House of Commons Hansard #76 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was murray.
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, just this morning I telephoned the Iranian foreign affairs minister. I reminded him of the Government of Canada's formal requests over the past two years to repatriate Ms. Kazemi's body so that we can conduct an independent autopsy to confirm what Dr. Aazam revealed last week.
This morning I asked the Iranian foreign minister to repatriate the body of Madam Kazemi to Canada. I have asked him that we conduct a third party autopsy to verify--
Foreign AffairsOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Glengarry--Prescott--Russell.
Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of the Environment regarding the Kyoto accord.
The government made the following promise in the throne speech, and I quote, “It will do so by refining and implementing an equitable national plan” for the implementation of the Kyoto protocol. We are aware of the Prime Minister's commitment on this issue. We are aware of all Canadians' commitment to the Kyoto accord.
When will the minister finally announce the plan for Kyoto?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, so that Canada can do its part in reducing climate change caused by human activity, and in such a way as to long-term results that further strengthen our economy, it gives me great pleasure to announce to the House that the improved plan for climate change, this major undertaking, will be made public next Wednesday, April 13.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, we have already seen the beginnings of this plan and it is frankly pathetic.
The voluntary agreement announced today with the automobile sector simply lets the government off the hook. It allows it to wash its hands, take no responsibility for pollution, and worse, it does not require the big polluters to take any responsibility either.
The Suzuki Foundation does not think it is a great day. The Pembina Institute does not think it is a great day. People choking on smog say that it is not a good day.
Where are the penalties for no action?
R. John Efford LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what the hon. member had for lunch today to be able to say that reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 5.3 million tonnes is not doing anything for the environment. What does it take?
The auto industry is playing its role. The environment minister is playing his role. The Minister of Natural Resources, together with the Minister of the Environment, agree that it will work. It is good for Canada. It is reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is showing leadership in North America and in the world.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, that is a completely outrageous statement to make. Canada is one of the worst polluters. The growth of our pollution, as was confirmed today by the deputy minister of the environment, has gone up by 20%, not like his minister said when he tried to say that we were wrong with that number. It is the government's own number.
The government has not saved one-half million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions from the auto sector in the years that it has been working on it and there is no penalty for any of the polluters. Where are the penalties? Give us one penalty for anybody who breaks this agreement.
The EnvironmentOral Question Period
Avalon Newfoundland & Labrador
Liberal
R. John Efford LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the most outrageous comment I have heard in this House since I came here two years ago just came from that member who just said that at 5.3 million tonnes we are not reducing greenhouse gas emissions. What grade did he get in mathematical courses in college or in high school?
Paul Forseth Conservative New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government's relationship with Iran appears muddled and pretty confused. It admits the tragedy of the Kazemi case and then withdraws its ambassador for a while, but has shown no leadership among our ally nations.
Why does the government not have any plan at all to be a leader at the UN with our allies to make human rights mean something and to create a circle of pressure on this rogue state?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, this is very much what the Government of Canada has been doing. For two years in a row, it has been Canada, at the very United Nations to which the member is referring, that has been sponsoring a resolution condemning the situation of human rights in Iran. For two years in a row we received the support of the international community. We will continue to put pressure on Iran, as I did this morning when I called the minister of foreign affairs of Iran.
Paul Forseth Conservative New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, maybe they are waking up over there.
The government knows the inside story of Iran. The people are ruled by fear, torture and payoff bribes to their religious police. The government knew for months the facts of the torture of Kazemi. Its excuse made today is rather late and is not very credible.
Why did the government provide political cover for Iran and why did it hide the graphic details of the doctor's report?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, it is the opposition that is waking up. This is the very work we have been doing and that we have been involved in. He can go back to the United Nations General Assembly last year and this year again. He should read the speech I made last month in Geneva at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
This morning I reiterated a demand I have made, and one which the Minister of National Defence made in the past, and this is something we will not give up on. We know that Iran has presented us with lies and cover-ups and this is totally unacceptable.
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, the following is what three senior Liberals are saying about the environment minister's hidden Kyoto agenda to use CEPA to push a carbon tax. The environment committee chair said, “CO
2
is not a toxic risk to human health”. The finance chair said that he had a hard time understanding taking CO
2
out of the atmosphere. The former environment minister said, “I think this one was a mistake”.
Why did the environment minister not trust even his own colleagues with his Kyoto hidden agenda?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, there is no obligation to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act in order to control greenhouse gas emissions as any other substances we need to control. This being said, it would be a good policy to remove the word toxic from the law and, indeed, it is what the industry is requesting. It is sad that, for now at least, the Conservative Party does not seem to understand that.
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, I thank him very little for that last answer.
Canadians need to know who speaks for the Liberal government on Kyoto. Is it the environment committee chair, the finance committee chair, the former environment minister, all of whom are opposed to using CEPA as a back door to push a carbon tax, or is it the present environment minister?
Stéphane Dion LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, even a student in economics 101 would know the difference between a regulatory regime and a carbon tax. I am sure it is only because they want to fight Kyoto at any cost that they are so blinded and using this kind of argument.
I want to quote what the Canadian Fertilizer Institute had to say. It said that it was still the right thing to do for Canadian farmers. The same has been said by other industries like the mining industry. They want the word toxic removed from CEPA and they are comfortable using CEPA as a regulatory tool for greenhouse gas emissions.
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, a former communications expert and right hand of one of the owners of an agency at the heart of the sponsorship scandal has confirmed that he met with members of the Chrétien cabinet or people from the Prime Minister's Office.
Can the Prime Minister assure us that none of his former or current cabinet ministers participated in meetings with agencies to divert money from the sponsorship program to the Liberal Party of Canada?
Scott Brison LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, these are allegations, not facts. We have to wait for the Gomery report.
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is trying to hide behind the work of the Gomery inquiry in order to refuse to give answers here in this House about the use of sponsorship money by the Liberal Party of Canada.
Does the Prime Minister realize that he does not have to wait until the end of the Gomery inquiry to tell us the truth? I repeat my question. Did any minister from his current or former cabinet have meetings with agencies, yes or no?
Scott Brison LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister deserves credit for having appointed Justice Gomery, for supporting Justice Gomery in his work and for fervently being focused on getting to the bottom of the issue.
The government wants to get to the truth. The separatists do not want to get to the bottom of this issue because they would rather have an election based on incendiary daily testimony than have the facts.
Federalists in Quebec and Canadians across Canada know that what is good for the separatists is not good for Canada, which is why Canadians want Justice Gomery to complete his work.
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
Mr. Speaker, prior to the last election, the government promised that MPs would have a substantive say in the appointment of Supreme Court judges.
The election has come and gone and from all reports so has the Liberal promise of judicial appointment reform.
Why does the Prime Minister think that curing the democratic deficit is only for leadership or election campaigns?
Irwin Cotler LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member knows the answer to his question because I will be appearing before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights on Thursday morning to share the proposal with regard to judicial reform.
Vic Toews Conservative Provencher, MB
Mr. Speaker, from all reports, it is a promise made and a promise broken, which is the only consistent pattern with the Liberal government. Whether it is Senate reform or the appointment of judges, the Prime Minister has broken his word on curing the democratic deficit.
Why does the Prime Minister think that it is only his opinion that matters when it comes to appointing Supreme Court judges for all of Canada?
Irwin Cotler LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I would like to invite the hon. member to stop reading newspaper reports and making policy on newspaper reports. He should read what we have to say and respond to that. He should also appreciate that the Constitution vests the authority with respect to Supreme Court appointments in the executive branch of government. That is what we are responding to, among other things, along with a democratic process being put in place.
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.
The Government of Canada is delivering on one of its key Kyoto commitments, vis-à-vis emission reductions.
Could the minister provide the House with further details of the voluntary emission reduction plan he signed in Windsor this morning with the Canadian auto sector?