This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

House of Commons Hansard #108 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was norad.

Topics

FisheriesOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Loyola Hearn Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL

Mr. Speaker, if that hon. gentleman and his caucus and the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador would stop fighting with each other and start working on the problems, we would have them solved.

Could the minister responsible for human resources development tell us if, in her plans to address this, she will come up with some innovative ideas instead of just planning to extend EI and coming up with some JCP programs, which is not the answer to this situation.

FisheriesOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member can count on is that we are always responsive. We look at the circumstances that face the labour market and respond to them as effectively as possible.

I take this opportunity to remind the House how effectively the employment insurance system does work, how responsive it is, how it changes with increasing or decreasing levels of employment, how it is financed and how it is there to respond to the needs of Canadians when they need it.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the last star wars test missed its target by hundreds of miles but clearly the defence minister has missed the mark altogether. Canada should have no part of star wars, period. It is destabilizing, it is expensive and it does not work.

Very simply, I would like to ask the minister if it is now Liberal policy that if a country wants a new weapons system, it is okay to tear up an arms control treaty? Is that okay by him?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Markham Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I always had a suspicion that the NDP lived in the past. The hon. member is talking about star wars which went out with the Ronald Reagan period some 20 or more years ago. We are not talking about star wars. This is a land-based system. We are discussing it with the Americans because it may be in Canada's interest to protect Canadian lives and to preserve a meaningful role for Canada in the joint defence of this continent.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about star wars because that is exactly to what this system is going to lead. It really is too bad the emperor is away today and we get Yoda instead.

The minister knows very well that George Bush has already blown $90 billion on star wars with hundreds of billions of dollars more to come.

Could the minister tell hotel workers laid off by SARS, or nurses who now want danger pay as a result of SARS, or meat workers laid off by mad cow why star wars gets billions of dollars and those workers get nothing?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Markham Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague the Solicitor General pointed out, I assure the hon. member that the force is with us.

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

David Anderson Canadian Alliance Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, I think the word is farce, not force.

The Minister of Agriculture announced today that he anticipates the American border will remain closed to beef exports for at least another week. The original cow has been slaughtered, the renderings have been trapped and removed from the system, the original birthplace herd has been depopulated and is being tested, cows from the trace out have been destroyed and feed mills have been cleared.

What else must occur before the U.S. will be satisfied that the disease has been contained and eradicated?

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, the only comment I have made about opening the U.S. border is that I hope it opens soon. I have not said when that soon will be because all of the science is not proven.

The Premier of Alberta said this morning that lobbying is not what it takes, it takes science. The science is not yet completed. The trace outs are happening and the tests are taking place. The DNA samples in some situations are not back yet because they take some days to do. That work will continue. The only way we will be able to demonstrate that this is an isolated incident is by completing the science, and that is what we will do.

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

David Anderson Canadian Alliance Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, last week the cattle industry was losing $11 million per day. This week it is losing $30 million per day. After next week, losses will be catastrophic, feedlots will be completely plugged and cow-calf operators will be running out of operating money.

Has the government established a target date for having the border reopened and if not, what contingency plan does the minister have in place to deal with such a catastrophe?

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, I answered the hon. member's question about opening the border. We want to open the U.S. border and other borders as quickly as we possibly can. It will take science to do that.

He should appreciate the fact that Canada has the best system in the world to do the tracking and tracing and conducting that science. The best compensation is opening the border and that is where we are concentrating our efforts.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

May 29th, 2003 / 2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, since the softwood lumber crisis began, the Minister for International Trade has been talking about the return to total free trade as the ultimate objective.

Given this, how does he explain the fact that he presented the Americans with a plan that, essentially, contains conditions similar to those adopted in 1996? What we want to know, after so many sacrifices, is why the government wants to return to square one?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey Ontario

Liberal

Murray Calder LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, I want to make it adamantly clear that we have had, and always will have, a two-pronged strategy with the softwood lumber.

Prong number one, which is at the WTO and NAFTA, is working very well for us. Prong number two is that we have been in consultation with the producers, with the industry and with the provinces to get the best deal that we possibly can with this.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, how can anyone explain that, suddenly, the government is changing its strategy when it has the upper hand and all that is needed is an assistance package for businesses and workers so they can make it through the process and still survive.

Why is the government changing its strategy when all that is required is phase 2 of its plan, which it has yet to deliver?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey Ontario

Liberal

Murray Calder LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has been very sensitive to the impact on the industry right across the country. The federal government has already announced over $300 million in assistance. The Minister of Industry, the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister for International Trade have been very active on this file.

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Diane Ablonczy Canadian Alliance Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, this week a man was arrested in connection with a brutal home invasion. A check of the man's status on the Canadian police intelligence computer showed, to quote one officer, “This guy is flagged everywhere for crime”. Yet that same man has just been granted Canadian citizenship.

Why would the minister welcome a violent criminal into our society as a citizen?

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Brampton Centre Ontario

Liberal

Sarkis Assadourian LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, we take the security of our nation very seriously. Every step is taken along the way to ensure that every potential immigrant passes the security check. We follow this procedure because, as I said, security is paramount for our nation.

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Diane Ablonczy Canadian Alliance Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, the man in question was charged for home invasion. He beat the owner so badly that 30 staples were needed to close head wounds. He tortured the homeowner for information about valuables. However when arrested, he laughed at police and bragged about his new status as a Canadian citizen.

Why has the minister failed yet again to protect our citizenship process from abuse by a dangerous repeat criminal?

Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Brampton Centre Ontario

Liberal

Sarkis Assadourian LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, we take the security of our nation very seriously. This man will be found guilty, I am sure. She will have the check the facts. This person will serve his sentence fully to the maximum allowed by the law.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Roger Gaudet Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, in talking with the heads of companies such as Tembec, Bowater and Abitibi-Consol, we are learning that they are experiencing difficulties and, consequently, must slow down production and lay off hundreds of employees.

How can the Minister of Natural Resources tell the House that everything is fine when hundreds of jobs are being lost in the forestry industry and there is more and more bad news every day?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Vancouver South—Burnaby B.C.

Liberal

Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, we are very conscious of the problems in the industry. In fact, that is why we were ahead of the game. That is why we introduced $350 million to support the industry. We will continue to monitor the industry. As I have said before, if we need to do more, we will be looking at options that can provide that.

In the meantime, our effort is to make sure that we deal with the countervail duties. The Minister for International Trade has done a tremendous job to make sure that we resolve this issue so that we have free trade in softwood lumber. That is where our efforts are.

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Roger Gaudet Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, 450 jobs were affected in Chibougamau, 300 in Béarn, Témiscamingue, and hundreds of others throughout the entire industry.

How can the minister say he is satisfied with the measures implemented by his government to date, when this industry needs loan guarantees, and employment insurance needs to be relaxed by eliminating the two-week waiting period, as was recently done in Toronto?

Softwood LumberOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Beauce Québec

Liberal

Claude Drouin LiberalSecretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague mentioned, $350 million was announced; $110 million of which will go specifically to help communities. Of the 80 projects proposed, 17 have already been approved for the region, for $1.2 million; this brings our investments to $5 million.

We will continue to work with the industry, the provinces and municipalities to support the communities.

EthicsOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Monte Solberg Canadian Alliance Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister once again defended personally strong-arming the head of the Business Development Bank for cash for friends on two separate occasions. What he defended yesterday would actually contravene his own ethics package if it had happened today.

How can the Prime Minister say that he was just doing his job as a good MP in 1997 when the same behaviour today would be a firing offence for any of his ministers?

EthicsOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Etobicoke Centre Ontario

Liberal

Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, what the member overlooks is that this very kind of case was before the ethics counsellor in November 2000, who reported in writing that such a call did not violate any principle or standard which was relevant to the ethics counsellor's work.

Will the member take that into account and recognize we are dealing with exactly the same issue?

EthicsOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Monte Solberg Canadian Alliance Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows very well that is completely beside the point. The question is, was it ethical?

According to the Prime Minister's own ethics guidelines, as of today, that kind of offence that the Prime Minister engaged in would be a firing offence. He would not be in cabinet if those rules applied to him.

My question is, will the minister admit that under the new ethics package that kind of behaviour would get him fired from his own cabinet?