Alexa McDonough

[The Environment, November 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the prime minister.

Just hours before the Liberals called the spring election cabinet pulled another fast one on Canadians, approving $1.5 billion in financing and agreeing to circumvent an environmental assessment of a Candu reactor sale to Turkey.

In six years this reactor reported 1,100 nuclear incidents. Politically unstable, Turkey has a disturbing human rights record and it is an alarmingly high credit risk.

How does this sordid deal promote environmental safety abroad and Canada's good reputation in the world community?

[The Environment, November 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister, the heritage minister and the prime minister are all on public record in support of a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2005.

In fact, this promise was front and centre in the Liberal red book, page 70, right up there with the promise to scrap the GST.

When the government broke the GST promise, the member for Hamilton East was forced to resign. Who is going to resign over this broken promise?

[The Environment, November 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the prime minister. At a $350 a plate dinner last night the prime minister nixed carbon taxes as a way to reduce greenhouse gases.

Unfortunately dinner goers and Canadians alike still did not get their money's worth. We still do not know what positive position the government will put forward at Kyoto.

Economic and scientific experts agree that solid leadership on greenhouse gas emissions can be win-win for Canada economically and environmentally.

Why then will Canada not go to Kyoto prepared to provide leadership?

[Goods And Services Tax, November 3rd, 1997]

That is progress, Mr. Speaker.

The finance minister is considering RRSP changes that would primarily benefit those earning over $75,000. Yet it is middle and lower income Canadians who have borne the brunt of his cuts to health, education and other vital services.

Before introducing more tax cuts for the well off, will the minister get in sync with Canadians, remove the GST now on family essentials like children's clothing, school supplies and home heating fuel, and grant GST tax relief to those who need it most?

[Goods And Services Tax, November 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the finance minister. Last week Nova Scotia's premier visited the finance minister seeking relief for the BST burden on essentials like home heating fuel.

The federal government sent the Nova Scotia premier packing empty handed even though a GST reduction would create far more jobs than any other proposed tax break.

Why will the finance minister not agree to reduce the BST on family essentials like children's clothing, home heating fuel and school supplies and at the same time increase the GST tax credit?

[Trade, October 30th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of trade. In an attempt this afternoon to completely deflect from the question we were putting to the government on whether it would or would not support binding protection for labour and environment in the MAI, he suggested we conscript the social democratic countries in our fight in this regard.

Let me make it clear from the minutes of negotiations that the U.K. is leading, together with France and other European social democratic countries, in that fight.

Will the minister answer the question? Is Canada prepared to support binding protection—

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, October 30th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is precisely because trade and investment are so important that we need to get these rules right, and we need to get them right for Canada.

Last week in this House the trade minister assured us that he supports binding commitments on labour and environmental standards. Today we have learned that the current MAI draft contains no such safeguards.

Will the prime minister assure Canadians that this government will refuse to sign any multilateral agreement on investments that does not contain binding labour and environmental standards?

[Multilateral Agreement On Investment, October 30th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the prime minister.

Canadian NGO representatives, just returned from the OECD meetings in Paris, confirm that the draft text of the multilateral agreement on investment is all but a done deal.

This government tells Canadians that our health care, social programs, environmental and labour standards and our culture will be protected, but behind closed doors in Paris Canada's negotiators have completely failed to fight for such protection.

Can the prime minister confirm that this is why no progress on these essential protections has been made?

[Canada Pension Plan, October 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister gave assurances last night that the government conducted a gender impact analysis on the CPP changes.

Now that I have seen the study I can understand why the government was not particularly keen that it see the light of day. It is a narrow actuarial study. It completely fails to measure the real economic and social impact on women of the proposed CPP changes.

How does the study live up to the government's commitment made in Beijing to submit all government initiatives and legislative changes to comprehensive and detailed gender analysis?

[Canada Pension Plan, October 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Last night in committee the finance minister acknowledged that women are forced to depend disproportionately on benefits they receive from the Canada pension plan.

We know the CPP changes will affect survivors benefits, death benefits and reduce benefits overall by 10%.

Will the minister acknowledge that the cuts to CPP benefits disproportionately affect women? Does the government really believe it is legitimate to penalize women for the fact they live longer than men?