Debates of May 2nd, 2003

David Eckmire

[Lynne Yelich, Canadian Alliance, Blackstrap, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my condolences to the family of David Eckmire of Saskatoon. David passed away in April at the young age of 59. David was an accomplished and multi-talented professional in many ways, but perhaps he was best known in my riding and in much of Saskatchewan for his passion for and contribution to the local aviation sector.

As one of the greatest aviation champions in the province, David was an enthusiastic pilot who loved to fly, but also worked tirelessly on the ground to promote aviation in Saskatoon and Saskatchewan. He was a founding member of the Saskatoon Airport Authority, past president of the Saskatchewan Aviation Council, past chairman of the Nav Canada advisory committee and a member of the Civil Aviation Tribunal.

David's contribution to the community lives on, as we now enjoy better air links to the city and a state of the art facility in Saskatoon.

His spirit and dedication was an inspiration to all who had the opportunity to know and work with him. It is with great sadness that we mark his passing.

Aline Chrétien

[Carole-Marie Allard, Liberal, Laval East, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to congratulate Aline Chrétien, who was presented last night with the DAREarts inaugural cultural award in recognition of her contribution to the advancement of arts education for young people.

DAREarts is a remarkable program that has changed the lives of young people in Toronto in recent years. It is an innovative program that makes it possible for children in downtown Toronto to become familiar with the world of the arts by introducing them to works of art and culture.

Mrs. Chrétien, herself a dedicated pianist, holds an honorary diploma from the Royal Conservatory of Music, and presides over the annual National Arts Centre gala. Her generosity and her commitment to the education of these young people are exemplary.

Health

[Bev Desjarlais, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the mayor, councillors and citizens of Thompson. May 1, 2003 was proclaimed National Public Medicare Day in Thompson.

The citizens of Thompson, like those throughout Canada, call on the government to follow through on the Romanow report. The resolution supports Canada's publicly funded and delivered health care system and the principles of the Canada Health Act. It calls on the government to protect, restore and improve our public medicare system with the funding to do it.

The government needs to show leadership. It needs to take immediate action to implement the Romanow health report recommendations including a national public health strategy. The present concerns around SARS and the West Nile virus emphasize the urgent need for the government to act now.

The health minister's decision to minimize SARS screening and now to cut funding to West Nile crow testing shows her lack of commitment and disregard for the health of Canadians.

The government needs to act now, not tomorrow or the next day or the year after.

Paul Massicotte

[Marcel Gagnon, Bloc, Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute today to a man who is one of our own, Mr. Paul Massicotte, from Champlain in Mauricie.

As a successful businessman, he has served the world of agriculture through the cooperative movement, whose local activities he led for many years. The parish and the region quickly became too small for this man capable of bigger things, and he became a member of the executive of the Coopérative fédérée de Québec, where he served for 30 years, 11 of them as president.

He has travelled around the world and, in his own way, has been a great ambassador for Quebec. Quebec, the agricultural sector, the riding and the municipality of Champlain are proud of you, Mr. Massicotte.

I would like to congratulate his wife, Lise, and their six children for supporting and encouraging him so well. Bravo, Mr. Massicotte, and enjoy your well deserved retirement. Thank you for being a beacon to all who work in agriculture.

National Defence

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, today the official opposition is talking about national defence.

I would like to talk a little about the official opposition and national defence. There are things the Alliance leader will not tell us on his party's position on the Canadian military.

For example, in 1994-95 the reform party was calling for a reduction of $1 billion from the defence budget. Yes, the Alliance leader's 1995 taxpayers' budget called for cuts to defence. In case there is any doubt, I want to quote what the current Leader of the Opposition said at the time: “I do not intend to dispute in any way the need for defence cuts”. So, I am somewhat puzzled today when the Alliance members suddenly pretend to be the champions of the Canadian military.

Canadians know that it is this government that increased defence spending this year by $1 billion and that will increase defence spending by over $5 billion by 2007. That is a real commitment to national defence.

Canadian Alliance

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

Mr. Speaker, I wish to read excerpts from a letter published in the Calgary Sun on September 5, 2002 signed by the Canadian Alliance candidate in Perth--Middlesex.

Referring to the Kyoto accord, Marian Meinen wrote that the Prime Minister “just wants to do what's politically expedient, as usual, and as usual the unthinking masses in Ontario are in agreement”. She also went on to say “But what do I know, I'm so out of the loop that I actually joined the Canadian Alliance and became president of our riding association. I think I live in the wrong part of Canada”.

What was she thinking? She deliberately insults the voters of Ontario and then asks for their support. What is worse is that her party has so far done nothing to distance itself from her offensive comments. She has insulted the good, well-meaning people of Perth--Middlesex.

I suspect Mrs. Meinen will regret her slight to Ontario on election day. I hope her leader will have the courage to denounce her comments.

Now more than ever, it is crystal clear that change comes with the Progressive Conservative Party.

Immigration

[Diane Ablonczy, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government has finally admitted that Ernst Zundel is a national security threat. Will Zundel be leaving the country tomorrow morning?

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

Mr. Speaker, because we are respectful of the rule of law and because we are respectful of the process, I would like to pay tribute to my department and the Solicitor General's department. They did a tremendous job.

What will happen now is this is in the Federal Court's hands. It will follow the process. I think it is pretty clear what the government wants to do.

[Diane Ablonczy, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is not quite that exciting because Zundel was identified as a security threat 10 years ago. The government still welcomed him back into Canada and allowed him to file a claim for refugee status.

The minister says a security warning is only valid for two years. Why does the minister give known security threats a clean bill of health after only two years?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am always disappointed when the official opposition's immigration critic has not done her homework. She knows perfectly well that under the new law, issuing certificates of renunciation is the method at our disposal to fully deal with these concerns. In order to do so, we must establish a process and follow the rules. This is exactly what we have done.

Some people might wish that the process were quicker, but I think that what is most important is that we ensure that we can act, in the end. That is exactly what we have done.

[Diane Ablonczy, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is all process and no action. Zundel is just the tip of the iceberg.

The Auditor General says that the thousands of people already illegally in Canada shot up by over 36,000 in the last six years. The government cannot manage to remove foreign criminals and illegals.

Given this sorry track record of incompetence, why should Canadians believe that Zundel will be out of our country any time soon?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member has run out of arguments. Probably she is frustrated because she will not have anything else to ask because we are doing what we have to do.

I would say one thing. First of all not only do we apply the law and the new act but second, we are in front of cabinet right now because we feel that we should also redo the refugee claim process because of the length of time. I understand that people can be frustrated about the process.

The government's policy is not about building walls. Our policy is about controlling the doors, having a balanced approach with openness and vigilance. That is exactly what the government is doing.

Agriculture

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

Mr. Speaker, today we hear that the United States is imposing a 20% duty on all Canadian wheat exports to the U.S.

Western Canadian grain farmers are shaking their heads in disgust while the U.S. slams our grain industry with multiple trade actions and the government stands idly by.

The catalyst for these trade challenges has been the Canadian Wheat Board, but now all Canadian grain producers will be penalized.

Will the minister make the Canadian Wheat Board voluntary as so many producers want, or is he prepared to punish all Canadian producers for an outdated compulsory monopoly marketing system?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the allegations involved in the pending American action are not new allegations. They have been in the public arena for 10 to 15 years.

The Americans have pursued these actions on at least 10 previous occasions. Every time they have been pursued, those same kinds of fruitless statements have been made by the opposition. At the end of the day Canadian farmers have won 10 out of 10. The Government of Canada has stood with them every inch of the way. We will continue to do so.

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

Mr. Speaker, that is rubbish. The minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board has assured farmers for the past year that this U.S. trade challenge has no substance. The Canadian Wheat Board has assured producers for the last year that the U.S. trade challenge has no substance to it.

Now we find that the United States department of commerce will levy duties of up to 20% on all Canadian wheat sales into the United States.

Is the minister so incompetent that he failed to take the United States seriously, or has he been deliberately misleading Canadian producers?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the government has consistently stood by farmers in arguments of these kinds.

It is significant that the government defends the rights of farmers to make their own marketing decisions in Canada by Canadians.

The opposition by contrast sent a delegation some years ago to Washington, stood on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, joined arms with Newt Gingrich and sided with the United States.

Employment Insurance

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in December 2002, the National Assembly passed a unanimous resolution asking the Government of Canada to use the surplus from the EI fund to support the unemployed, rather than to pay off the national debt. This consensus in Quebec remains strong, and the proof is in the fact that Quebec's new employment minister, Clause Béchard, just reiterated Quebec's concerns about the shameful use of the fund's surplus.

Given that a new spirit of cooperation is supposed to exist with Quebec and that the needs of the unemployed are pressing, is Ottawa now prepared to agree to the emergency meeting requested by Minister Béchard?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first, I reject the comments of the hon. member. The Minister of Finance has said that he will sit down and work co-operatively with the new Government of Quebec and with his counterpart, Mr. Séguin.

Second, the member knows that the minister has already started a review of the EI program.

Therefore I suggest that the member be patient while that review continues and while the minister sits down and has good conversations with the new Government of Quebec.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Claude Béchard feels the Government of Quebec could recover a significant share of the EI fund's surplus in order to better meet the needs of workers who are unemployed.

Is the federal government ready to go this route, as the Employment Insurance Act permits?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

First, Mr. Speaker, as we know there is no separate EI fund.

Second, the Bloc members should know that their kissing cousins in Quebec, the Parti québécois, are clearly not very good at mathematics to begin with. I do not think we need to take any lessons from our friends across the way.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the reason the government obstinately refuses to recognize the existence of surpluses in the EI fund is that it is using the money collected from employers and employees like a tax it can spend as it pleases, and has indeed used it to pay down the debt.

Will the government deny that using the EI surpluses as it is doing shows that it views these surpluses not as money belonging to the contributors but as a tax on employment?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Again, Mr. Speaker, we know that the EI fund is there for workers in times of need and it is being used as such.

The hon. member should know that the minister has started a review of the EI program.

I again remind the hon. member that since this government has come to power, EI rates have continued to go down. They have continued to go down this year, the 10th year in a row.

The math of my friends across the way is not very good and that is clearly reflected in the type of questions they have been asking. I suggest that they be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the government realize that viewing the surplus in the fund as a tax results in money being diverted from its intended purpose, thereby making it impossible to find a sustainable solution to the problems faced by the victims of the softwood lumber crisis, the fishers affected by the moratorium on fishing and seasonal workers, to name but a few?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the government has responded in all of those cases and has assisted where needed.

The member should know that in her own province workers in all those industries have benefited because we have a very effective EI program.

The minister, I repeat for the third time, is working with all stakeholders to review EI for future rates. However the rates have continued to come down, something that never happened under the previous government.

Marriage

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the historic B.C. appeal court decision yesterday on same sex marriage is a victory for equality in Canada. It also is further evidence that the waffling and denial of equality for gays and lesbians by the government is unconscionable and unacceptable.

After three appeal court decisions, will the minister make it clear today that there will be no more delays, no more studies and no more government appeals?

Will the government do the right thing and stand on the side of equality and change the law to allow same sex marriage? How long will the minister take on this issue?