David Anderson

[Points Of Order, December 13th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The practice of the Reform Party is to filibuster the Nisga'a treaty as it has been doing consistently throughout these debates. It is nevertheless the time of the hon. member of the Conservative Party for South Shore.

The hon. member has been told to be brief. He was told that he was out of order, but he is still persevering. Why is he allowed to take the time—

[Fisheries, December 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member clearly is unaware that with the surprising decision of the Marshall case where there is indeed a need to accommodate a large number of people who previously were not taking part in the lobster fishery, adjustments will have to be made along the line. We cannot simply say that we can change that and leave everything else the same. Clearly under those circumstances there would not be enough of the resource for the fishermen involved. Alternatively, we would simply run the resource into extinction which would be the worst possible thing we could do.

[Fisheries, December 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the issue of licences for lobster fishermen in the area in question is a tricky one. These licences are worth a great deal of income and money. We are attempting to work out a system whereby fairness prevails. Inevitably in such a system we want to have a full discussion with the lobster fishermen themselves. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and I believe that this process is working effectively. However, we have to accept that in a situation such as this, we cannot satisfy every player.

[The Environment, December 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, although he comes from Alberta, the hon. member should know that in the oceans there is the possibility of allowing the natural effect of heavily oxygenated sea water to treat sewage. Within 1.4 metres of the outfall pipe there is no toxicity and within 400 metres there is no visible sign whatsoever.

We have to recognize that if the member's party wants to spend an extra $400 to $600 million in one Canadian city for something that has no environmental advantage, go ahead and propose it. We see nothing in this House but increased expenditure by the opposition and no suggestion that we should do things intelligently.

[Child Poverty, November 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member fails to point out that the unemployment rate for adult women is at its lowest rate in 25 years. It is now at 5.8%. Since we were elected in 1993 there have been more than 800,000 jobs created for women.

Women's employment has grown faster than men's in each of the last four decades. In fact, we have had the highest growth of any of the G-7 nations in the last 20 years.

I point out to the hon. member that we are trying to deal with the causes of child poverty, the causes of women in disadvantaged conditions by making—

[Poverty, November 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, may I point out to the hon. member and to all members of the House that the fundamental way to get children out of poverty is, of course, to get families out of poverty.

The way to do that is to make sure this economy works effectively, which this government year after year has been doing under the leadership of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance.

It is by correcting the economy's fundamentals so that they work that we reduce poverty and, therefore, do not have to adopt band-aid solutions to the problem, which has been recommended so often by New Democrats and the Bloc.

[Trade, November 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am interested to see that the Reform Party has adopted the position of the NDP Government of British Columbia and Glen Clark's policies.

The way to protect water exports is to make sure that there are not inter-water basin transfers of water. If we try simply to protect water exports at the border, we wind up with the problem of this becoming an item of trade and, therefore, the decision on it will be made by an international panel of trade experts, not by Canadians.

I believe, and the government believes, that decisions on Canadian water should be made by Canadians and not by foreigners.

[The Environment, November 23rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, there was progress in Bonn.

There was substantial progress on the mechanisms whereby developed and developing countries can collaborate to achieve some of the Kyoto agreements.

There was substantial progress with respect to the enhancement of the capacity of developing countries to achieve Kyoto.

There was a clear indication from the developed countries that they are taking serious measures to achieve Kyoto which only illustrates the importance of the Prime Minister's decision that Canada also takes this matter very seriously.

[The Environment, November 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I will respond to the preamble with the comment that there is an investigation into this to determine whether there is any conflict of interest. That is exactly what the ethics counsellor is now doing.

There is only a claim and a charge that there is some potential for conflict of interest. It is being looked into appropriately by the official who has this task. If he determines there is enough information prima facie to launch a more formal inquiry he will do so. But at this point it appears there is not even enough to launch an inquiry under the code of conduct for lobbyists.

[The Environment, November 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the answer I gave to the hon. member a few days ago is correct. There is at the present time no reason to remove Mr. Mulder.

There is, however, an investigation taking place by the ethics commissioner to determine whether, prima facie, there is enough information to start a formal inquiry under the lobbyist code of conduct.

The situation has not changed since I replied to my hon. friend two days ago. The situation is that the ethics counsellor is looking into this and in due course we will get his report.