John Manley

[Ubi Soft Entertainment, March 10th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may or may not be aware of the fact that there have been discussions between FORD-Q, Human Resources Development Canada and Quebec government officials regarding UBI SOFT.

Before getting involved in this project, we must determine whether it is worthwhile and whether the jobs that will be created are long term jobs and justify the request submitted to both governments. I think that even the Government of Quebec would want to know that much.

[Questions On The Order Paper, March 3rd, 1997]

The estimated cost of administering the Investment Canada Act in fiscal year 1996/97 is $788,000.

The Investment Canada Act came into force on June 30, 1985. Since that time, no investment proposal submitted under the act has been disallowed.

[Interprovincial Trade, March 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the issue to which the member refers is the announcement by the province of British Columbia that it will not proceed with

negotiations to extend the application of the internal trade agreement to municipal governments as well as schools, hospitals and administrative agencies of its government.

As was agreed in 1994 when the federal government and the provinces signed the internal trade agreement, it was foreseen that we would complete negotiations to extend that chapter within a year. The third anniversary is now approaching.

This decision is regrettable from the point of view of the benefits that could be enjoyed by British Columbia taxpayers if procurement were opened to firms from other parts of Canada. It is also regrettable because other provinces may choose not to extend the benefits of the agreement to firms based in British Columbia.

It is my hope that the Government of British Columbia, which entered into this agreement in good faith and negotiated by the current premier of the province, will reconsider its position.

[The Budget, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the hon. member is quite wrong. Apparently she cannot read. Perhaps she should go back to the red book. She would see that our commitment was to invest $1 billion in science and technology during our mandate. By creating the Foundation for Innovation we have already invested $800 million.

We also created Technology Partnerships Canada, whose budget, starting next year, will be $250 million annually, and this is stable funding.

Today we announced the renewal of the national network of centres of excellence as a permanent program with $47 million in funding. We announced other investments in the budget.

[The Budget, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the position taken today by the hon. member for the Bloc Quebecois is a rather interesting one.

I can quote some comments by Denis Gagnon, vice rector of Laval University. He said: "I think it was very good news yesterday for universities and teaching hospitals that do research. Excellent news at last that we may be entitled to assistance in developing our research infrastructures".

He also said: "The federal government is involved, but it is looking for what it calls a partner in any commitment it will make, and it will be up to us to work with these partners".

David Johnston, former head of McGill university said: "We can establish-"

[Prescription Drugs, February 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I hope the hon. member listens closely because he evidently has been misled by somebody.

He will know that since the time he has referred to, Canada has entered into, among others, the World Trade Organization agreement which resulted from the Uruguay round negotiations. One commitment of that agreement is article 33 of the TRIPS agreement which was signed subsequent to that: "The term of protection available shall not end before the expiration of a period of 20 years counted from the filing date".

I understand why Bill C-91 was very controversial. I was here during those debates. I also understand how important it is for Canada to participate in international trade organizations such as the World Trade Organization, particularly when so much of our economy benefits from export access to many countries.

I urge the hon. member to make significant and important contributions to the work of the industry committee that is reviewing Bill C-91, but to understand the context in which that review is being conducted.

[Small Business, February 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard from small business people from across Canada that they are concerned about the extent and number of surveys they have been receiving.

We have asked Statistics Canada and it has agreed to work with small business people to choose the best time of year for them to complete survey information. Small business owners know how important it is, not just to the federal government but to provincial and local governments as well, that Statistics Canada has adequate information so it can provide a basis upon which policy decisions can be made.

StatsCan has moved in the last two years to reduce the burden it imposes on small business by over 15 per cent.

[Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 14th, 1997]

moved that Bill C-81, an act to implement the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement and related agreements, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Telecommunications, February 14th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the member is confusing the government's responsibility with that of the CRTC.

I would point out that the basic issue here is that we have put in place a system of competition that has already resulted in a substantial reduction in long distance rates, thus benefiting all SMBs. This system has made it possible to set up competitive services not just for Canadian businesses, but also with respect to American businesses. Here in Canada, we will receive modern and different services, and prices will be-

[Telecommunications, February 14th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the member knows that the CRTC is in the process of examining issues related to the affordability of telephone services.

I think this is a very important question. One of the objectives of our information highway policy was that all Canadians should have affordable access to telephone services. But I think the member also knows that some very important changes are taking place in the telecommunications sector. There are new services, using advanced technology, and all Canadians would like to receive them.