Debates of May 16th, 2003

Grants and Contributions

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Canadian Alliance, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, Industry Canada grants billions of dollars to the Liberals' big business buddies, yet thousands of small businesses struggle to employ Canadians, struggle to make a profit and struggle to pay numerous Liberal taxes. It is truly shameful that the Liberal government uses these very tax dollars to support its pals.

In the spirit of the new proposed elections act will the provisional government, the interim government, stop subsidizing its big business pals?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the member should talk to his colleague just down the aisle who asked me the last question. His colleague wanted to know what we are going to do to support aerospace in his riding and the member now asks us to stop supporting Canadian business.

There is obviously a failure to communicate among the members of the Alliance Party. If they will not talk to each other, how do they expect to speak to Canadians?

Justice

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

Mr. Speaker, a number of provinces are committed to the Amber alert program to rescue children. Amber alert uses radio, TV, electronic billboards and emergency broadcast systems to immediately alert the public about abducted children whose lives are in peril.

Unfortunately, provincial programs stop at provincial borders. Does the justice minister not agree that a truly effective program must be national and if so, why will he not show some leadership and establish one?

[Paul MacKlin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, clearly children are a priority for this government and anything that we possibly can consider will be taken into consideration.

I am sure that the minister at the next federal, provincial and territorial meeting will raise this issue and see if there is some possibility that we might be able to implement something of that nature.

Multiculturalism

[Paddy Torsney, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of concerns about some police forces using selective treatment of individuals based solely on their ethnic or racial characteristics. I would ask the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and the Status of Women to tell the House if anything can be done to work on these issues to ensure that all people are treated fairly.

[Jean Augustine, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada considers the selective treatment of individuals based solely on their race or on their ethnic characteristics as unacceptable. Today in the newspapers we read that Kingston, Ontario police chief Bill Closs has shown some leadership in providing guidelines and setting light on the issue of racial profiling and I commend him for this.

The National Forum on Policing in a Multicultural Society was an important step that helped us to develop knowledge that exists on the issue of policing in a multicultural society.

Tourism Industry

[Cheryl Gallant, Canadian Alliance, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State for Rural Development knows that the Algonquin Park visitor centre plays an important role in attracting tourists to Ontario. Its mission is more critical this year since tourist operators outside Toronto are bracing for a 35% to 50% drop in business due to SARS, West Nile virus and anti-American comments made by government MPs.

Why does the federal government always find ways to funnel money to voter rich cities instead of considering projects like the Friends of Algonquin Park's expansion for the visitor centre at the east gate?

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Secretary of State (Rural Development)]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to the statement of the hon. member, we have had discussions with the Friends of Algonquin Park. We want to work with them to see the type of development they are proposing. As the secretary of state for FedNor, we may be in a position where we can assist. FedNor has done substantive work in terms of creating a tourism industry in northern Ontario. We have done that in the past and we will continue to do it in the future.

Homelessness

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

Mr. Speaker, in Edmonton a subway station was opened because of emergency shelter shortage. Two street people died. Toronto homeless deaths are up four times.

This week, homeless dollars were spent on a conference for 300 people at a luxury hotel in Saskatoon while the homeless on the riverbank looked on in envy. As homeless numbers and deaths grow, conference goers wine and dine on homeless dollars, and homeless issues are not even on the agenda.

Why are luxury hotel conferences more important than basic emergency shelters? What is the minister's priority?

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, what rhetoric coming from that member.

The conference was an FAS/FAE conference. It is the biggest problem facing our country today, fetal alcohol syndrome, fetal alcohol effects; we have forgotten these people. We had community people there. We had doctors there. We had the academics there.

It shows the member has no understanding whatsoever of the needs of the homeless. His numbers are rhetoric. His community organizations work 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the homeless. He should be ashamed of himself.

Gasoline Price

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

Mr. Speaker, the Commissioner of the Competition Bureau as already said that he has done all he can under the law to investigate the behaviour of oil companies, while the Minister of Industry acknowledges that he has the power to demand a more in-depth investigation. The only thing that the minister is missing is the will to act.

Rather than hide behind the issue of provincial jurisdiction or investigations by the Conference Board, some of whose members come from the oil patch, what is the Minister of Industry waiting for to initiate a real investigation, as he is empowered to do under the law?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, the competition commissioner appeared before the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology to talk about this issue. He outlined his position. He said clearly that he had investigated the matter recently and that he concluded that there is no information supporting allegations that oil companies are engaged in anti-competitive behaviour. Retail gas pricing comes under provincial jurisdiction. We must let the provinces regulate retail pricing.

Political Party Financing

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the government House leader.

Bill C-24 does not treat corporations and unions in the same way. It allows for the thousands of individual franchises across the country, such as Tim Hortons, to each contribute $1,000 to a political party, but each individual union local cannot do the same thing.

I want to know if the minister will change the bill and ban unions and corporations outright. There is a hole in the legislation and I am not talking about Timbits.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is not much of a doughnut, let me tell the hon. member. The premise of his question is totally wrong. In fact I just finished answering an excellent question from a member on this side of the House about the exact same issue.

A corporation can only contribute once, no matter how many people it has. The hon. member is telling me that it is not an individual business if it sells a product manufactured by somebody else. It is an individual business and we respect small, independent businesses at least on this side of the House.

If the hon. member is equating a small independent business with a large one, a labour union or anything else, he can explain it to his constituents.

Forest Industry

[Rex Barnes, Progressive Conservative, Gander—Grand Falls, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am puzzled as to why the minister responsible for ACOA approved funding in the amount of $94,000 for a pilot project that would study the feasibility of using snowmobiles to harvest timber in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador when only last fall he pulled the plug on a pilot project of heli-logging, which is considered to be cost efficient and environmentally friendly.

Will the minister tell the House on what grounds he cancelled the worthwhile project of heli-logging?

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Minister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)]

Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Lumber Producers Association had requested support to conduct the feasibility study on the benefits, the economic merits, of harvesting timber off steep slopes using helicopter technology.

The project was conducted. There was some slippage of funds. There was an additional amount granted to provide a full assessment. The feasibility study was not positive. What feasibility studies do is they assess the relative merits. In this particular case there was no merit to the project.

Aboriginal Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a national disgrace that in this country there are over 200 communities where the water is undrinkable and they are all aboriginal. Over the next half decade the government will only address fewer than one in five of those 200 communities' water problems. Meanwhile in Manitoba it will spend $50 million by throwing it at brand new segregated Black Sturgeon reserve. Meanwhile aboriginal kids are afraid to wet their toothbrushes or they will become seriously sick.

Why does the government not fix the problems it has instead of just throwing money at new problems?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Indian Affairs this week announced a detailed program to spend $600 million extra over the next five years on top of the $600 million that would be spent anyway to introduce a very structured plan to improve the situation of water and sewage systems in aboriginal communities.

This will deal with structural repair as well as new structures and training and monitoring of personnel, as well as specific guidelines for training to go ahead.

This is a quality of life issue that is top of mind for the government for aboriginal--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, 8,000 aboriginal people took to the streets of Kenora, in the riding of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, to voice their strong opposition to the governance bill.

Does the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development understand that he must scrap this bill immediately and return to the table with first nations, treating them as equals and respecting their fundamental human rights and their inherent right to self government?

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

Mr. Speaker, native people across the country have had opportunities to express their concerns, their support and protests against Bill C-7.

This is a normal legislative process. Hundreds of witnesses have been heard by the aboriginal affairs committee of the House. I think all of our congratulations and sympathies should go out to the members of that committee who have spent long hours night after night considering this extremely important legislation.

It will be passed in due course with amendments as suggested, as this House decides. Regulations will also be--

[The Deputy Speaker]

Order. This concludes question period for this day.

I have notice of a question of privilege from the hon. Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

Privilege

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

Mr. Speaker, further to my May 12 question of privilege, I wish to draw to the attention of the Chair an Ontario Superior Court ruling of May 14 regarding the matter of court decisions that affect parliamentary privilege.

The court, in its May 14 ruling, while confirming the parliamentary privilege of members from being compelled to participate in legal proceedings when Parliament is in session, asserted that this privilege should be limited to the period that Parliament is actually sitting and for 14 days after it adjourns. This was in reference to the Telezone case versus the MP for Ottawa South.

This again is an attack on the privileges of hon. members in the House.

I know the Speaker is already seized with another matter in this regard that I brought to the attention of the Chair only a few days ago. Of course, the decision in the Telezone case is even more serious, in terms of the intrusion by the courts in improperly attempting to define what is parliamentary privilege.

If members of the House were to decide at any point that the definition of privilege needed to be altered, if they were to lengthen what is today the 40-day period, shorten it, remove it or otherwise, that would be a decision which the House would make in relation to its own privileges. However, I do not believe that it is appropriate for a court to define what is parliamentary privilege in our country.

I suggest that the Chair would want to take this case into consideration in ruling on the question of privilege that I raised on May 12 and possibly rule at that point that there is a bona fide case of privilege and then both matters could be referred to the parliamentary committee on procedure and house affairs.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I thank the hon. Minister of State for his intervention, adding to an already earlier intervention on a very important matter for Parliament. I would feel secure in saying to the House that I would think we could all expect that our Speaker will rule on this matter at the earliest possible time upon our return from the upcoming recess period.

Points of Order

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to provide some clarification on a response the Solicitor General made while answering a question from my colleague from Edmonton North. He seemed to say that single-handedly I had short-circuited Bill C-23, the sex offender registry.

In fact, it was an amendment to the motion. The reason that we were seeking to have the bill set aside was that the bill failed to provide retroactive registration of sex offenders.