Julian Reed

[Remembrance Day, November 6th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, Remembrance Day is next week, and so we think of the heroes who have willingly put their lives on the line in order to protect the values of this great country of ours.

From World War I, World War II and Korea, through peacekeeping missions, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Afghanistan, our soldiers, sailors and air crew have exemplified the best of what is Canadian.

Every November 11, we remember and honour those who have served in the name of freedom by wearing a poppy, attending ceremonies and laying wreaths in the communities we are privileged to represent.

As we honour our veterans, let us also remember our soldiers who are currently serving in operations overseas, the risks they face, their families' hardships and their contribution to the well-being of Canada.

[The Environment, October 30th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, environmental assessment helps us make wise choices about the environment before projects are constructed.

This is why I am pleased that amendments to strengthen the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act take effect today.

The Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development diligently worked on this legislation to increase transparency and to close loopholes. These amendments will help safeguard our environment through a process that is more predictable, certain and timely. We will see the quality of assessments improve through measures to promote compliance and ensure better follow-up programs for projects.

By strengthening the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act the government is once again demonstrating its commitment to protect our fragile environment.

[Arts and Culture, October 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of talking with Wendy Crewson who last week received a well deserved Gemini Award for best actress in a TV movie. As she said, “Canadian drama is in a rough spot right now”.

Could the parliamentary secretary tell the House when we can expect more support for Canadian television and film?

[Housing, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, now for a change of pace.

With the impact of climate change, we know that reducing our greenhouse gas emissions is important, but what is more important for Canadians is how they can save money in the process.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources tell the House how Canadians can access the EnerGuide for Houses retrofit incentive?

[The Environment, October 9th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday I had the pleasure of attending a conference at Mount Royal College in Calgary on Canadian Energy Policy and the Challenges and Opportunities of Climate Change.

Some might say that I was a sacrificial lamb entering the lion's den, trying to talk to Albertans about the opportunities of implementing the Kyoto protocol.

I would like the House to know that was not the case. In fact Albertans are embracing the opportunities. One oil company calls itself “Beyond Petroleum”, while another has transformed from the oil to the energy business.

The oil industry sees opportunities in its future. From wind farms, to hydro power, from solar power to bio-fuels, the opportunities are popping up across this great land and Albertans are leading the way.

Please join me in thanking Mount Royal College and all the innovators in Alberta who are moving toward the future.

[Assisted Human Reproduction Act, October 6th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that Bill C-13 has engendered a lot of thoughtful debate in the House and a lot of careful consideration regardless on which side of the issue one ends up coming down on.

The bill has probably exposed some of the elements that could be improved. My colleague from Mississauga South has looked at it very closely and done a tremendous amount of work. He should be commended for his efforts.

The question of human cloning is one of the fundamental underlying concerns in the bill. His concern is that the bill does not ban all known forms of human cloning. That in itself presents something of a dilemma because as medicine progresses and the practice of medicine evolves over years and generations, what is unknown now will probably be known 20, 30 or 50 years hence.

I will repeat a story involving a fairly close relative of mine who was attending university in Toronto and was rooming with another young man. They were both studying medicine at the time. At that time two very prominent doctors were researching diabetes and how this scourge could be treated. One was Dr. Macleod and the other Dr. Banting.

My cousin and his friend were both looking for summer jobs. They decided that they would try and obtain work with these researchers. They flipped a coin and my cousin went to work with Dr. Macleod and Charlie Best went with Dr. Banting. At that time no one knew and no one had a breakthrough on how to deal with the scourge of diabetes. I am sure debate raged about what one should do and should not do in terms of research and in terms of developing the techniques that would look after that disease.

A part of Bill C-13 addresses not just human cloning, but the question of developing a fetus in the very early stages. In the process of human reproduction there are sometimes leftovers that are not used. The argument that has been put forward by researchers and so on is that it would be appropriate and practical to use these things in their research. The people who are opposed have taken the position that these are undeveloped human embryos and, therefore, should not be tampered with.

My colleague from Mississauga South has pointed out that the United Kingdom at one point destroyed about 40,000 human embryos without any positive research results. I am wondering, when we are considering the use of embryos, whether we should simply say that there are not enough of them that appear at any given time to do positive research on, or whether we should press ahead into the unknown. The other side of the argument has to do with the potential that stem cell research has to cure disease.

I very often think of my late mother who succumbed to Parkinson's disease. I wonder, if it was 15 or 20 years hence whether the stem cell research would not be able to provide something to arrest, cure or prevent the progress of Parkinson's disease. However the decisions are made, we should not close the door on any of these things.

I am totally opposed to human cloning. That is a given. I think virtually everyone in this chamber regardless of their party affiliation would share that point of view.

I ask that we proceed with great care on the bill so as not to inhibit medical advancement in the future. Let us look at the bill, let us look at its weaknesses and flaws. If the bill can be improved, it is our responsibility to improve it. Whatever we do, whatever conclusions we come to however, we should not inhibit human progress in this regard.

[The Environment, September 16th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, today is the International Day of the Ozone Layer. Canada was a principal architect of the 1987 Montreal protocol, which phased out substances that damage the earth's ozone layer. This year's theme, “Save Our Sky: There is a Hole Lot More to Do for Our Children”, emphasizes the need to remain vigilant about this important issue.

The Canadian government continues to work in cooperation with other countries to research the state of the ozone layer and fulfill our international obligations to protect the global commons.

Preservation of the earth's ozone layer continues to be equally as important today as it was 16 years ago. We have had much success thanks to the efforts of Canadian citizens, scientists and corporations.

I ask all members to join me in promoting these efforts to Canadians, especially to students and young people.

[The Environment, June 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.

Why is the government taking a phased approach to implementing the Species at Risk Act? What are we doing in support of the stewardship provisions in that act?

[Juno Beach Centre, June 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, when the Juno Beach Centre opens this week, a bronze sculpture called “Remembrance and Renewal” will be the centrepiece of the courtyard leading into the centre.

It features five helmeted figures facing outward from a circle. Each figure represents a distinct emotion, such as leadership, vigour and alertness. Another looks sombre and reflective. A fourth figure advances while assisting a comrade.

It was sculpted by Colin Gibson and cast at Artcast Inc. foundry in Georgetown, in the riding I serve.

I would like to thank the sculptor and Artcast Inc. for their contribution to the Juno Beach Centre.

Above all, I would like to pay tribute to the veterans who stormed the beaches of the Normandy coast in 1944, for all the sacrifices they made.

We will remember them.

[Clean Air Day, June 4th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, as part of Environment Week, today we are celebrating Clean Air Day, a day for Canadians to applaud actions being taken to reduce air pollutants causing smog and climate change.

Since the first Clean Air Day in 1999, we have seen its profile increase significantly. Canadians are responding to the call to action through a wide variety of community events. One of these activities is the commuter challenge, where communities compete with each other to log the most kilometres using sustainable transportation, to reduce air pollution levels and greenhouse gas emissions. There is also the Clean Air Day sustainable transportation awareness campaign, delivered in 65 communities by the Canadian Urban Transit Association.

Clean Air Day is also a time to praise and encourage Canadians to take action all year round to reduce air pollution and the emissions that lead to climate change.