Joe McGuire

[Petitions, May 31st, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I want to present two petitions on behalf of Prince Edward Islanders who live along rural mail routes and who support their rural mail route couriers.

Rural mail route couriers earn less than minimum wage and are not allowed to bargain collectively to improve their wages because section 13(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act prohibits rural couriers from having collective bargaining rights. Therefore the petitioners call upon parliament to repeal section 36(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act.

[Rimouski Oceanic Hockey Team, May 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Rimouski Oceanic of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League on winning the Memorial Cup played in Halifax last week. To win the Memorial Cup, emblematic of the best junior team in Canada, ranks as the achievement in junior hockey.

I am particularly proud of the Oceanic team members, not just because they won and were a great example of team play, skill and dedication, but also because the most valuable player of the tournament and one of his teammates both come from Prince Edward Island.

Brad Richards from Murray Harbour and Thatcher Bell from Gurnsey Cove played outstanding hockey and represented their league, their hometowns and province with enormous class and enthusiasm. Congratulations and good luck in their futures to Brad and Thatcher. Also to the Barrie Colts captain Sheldon Keefe who also hails from P.E.I., best of luck in his future.

Also, Maurice “The Rocket” Richard, my first hockey hero, rest in peace. You were a great man and a first class Canadian.

[Division No. 1279, May 3rd, 2000]

Madam Speaker, I move:

That Motion No. 2 be amended by deleting all of the words after the words “19.1 If an officer decides,” with the following:

“to exercise powers under subsection 18(1), the officer shall record in writing reasons for the decision”.

I also move:

That Motion No. 3 be amended by deleting the following words:

“, on grounds that the officer believes to be reasonable,”

[Supply, May 2nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I will respond briefly to the hon. member's question. She says that she is not an alarmist and that is good news. There are a lot of alarmists around the world who are upsetting people unnecessarily when it comes to their comments on foods derived from biotechnology.

That is why the government is striking these panels, striking these advisory boards, getting as much information as possible and going through rigorous testing to make sure that any new foods are subjected to rigorous regulation and investigation before we ever put them before the Canadian public as food.

[Supply, May 2nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker and hon. members, it is a pleasure to say a few words on this very important topic.

Canada has an enviable reputation around the world for the safety of its food and the rigour of its food inspection system, including foods derived through biotechnology. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Canada's food safety system is certainly one of the best in the world.

Regulation through sound science is an essential step in the continued safe production of biotechnology derived foods. The federal budget confirms this priority in Canada's regulatory system. The $90 million investment in the regulatory system for biotechnology products will allow Health Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, CFIA, and other regulatory departments to continue to enhance and involve its safety first regulatory approach to keep pace with the next generation of scientific discoveries.

There are a number of science based organizations within the Canadian government that rely on leading edge science to carry out regulatory and other science based mandates. One of these is the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

Budget 2000 targets regulation of biotechnology products as well as upgrading federal laboratory facilities. This funding includes approximately $30 million directly to the CFIA for biotech regulation. What is this funding for? This funding will help the CFIA to increase its capacity for monitoring, for inspection, for testing and for enforcement; to meet human resource and technical needs to ensure CFIA staff have up to date expertise; to generate research and knowledge that will underpin regulation; and to strengthen international co-operation and harmonization on regulations.

Canada's science based regulatory system for agricultural products has been a major factor in contributing to the reputation of the safety and the quality of Canadian goods around the world. In order to maintain that reputation the government is dedicated to upholding the regulations that protect the health and safety of Canadians, of animals and of the environment. This is the government's first priority and to achieve that we must have regulation through sound science.

I am pleased to say that the budget confirms the priority of health and safety for Canada's regulatory system. The government believes that biotechnology derived products must go through the same stringent regulatory and approval processes as all other new foods.

The budget 2000 investment in the regulatory system for biotechnology products will allow Canada to continue to enhance and evolve the safety first regulatory approach. The continued dedication to supporting this regulatory system will mean the continued reputation of the safety of Canada's food supply.

Canada is committed to protecting human health, animal health and the environment. Our regulatory system is dedicated to maintaining the highest scientific standards. We continually strive to ensure that scientific advice is broadly based and that our assessments will keep pace with new scientific discoveries.

This commitment is reflected in the establishment of two important groups. An expert panel and an advisory committee have been set up at the request of the government. The Royal Society of Canada at the request of the government has appointed an expert panel to examine future scientific developments in food biotechnology and to provide advice to the federal government accordingly. This proactive, forward thinking body will advise Health Canada, the CFIA and Environment Canada on the science capacity the federal government will need to maintain the safety of our new foods derived through biotechnology into the 21st century.

In examining the leading edge of this technology, the panel will identify the possibility of new or different issues related to the safety of products of food biotechnology. It will suggest what new research, policies and regulatory capacity if any may be needed by the federal government to keep our standards of safety as high for the next generation of biotechnology derived foods as for what we have for the products approved today.

The Royal Society's panel consists of people who have widely recognized expertise in specific areas of knowledge. The panel is carefully balanced with respect to the various points of view on biotechnology issues.

Royal Society panels operate entirely independently of the agencies which request their reports, in this case the government. They also operate independent of the Royal Society itself. In short, Canadians can be assured that the Royal Society's expert panel will be balanced, fair and completely impartial.

There are a number of challenges and opportunities associated with biotechnology that require detailed consideration and public discussion. Food biotechnology presents Canadians with unprecedented challenges but also unprecedented opportunities.

The recently formed Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, CBAC, will bring stakeholders and interested parties together to advise the government, to raise public awareness and to engage Canadians in an open and transparent dialogue on biotechnology issues. The CBAC will deal with tasks such as the issues surrounding regulation and stewardship of emerging applications of biotechnology with public education about biotechnology and the social, economic, environmental, legal and ethical issues related to food biotechnology. It will monitor scientific developments that underpin new developments in the field of biotechnology and the application of these new developments.

Canadians want to take part in the dialogue on food biotechnology. The CBAC will actively create opportunities for Canadians to participate in its activities and discussions. This will include an interactive website for interested Canadians to review, consult and provide input into the issue.

When this work is completed and the CBAC has also received the work of the Royal Society's expert panel, the CBAC will create an overarching report with recommendations to the government that will be informed by the work of the panel. The work of the Royal Society's expert panel and the CBAC will contribute to a balanced and consultative process where all concerns can be thoroughly considered. The government looks forward to the contributions that the expert panel and the CBAC will make to further the dialogue on biotechnology issues. This is an example of the government's commitment to the exchange of ideas and the issues surrounding biotechnology.

In addition to the expert panel and the CBAC, the scientists and specialists at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency as well as those at Health Canada all contribute to maintaining the safety of the food supply of Canada. They help to ensure that Canada's regulatory system remains science based, that the regulatory system is fair and transparent, and that Canada's food supply remains one of the safest in the world. That is money and effort well allocated and well spent.

[Petitions, April 13th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 many petitioners from the province of Ontario state that since Canada has the second highest incidence rate of breast cancer in the world, they call upon parliament to enact legislation to establish an independent governing body to develop, implement and enforce uniform mandatory mammography quality assurance and quality control standards in Canada.

[Human Resources Development, April 13th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 109, I have the honour to table in both official languages the government's response to the first report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on the Human Resources Development Canada accountability for shared social programs.

[Air Canada, April 6th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the monopoly that exists in airline travel in eastern Canada has resulted in Air Canada becoming an arrogant, overbearing, corporate bully with little or no understanding of customer service or regional needs.

What used to be a one and one-half hour flight from Charlottetown to Ottawa when I was first elected in 1988 can now be an overnight trip. A flat tire in Halifax at 4.30 in the afternoon can mean an overnight stay in Montreal because Air Canada dropped its connection to Ottawa. Flights are cancelled without warning and customers are expected to be happy.

I used to feel slighted as a customer if all I got was a sandwich or a bag of nuts to eat on a suppertime flight, but now I am more than happy if I can get a seat.

A good transportation system is vital to a region's economy. It is inevitable that the economic advances made by P.E.I. over the past 10 years in tourism and business diversification will be undone by the present airline monopoly which occurred after the bankruptcy of Canadian Airlines and the reduction of Air Canada seats when it took over Canadian's assets.

We need to regulate this company or, even better, we need competition in eastern Canada in the airline industry.

[Division No. 1263, April 4th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Brandon—Souris for his St. Patrick's Day question and for his interest in our policy convention.

He did not want me to mention the platform of his party in the previous election so I will not belabour him in that regard, but I am glad he is watching what we are doing in our policy conventions. I hope his party adopts some of our programs.

The Government of Canada is willing to consider various options for farm safety nets. The national safety nets advisory committee has been asked to look at a variety of proposals submitted to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food over the past few months.

A few of these proposals share some similarities to the former GRIP program. All of these proposals will be reviewed by the committee and will be measured against criteria the committee has established for an income disaster program. The criteria it has established is split between essential and preferred criteria.

The first element is that any new disaster program be whole farm, that is, applicable to all farm production. As well, the committee is looking for proposals which will complement current safety net programs. As safety net programs are cost shared with provincial governments, any new programs must also meet their key principle, which is that safety net programs are equitable, fair and generally available, and that these programs do not put producers at risk for trade actions or countervail threats. All of the programs which have been submitted, including those based on the former GRIP program, will be measured against this criteria.

The national safety nets advisory committee will prepare a report for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food after it has met with the organizations or individuals who submitted each proposal.

[Petitions, March 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to present a petition under Standing Order 36 signed by many citizens from the Summerside, Kensington and Miscouche areas.

They pray that parliament take all measures necessary to ensure that possession of child pornography remains a serious criminal offence and that federal police forces be directed to give priority to enforcing this law for the protection of children.