David Anderson

[The Environment, September 22nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, that is very kind of you and I would like to reply. I did not know that when I rise to speak I have such remarkable support outside the building. To finish the response, on May 2 of this year I responded to the proposal that was put forward by the proponent of this particular energy facility.

I point out to the member that we have consistently opposed the aspects of this plan which would increase pollution in the Fraser Valley. I urge him to join with me and with other members so that we can have a Canadian approach rather than have the Americans proposing something and him and his colleagues—

[The Environment, September 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a bit behind the times. In fact, on May 2 we presented to the Washington state site evaluation committee the analysis of the proposal of the Sumas II power plant. At the time we listed deficiencies. We are waiting, as I understand it at the present time, to get the full response. In that period we have also done a joint study with the province of British Columbian and the GVRD, the greater Vancouver regional district, on air quality.

The hon. member has to remember that the major threat to air quality in the Fraser Valley is in fact automobile emissions. He must also remember that the provincial government in the same proposal along with Sumas permitted two other power plants—

[Species At Risk Act, September 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to assure the hon. member that the recommendations of the committee and the presentations before the committee will be looked at very carefully by the government.

Obviously the bill is at second reading and until it leaves the House the committee cannot start its work. When it does and the witnesses are heard and the committee comes forward with carefully considered suggestions for the government, we will look at those with great care.

[The Environment, June 15th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the tragic events at Walkerton should not be used for crass political advantage.

The member knows that the federal Department of Health, in conjunction with the ministries of health in the provinces and the territories, sets the standard for various substances in water. For E. coli it is zero parts per million.

He also knows that the system of distribution of drinking water in the province of Ontario is essentially the responsibility of the municipalities, supervised by the provincial government. If he wants to have a system where all three levels of government get in one another's way allowing the—

[Criminal Code, June 14th, 2000]

moved that Bill C-18, an act to amend the Criminal Code (impaired driving causing death and other matters), be read the third time and passed.

[The Environment, June 14th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, when I met with my American and Mexican counterparts, we agreed to focus our efforts on the specific problems of respiratory problems of children, asthma, other respiratory diseases, and the effects of toxic substances. This is also part of our domestic policy.

The member will recollect that recently we tightened controls on sulphur and gasoline. We are reducing the level of sulphur in diesel from 500 parts per million down to indeed 15.

I will be discussing a specific side agreement with the United States. In fact, discussions are on today on the ozone agreement with the United States. In addition—

[Fisheries, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the government wants to treat all bands equally. That is why we are trying to get agreements with all bands.

I am happy to report to the House that as of May 30, 18 agreements have been signed with first nations. The government has five more agreements in principle with other first nations and we hope that there will be signatures soon. I believe there has been good progress in the negotiations. I am certainly hopeful that there will be agreement overall in due course.

[Fisheries, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the issue of the purchase of boats and turning boats over to people who are new entrants in the fishery obviously has some aspects which are of concern. We are watching the problem closely. We want to make sure that the boats that will be used will be used for licensed activity, not illegal activity. I can assure the hon. gentleman that this issue is a matter which has the close attention of the department.

[The Environment, June 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to give yet another lesson to the Conservative Party, but as I must, it is in fact the Minister of Finance who handles taxes and not the Minister of the Environment. Perhaps this is lost on them.

Nevertheless, we are reducing the sulphur content of gasoline from the average of 360 parts per million to 30 parts per million. I applaud Irving Oil for taking steps in advance of the regulations coming into force.

That is the way we could work with progressive companies and the way we could indeed improve the health of Canadians. I would add that 15 parts per million is the figure—

[The Environment, June 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, part II of the act to which the hon. member refers is an area on which we are working with the provinces. The large part of the actual subject area falls under provincial jurisdiction.

We have to recognize that there are provinces that have jurisdiction established by the constitution and we respect that constitution.

I would ask him why it is that in an area on which we are working with the provinces, that is, on the accord and on the transfer of water from one water basin to another, all three NDP provinces have failed to come on board with the other nine jurisdictions.