Karen Kraft Sloan

[Finance, December 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, last year I rose in the House to speak in a similar debate. At that time I raised concerns regarding the social deficit in this country, in particular the issue of child poverty, and urged the finance minister to do something for Canadian children in need.

I am a member of the Liberal Party child poverty committee. Last year this group of Liberal members spoke to the finance minister a number of times and also had an opportunity to meet with the Prime Minister and other members of cabinet. We asked for an increase in the working income supplement.

As a group of House of Commons backbenchers and one Liberal Senator, the child poverty group worked very hard and in the end our efforts were rewarded. The cabinet, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance listened and the Canadian children benefited.

In the 1996 budget the working income supplement was doubled for low income families. This change will increase assistance by $250 million a year to 700,000 Canadian families.

These are not easy times in which to govern. We must recognize the challenges facing the Minister of Finance and applaud his efforts to stabilize the Canadian economy. He has taken strong measures to correct the previous government's mismanagement of the public finances. As a result the confidence of the people in the national government has increased. We have exceeded our deficit reduction targets, interest rates are lower than they have been for 40 years and almost 700,000 new jobs have been created.

We are getting the economic fundamentals right to create an environment of opportunity for job creation. Tough decisions have been made to get our economic deficit under control and Canadians can take comfort in the fact that we are making prudent judgments in a balanced and compassionate way.

In light of calls by the Tories and the Reform Party advocating income tax cuts, it is imperative that we continue to stay the fiscal course. In fact, I conducted a recent poll in my riding and results to date show overwhelmingly that over three-quarters of the respondents do not favour the policies of the Tories and the Reform Party on income tax cuts. Until the debt and deficit are under control, income tax cuts are fiscally irresponsible and detrimental to the public good. One has to look no further than the extreme disparities between rich and poor that have resulted in Ontario from the tax cut imposed by the Progressive Conservatives under Premier Harris.

The finance minister has spoken about the plight of poor children many times in this Chamber. I know he will continue to establish initiatives that seek to better the lives of all children in Canada. We must continue to reduce the social deficit in this country.

Today I would like to address the third deficit we face, the ecological deficit. Increased awareness of the causes of environmental degradation and the impact on human health ensure a high national concern for environmental issues.

As human beings, we often forget that we are part of nature, that we are in nature and that nature is in us. We are, in some ways, disconnected to the natural world. In the words of Edward Wilson, biological wealth is the basis of our material and cultural wealth. Too many forget this inextricable link and place short term economic gain ahead of long term ecological disaster.

Thomas Berry, an ecotheologian says in his book The Dream of Earth , that the earth community is a wilderness community that will not be bargained with, nor will it simply be studied, or examined or made an object of any kind, nor will it be domesticated or trivialized, except when other living species are violated so extensively the human itself is imperilled.

He goes on to say that if the earth does grow inhospitable toward human presence, it is primarily because we have lost our sense of courtesy toward the earth and its inhabitants, our sense of gratitude,

our willingness to recognize the sacred character of habitat, our capacity for the numinous quality of the earthly reality.

We must remember to be grateful for the biological material that we use. We must remember to be courteous to the earth community as we use its products. We must be ever mindful of the effect of the disposal of waste materials back into the earth.

Paul Hawken, author of The Ecology of Commerce , states that we currently use 40 per cent of the world's biological production. In 40 years the earth's population will double. If there is no increase the rate of consumption, we will use 80 per cent of what is produced. Major ecosystem failure happens at 60 to 70 per cent.

We pump toxins into the water, the air, the soil. Some substances act as endocrine disrupters and affect the endocrine system, especially on developing human and non-human fetuses. Scientists have yet to determine a tolerable minimum threshold. It appears that the timing of exposure has more significance than the dose. As a result, endocrine disruptions play havoc with the reproductive and neurological systems of the developing fetus.

Some forms of endocrine disruptions, like PCB molecules, are persistent and can travel with the wind currents to pristine, isolated Arctic areas where they biomagnify as they make their way up the food chain. Once absorbed in the flesh of higher order animals and mammals, they bioaccumulate. PCB ratings in the milk of Inuit mothers is significantly higher than mothers who live in the south.

I am pleased to say that we have met, and in some cases exceeded, our ozone depletion goals. However, we must work harder to achieve our climate change commitments.

Environmental problems are complex and multifaceted. They require the support of many inside and outside of government. It is not only the Minister of the Environment that should champion the environment. The Minister of Finance can also support the cause of a healthier environment. This starts by greening the budget.

I would like to congratulate the Minister of Finance on the steps he took in the last budget to begin this process. Changes were made to the Income Tax Act that allow for tax incentives for donations of ecologically sensitive land. This is an excellent model for encouraging conservation. As well, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Natural Resources are looking at removing fiscal barriers to energy efficiency investments.

These are examples of a good start. I commend the Minister of Finance on these initiatives. We must work hard to continue to find ways to reduce our ecological deficit. Above all, we must remember to show courtesy and gratitude for the biological wealth that the earth community provides us, for this biological wealth is the basis of all our other wealth.

[Hazardous Materials, December 4th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his concern and for his question. He has been a very active member on the environment committee.

The original proposal for the endangered species legislation covered only 4 per cent of Canada's land mass. The new legislation, Bill C-65, extends this 4 per cent coverage to 60 per cent. While the legislation does not extend the coverage to 100 per cent,

from sea to sea to sea, it is important to note that the legislation is part of a larger framework.

In October 1996 the federal Minister of the Environment and the provincial ministers responsible for wildlife protection agreed in principle to a national accord to protect species at risk. Under this accord the provinces and territories are co-operating with the federal government to ensure that complementary legislation and programs are put into place.

The member asked if there are stumbling blocks to comprehensive habitat protection. I would prefer to think of these as challenges and opportunities.

Endangered species protection in Canada is dependent on the co-operation of different levels of government, of the public, the private and non-governmental sectors, of groups, organizations and individuals.

Over 90 per cent of Canadians want endangered species legislation. Canadians from all walks of life want species to be preserved and to be protected. They are our most important allies. Some Canadians may have concerns about how the implementation of the endangered species legislation will affect them. It is important to remind the House of the fantastic contribution that ranchers, farmers and other private land owners have made to protect endangered species.

The burrowing owl program in Alberta is one fine example. My mother-in-law in southern Ontario supports habitat protection for migratory birds. She lives on the edge of 100 acres of a heritage wetland along the shore of Lake St. Clair.

Yes, we have challenges but we also have opportunities and partnerships that have been long established. The Canadian people want endangered species legislation and the Canadian people will help us preserve and protect species at risk.

[Questions On The Order Paper, December 2nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the House leader and the parliamentary secretary to the House leader are not in the House today. I will bring these concerns to their attention and they will advise me.

[Questions On The Order Paper, December 2nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Government Response To Petitions, December 2nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions.

[Canada Endangered Species Protection Act, November 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the referral of Bill C-65, the Canadian Endangered Species Act, to committee for study and action.

Canadians from all walks of life, from urban to rural areas, have told us we need endangered species legislation.

Members of Parliament on both sides, in the government benches and in the seats across the way, have reflected this genuine concern for Canada's wildlife. That is why the government looks forward to working with the committee while they study and strengthen Canada's first ever endangered species legislation.

The government commitment to this legislation was made in the speech from the throne. It followed extensive consultations with wildlife conservation groups, other environmental groups, farmers, the private sector, provincial and territorial governments and individual Canadians.

Our planet is losing from one to three species per day, mainly as a result of human activity. The recently released IUCN red list contains over 5,000 animal species currently at risk of becoming extinct. Unhappily some countries now have up to 50 per cent of their mammal species in this category.

Fortunately Canada is nowhere near that figure but we are not immune from this disturbing trend. One out of every 25 of our mammal species and one out of every 33 of our bird species are threatened or endangered. In Canada 276 species of fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and plants are facing extinction and once they are gone, they are gone forever.

All levels of government have a duty and a responsibility to work in partnership with one another and with concerned citizens across the country and around the world to do all in our power to prevent this from happening.

Canadians care passionately about the natural environment. When we have the opportunity to enjoy wild places, few of us can deny the incredible feelings that overwhelm us. We must never forget that not only are we in nature but that nature is in us. Our connections with nature are expressed through social, biological, economic, cultural and spiritual relationships.

Thomas Berry, an eco-theologian, urges us to maintain a sense of respect and a sense of gratitude toward the earth. Indeed, Canada's identity has been shaped by our wilderness in the grandeur of its gifts. It is how we see ourselves and how we are known by others throughout the world.

As I said, Canadians feel passionately about our natural environment. Our provincial and territorial colleagues and our federal minister have listened to Canadians. Last month we agreed to a national accord to the protection of species at risk. With it we have put nature first and jurisdictional disputes second.

The accord commits all provincial and territorial governments, along with the federal government, to take action within specific time periods to provide for the recovery of species in danger. I am confident that the provincial and territorial governments will live up to the spirit and the letter of that agreement in the same way that we are doing with this legislation before us today.

Provisions throughout the bill enable federal action to protect critical habitat, including automatic protection of wildlife residences until the recovery plan has been developed. It covers threatened and endangered species that move across international borders. There are authorities in this legislation for immediate action with other levels of government, the private sector, environmental groups, farmers, fishers, loggers and individual Canadians to work together to protect species in imminent danger.

Once an endangered species is officially listed, activities causing damage or destruction to its residence will be prohibited. This bill requires that recovery plans address threats to survival of species, including threats to critical habitat. It will also give provision for immediate emergency protection of habitat. Offences under the legislation could result in fines up to $250,000 and up to five years

in prison. Corporations would be subject to penalties up to half a million dollars.

Another important element is the provision to protect international cross-border species at risk. Only the national government has the ability to work co-operatively with other countries for the conservation of species.

I would be remiss if I did not mention public participation. It gives all Canadians a chance to play an active part in the protection of species. The public can take part in everything from proposing species for listing to access to the courts for legal redress.

This is good legislation. Members of the committee have shown an active interest in working on and improving what is before us. They, like most Canadians, understand the special reverence we have for Canada's wilderness. This legislation will help us protect species at risk. It is time now to continue the work of putting in place Canada's first ever endangered species legislation.

[Cleanup Of Contaminated Sites, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member laughs about a very serious problem that affects all Canadians.

I would like to point out that it was the leader of his party who was the minister of the environment, Lucien Bouchard, who did nothing about this problem. We are acting on it.

[Cleanup Of Contaminated Sites, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, a committee is looking into it. This has been a problem in Canada since World War II. Each federal department has responsibility for dealing with contaminated sites.

We recognize that there is a need for a comprehensive way of dealing with it, and it is being dealt with.

[Cleanup Of Contaminated Sites, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the government is well aware of the auditor general's concerns. In fact, we have already been working to deal with contaminated sites in Canada.

We have established an interdepartmental committee which is looking at contaminated sites and we are developing a template to deal with this issue in Canada.

[Divorce Act, November 18th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I want to point out to the constituents of the member for The Battlefords-Meadow Lake that he works very hard on environmental initiatives in this House. In responding to his questions I would like to say that Bill C-65, the Canadian Endangered Species Protection Act, is the first ever federal legislation to protect endangered species in Canada.

The purpose of this act is to prevent Canadian wildlife species from becoming extinct as a result of human activity and to secure their recovery. This act along with provincial and territorial co-operation in ensuring complementary legislation and programs will afford protection to endangered species across the country.

The provinces and the territories have agreed to a national accord for the protection of species at risk. Under the terms of the accord the provinces and the territories are co-operating with the federal government to ensure that complementary legislation and programs are put into place.

The act formalizes the existing process by which we identify those species that are endangered. The committee on the status of endangered wildlife in Canada, COSEWIC, comprises a group of independent scientific experts who review and report on the status of wildlife species in Canada.

The bill now provides a legal basis for the committee and formalizes its work under Canadian law. This bill recognizes that habitat is fundamental to the protection of species. On the official listing of an endangered species, activities causing damage or destruction to its residence, such as its den, nest or burrow, will be prohibited. We also recognize that we need to go beyond the immediate residence of a given species in order to protect its critical habitat.

The mandatory recovery plans will address the threats to the survival of the species, including threats to critical habitat as defined by the scientific experts. As far as federal lands are concerned, the minister and his colleagues will be made aware of species listed annually by COSEWIC.

This bill gives the federal government the authority to create regulations needed to regulate or prohibit activities that will adversely affect the species or its critical habitat. The act also enables regulations prohibiting activities that wilfully harm species at risk that cross Canada's international boundaries in the absence of equivalent action by the provinces.

It also provides for emergency orders in the event that immediate action is required for the protection of a species. Where loss of habitat is identified as an imminent threat, emergency orders will include measures for its protection.

Under the national accord with the provinces and territories, all jurisdictions are publicly accountable for their actions and decisions. If a province chooses not to provide species protection, that decision will be on the public record. Further, the accord provides for a mechanism to address any such disputes that may arise.

Governments have a duty and a responsibility to work in partnership with one another, and with concerned citizens across the country and around the world, to prevent species from becoming extinct.

This act, along with complementary provincial and territorial legislation and programs, does just that by putting the needs of nature first.