John Harvard

[Supply, October 9th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to say thank you to the new member who just spoke. He reminds me of his father. I was here when his father was here. In fact his father was here a good many years before I arrived in 1988. His father left his mark on this institution. He made an enormous contribution and I am sure that his son will do exactly the same thing.

I want to comment on a couple of things that he did say. In the period of the existence of Canada and going back to 1861, I suppose every political party has been tarnished and sullied by a financial scandal of one kind or another. It certainly does not bring honour to this institution and certainly does not bring honour to politicians. It concerns all Canadians. I think all of us are very concerned when we hear allegations of financial scandal, influence peddling and that kind of thing.

One of the things that concerns me about the debate that is taking place today is that I smell a bit of a witch hunt. I was in opposition once too and this kind of an issue lends itself to all kinds of serious questions as to where we are going and is the world coming to an end. Most of the questions are very responsible.

One of the things that we should keep in mind is that the RCMP as far as I know have not yet completed the investigation. As far as I know they were told back in the month of March and yes, that is a few months ago. I am not a policeman so I do not know how long it takes police agencies to investigate this kind of an issue.

However before we go off the deep end and make all kinds of assumptions, particularly that the government has wronged and wronged, why do we not just wait for the investigation? I can assure the hon. member who just spoke that if the RCMP find in their wisdom, and if it is confirmed by a court later that there was influence peddling, I will be as concerned as he is, and I should be. But why do we not wait until the RCMP investigation is finished? It seems to me that in itself will answer some of the questions. It may raise some other ones later on and we may have to shore up the system that we have.

I do not agree with the member from British Columbia who spoke a few minutes ago. I do not think the system is perfect, but I do not think it is as rotten as perhaps some other speakers have suggested. All I suggest is we just hold on to our hats and wait for some of these answers.

I know there can be a lot of impatience but let us wait for the answers. I am absolutely convinced, because I think I know the prime minister very well, that if this investigation leads to some serious allegations by the police and if someone is found guilty there will be things done to correct the system. No political party can tolerate this and certainly the voters in Canada cannot expect to tolerate this for a minute, if this kind of thing did indeed happen.

[Canadian Wheat Board Act, October 7th, 1997]

Madam Speaker, I understand that I have only a few seconds left. After all, I was given 10 minutes as everyone else was.

I look forward to this bill's moving on to committee and I am sure that it will be vetted and examined there very closely and we will have a vigorous debate.

[Canadian Wheat Board Act, October 7th, 1997]

Madam Speaker, first I would like to offer my apologies for a raspy, scratchy voice. I beg the indulgence of members of the House to hear me out this morning.

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate you on your appointment to the Chair. I am sure you will do a good job.

This being my first opportunity to give a speech in the House during this Parliament, I want to take the opportunity to say thanks to my constituents for returning me to the House of Commons for a third term. I thank them for placing their confidence in me once again.

One of the reasons I am happy to speak on Bill C-4 is because the Canadian Wheat Board's home is in my city, the city of Winnipeg. In fact many employees of the Canadian Wheat Board are constituents of mine who live in the riding of Charleswood—Assiniboine.

I would like to outline some of the changes which distinguish the new bill from its previous incarnation in the last Parliament, that is Bill C-72. I would also like to detail the proposed amendments that are aimed at both rejuvenating and modernizing the Canadian Wheat Board and putting control over its activities squarely in the hands of producers.

Throughout its 62-year history the board has been an agent of the crown answerable solely to the Government of Canada and governed by a small group of up to five commissioners. Bill C-4 provides for a big and immediate change in the way the board is governed. Under this proposed legislation a board of 15 directors of whom 10 would be directly elected by producers would govern the operation of the wheat board.

Therefore under the new bill the Canadian Wheat Board would become a mixed enterprise, and for the first time in its lengthy history it would become accountable in a very direct way to the producers it serves. This means that producers will have a larger and more direct voice in the way in which their marketing system operates. These changes are consistent with the majority recommendations put forth by the Western Grain Marketing Panel.

As many of the members of the House may recall, in 1995 an extensive consultative process was undertaken that involved literally tens of thousands of producers across western Canada. The goal of that process was to determine how best to revitalize and modernize the operations of the Canadian Wheat Board. It culminated in a set of recommendations made by the Western Grain Marketing Panel in July 1996.

While the debate among western farmers with respect to grain marketing is a sharply polarized one, it makes it all but impossible to arrive at one all-encompassing solution. The minister responsible for the wheat board has listened to the concerns of western farmers and has answered their calls for a more responsive, accountable and accessible wheat board.

The evidence is before the House today in the form of Bill C-4, an act to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. This legislation proposes major changes to the Canadian Wheat Board that will empower farmers as never before.

What has changed from Bill C-72? Although Bill C-4 resembles very closely Bill C-72, there are a few changes that differentiate it from its predecessor. Foremost among these is the elimination of the interim appointed board of directors provided for in Bill C-72. This was to be a transitional measure, however the government has responded to farmers who saw no need for this step.

Under Bill C-4 the Canadian Wheat Board would be governed by a board of directors with a majority of its members elected by farmers and accountable to them. I repeat elected to farmers and accountable to farmers. This board of directors should be in place by December 1998 at the very latest. Ideally it would be in place as soon as next spring. The draft bill no longer provides for an interim bill.

The second major change in Bill C-4 is the provision that allows for the inclusion or exclusion of grains under the Canadian Wheat Board's mandate. Similar to an amendment tabled by my colleague the hon. member for Malpeque during the last Parliament, this provides that such a change in the Canadian Wheat Board's mandate can only be triggered if certain conditions are met.

If producers wish to remove a type of grain from the mandate of the board, they will be able to do so subject to three conditions. First there must be a recommendation to do so from the board of directors. Second the Canadian Grain Commission must approve an identity preservation system to ensure quality standards remain intact. Remember Canada has a great reputation when it comes to our wheat and we want to maintain that. Third if the exclusion is viewed as significant by the board of directors, a vote among producers must be held.

Similarly if producers wish to add additional grains to the wheat board's mandate, this too could be possible subject to three specific conditions. First the farm organization representing the producers of that commodity must make a written request for the inclusion. Second the inclusion would have to be recommended by the wheat board's board of directors. Third producers themselves must vote in favour of the addition. That is pretty democratic in my estimation.

These new provisions are balanced and fair both ways for either exclusions or inclusions. In either case the decision making authority lies where it should be, directly with producers themselves. The clear goal is to put farmers in the driver's seat when it comes to any future changes in what grains the wheat board markets.

It should also be noted that when Bill C-72 was originally drafted, both the Financial Administration Act and the Canada Business Corporations Act were used as models for various provisions. Subsequently it was decided that it would be more appropriate if provisions in the CWB act relating to the duties of directors and officers were the same as those in the Canada Business Corporations Act which applies to private sector corporations. Accordingly, a few revisions have been made.

Hon. members opposite might wish to note that references to employees in provisions relating to the duty of care, duty to comply, limit of liability and indemnification have been deleted. These changes will result in employees of the Canadian wheat board being placed in the same position as employees of any corporation. To me that makes a lot of sense. If they are acting in good faith and within the scope of their employment, then they would have the same protection under common law as would employees of private corporations.

As for the directors and officers of the Canadian wheat board they will naturally be required to abide by the law. They will also have the duty to act honestly and in good faith, exercising all reasonable care, diligence and skill. If they fail in that duty they will expose themselves to legal liability.

In addition to the changes that I have mentioned, all of the amendments made to Bill C-72 in the last Parliament have been retained in Bill C-4. It reflects the essence of the Western Canadian Marketing Panel's recommendations on Canadian wheat board governance and operational flexibility and also establishes the criteria and general process for making changes to the wheat board's marketing mandate. These changes usher in a new era of accountability and flexibility within the Canadian Wheat Board, ensuring that it is well positioned to compete with in the global marketplace as the dawn of a new millennium approaches.

Canada has roughly a 20% share of the world market in grain. This is in no small way as a direct result of our having a single desk seller of wheat and barely that combines size, global reach and marketing clout to bring about the best possible returns from its world markets. Because of the not for profit nature of the Canadian Wheat Board the cost to farmers for the premiums commanded by the board amount to mere pennies per bushel. This is well worth reiterating.

[Supply, September 30th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome your appointment to the Chair. I am sure you will do fine work on behalf of all of us in the House.

I welcome the remarks of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. We all know that he is anything but a new member. He spent about 25 distinguished years in the House and I am delighted that the voters in Qu'Appelle have decided to send him back to the House. I think he has made an enormous contribution to the debate that is taking place. I look forward to more interventions from him.

Now that we have five official parties in the House, this Parliament will work better and all regions of Canada will be better represented in the 36th Parliament.

Let me say that I too welcome the debate on what the government is going to do with greater revenues as a result of a growing economy. I welcome the suggestions made by the member for Qu'Appelle. However let me say that I think Canadians are a balanced people, are pragmatic and believe in balanced approaches. This is the reason why the government and the Liberal Party said in the election campaign in May that we propose to spend half of any surplus or extra revenues on tax reduction and debt reduction and the other half on the development of social and economic programs. I believe that is a balanced approach and something that Canadians support.

I would like to hear the member for Qu'Appelle comment on that.

[John Cochrane, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the efforts of my constituent and friend, John Cochrane.

John recently travelled, as a Canadian volunteer adviser, to Russia to assist a private company that publishes a newspaper and produces stencilled colour printing. The company which requested Mr. Cochrane's assistance was seeking advice on creating a new product line and improving efficiency and profit. Mr. Cochrane developed a plan to increase subscriptions and attract additional advertisers as well as a new and more aggressive marketing strategy.

Mr. Cochrane, like many other CESO advisers who work as Canadian volunteer advisers to business and assist business and organizations in Canada's aboriginal communities, developing nations and emerging market economies in central and eastern Europe. CESO volunteers are skilled Canadian men and women who willingly share their lifetime of practical experience with those who need it.

Again I congratulate all CESO volunteers and especially my constituent, John Cochrane, on a job well done.

[Quebec Contingency Act (Referendum Conditions), April 23rd, 1997]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Brandon-Souris for his question. I understand his concern for our fellow Manitobans.

By all measures the flood waters that now threaten Manitobans are cause for great concern. While we cannot fully overcome the full force of Mother Nature, the local municipalities, the Government of Manitoba and the Government of Canada will endeavour to do everything within their powers to minimize the personal, social and economic dislocation that so often follow natural disasters of this magnitude.

Already the federal government, working with Manitoba's emergency measures organization, has in place a number of initiatives aimed at helping Manitobans prepare for the impending floods. As of today more than 300 Canadian forces members are actively participating in sandbagging operations in southern Manitoba. An additional 1,400 CF members have been committed and are moving into the area. Many more CF members are on standby and ready to deploy at a moment's notice.

A number of reservists from the Manitoba area are among those on standby, a wonderful example of how local support for the militia is often returned in kind to the community.

By Friday April 25, air command will have 10 helicopters in Winnipeg. Zodiac boats, heavy equipment and more personnel are being moved to the area as we speak. Resources such as these will prove to be vital in flood support operations such as evacuations and emergency situations.

At the request of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Manitoba's Liberal MPs, yesterday afternoon the Minister of National Defence toured by helicopter the area south of Winnipeg affected by flooding. The minister wanted to review the situation personally and ensure that all that can be done is being done to assist the Manitoba government and those people affected by this natural disaster.

The Canadian forces however represent but one dimension of the federal government's response to this potential disaster.

Human Resources Development Canada is arranging for expedited movement of pension and other such cheques.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is in close communication with First Nations communities, including Dauphin River, that could be isolated by flood waters.

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has compiled an inventory of emergency housing if evacuees need to be relocated.

Revenue Canada Customs has arranged to provide 24-hour service at other entry sites to expedite commercial truck traffic detoured from its usual port of entry.

The Canadian Wheat Board has been moving grain out of threatened areas with the assistance of the railways.

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans-Canadian Coast Guard in Manitoba has its fleet of small boats and equipment ready for use by municipalities if required. The coast guard has mobilized several large barges ready to transport livestock and other property if evacuation is necessary. Some cattle already have been evacuated in the St. Pierre-Joly area.

The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration has five fields ready for use as an emergency feedlot. Preparations are also being made to deal with an influx of animal carcasses in areas where evacuation of livestock may not have been completed.

No one can fully mitigate the devastating effects caused by flooding. If our worst fears are met, challenging times surely will come in the wake of rising flood waters.

While it is the human spirit which will ultimately ensure that the vitality of communities facing flood waters will remain intact, I can assure the citizens of Manitoba that the Government of Canada will do its part. Everyone from the Prime Minister on down is on alert and everything possible will be done to help my fellow Manitobans.

Finally, Manitoba is not facing its first nor likely its last natural disaster. The treatment of Manitobans by the Government of Canada however will be second to none.

[Broadcast Act, April 22nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Works and Government Services followed closely the work of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and welcomes its final report and recommendations on government contracting.

The minister was pleased to note that the report recognizes much progress has been made by the government to improve the contracting process. At the same time, this government is committed to taking further steps to enhance the openness and accessibility of the federal procurement process for all Canadian businesses.

We rely heavily on views expressed at the committee and on the committee's interim report while developing the request for proposals for the new electronic tendering system. This new system will be launched June 1, 1997. It is a joint federal-provincial initiative that will give Canadian firms cheaper, more user friendly, single window access to information on government business opportunities.

With regard to the matter of sole source contracting, the Department of Public Works and Government Services is sensitive to the concerns of the committee. However, there are cases when the government can turn to only one supplier. Reasons for this include: extreme urgency; exclusive rights, such as copyright and patent; the need for systems to be compatible; or the need to obtain replacement parts from the original manufacturer. The competitive approach is always preferred.

The Department of Public Works and Government Services has dramatically reduced its reliance on sole source contracting from 47 per cent of the value of contracts in 1992-93 to 26 per cent today. One of the ways we have achieved this is through the use of advanced contract award notices or ACANs. When the department publishes an ACAN on the open bidding service and in the "Government Business Opportunities" publication, any supplier that feels qualified to meet the requirement can challenge the sole source award. When the supplier is successful in demonstrating its capability, the requirement is completed.

To be clear, when the non-competitive approach is used, it must be for valid and compelling reasons. Otherwise the requirement is tendered competitively.

I hope that helps the hon. member.

[Canada Labour Code, April 15th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for providing this opportunity to further explain the approach and actions the federal government is employing to achieve further CO2 reductions.

First, with regard to approach the government is committed to working with provincial governments and major stakeholders to achieve these reductions.

The government is also committed to employing those policy instruments that can offer the lowest cost and most flexible methods of achieving further reductions. This includes energy efficiency regulations, voluntary initiatives, technological support, public education and tax changes to encourage investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Actions to date under the national action program on climate change have helped to lower projected emissions from 13 per cent to 8 per cent above 1990 levels by the year 2000.

With respect to specific actions the federal government announced 45 new or expanded initiatives in December 1996 to help lower emissions in most sectors in our society.

Among other initiatives there is a strengthened focus on renewable energy and an increased support for green power pilot projects to supply electricity to federal departments.

National climate change outreach initiatives seek to engage educators and different stakeholders to develop ways and means of better informing Canadians about climate change.

In the residential sector the federal government will work to adopt and apply the national energy code for houses to federally owned and leased houses, as well as to produce a home energy efficiency rating system for homebuilders, renovators and buyers.

There will also be an expansion of energy efficiency regulations to include a number of energy using products in the commercial, residential and industrial sectors.

Further, the federal government in co-operation with provincial governments and the private sector will be strengthening the voluntary challenge and registry program, VCR.

Meeting our country's commitment on schedule will not be easy. While we are achieving progress through improvements in energy efficiency and energy substitution, this progress is being offset by our increased population and strong economic growth.

In spite of these challenges I emphasize that Canada has been making progress on reductions. Moreover, the new and expanded initiatives promise further carbon dioxide reductions. We have the initiatives and momentum in place for further progress.

[Canada Labour Code, April 15th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond further to the question raised by my colleague regarding the important negotiations between the federal government and the provinces concerning housing.

The federal government has offered to the provinces and territories the opportunity to take over the management of the existing federal social housing resources, with the exception of housing in Indian reserves, provided federal subsidies continue to be used for housing and are targeted to low income households.

These negotiations are aimed at simplifying the administration of social housing by eliminating overlap and duplication and by providing clients one-stop shopping.

We have already signed agreements with some provinces, including Saskatchewan and New Brunswick, and will be signing with other provinces shortly. Negotiations are continuing with the remaining provinces and territories.

Let me assure my colleague that national principles and a rigorous accountability framework will govern the agreements and provinces and territories will have to agree and respect these agreements. The federal government is not withdrawing the financial support it provides to low income Canadians with housing needs. We will continue to meet our financial obligations related to the existing social housing portfolio which is currently about$1.9 billion a year.

[Criminal Code, April 8th, 1997]

Are you going to support the report?