Debates of June 6th, 2003

Diabetes

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, juvenile diabetes affects many Canadians. That is why last Sunday over 1,200 energetic individuals and 80 volunteers gathered to walk for a cure.

I was honoured to join volunteers like Christie Schuet, the youth ambassador for Waterloo-Wellington, Christine Bruce who organized families and raised their contribution to over 32% over last year's contribution, and Ball Construction that led an amazing participation on behalf of local contractors.

Great strides have been made in research for a cure. Researchers have found that embryonic stem cell research is critical in beating juvenile diabetes. Scientists have already shown that they may be able to direct the growth of stem cells into insulin producing cells that can produce a cure.

This is an exciting time in diabetic research for juveniles. This walk raised over $132,000 and we are anticipating an equally successful walk this Sunday in Cambridge. I ask all hon. members to join me in thanking the supporters who came out to support--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Winnipeg Centre.

Canadian Alliance

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, with all the Alliance flip-flops lately one has to wonder if it has a secret deal with David Orchard as well.

It used to demand that corporations regulate themselves. Then a rail accident hit B.C. What did the Alliance say? It flip-flopped faster than Mike Harris and Walkerton. It said to get government back on the job with more regulations.

It used to want to privatize medicare and railed on about those lazy bureaucrats wasting money in the health system. Then SARS hit and the Alliance discovered some value in public health care. It mocks the Tories on principles, but during a health crisis its principles go into hiding.

Then there is EI. When EI cuts hurt Quebec and Atlantic Canada, the Alliance could not care less. It said to just cut faster. Now it cannot stop talking about EI as if it has just realized that the unemployed are people too.

The next thing we know it will want more money for farmers after demanding that Liberals cut subsidies to farmers even faster. So much for Alliance principles.

Juno Beach Centre

[Paddy Torsney, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada played a vital role in the great campaigns for world peace during World War II. The most pivotal of these campaigns took place at dawn on June 6 as Canadian soldiers landed on the Normandy shore, code-named Juno Beach. This brave and historic landing was a turning point as the Allied forces moved on to liberate France.

Burlington resident, Garth Webb, a proud D-Day veteran, is president and director of the Juno Beach Association, a non-profit society working to preserve the memory of Canada's contributions to the second world war. With incredible commitment and dedication, the association members have built the Juno Beach Centre, officially opened today in Normandy. This centre commemorates Canadian veterans' contributions to the war and honours our soldiers, our heroes.

I ask that all members join me in paying tribute to those brave Canadians who fought that fateful day at Juno Beach. I wish to congratulate Garth Webb and everyone whose contributions made the Juno Beach Centre a reality.

Agriculture

[Dave Chatters, Canadian Alliance, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian cattle industry is facing the worst animal health crisis in the history of the industry. Having been a beef producer in my former life, my heart goes out to my constituents, neighbours, and friends who are facing the loss of their farms, feedlots and livelihoods.

If they do not regain access to the American market immediately, or if the government does not come forward with an interim aid package that is bankable within days, not months, the worst case scenario will come true. Existing farm safety net programs cannot work for extraordinary disaster in the feedlot industry where finished cattle have backed up and losses are estimated at $100 million per month.

The government must move now to show some human compassion to prevent increased human and animal suffering if this situation is allowed to continue.

Emergency Assistance

[Stephen Harper, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask today about the SARS crisis in Toronto and how the federal government plans to deal with that.

There are reports today that the federal government is reneging on a commitment that has been made by the federal government, through the Minister of National Defence, to help Toronto with emergency relief assistance.

The Ontario government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on this emergency, mainly through spending emergency funds on the health care system. It has written to the government. It is expecting matching funds through disaster relief.

Could the government confirm that this commitment will be honoured?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, certainly the hon. Leader of the Opposition has correctly identified the close cooperation between the federal and Ontario governments in handling the SARS crisis. I would like on behalf of the House to thank the health care professionals who did such an outstanding job in dealing with the crisis.

We will be discussing the issue of emergency compensation with the Ontario government as he has indicated as we proceed. We expect that there will be announcements in this regard in due course.

[Stephen Harper, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I guess we have yet to see whether there will be cooperation. There seems to be some bureaucratic wrangling here about definitions.

If this is not a disaster now in Toronto, I would like to know what the minister thinks would constitute a disaster. If the government will not help Toronto now, when will it help Toronto? It put disaster relief funds into the ice storm in Quebec.

Will the government make a clear commitment to give matching disaster relief funds to the province of Ontario for the SARS crisis in Toronto?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, the issue of disaster relief funds is being discussed by the two governments in an amicable way. We fully expect this matter to be resolved effectively.

There is disaster relief legislation and funding under it. We have discussions with provinces frequently throughout every year that I have been in Parliament. It is not unusual for discussions to take place as to exactly how relief should be provided and to ensure there is no unfairness in any program that is put forward.

Agriculture

[Stephen Harper, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask about yet another disaster, and on this one we do not have endless time for more discussion and wrangling. This is the problem of course with mad cow and the beef industry.

As I have indicated several times this week and as the government knows, feedlots are on the verge of bankruptcy. Hardship and worry is spreading throughout the industry and throughout sections of the industry, obviously through farm families.

I understand the beef industry and members of it have presented a very reasonable, modest proposal for compensation assistance. When will we know from the government the details of its compensation plans for the beef industry?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member has said and he knows I have continually met with the industry, and on Wednesday in Edmonton. Officials from my department met with the beef industry yesterday. They will continue those discussions today. The meetings have gone very well.

They are working on some support for the industry. I guess it is best to put it this way. One of the vice presidents of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association last night told me that they had excellent meetings yesterday.

Air India

[Jay Hill, Canadian Alliance, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service has belatedly released an internal memo. It concedes that CSIS might have been able to prevent the deaths of 331 people on Air India flight 182.

Now that it has been confirmed that CSIS may have been derelict in its duty to protect Canadian lives, why will the Solicitor General not launch a royal commission of inquiry to determine all of the facts in this case?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, this issue has come up numerous times in the House. I have responded consistently that there is no need for a public inquiry.

The fact of the matter is, and if I could refer the member to the annual report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee that reviewed thousands of documents and had numerous interviews, the bottom line was that it determined that, “the Service wasnot in a position to predict that the Air India flight was to be the target of a terrorist bomb”. That is in the good work from an independent review committee.

[Jay Hill, Canadian Alliance, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the facts are that since that report has been done, more and more information is leaking out.

We now know that CSIS agents followed Parmar and Reyat to a secluded area on Vancouver Island where they tested a bomb. Had the agents understood the seriousness of this test, they could have intervened, had the pair arrested and thereby prevented the tragedy. It seems like only in Canada do we have spies that cannot recognize the sound of an explosion.

Why does the government not want all the details of this disaster known to the public?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the government has always wanted all the details, which are not related to operations at CSIS, known to the public. The bottom line is we have one of the best security intelligence agencies in the world bar none.

The SIRC report has reviewed it extensively. I already quoted its response to that. It reviewed thousands of pages of documents, held interviews with numerous individuals, met with the commissioner of the RCMP at the time and it laid to rest this issue which that member continues to raise out of the past.

Transport 2000

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

Mr. Speaker, every year since 1996, Transport 2000 Québec has organized the awareness campaign for Clean Air Day, held on June 4. Despite a three-year agreement, however, Environment Canada last year appropriated the official Clean Air Day trademark and gave the Canadian Urban Transit Association the mandate, along with $250,000 in funding.

Why is Environment Canada not respecting its signature and why is it withdrawing funding from Transport 2000 Québec, although it congratulated this organization in the summer of 2000 for its exemplary contribution to public awareness?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, on February 13, I wrote to the chair of Transport 2000 to make an offer of collaboration. Unfortunately, I never received a reply. I am therefore very surprised by the press release the hon. member mentioned just now. Environment Canada did not refuse to cooperate; it is Transport 2000 that never asked us to do so.

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

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the fact that what the minister is saying is incorrect, the Canadian Urban Transit Association has received the mandate from the federal government to put together a Canadian campaign to promote Clean Air Day with public funds. However, the organization's web site provides information on this event only in English.

How can the federal government explain that a Canadian campaign, with a registered trademark and funding from this same government, is providing the public with services solely in English?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, my letter to the chair of Transport 2000 was in French. I do not think it contained one single word of English. Since I sent the letter and despite numerous requests by Environment Canada program agencies, Transport 2000 has not submitted an official application for federal contributions to organize Clean Air Day 2003, in Montreal or Quebec City.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in three years the sponsorship Transport 2000 Québec received from the federal Department of the Environment went from $80,000 down to zero in 2003. Not satisfied with just cutting them off, the department handed event organization over to the Canadian Urban Transit Association, a Toronto-based organization whose campaign was funded by ACART Communications, which gave $15,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada.

Are we to understand that the Department of the Environment's choice of the Toronto organization over Transport 2000 Québec has much more to do with the $15,000 contribution to the Liberal slush fund by ACART Communications than with the undeniable expertise of that Toronto organization?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat, we received no request from Transport 2000. The Canadian Urban Transit Association, CUTA, has been organizing a Canada-wide bilingual campaign around Clean Air Day and sustainable transportation since 2000. Sixty-five transit companies across the country belong to CUTA, including most of the companies in Quebec.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister wants to dispel the doubts surrounding this questionable decision, all he needs to do is to renew the sponsorships they used to award to Transport 2000 Québec so that it can organize Clean Air Day events as it did in the past. Can he commit to this today, in this House?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, it is not normal for a minister to promise money to an organization that has not asked the federal government for any. If they did not approach us, it is pretty hard to know what to do.

National Security

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, in 1993 the Conservative government of the day announced it would create a ministry of public security.

The ministerial responsibilities would have included oversight of the RCMP, Corrections, CSIS, the Immigration Board and the Refugee Board. The move was of course fiercely attacked by the Liberals.

Yesterday the minister responsible for public security and the Deputy Prime Minister stated he likes our idea. It joins the list of many other policies his government has opposed and then subsequently adopted and called its own.

Is the government now committed to working closely with our North American allies on the creation of a continental security perimeter?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, may I start by congratulating the hon. member on his first week as leader of the fourth party. It certainly has been a week from hell for him, but that is what happens when we make deals with the devil. We on our side of the House feel that this may have assisted us in remaining on the good side of heaven.

With respect to the question of the hon. member, certainly we are willing to consider any ways of improving public security, but the fact is we believe that we have one of the best services--