Debates of Feb. 7th, 2005

The Environment

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when the president of the association talks about some kind of agreement—if possible—and says that he does not feel bound by the Kyoto protocol, I do not know what else the minister needs to understand.

I want to ask the Prime Minister this. The Kyoto protocol is being implemented next week; the major polluters are refusing, in actual fact, to cooperate, while the government is not assuming its responsibilities. The Prime Minister did everything to prevent the previous government from adopting the Kyoto protocol. When will he finally show leadership and adopt the necessary measures to force the industry to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, as 92% of Quebeckers are demanding?

[R. John Efford, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member is getting his information. It is not the same information that the Minister of the Environment and I have received from the auto industry. In fact, we have had a very good discussion. I am very confident that we will meet our obligations working with the auto industry.

Before the hon. member asks another question stating the wrong facts, he should check out his information and get the right information to present to the House.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on November 19, the Minister of the Environment told his Quebec counterpart that it would be necessary to speed up negotiations to reach an agreement with the province on the implementation of the Kyoto protocol.

Since the protocol comes into effect on February 16, can the Minister of the Environment tell us about the outcome of these accelerated negotiations, to which he referred in November? Has the federal government signed a bilateral agreement with Quebec, at the moment?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, it goes without saying that improving our plan for Kyoto also includes improving our ability to act with provincial governments. We have agreements with some provinces. Negotiations with Quebec are progressing very well, particularly since the Bloc Québécois is not involved in the process.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not understand the minister's attitude. Protecting the environment goes beyond parties and individuals. It is a societal objective. Things would be a lot better if the minister stopped politicizing this issue and did his job.

Will the minister recognize and accept the efforts made by Quebec, including the money invested in hydroelectricity? Will he recognize, in his bilateral agreement, that Quebec is where pollution and greenhouse gas emissions are the lowest per capita in Canada? Will he take that into consideration?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, the Bloc Québécois will stop politicizing all the issues, but that is difficult for it to do, considering that its objective is to ensure that Quebec leaves Canada.

Iraq

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians could be excused for being a little bit confused this morning in looking at the reaction to the proposal from George Bush and others that Canadians should send troops to Iraq. The leader of the Conservative Party apparently is taking issue with this, after having called for troops to be sent into Iraq. The Canadian government is prevaricating on the question after having campaigned on it.

Will the Prime Minister honour his commitment to Parliament that there would be a vote in the House before troops were sent to Iraq?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we refused to send Canadian troops to Iraq two years ago. That decision stands. Canadian troops will not be going to Iraq.

I want to be very clear, so I will repeat what I just said. We refused to send Canadian troops to Iraq two years ago. That decision stands. Canadian troops will not be going to Iraq.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for the answer. We are waiting for a similar commitment that we will not get involved in missile defence with George Bush's administration and we are waiting for a vote in Parliament on that. We have been waiting for months.

The Environment

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on another matter, we are waiting for action on pollution. We have smog here in February, which is absolutely incredible. Canada still has no vehicle emission standards, no plans for major polluters and now there is smog in February.

Will the Prime Minister tell us whether it is acceptable to have money—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of the Environment.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the preamble was too long and I did not hear the question. However, what I can say about the smog in the Montreal area is that the current problem is due in large part to the growing use of wood for heating. We are working with the Government of Quebec to look at ways of changing habits that have developed over the years.

As for pollution in general, I want to say that the figures the Leader of the NDP gave are completely false. There has been a dramatic decrease in air pollution in Canada.

National Defence

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Lanark, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government took two weeks to dispatch the DART to Sri Lanka on rented commercial aircraft. This delay was caused by a combination of political dithering and lack of airlift capability. The Canadian Forces do not have the capability to move the DART rapidly and will have to continue to depend upon unreliable commercial airlift availability for years to come.

Why have successive Liberal governments been so negligent in addressing this fundamental requirement of the Canadian Forces?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the question is answered by two false premises in the preamble.

In the first place, the DART did not fail to go for lack of airlift capacity. The airlift capacity was there. We sent the DART when it was appropriate to send it.

Second, we have never had an occasion, and I think the hon. member knows this, when we have not been able to obtain appropriate rental facilities to take our forces abroad. Rather than put a lot of capital into something which is not used regularly, we have chosen the most prudent, best and most effective way to operate. We will continue to do so in the interests of the Canadian Forces.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Lanark, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is typical bafflegab. Successive Liberal governments have failed to protect our sovereignty in the north--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

There is too much bafflegab going on in the House. There is constant noise and it is very difficult for the hon. member for Carleton—Mississippi Mills to hear himself let alone anyone else. I am having trouble hearing. The hon. member for Carleton—Mississippi Mills has the floor. We will have a little less noise, please.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Lanark, ON]

Mr. Speaker, successive Liberal governments have failed to protect our sovereignty in the north. We cannot survey our territory on a continuous basis. We cannot transport troops rapidly in the north. Now we discover that our Sea King helicopters cannot fly in the north. Because of political interference, the replacement for the Sea King helicopter will not be delivered until 2008 or 2009.

Will the minister admit that Liberal politics have adversely affected Canada's ability to protect our sovereignty?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the hon. member will rejoice with me the fact that we have made the decision to acquire the Cyclone. We look forward to it. In the meantime, the Sea Kings continue to perform their service. We maintain them. We operate them and we will do that under all conditions. They serve our country well, but we look forward to the replacement by the Cyclone which will be a tremendous asset for our military when we obtain it.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, only days after his appointment as Chief of Defence Staff, General Rick Hillier terminated the current defence policy review which was described as boring, dry and dreadful. The minister has delayed the release of the review several times in the House. Now we learn that we are going to start over again from scratch.

The Minister of National Defence now fully supports the overhaul of defence blueprint and wants it to be filled with fresh ideas. Can the minister explain his 180 degree turnaround?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I can certainly agree with the part of the premise that says that a lot of the stuff that I write is boring, dry and not very interesting, but that is a personal problem. The defence review has been the product of many people in my department. We have worked hard on it.

I am thrilled that Gen Hillier who has come on board is contributing to making it one of the best documents. I look forward to when we get our IPS out--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I thought we had said that there was too much bafflegab. The hon. minister has the floor and he is giving an answer to the question that was asked.

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, surely hon. members have to recognize the difference between boring and superior bafflegab.

Foreign Affairs

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, after campaigning for the job of Prime Minister for the better part of a decade, and holding countless policy discussions and round tables, and after a year of in-house bureaucratic work on a foreign policy review, the Prime Minister has sent the long awaited document back and brought in a Liberal academic to give it more pizzazz. We are still waiting for the Prime Minister's own vision on what Canada's foreign policy should look like.

Can the Prime Minister tell the House when the pizzazz will be ready for delivery and what it will cost?