House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was offence.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for Welland (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 14% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Tobacco December 4th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, cigarette smoking is a scourge in our society, especially and regrettably for youth.

Over 40,000 Canadians die each year from tobacco related diseases. Eighty-five per cent of smokers in Canada make the decision to smoke before the age of 18. What 12 year old thinks about lung cancer or heart disease as they light up their first cigarette? The answer is, a child who has been educated about the dire consequences of tobacco use.

This government has heard, has listened and is acting. The tobacco control initiative allocated $50 million for research program development, public education and enforcement of legislation; legislation restricting access by young people to tobacco products, restricting promotion of tobacco products and empowering the imposition of health warnings on package.

Bill C-42 will impose a complete ban on tobacco sponsorship by 2003. We are committed to spending $100 million to reduce tobacco use, $50 million of which will be targeted to young Canadians. We are committed to win this tobacco war. Young Canadians, indeed Canadians of all ages, will be much better for it.

Canada-United States Days Of Peace And Friendship December 2nd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, Canada and the United States are broad lands: broad in mind, broad in spirit and broad in physical expanse.

My friend, the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, quoted a U.S. president and I would like to follow that initiative by quoting another president. Over 50 years ago a U.S. president stated:

Canada and the United States have reached the point where we no longer think of each other as “foreign” countries. We think of each other as friends, as peaceful and co-operative neighbours on a spacious and fruitful continent...

The example of accord provided by our two countries did not come about merely through the happy circumstances of geography. It is compounded of one part proximity and nine parts good will and common sense.

The record proves that in peaceful commerce the combined efforts of our countries can produce outstanding results. Our trade with each other is far greater than of any other two nations on earth.

We seek a peaceful world, a prosperous world, a free world, a world of good neighbours, living on terms of equality and mutual respect, as Canada and the United States have lived for generations.

This was said over 50 years ago by the late President Truman as he addressed parliament in this very House. What was true then is true today.

My friend, the Parliament Secretary for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, also quoted the late John Kennedy, another U.S. president. I would like to reiterate that quote as well because it is very succinct:

Geography has made us neighbours. History has made us friends. Economics has made us partners. And necessity has made us allies.

However, he went on to say the following:

Those whom nature hath so joined together, let no man put asunder.

He then went on to say:

We do not seek the unanimity that comes to those who water down all issues to the lowest common denominator, or to those who conceal their differences behind fixed smiles, or to those who measure unity by standards of popularity and affection instead of trust and respect.

We are allies. This is a partnership, not an empire. We are bound to have differences and disappointments, and we are equally bound to bring them out into the open, to settle them when they can be settled, and to respect each other's views when they cannot be settled.

But our alliance is born not of fear but of hope. It is an alliance which advances what we are for, as well as opposing what we are against.

What was true then, when said by John Kennedy in this very House on May 17, 1961, is true now. This is really an apple pie motion. Canadian apples and American apples make for a very great dessert. It is non-partisan. It is equally applicable to Quebec as it is to New York state, as equally applicable to British Columbia as it is to Washington state.

It is a good motion. My friend, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has suggested that maybe we should see what is going on on the other side in the United States and have something come from them. I certainly agree but I think we should show the leadership in this. As a consequence I am going to ask for the unanimous consent of the House to have the motion declared votable. We must take the leadership on this. Let us do it. It is the right thing to do.

Canada-United States Days Of Peace And Friendship December 2nd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my colleagues in the House from all parties who have spoken in favour of this motion. It is very much appreciated.

At the opening of the debate I requested unanimous consent to put an amendment to the motion to delete the year 1998. This motion was actually introduced back in 1997, in the last parliament, and the year does not make an awful lot of sense at this time. Accordingly, I would request unanimous consent to delete the year 1998.

Canada-United States Days Of Peace And Friendship December 2nd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on Motion No. 263 to say the fact that the Canada-U.S. relationship is dynamic and thriving does not do justice to its complexity, scope and depth. Our trade with the United States is booming but our partnership is not based only on economics and geography.

In dealing with important issues posed by a changing world, Canada and the United States have extensive shared interests that often complement each other's roles. The relationship is thriving because it is carefully nurtured. A further step in this nurturing is the motion we are speaking to this evening.

In 1987 a private American citizen named David Boyer felt strongly that there should be an official recognition of the friendship between Canada and the United States. Mr. Boyer diligently contacted both Canadian and American elected officials urging them to take the necessary steps toward such a declaration.

In the United States a joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Representatives was passed proclaiming that July 2 and 3 would thereafter be known as days of peace and friendship between Canada and the United States.

The Canadian government introduced a similar motion on March 25, 1987, resolving that July 2 and 3, 1987, be designated as days of peace and friendship. The 1987 motion was introduced by then Deputy Prime Minister Don Mazankowski and seconded by the now Deputy Prime Minister and member for Windsor West. The 1987 motion was also seconded by the current member from Qu'Appelle. The motion was debated on March 25, 1987, agreed to by the House of Commons, and subsequently agreed to by the Senate on April 2, 1987.

My predecessor from Erie, Mr. Girve Fretz, spoke in support of the motion as the town of Fort Erie was preparing to celebrate the 175th anniversary of the War of 1812 with a four day friendship festival.

During the War of 1812 Americans attacked and burned government buildings in York, the then capital of Upper Canada which is now known as Toronto. In 1814 Washington, D.C., was torched in retaliation. Similarly Old Fort Erie in my riding was burned by U.S. soldiers. Now Old Fort Erie is one of the venues of the celebration of our two nations in the friendship festival.

Therefore celebrating the end of the War of 1812 is significant because when both Canada and the United States lowered their weapons the peaceful result was the evolution of the longest, oldest undefended border in modern history. That border is not something that divides; it is something we build on. From rivals in 1812 Canada and the United States have become fast friends, best trading partners and staunch allies.

From those modest beginnings of a celebration in 1987 I am pleased to inform the House that last July marked the 11th year of the Fort Erie Friendship Festival, one of the major summer attractions in the Niagara Peninsula where over 100,000 visitors enjoy the cultures of our two countries.

The friendship festival organizers do a superb job of planning the event which runs from July 1, Canada Day, to July 4, Independence Day. It attracts participants from southern Ontario and western New York. It boasts the biggest Canada Day celebrations in the peninsula and is a major attraction for the July 4 festivities in LaSalle Park, Buffalo.

It is interesting to note that recently this annual event was opened by the former Canadian ambassador to Iran, Mr. Ken Taylor, who, at considerable personal risk to him and his staff during the occupation of the U.S. embassy by the forces of the Ayatolla Khomeni, hid members of the U.S. staff from threatening mobs and subsequently spirited them out of the country to safety.

In order to celebrate its 10th anniversary in 1997, the friendship festival approached me about reintroducing a motion to redesignate the days of peace and friendship. Unfortunately Motion No. 327 died on the order paper when the spring election was called in April 1997. When the 36th Parliament returned I immediately resubmitted the motion, and here I stand today.

Due to the delay in being drawn for Private Members' Business the date of the motion still reads 1998. I suggest that the designation of any year should be eliminated and an amendment moved accordingly. The most obvious reason is that the 1998 celebrations have come and gone. Also, by doing so, our commitment to this partnership is clear and without time limitation. It will endure and continue in perpetuity parallel with the positive and beneficial relationship between our two nations.

The fact that people from the Fort Erie community have spearheaded the motion is not surprising. What better symbol to emphasize the peace and friendship that existed between the United States and Canada than the Peace Bridge spanning the Niagara River and linking Fort Erie with Buffalo.

After 70 years since it was first opened by the Prince of Wales, the Peace Bridge is now the second busiest land border crossing between Canada and the United States. Next spring the sod will be turned marking the start of construction of the Peace Bridge twin span, a true testament to the trade and close ties with our neighbours to the south.

Last month, on November 20, the largest duty free facility in North America was opened at the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie, another example in bricks and mortar of the enormous number of travellers who cross our borders each day.

Fort Erie is not alone in its efforts to celebrate friendship between Americans and Canadians. For example, just to name a few, the communities of Windsor and Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario and Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan also have yearly events that strive to bring us closer and to celebrate all that we share together. I am certain they would appreciate this effort to celebrate and mark our special relationship. This continues across the entire country from the maritimes through Quebec to the prairie provinces and British Columbia.

In February 1995, U.S. President Bill Clinton stood in the House and stated that we needed to strengthen that relationship because it was our job to spread the benefits of democracy, freedom, prosperity and peace beyond our shores. We do this as emissaries of the free world and as examples for the entire globe.

Political meetings between our respective countries regularly take place not only between our leaders but at the elected representative level as well. It was with our vital national interests and our close relationship in mind that the 39th annual meeting of the Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group took place this year in Nantucket, resulting in one of our most productive meetings. Organized in three workshops—trade and economics, political and global, and transborder issues—each group discussed in detail from both Canadian and American perspectives over 38 separate issues.

For instance, in the trade and economics workshop topics ranged from culture to lumber and from potatoes, sugar, grain and dairy to electricity.

The transborder workshop considered issues of congestion encountered at a number of border points across our two countries, stultifying the free exchange of goods and services.

There were candid in depth discussions in the political and global workshop where our views differed and where we held common views on the international field ranging from trans-Atlantic trade to Bosnia, Cuba and China, to the economic fallout in Asia, and to the consequences of nuclear tests in the Asian subcontinent.

At the plenary all issues were reviewed by all delegates. The plenary decided unanimously to start a much more active process to exchange views of bilateral concern in a more detailed way between the annual meetings as all delegates believed a number of these issues required more regular, timely and friendly exchanges. The plenary further decided that there would be a bilateral meeting on the west coast to exchange views on the contentious issues of lumber and fish.

I understand that a meeting will be arranged between our parliamentarians and members of our respective governments to facilitate a common North American front on drug trafficking. Another bilateral meeting is to be arranged between parliamentarians and officials to consider our common interest in a trans-Atlantic trade approach and, it is hoped, a common trans-Atlantic action plan.

We share a common history and a common culture. We are two nations blessed with great histories and resources and we have great responsibilities. We were built, after all, by men and women who fled the old world for the new. We are nations of pioneers, people who were armed with the confidence they needed to strike out on their own and had the talents to shape their dreams in a new and different land.

Culture and tradition distinguish us from one another in many ways, but we share core values, which is more important; a devotion to hard work; an ardent belief in democracy; and a commitment to giving each and every citizen the tools to achieve an understanding of giving back the greater global community a share of the advantages we enjoy.

These common values have nourished a partnership that has become a model for new democracies around the world. They can look at us and see just how much stronger the bonds between nations can be when their governments answer the desires of citizens for freedom, democracy and enterprise, and when they work together to build each other up instead of working overtime to tear each other down.

However the differences have been the true test of our relationship. While we have many similarities, we are different. We disagree on the issue of culture. While Canadians believe that culture is part of our national identity, the Americans view culture as an important commercial export. Canadians believe that with bilateral trade and constructive engagement democratic values can be better implemented in states like Cuba.

Our unique geography and small population impart a unique relationship, one Canadian with another. Our bilingual society reaches populations from coast to coast to coast through public radio and television. Our education, health and justice systems differ substantially as do our political systems.

However, the experience of these two great nations has taught us unity through diversity can thrive, not a new concept for Canadians. By celebrating our friendship and ties we can all come to appreciate and understand those differences. Our diplomacy in dealing with these differences, as I have said before and will say again, is a model for other countries struggling with their relations.

Our economy is another area. Our economic ties remain one of the strongest aspects of our relationship with the United States. I would like to sketch out the extraordinary breadth and depth of the U.S.-Canada economic relationship.

Trade between Canada and the United States has more than doubled since the signing of the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement barely 10 years ago. A mind-boggling total of $1 billion in trade crosses our border each and every day. Ninety-five per cent or our trade is trouble free; it is the other five per cent of the trade that grabs all the headlines, be it bilateral disputes over spuds and suds or, more recently, hogs and logs. The value of this trade to both countries is enormous. Exports to the United States account for one-fourth of our gross domestic product.

U.S. merchandise exports to Canada exceed every other trading relationship, including trade with the European Community. Just the two way trade that crosses the Ambassador Bridge between Michigan and Ontario equals all U.S. exports to Japan.

Much of this trade is in the auto sector. General Motors Detroit Cadillac plant, for example, receives seats on a just in time basis from a plant in Windsor, Ontario, as well as other parts from plants in Canada and Mexico. Motors produced in Tonowanda, New York, just outside Buffalo, are installed the next day in motor vehicles bodies in Oshawa, Ontario. Overall autos and auto parts account for about one-third of our bilateral trade.

Energy is an excellent example of an economic sector that was deeply affected by domestic regulations and policies which once complicated our relationship but is now an area of close co-operation and enormous mutual benefit. I do not have to tell the House how well Canada does in exporting oil and natural gas to the United States. Canada is the second largest oil supplier, not far behind Venezuela, to the United States.

The future is even brighter. Private economists say the U.S. and Canada have only scratched the surface on the potential of jobs and higher incomes that economic integration through trade and investment can bring to both Canadians and American.

Since virtually all tariffs on trade between the United States and Canada have been eliminated as of the beginning of this year, much of our current focus in on facilitating lawful trade through removing non-tariff barriers, including more efficient customs and immigration processing of cargo and people.

This has been a central theme of the U.S.-Canada shared border accord announced by the Prime Minister and President Clinton in 1995. The accord incorporates a series of practical projects that mix bilateral co-operation and pragmatism with intelligent transportation technology to speed goods and people across the border.

Let me add that Canada is deeply concerned about the potential of the exit control requirements under section 110 of the 1996 immigration reform to create massive bottlenecks on our land border crossing to the United States. Although section 110 was to come into effect on October 1, the immigration and naturalization service of the U.S. indicated that it will not change its inspection procedures at this time. Canada will continue to work with congressional counterparts to ensure that the implementation of section 110 will be delayed perhaps indefinitely and hopefully forever.

I will conclude on friendship engagement. Canada and the United States have shown the best there is in partnerships between nations. As a monument commemorating the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority at St. Lambert declares, we are “two nations whose frontiers are the frontiers of friendship, whose ways are the ways for freedom, whose works are the works of peace”.

Every day we see the enormous benefits this partnership brings to us in jobs, in prosperity. There is also the creative energy that our interchanges bring. The strength and character of that co-operation is annually demonstrated by the spirit and goodwill which prevails in our border communities, like Fort Erie, Ontario and Buffalo, New York.

Canada and the United States are more than neighbours. Sharing a common past, many interests and objectives, we have become friends, allies and economic partners. Our relationship is a model for the world.

Today more than ever, let us reaffirm and renew our great tradition. We must maintain our partnership. We must make it stronger.

Canada-United States Days Of Peace And Friendship December 2nd, 1998

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the Government should designate July 2 and 3, 1998, coming between Canada Day and Independence Day (U.S.), as “Canada-United States Days of Peace and Friendship” in recognition of the close and peaceful relations that exist between the two countries, the warm personal links that prevail between neighbouring communities along the length of the common border and the commitments to freedom, democracy and human rights shared by the two nations.

Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to ask for unanimous consent to make one amendment to the motion and that is to delete the year 1998. With the way our Private Members' Business works the motion is a bit redundant. It makes a lot more sense that the two dates, July 2 and July 3, would continue in perpetuity in accordance with the motion.

Agriculture November 30th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time this evening with my colleague from Etobicoke—Lakeshore. Later in the evening the House will also be hearing from my colleague from Scarborough East. It is important to note that these two members come from the largest urban centres in Canada and they are as concerned and as anxious about the plight of our farmers as members from rural areas.

The Ontario pork industry is suffering through a severe period of below cost of production pricing. The outlook for the next 6 to 10 months appears most unfavourable.

Many of our nation's pork producers are under financial stress. Some are facing bankruptcy and financial ruin. Last week I met with over 70 representatives of the pork industry from the Haldimand and Niagara regions. I would like to tell this parliament and the people of Canada about the crisis they are facing.

As of last week the price was 62 cents per kilogram. The five year price average is $1.65 per kilogram. Hogs are sold on a dressed weight basis of approximately 84 kilograms. The break-even cost, including feed plus variable and fixed costs, is about $1.50 per kilogram. At 62 cents per kilogram, feed costs for hogs are not being met, yet farmers are obliged to look after the welfare of the hogs plus cover the other variable and fixed costs. Simple mathematics tells the tale.

In the Niagara and Haldimand regions where my riding of Erie—Lincoln is located, pork producers produce upward of 38,000 hogs annually, plus weaner pigs and sows. This production translates into over $4 million directly into the economy of the region. The added value of further processing, transportation, assembly, jobs, et cetera, pushes the economic benefit well beyond the $4 million mark. This is an industry that my riding can ill afford to lose.

In Ontario pork producers pump $668 million directly into the economic activity of their local communities. Agriculture accounts for 13% of the gross domestic product of Ontario. The Ontario pork industry in total accounts for 43,000 jobs and $4.5 billion in the economic activity of our province. One out of every seven jobs in the agricultural sector is provided by the pork industry. As the House can see, the pork sector plays a very significant role in the economic activity of the province of Ontario.

The current depressed prices are taking a whopping $64,000 per week from my region of the economy and an incredible $8 million out of the Ontario economy each week. This not only affects the producers, it also affects the feed suppliers, equipment dealers, utility companies, et cetera.

What brought about the severe price drop? The answer is direct. Oversupply of hogs in the North American market. A rapid vast expansion in the United States and within Canada has pushed hog numbers beyond the capacity to consume, both domestically and in foreign countries.

Growth in Ontario has been somewhat modest, coming at the request of processors and government urging producers to tap into the Asian export markets. These markets have not developed as rapidly as hoped, largely due to the economic crisis in the Asia-Pacific region, an unexpected phenomenon that has occurred through no fault of the pork producers. Fortunately, the quality of pork produced in Ontario is still in demand, but not at the export levels hoped for.

Ontario pork producers are competitive. They have the skills, the genetics, the infrastructure and the land base to continue producing a high quality product recognized the world over. However, they cannot compete against subsidies outside of Ontario, be they in other provinces or the United States.

Pork producers in Ontario have little or no government assistance. The NISA program to which producers and governments contribute only have sufficient funds to cover two to three weeks of losses for the average producer. This is totally inadequate under the current circumstances.

During my meeting with representatives of the pork industry at my Smithville constituency office I was asked to make several requests of the federal government.

At the federal level producers across Canada are represented by the Canada Pork Council. They have asked that federal members of parliament talk with members of cabinet, especially non-rural members, to urge swift acceptance and passage of an all farm disaster relief program in order to get funds into the agricultural community by January 1999. This I have done.

Pork producers are used to and operate within a cyclic market. The present situation, however, is not a normal cycle in the pork industry. The crisis has caught everyone by surprise and is well beyond the disaster stage. It is now a catastrophe.

I believe that this government can and should assist pork producers in this period of unprecedented need. I also urge Canadians everywhere to do their part by including more pork in their diet. It is a truism that every little bit helps.

I have focused on the pork industry; however, this is not the only industry affected. Let me speak about the overall crisis.

For the many Canadians who may be listening to this important debate tonight I want to point out that many connections link rural and urban Canadians and all of us will be affected by the current problems in the agricultural sector.

Canadian farmers produce affordable and healthful food for our tables, along with many non-edible products such as ethanol motor fuel that contribute to a clean, sustainable environment.

Now that this combination of factors, including grain stock surpluses and financial political instability in Asia, Latin America and Russia, have decreased demand for our commodities and pushed prices to their lowest level in 20 years, today some farmers are experiencing a potentially disastrous cash crisis.

The Canadian agriculture and agri-food industry is the third largest employer in Canada. In addition to farmers, there are suppliers, processors, transporters, grocers and restaurant workers. The agriculture and agri-food industry generates about $95 billion in domestic retail and food service sales annually. Grains and oilseeds are among our leading agricultural exports. In 1996, the value of Canada's agricultural food exports was a record $19.9 billion, with half of the exports going to the United States.

The prairies, the bread basket of Canada, have been particularly hard hit by the low prices. Grain producers, especially those in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, are affected—and let us not forget Ontario—as are cattle producers and the hog farmers who I mentioned earlier.

On a national level, farm income is expected to be down 20% from 1997. Farmers in Manitoba are expected to see their incomes drop by 40% compared to the five year average. In Saskatchewan incomes are expected to be almost 70% below the five year average. With problems expected to continue through 1999, the situation requires a short term targeted response, but also demands long term solutions. It is a national problem requiring a national response.

At the request of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, industry leaders and provincial and federal representatives met in Ottawa on November 4 to look at farm income forecasts and discuss options to address the income crisis.

The Government of Canada is very concerned about the farm financial situation and realizes the sense of urgency and importance. It is indeed very urgent and very important. This is why farm income is currently one of the priorities being considered by cabinet today. I thank the minister and his staff for keeping us apprised of the developments.

I know that the minister has had ongoing discussions with industry and provincial counterparts about the problems Canadian producers are facing. I am confident that this work will continue with all stakeholders to put solutions into place, hopefully very soon.

I hope the minister understands the importance of giving farmers some indication before Christmas, if at all possible, not on whether there will or will not be additional support for farmers, but what the particulars are of this much needed all farm disaster relief program.

When such a program is announced, I urge all of my colleagues in this House to ensure that it receives the support it deserves. I urge this government to hold out a hand to a deserving group in need in Canada, our farmers.

Violence Against Women November 27th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, violence against women is unacceptable any way, anytime and anywhere. In Canada one woman is killed every six and one half days by a gun. Four out of every five victims of spousal homicide are women.

These statistics confirm a fundamental abuse of power, an abhorrent violation of human rights. All too often violence against women goes unpunished. All too often it is tolerated in silence by its victims.

This government has sent a powerful message through gun control legislation, anti-stalking amendments, rape shield laws and other amendments to the Criminal Code. This is not enough. Canadians as a community must become motivated to break this cycle of violence.

I urge members of this House and Canadians everywhere to break the silence and eradicate violence against women now.

Canada must be a safer place for our wives, mothers, daughters and sisters; for women everywhere.

Canadian Farmers November 25th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, pork producers are being devastated by low prices. Hogs are selling for half the cost of producing them. Last Friday I met with over 70 hog farmers in my constituency office in Smithville. These are efficient, hardworking producers who know their business, but they have been caught in circumstances beyond their control.

Hog farmers recognize that their industry is cyclical and they prepare for the normal ups and downs, but the situation they find themselves in is not normal. Pork producers and other farmers who export their product are suffering from the fallout of the Asian economic crisis and its spinoffs. Canadian exporters have lost their markets and oversupply has depressed prices globally.

The farm income situation is urgent. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food has been working with farm leaders and his provincial counterparts to find a solution to the problem. I encourage him to create a national disaster program that will kick in when the safety net system proves insufficient.

The Canadian Justice System November 3rd, 1998

Mr. Speaker, federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for justice met for two days in Regina last week.

It comes as no surprise that public confidence in the justice system was the first item on the agenda. Even though crime rates across Canada may be dropping, fear of crime among Canadians has increased.

The message is clear. Canadians deserve a justice system that protects society, one that is administered efficiently and fairly.

Canadians deserve a system that is accountable, one that is more responsive to the needs of victims and communities.

Canadians deserve safer communities, ones that are free of crime and free of the fear of crime.

All ministers expressed their commitment to working together to establish a more effective and more equitable justice system in which Canadians can have confidence.

I think that effort deserves the support of this House.

Interparliamentary Delegations October 26th, 1998

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34, I have the pleasure of presenting, in both official languages, three reports of the Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group, namely the report of the third annual visit to Japan to meet with Diet members, business persons, community leaders and academics. The visit was held in Tokyo, Tohoku and Hokkaido from May 22 to June 2, 1998.

Second is the report of the ninth annual meeting between the Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group and the Japan-Canada Parliamentarian Friendship League held in Banff, Calgary, Edmonton and Fort McMurray from August 21 to August 28, 1998.

Third is the report of the executive committee meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum held in Lima, Peru, from September 6 to September 8, 1998.

Interparliamentary associations provide forums at which parliamentarians are ambassadors for their countries. Members of the Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group have been able to address and promote issues such as the anti-personnel landmines convention, cultural exchanges and trade matters.

We wish to thank all those who supported us in our work.