House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 67% of the vote.
Health June 12th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
Recent American research shows that dioxins, which are cancer causing substances, are more dangerous to health than originally believed. In Canada safe dioxin exposure levels for humans have been under review for over a year.
Can the minister tell the House when he will inform the public of Health Canada's revised dioxin safety levels?
Yukon Quartz Mining Act June 4th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the question for discussion tonight is when will Canada ratify the law of the sea convention. The convention is designed to protect the world's fisheries, stop the pollution of oceans and advance the idea that ocean resources belong to humanity and all of humanity is entitled to share in their benefit and use.
In the late seventies and early eighties, Canada was a leader in preparing this convention and among the first to sign it. To come into effect, the law of the sea convention needs to be signed and ratified by 60 countries. This was accomplished on November 16, 1994. In total 92 states have ratified the convention. China has recently stated its intention to ratify and Spain is expected to do the same by the end of June.
In Canada the speech from the throne restated the government's intent to ratify the law of the sea, but this has yet to occur despite a commitment in the red book, despite a recommendation in the 1994 report of the special joint committee of the House of Commons and the Senate reviewing Canadian foreign policy, and despite two commitments in the House by the former minister of foreign affairs. Twice the former minister said ratification by Canada was imminent.
On April 29 of this year the present minister linked the ratification of the law of the sea convention to the importance of ratifying another convention, the convention on straddling stocks, which also deals with the protection of fisheries and oceans. However, there seems to be a reluctance within government to understand that ratifying the law of the sea is a necessary first step in protecting Canada's fisheries and oceans. Once the law of the sea is ratified Canada will gain the necessary credibility to help ensure the straddling stocks convention is ratified by a sufficient number of states so as to be brought into force.
The lack of understanding does not seem to rest with the Department of Foreign Affairs. It seems to rest with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for some strange reason. In other words, there seems to be an impasse between these two departments which is damaging and embarrassing to Canada abroad.
Tonight I ask the parliamentary secretary to the minister when this impasse will be broken. Surely now that 92 nations have ratified the law of the sea, including Australia and France, Canada should act. Ratification is long overdue. Our absence from the international community is damaging. A red book and a throne speech promise has been made. What are we waiting for?
Yukon Quartz Mining Act June 4th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Yukon for making such an interesting presentation and for giving us a firsthand account of mining in her riding. It comes from someone who knows of what she speaks, whereas in my case I go into that magnificent area only every three or four years and gather impressions without being able to get into greater depths on some of the mining issues.
The member for Yukon indicated in her speech, if I understood her correctly, that the bill does not streamline the regulatory regime enough. I would be interested if she could briefly elaborate on what kind of regulatory regime she would like to see.
I would also like to ask her what, in her view, considering all the interested parties she described in her speech, would be a sustainable mining policy for her region. Does she think that the Whitehorse declaration is adequate as a document? If I remember correctly, it was announced a couple of years ago. Is it being implemented or has it remained a declaration on paper? Does she see evidence that the document has become part of the mining activities in that area?
I was glad to hear the member refer to the fact that there are some reservations on the part of certain organizations. She referred to the Yukon Conservation Society which apparently has withdrawn its support.
To conclude, I recall some of the mines in northern British Columbia on the border of Yukon where the mining tails are left in a very undesirable condition. The landscape, the condition of the soil and the surface are left in a degraded state. It makes one wonder if the mining community takes no responsibility for taking care of the surface and the water conditions after a mine closes.
I am sure the member for Yukon has experience in matters related to mining closures. I would be very grateful if she would give us her views on these aspects which relate to her region.
Human Rights June 3rd, 1996
Mr. Speaker, last year the Nigerian government executed Nobel Prize winning poet and activist, Ken Saro Wiwi.
At a recent meeting in Vancouver the interaction council of former heads of government rebuked the democratic world for ignoring serious human rights abuses in Nigeria and is pressing governments and the UN Secretary-General to freeze Nigerian bank accounts overseas, end air travel to and from the country and deny visas to Nigerians until basic democratic and human rights are restored.
I urge the Government of Canada to apply the sanctions suggested by the interaction council and call on Shell Canada to espouse Canadian values by ensuring the reinstatement of free speech, democracy and human rights in Nigeria.
Mining Industry May 15th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian mining industry consists of very dedicated people.
Each day however this industry generates approximately one million tonnes of waste rock and 950,000 tonnes of tailings; some 650 million tonnes of waste per year. We have approximately 6,000 abandoned tailing sites and over 10,000 abandoned mines resulting in clean-up costs conservatively estimated at $6 billion, costs which will likely be borne by taxpayers.
A sustainable mining industry would ensure that the price paid for its products includes the costs of repairing damage to the environment. To further the implementation of sustainable development the government could ensure the efficient use of minerals and metals through the removal of tax barriers favouring the use of virgin material over recycled material.
Criminal Code May 14th, 1996
Yes, it was a free vote.
In Canada we can confidently look at statistics as they are and we can confidently look at the reality which surrounds us in everyday life. I would like to make two brief points because of the time limitation.
Contrary to what the previous speaker said, statistics are a reality that cannot be denied. Statistics are there for guidance. If the statistics are not liked by certain members of the Reform Party, that is too bad. Statistics demonstrate not only in Canada but also in the United States that the murder rate and crime rates are down. That may not be good news politically for the ambassadors of bad news, but nevertheless that is a fact.
There is proof on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean that capital punishment is not a deterrent. This evidently has some difficulty penetrating into the consciousness of some Reform members. It is not a deterrent and it has been proven in jurisdiction after jurisdiction. There is one just south of us which can demonstrate at any time on any day that capital punishment does not deter crime. That has been established over the last 60 years in a number of nations so much that progress on this matter has been achieved exactly as a result of these findings in recent decades.
For the state to have capital punishment is tantamount to giving a bad example. We want society to behave in a positive manner with respect to life. We want the state to promote that concept. We want the state to do whatever is in its power, on behalf of the population, to ensure life is protected.
If that premise holds, as most of us believe, then we cannot have the state commit murder. We cannot have the state using violence on people. We cannot have the state adopting double standards. This is another point which is so difficult for some Reform members to understand and accept. The state has to give the right example. The state cannot use violence by snuffing out life.
This is an important watershed on this issue, in addition of course to other considerations, which we all well know, of misjudgments of people who were condemned and whose life was taken away and whose innocence was proven decades later. The records are full of those cases as well.
Apart from that aspect, it is well known, an established principle, that if the state is to give the example that the population must follow, the state cannot be seen as being the one that commits the action of taking away the life of an individual. Some criminologists have claimed in their findings that imprisonment for life is a very serious and heavy punishment for any human being, the removal of liberty, freedom and being able to enjoy the things in life that a free individual can.
It is clear some Reform Party members have difficulty understanding the validity of statistics. They do not exist for them because they do not confirm their biases. That is too bad. Reform members have difficulty in understanding that capital punishment does not work as a deterrent. I invite them to visit countries where capital punishment still exists and see what they have achieved in terms of reducing the crime rate. It has not made one indent.
A concept which is perhaps too far reaching for the Reform members to grasp is that the state must give the example it wants the public to follow.
For all those reasons it seems this motion ought to be defeated. I am sure that if it ever comes to a vote it will be. We cannot turn the clock back 300 years. We have moved into an era in which we have developed values and appreciation and in which we have learned from past mistakes.
We crossed this threshold a few years ago after a very lengthy debate and a very close vote; by eight votes. However, it was done and Canada is committed to being a country in which the death penalty no longer exists. We want to make sure that for the next millennium this matter will never be considered seriously.
Criminal Code May 14th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to watch members of the Reform Party, the less civilized ones, trying to turn the clock back some 300 years. They do not seem to realize Parliament and Canada several years ago, by way of an historic vote, decided to eliminate once and for all the death penalty.
Child Labour May 7th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, tonight the topic for discussion is whether the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans will keep the 1993-94 budget levels for the Freshwater Institute in Winnipeg and the Canadian Centre for Inland Waters in Burlington. Both of these institutions are internationally renowned freshwater research institutes. They study and monitor the quality of Canada's lakes and rivers.
During the 1970s and 1980s policies were developed to control acid rain and to regulate the use of phosphates in detergents. Those policies were due, in good part, to the groundbreaking science developed at the Freshwater Institute.
Another achievement came recently when researchers at the Freshwater Institute proved that the banned insecticide toxaphene travels by air from as far away as Asia and Central America and contaminates some of our lakes.
These studies warn us and help us to understand the ecology of our country. They also tell us when toxins are entering our food chain. Thus we are able to monitor their effect on the long term health of Canadians and the environment.
Freshwater is the resource of the future. Unfortunately, we are cutting back on the research budgets at the Freshwater Institute and the Centre for Inland Waters. I am told that in 1993-94 the budget for freshwater science was $10.5 million and that this amount will be reduced by up to 70 per cent. This spells virtually the end of important work of many Canadian scientists at the Freshwater Institute and their leading research as well. The protection of our freshwater resources for the benefit of future generations requires continuous funding of research.
To conclude, tonight I ask the minister through his parliamentary secretary whether he will commit to maintaining the budget for freshwater science in Canada at the 1993-94 levels.
Child Labour May 7th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, in the two minutes which are remaining it is possible to say that the hon. member for Winnipeg Transcona has once again come forward with an excellent initiative.
We have all heard various viewpoints. It is an initiative which requires political will and the unanimous, full voice of Parliament. It is not one of those issues where we can say, "Yes, but-", with a long list of qualifications which would have to be met before action is taken. It is one of those issues on which a political decision is made by way of the unanimous consent of the House, which would send a political signal to the government.
The hon. member for Red Deer elaborated at length on all the qualifications which would be required for him to support the motion. Every i would have to be dotted, every t would have to be crossed. The hon. member for Winnipeg Transcona met most of the items which were mentioned in the intervention of the hon. member for Red Deer.
The matter before us has moved and touched the Canadian people profoundly as a result of what they saw on television a few months ago.
Obviously, parallel initiatives will have to be taken. However, first and foremost the international community must send a strong signal, not simply in Geneva at the ILO, but also in this and other Parliaments, to let the world know what we think of child labour and the remedial action that must be taken. In that respect I am sure that most members of the House would fully support the hon. member for Winnipeg Transcona.
Health May 7th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.
Can the minister assure the House that he has sufficient regulatory and enforcement powers and means to prevent the use of the remains of infected livestock in feed for other livestock so as to protect the health and safety of Canadians?