House of Commons Hansard #111 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was amendment.
Government PoliciesOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order please. I know that the hon. member for Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough will want to contain his enthusiasm. His microphone is on when the hon. member for Winnipeg--Transcona's is on and it makes it very difficult for the Chair to hear.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
In any event, Mr. Speaker, it seems that there are two camps in the Liberal Party with respect to star wars and that government can only make announcements about those things that the Liberals are divided on, such as election financing and star wars, and we cannot get any action on anything else.
I want to ask the Minister of the Environment a question. It is Environment Week, it is Clean Air Day. Could he please tell us how he intends to provoke some division within the Liberal Party on this issue so we can get some action?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I always listen to my caucus colleagues attentively and with respect.
One message yesterday came out loud and clear and it is a message I welcome. The message from my caucus colleagues is: government do not mess around with weapons in space because if you do, you will face the wrath of the caucus. I accept and agree with that message.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
It is nice to know, Mr. Speaker, that the minister of defence can get a message once in a while from somebody.
I want to ask the government more generally, when it comes to mad cow disease, when it comes to softwood, when it comes to helping hospitality workers affected by SARS, all we have is silence or inaction. Still we only have a government focused on the things that divide them. When are the Liberals going to get their act together and help people who are the victims of these various crises in our country?
David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I totally reject the hon. member's question. The fact is the Minister of Industry is working on measures that will improve the economic lot of those affected by SARS, as is the Minister of Human Resources Development. The Minister of Agriculture is in Alberta today dealing with the beef industry crisis.
This government acts on behalf of all Canadians all of the time.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the trade minister indicated he would be willing to step away from a quota based softwood proposal tabled by the Canadian negotiator with the Americans. A cardinal rule of good faith negotiations is that a tabled offer cannot be unilaterally withdrawn.
Why did the minister show such disrespect as to table an offer that he is now prepared to abandon?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I showed absolutely no interest in withdrawing the paper that was tabled last week in Washington.
John Duncan Canadian Alliance Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, that is contrary to one statement yesterday. Whenever the government is questioned about softwood lumber assistance, the natural resources minister pops up and repeats his softwood promises from last October. It is now eight months later and not a dollar has flowed to forest workers and communities.
The government's promises have done nothing for softwood workers or the industry. I will save the minister the trouble of repeating himself. When is he going to deliver?
Stephen Owen LiberalSecretary of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Indian Affairs and Northern Development)
Mr. Speaker, it was not last October. It was on December 19 that the Minister of Industry announced a $110 million program for economic adjustment in forest dependent communities across the country. Over 50% of that money will flow to British Columbia workers and communities.
The minister appointed a high level, multi-sector committee to review these proposals. The call for proposals has gone out. They are being received and reviewed by community futures development corporations at this point. Money will be flowing very soon.
Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, last October, the Minister of Natural Resources announced that the government was considering the possibility of creating phase 2 of the softwood lumber industry assistance package. Yesterday, he confirmed that loan guarantees were an avenue worth exploring to assist the lumber industry. In addition, his colleague from International Trade confirmed that the situation had worsened.
What is the government waiting for? Is it going to launch phase 2 of the assistance package or not?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, as I have said on a number of occasions in the House in response to the hon. member, we had a major program in phase one. We admitted at that time that this was an area that we wanted to monitor closely, that we wanted to watch what has happened across the country and if other programs were needed, if more help was needed, that it was something we would look at.
We still have the same position. We have not changed. We are monitoring the situation. We certainly will take the representation of the hon. member and the party into consideration.
Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, I did not hear a “yes”.
How does the government want us to interpret its total inaction on phase 2 of the softwood lumber industry assistance package? Does the government realize that the signal it is sending to the Quebec regions so severely affected by the softwood lumber crisis is that, if it wanted to make this industry disappear, this is exactly how it would go about it?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is simply wrong when he says there is a lack of action. We in fact have provided action.
Just a few minutes ago the Secretary of State for Western Economic Diversification put forward a number of programs and proposals that are there that are looking at community adjustment programs. Human Resources Development Canada has also indicated the programs it is involved in.
We are taking action for the workers and for the industries across the country. I would hope the hon. member would recognize the good work that has already been done in all those programs.
David Anderson Canadian Alliance Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Mr. Speaker, the BSE saga continues. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has commissioned three international experts from the United States, Switzerland and New Zealand to issue a report on our response to BSE and to address the issue of the safety of Canada's beef supply.
Could the minister tell us what are the terms of reference for those experts and their future report?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I will certainly bring the question to the attention of the Minister of Agriculture who, as members know, is meeting with representatives of the beef industry to make sure they have their input. I will make sure that the hon. member gets a comprehensive response from the Minister of Agriculture.
David Anderson Canadian Alliance Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that there is not a spokesman in the House who can deal with this issue. The CFIA has stated that these individuals will be asked to validate the Canadian actions and to determine whether policy adjustments are warranted.
Could the minister tell the House if the reopening of the border is contingent on the findings of the team from the United States, New Zealand and Switzerland?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has stated before, we need to make sure we do the science. That is exactly what we are doing. It is on sound science that we will be able to convince the international community and the U.S. that this was an isolated case. So far we have only found one cow that was infected with BSE; no other animal has been found. It is something we are looking at.
As I said in my earlier response, we hope that next week all the tests will be done so that we can start moving our product to our markets around the world and into the U.S. That is what the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is doing right now.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Defence voted in favour of the missile defence program while other government members voted against it, for fear that this program would lead to the militarization of space. That motion closes the discussions. It is as if we were giving blanket approval to any system from the outset.
Does the government realize that the expression any system contained in the motion means that the government is accepting in advance the militarization of space?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as I just explained in English, the message of the caucus is very clear: we are opposed to the militarization of space. That is also the government's position.
As I have already explained, I have received this message, and the government says it welcomes it, because it is also government policy.
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, responding to the committee report, the Minister of Foreign Affairs stated, “Canada remains opposed to the weaponization of space and will continue to oppose deploying weapons in space”.
Yesterday, some Liberal members voted against the government, because they felt that the motion went too far.
Could the government give us the reason for this shift between the position it took a month ago and the one voted on in this House yesterday?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to get across to this member the reality I have now explained twice.
There has been no change in the government's position. We were opposed to weapons in space months and years ago. We were opposed yesterday, we are today and we will be tomorrow. That is the reality.
Kevin Sorenson Canadian Alliance Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, of the 331 people killed on Air India flight 182, 280 were Canadians, 80 of whom were children, yet both the previous administration and the government refused to initiate a commission of inquiry. Recent allegations only serve to remind us that Canadians and the rest of the world deserve to know exactly what transpired on or before the June 23, 1985 disaster.
Will the Solicitor General immediately initiate that commission of inquiry?
Wayne Easter LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that the most important inquiry in the whole Air India bombing is taking place right now, where the people who are responsible for that bombing will be brought to justice. That is what we should keep our eyes on.
Kevin Sorenson Canadian Alliance Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, in 1993 the leader of the official opposition, now our current Prime Minister, promised that the Liberals would “continue to press the government to create a royal commission to look into the Air India disaster”. After 10 years Canadians are still waiting for this unfulfilled promise.
Will the Solicitor General put an end to the wait and immediately initiate that royal commission of inquiry?
Wayne Easter LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, even if we wanted to do a public inquiry, it would be inappropriate while the court case is going on. However, I would refer the hon. member to the annual report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee for 1991-92. It reviewed extensively and had numerous interviews. It reviewed a lot of the documentation around the incident and concluded that the “service wasnot in a position to predict that the Air India flight was to be the target of a terrorist bomb”.
I would refer the member to the report. If he were to read it, he might learn something.