statistics Canada 2001 census, the total population of visible minorities was almost four million, or 13.4% of the total population. That is an increase from 11.2% in 1996.
Over the years police organizations throughout the country have evolved to meet the needs of our multicultural society. As society continues to become more diverse, police services will be required to respond to our changing demographics.
Could the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and the Status of Women explain to the House how her department is facilitating this?
MulticulturalismOral Question Period
February 26th, 2003 / 2:50 p.m.
Etobicoke—Lakeshore Ontario
Liberal
Jean Augustine LiberalSecretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)
Mr. Speaker, on February 27 and 28 I am hosting a national forum in Ottawa entitled “Policing in a Multicultural Society”.
The forum will involve key federal departments, aboriginal and diverse ethno-racial leaders and communities, and the police. The forum will focus on three major areas: sharing information; building and strengthening partnerships; and showcasing tools and best practices.
Outcomes from the forum will be linked to an upcoming RCMP conference in June 2003.
Svend Robinson NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
There was a recent study by UQAM professors Lauzon and Hasbani of the big nine multinational drug companies. It showed that they had an obscene level of after tax return on investment, 41%, and that they spent three times as much flogging their drugs as they did on research.
I want to ask the minister, will she now, in light of this, withdraw her defence of big pharma and her contemptible attack on patients whom she blamed for taking too many pills? Will she instead accept the Romanow commission recommendation to fully review Canada's patent laws? Will she stand up for the sick and--
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, it is most unfortunate that the hon. member chooses to misconstrue and misrepresent the comments that I made, but he does raise a serious point. That is in relation to both the cost and utilization of drugs in the Canadian health care system.
If the hon. member had taken the time to read the recent health accord, he would have seen that the first ministers have instructed their health ministers to take up both issues, the overall cost of drugs in our health care system and also the equally important issue of utilization, how drugs are used and are we getting better health outcomes for all Canadians in the use of those drugs.
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Finance stiffed municipalities by leaving them out of his budget. We warned at that time that new taxes and user fees would be introduced. Yesterday the Minister of Transport introduced a plan with no new funds and today he is calling toll roads an innovation.
My question is for the Minister of Finance. Is this the best Canadians can expect? Is this the innovation we are going to see save our cities?
Maurizio Bevilacqua LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, I remember back in 1993 when we inherited a $42 billion deficit. The first thing we did was to introduce a $2 billion infrastructure program that generated $6 billion worth of infrastructure. Since then we have introduced $8 billion worth of infrastructure program. That adds up to $14 billion, if I am correct. That is hardly stiffing the municipalities.
Bill Casey Progressive Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Mr. Speaker, in December the Minister for International Trade announced an outright grant of $15 million to the Canadian Lumber Trade Alliance.
I would like to ask the minister, has the cheque gone out yet for the $15 million? Exactly what accountability is required for the $15 million? Will Parliament have access to the accounting of exactly where every single dollar went?