House of Commons Hansard #38 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, we know that the aid package will cost around $16 million to ensure that farmers receive the floor price.
Therefore, can the minister confirm that he will make a 60-40 commitment, that is with the federal government putting in 60% and Quebec 40%?
Andy Mitchell LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct in that historically the share between the provinces and the federal government is normally 60:40. In this particular instance, there is at this point in time no specific request of the federal government. We understand that there is a particular issue. We will work with our colleagues in the province of Quebec and with producers in Quebec as we will work with producers and provinces right across this country to deal with the issue of cull cows.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, not only are the existing programs poorly suited to the Quebec situation, but they are temporary and will end in February.
Is the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food ready to make a commitment not only to cover 60% of the costs, but also to ensure that the programs lasts until the floor price of 42 cents is reached, which would be in about eight months?
Andy Mitchell LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is not correct when she talks about a February date. Our CAIS program, which is an income support program, is a permanent program of the Government of Canada. It does not expire in February. The BSE programming that we put in place on September 10 will run over the next year and a half. It does not expire in February.
We are determined to deal with the issue of cull cows in Quebec. There are other issues that will impact that and we will be taking those into account as well.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, it must not be forgotten that Quebec's farmers have lost $241 million since the beginning of the crisis—for which they are in no way responsible. The possible solutions may make corrections for the future, but can do nothing for the past.
Does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food not agree that $241 million in losses fully justifies the implementation of specific measures to cover this loss of income suffered by Quebec's farming community?
Andy Mitchell LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member is simply not accurate.
The income support programs that the government has put in place have been of assistance to producers in Quebec in the past and will be of value to them in the future. The cull animal program that we put in place specifically to deal with BSE has applied to producers in Quebec. The transitional industry support program that we put in place last year has applied directly to producers in Quebec as these programs have applied to producers all across Canada.
The hon. member is simply incorrect. The federal government has been assisting producers in Quebec and right across the country.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
After two years it is time the Prime Minister faced the facts and said no to star wars.
Can the minister explain why the U.S. Missile Defense Agency is asking for money for space weapons if the program does not involve space? Can the minister explain why a space based laser project in Colorado is funded by the U.S. Missile Defense Agency? It is abundantly clear that missile defence will weaponize space.
Will the Prime Minister say no to George Bush and make it clear, finally, that Canada will not participate in this crazy program?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been saying no to the weaponization of space for a long time. Therefore, I do not understand why the member keeps coming back to this. The Prime Minister and the Government of Canada have been clear. We have been saying no to the weaponization of space.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the reason we keep coming back to it is that the Government of Canada has not made it clear that it will not participate in this project when it is very clear that it will weaponize space. In fact, yesterday the Prime Minister said that Canada would not support arms proliferation.
Why is he not saying no now to this missile defence program? We cannot both oppose arms proliferation and move ahead and participate in this weapons system because it will weaponize space.
Why will the government not recognize that reality and say no, now?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, that is the NDP reality. The NDP has decided to see it that way.
I am telling the House that the government has been clear. We will say no to the weaponization of space. In the meantime, we are discussing with the Americans what the exact impacts of this missile defence system will be for Canada. We will want to ensure the best security of North America. We will continue to resist any orientation toward the weaponization of space.
Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Speaker, last November 19 the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration told members in the House that she had in her possession a thick book full of requests from members on both sides of the House.
Will the minister commit to tabling this book today or if she continues with this cover-up, will she simply do the right thing and resign?
Jacques Saada LiberalMinister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie
Mr. Speaker, most members in this House intervene on behalf of people who would like to obtain, for humanitarian reasons, visas for family or loved ones. We do this regularly. If we did not, we would be accused of being insensitive or lacking compassion. It is not a matter of justifying whether the country should be compassionate or not.
As for the document, or documents, in question, how can this be assigned to any particular riding when we know that two or three hon. members can intervene on behalf of the same case? The permits are not issued to the hon. members—
Citizenship and ImmigrationOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle.
Andrew Scheer Conservative Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, this is really simple. Every immigration application has an address on it. Sort the database by postal code and we will know which riding they are in. Even the minister herself could figure that out. We know she is having a bit of trouble staffing her office, but I am sure somebody there knows how to hit “print”.
Will the minister either table her big book of requests or give the House a breakdown riding by riding?
Jacques Saada LiberalMinister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, that question is absurd. We frequently have someone come into our riding offices asking us to intervene in their application. For instance, two brothers, one in my riding and the other brother in my colleague's riding, want to bring someone to Canada. What should they use for the official address? The permit is not issued to the MP; it is issued to the person abroad who wants to come here. The riding is not identified. This is totally absurd.
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Mr. Speaker, this summer a hard-working Romanian family in Saskatoon was kicked out of Canada by the immigration minister. These people had settled in Saskatoon and contributed to our city while they waited for a decision on their refugee claim.
Because Mr. Pascu was an ethnic minority, he was subject to persecution in Romania. The Romanian police harassed and threatened to rape Mrs. Pascu. Clearly, they should have qualified on compassionate and humanitarian grounds.
Why does a Romanian stripper get to stay in the country on compassionate grounds while a persecuted Romanian family is kicked out?
Jacques Saada LiberalMinister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie
Mr. Speaker, it is not the practice of this House to disclose confidential information.
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister told me about the great welcome program for immigrants in Saskatchewan. She seemed proud of this welcome initiative, yet when established immigrant families in Saskatoon needed her intervention to stay in the country, she turned away. Canadians have lost faith in this system. They have lost faith in this minister.
Will she offer her resignation today?
Lucienne Robillard LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, Canadians support our immigration program. Canada is a land of immigrants. It has been such in the past and will continue to be in the future. This program is very important for the future of our country.
Our Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is currently working with all her provincial partners to improve this program from coast to coast to coast.
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister stated that he had not received any specific request from President Bush on Canada's possible participation in the missile defence shield. However, a report from the Department of National Defence indicates that Canada could do a lot to accommodate the Americans in the development of this shield.
Can the Minister of National Defence tell us if these are the proposals that were conveyed to the U.S. government?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, President Bush expressed his wish. In his speech he said, “We hope Canada will join in”. The opposition prefers to interpret this remark as exerting enormous pressure. Frankly, when it comes to pressure, I have seen much worse.
The president expressed his wish that Canada will join in this program. I can tell hon. members that the decision will be made in Canada, in the best interests of Canadians, while keeping in mind the future security of our continent. This is the exact position of our government.
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is merely pressure exerted by the world's most important and most powerful leader.
The Prime Minister argued that he had obtained assurances the missile defence shield would not result, in its initial phase, in any form of militarization of space. Yet, the report of the Department of National Defence alludes to the possibility of providing Canadian assistance for the development of weapons.
Is this not yet further proof that the missile defence shield will result in the weaponization of space and that Canada intends to participate in it?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, even though the words may come from the world's most powerful leader—and I agree that he is—what he said is, “I hope”. He did not say “I want” or “We demand”. He said “I hope”. When the President of the United States says “I hope”, it is not a very pressing request. I think we have to set the record straight.
I can tell the House that our country will not contribute to the weaponization of space. We are not interested in contributing to it and, should this project contribute to it, Canada will assume its responsibilities based on its own best interests.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Mr. Speaker, natural resources deputy minister George Anderson has publicly recognized that Canada will not meet even two-thirds of its greenhouse gas emission reduction target.
Is the deputy minister's statement not proof that the government is dragging its feet and is not dealing with those really responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, namely oil companies, power plants and the automotive industry?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the interpretation given the remarks of the deputy minister of natural resources is incorrect. At any rate, the Government of Canada has always said, and is saying yet again, that it would do everything in its power to achieve its Kyoto goals. It is working toward these goals with the industry, the NGOs, the Canadians, the provinces, as well as our international partners.