Debates of May 1st, 2003

National Defence

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, one thing the Prime Minister will not say no to, what this party will not say no to, and which I hope parliamentarians will not say no to, is the investigation and understanding and reaching a conclusion as to what is the best for the security of Canada and Canadians, and working with our American partners in North America, as we have traditionally done, to achieve that result. We will look at all proposals for the interests of security of Canadians. Surely the hon. member opposite cannot object to any such investigation.

Canada Labour Code

[Dick Proctor, NDP, Palliser, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Labour Code does not protect workers enough from the use of replacement workers during strikes and lockouts. The use of strikebreakers causes bitter disputes that persist. Anti-strikebreaking legislation produced excellent results in Quebec and also in Ontario, until Mike Harris scrapped it.

When will the Minister of Labour set up a working group that includes employers and unions to change the Canada Labour Code and prohibit strikebreakers?

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, as I already mentioned, amendments to the Canada Labour Code were made in 1999. Employers and employees can see me at any time to review the situation. I am prepared to meet with both groups.

It is important to remember that the Canada Labour Code belongs to both employees and employers.

Public Service

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have in my hands a job listing for at least 10 administrative support jobs for the Government of Canada. Anyone in Toronto is eligible to apply for these jobs, but not one person in Perth—Middlesex is even allowed to apply. Constituents in all the ridings in Toronto are automatically included in the job competition, but the residents of Perth—Middlesex are automatically excluded because of where they live.

Will the government change these offensive hiring practices and stop discrimination against the people of Perth—Middlesex?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, the whole hiring system in the public service is the responsibility of the Public Service Commission. This is an agency that reports directly to Parliament.

Parliamentarians have asked the commission, and I think the opposition member is aware of this, to change its system. Right now, it is undertaking pilot projects and must report the results directly to Parliament to make all public service positions more accessible to all Canadians.

National Defence

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday the member for LaSalle—Émard told journalists that both the defence minister and the minister of public works, and I quote, “don't think we can waste any more time” before replacing our Sea Kings. The member clearly implied that the delay in replacing the Sea Kings is not caused by these two ministers in charge of the file but rather some other person in the cabinet.

Seeing as how the Prime Minister is not here today, I will ask the Minister of National Defence to explain the frequent delays that have plagued the Sea King replacement process, and will he give us a firm date when our pilots--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of National Defence.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is entirely correct that the two ministers she referred to and indeed the government as a whole are working as hard as we can to get that helicopter as fast as possible. The two of us arrived in our new jobs on the same day and have been working ceaselessly since that time, through a re-bundling of the contract and other measures, to get the right helicopter as fast as possible.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian military needs heavy transport planes to quickly and reliably move troops and their equipment to trouble spots, both in Canada and abroad. The Royal United Services Institute says our military's lack of strategic airlift undermines Canada's sovereignty and security. That is the view shared by almost every military organization in the country.

Why will the defence minister not just get our military the heavy transport planes it needs to protect and to deliver to the Canadian people when they need help?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I have made it abundantly clear that one thing we are not about to do is make a unilateral purchase of large numbers of huge airplanes at a cost of $3 billion to $5 billion in strategic lift, because if we did that we would use up so much money for the lift that we would not have enough money left to put things into those big planes. On the other hand, we are still looking into cost effective alternatives to get the lift to which the hon. member refers.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

In fact, Mr. Speaker, this report says that the minister's plan to share planes with small European countries simply will not work because too often there will be too few planes to deliver our troops and equipment to where they have to go. Even within Canada our military has had to rely on the United States to deliver the troops and their equipment to such natural disasters as the ice storm and the floods in Manitoba, for example, but the United States will not always be there to help when Canada needs the help.

Will the minister commit to lease or purchase large strategic airlift or will he leave it to chance to get our troops to disasters when they happen?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I have made it abundantly clear precisely what we are not going to do. When one is in the opposition one will not say no to any piece of equipment. One will urge the government to buy everything under the sun.

On the other hand, when one is a government, one has limited resources and one has to use them wisely and strategically. I have determined that of all the pressing demands upon us strategic lift unilaterally made to buy all these large aircraft, which only the two biggest NATO countries have, the United States and the United Kingdom, is not the right thing for Canada.

Agriculture

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

Mr. Speaker, while the government claims to be 1000% behind supply management, yesterday, the Canadian agriculture negotiator at the WTO told farm producers difficult decisions may have to be made.

Could the Minister of Agriculture explain to producers what these difficult decisions will be?

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

Mr. Speaker, in some of the recent decisions Canada made it very clear that we would not support the Harbinson's report on modalities. That emphasizes and stresses the support that the government has for supply management in this country. We recognize what it does for producers, for consumers and for the economy of our country. We will continue with that full and strong support for supply management.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government's positions are increasingly vague. On the one hand, our ministers are telling us they will not touch supply management, but on the other hand, the chief negotiator told producers yesterday that defending administered prices was not part of her mandate.

Does the minister not think that the time has come to give his negotiator a clear mandate to protect all three pillars of supply management: first, planning; second, border control; and third, administered prices?

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

Mr. Speaker, those three pillars are very clear. The industry was part of that. The government was part of that. Part of the mandate to the WTO of this government is that on supply management the decisions of domestic marketing and the protection of that system will be made here in Canada. That is the position of the government. Industry agrees with it and that is the position our negotiators are taking as well.

[David Anderson, Canadian Alliance, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the dairy farmers of Canada have spent eight years trying to get the government's attention on the butteroil/sugar blend issue and the government has been indifferent.

Now the working group that was established to study the issue has also pushed producers right out of the loop.

Why, as has happened in so many other agricultural areas, is the government ignoring dairy producers?

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

Mr. Speaker, the working group of the four departments involved in this, revenue, finance, trade and agriculture, met with the industry group and took its recommendations.

Those recommendations are being considered at this time and we will be making a decision in order to see the direction that we can take. We recognize the erosion of some products in the dairy industry and we will do all we possibly can to stop it.

[David Anderson, Canadian Alliance, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the government has failed to protect Canada from imports of dairy substitutes. The importation of butteroil-sugar blends has reduced the market share for Canadian dairy farmers. It has cost them a pile of money.

Now the working group has said that its report will not be ready for another month.

Is the government waiting until after the Perth--Middlesex byelection to give its dairy producers the bad news?

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

No, we are not, Mr. Speaker. We are working on that so we can, hopefully, come up with a solution in order to assist the dairy industry in this. However it is interesting to hear the comments about supply management coming from a party that does not even support supply management.

Western Economic Diversification

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Vancouver agreement was developed two years ago by three levels of government, NGOs and local communities with seed money from the crime prevention program and two other federal departments.

In the early stages the plan was adequately funded by the pooling of resources from many departments of all three levels of government. As one of its originators, we knew this would not be enough in the long term.

On April 22 the Secretary of State for Western Economic Diversification announced additional funding for the Vancouver agreement. Could he inform the House of the details?

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Secretary of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Indian Affairs and Northern Development)]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Vancouver Centre for her question but also for her dedicated and effective work in launching, as my predecessor and minister responsible for the federal government, the Vancouver agreement.

I am pleased to advise the House that the federal government has invested a further $10 million in the Vancouver agreement to be matched by $10 million from the province of British Columbia. This will go toward the revitalization of the downtown east side of Vancouver together with the partnership of the mayor of Vancouver, past and present, and will help to make that community safer, more secure and healthier, and it will create jobs and business opportunities, restore cultural places--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Lanark—Carleton.

Agriculture

[Scott Reid, Canadian Alliance, Lanark—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I realize that the concerns of Canadian farmers are rarely top of mind for the Liberals but given that there is a byelection underway in the largely agriculture riding of Perth--Middlesex perhaps they will take them seriously today.

The government and its Pest Management Regulatory Agency are making it harder for Canadian farmers to compete with their American counterparts by denying Canadian farmers the right to use cheaper and more environmentally friendly farm chemicals that have been approved for use in the United States.

Why does the Liberal government deny farmers the right to these safe, environmentally friendly farm chemicals?

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

Mr. Speaker, the system of regulations and registration of agricultural chemicals, as with all chemicals in Canada, is reviewed by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency in Health Canada.

First, there has to be an application for them by the company that wishes to use them. As well, the government put over $60 million in place to help the industry in minor use registration. We will now be able to move to a program similar to that in the United States IR-4, but the application for those products first has to be applied for. We will then make sure that the application for those in use in Canada is safe.