House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Bulk Water Exports May 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, were that the case, it would certainly undermine the authority of the province of Quebec to take decisions with respect to water within its jurisdiction, which it is entitled to do by the constitution, but fortunately it is not the case.
Bulk Water Exports May 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned a moment ago, on the issue of bulk water exports there is need for co-operation between all jurisdictions in Canada. Certainly we respect and we applaud the decision taken by the province of Quebec with respect to water within its jurisdiction. As I indicated, the federal government's position is clear. We do not approve of transfers from one water basin to another.
Bulk Water Exports May 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I would always hesitate to enter into discussion with a minister of religion on the creation of oceans or any other part of the biosphere.
Nevertheless, I will take his suggestion of a briefing with provincial premiers and provincial ministers of the environment as notice.
Bulk Water Exports May 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. The government's position remains clear. We oppose bulk water removals. This is an environmentally sound strategy. It respects provincial jurisdiction and is trade consistent.
There is concern across the country but, as the Prime Minister correctly pointed out, there are constitutional complications and we do need provincial support to make this the most effective ban possible.
Government Of Canada May 11th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member served on a municipal council for some years before her election. This patronizing approach that we know best here in Ottawa about everything across the country and in every municipality is wrong. It is wrong headed. We do not agree with that.
We think we should provide a national program which assists municipalities in every part of the country to choose their own priorities. She does not believe they are capable of choosing priorities but we do. We think they understand local problems.
Government Of Canada May 11th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the hon. member appears unaware of a $2 billion federal contribution to the third infrastructure program, which will of course by matched by a provincial contribution of $2 billion and a municipal contribution of $2 billion.
Certainly there are many things that need to be done but we believe in allowing municipalities to choose their own priorities, unlike her leader who thinks they all should be top down. We think we should be bottom up from municipalities.
If there is a further need, the government, if indeed revenues are available, will undoubtedly consider how the program continues in the future.
The Environment May 11th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, once again I find it surprising that a member who has served in the provincial legislature of Nova Scotia should be so insultingly dismissive of the correct position taken by the people elected to Nova Scotia legislature.
The fact is that we will have the agreement of the parties based upon proper scientific information. She claims that we do not need proper scientific information. She claims we should proceed regardless of the experts. It is her privilege to ignore the province and the local people, but we expect to abide by the agreements we have made both with the province and the local people.
The Environment May 11th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question comes from the partial nature of the preamble she gave. It omitted a number of important facts.
As she should be well aware, we awaiting the report of the consultant on this very subject, which was expected this week and now is expected next week. As the premier of the province, as my hon. friend the Minister of Health and as local residents of the joint action group have made clear, we think it is important to wait until we have the basis upon which we should move rather than moving prior to receiving the information.
Infrastructure May 9th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure program is a joint program of municipalities, the provincial governments and the federal government.
We have a situation in Newfoundland where the province has decided to focus its attention under the infrastructure program on smaller communities. Certainly it wishes to deal with the issue of water, drinking water, and I think that is appropriate in light of some of the developments that have occurred recently.
That is the decision and the proper decision of the people of Newfoundland and not of the federal government.
Acid Rain May 7th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, in December I signed an agreement with my counterpart in the United States to reduce by 50% the emissions related to ozone impacted pollution at low level. This will have a dramatic impact upon acid rain emissions in exactly the area and from the sources the hon. member has outlined.
I do not understand why he does not pay attention to the ongoing process with our partners in the provinces and of course in the United States to reduce emissions because the problem, as he has correctly pointed out, is very serious.