Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was federal.

Last in Parliament April 1997, as NDP MP for The Battlefords—Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)

Lost his last election, in 1997, with 28% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have just noticed the clock. It is my understanding that we have only 10 minutes remaining in the day. I do have at least the full 20 minutes allocated to me. I wonder if the House would not like to see the clock and allow me the full 20 minutes when the House next convenes.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have a short supplementary question. In his speech the member also talked about water testing, in particular water testing for oil companies in Alberta.

The member may be aware of a project near my constituency where Esso Resources has been withdrawing water with the approval of the provincial government from an aquifer that runs under the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Communities in my constituency have seen reduced water flow as a result of the work in Alberta. There has been a tremendous amount of wrangling between the Saskatchewan and the Alberta interests. There has been no room for federal government assessment or work to date.

With the member's experience would he consider the support of a national water act that would help to bridge some of the gaps between provincial government interests and others to ensure that water is available to all Canadians?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions for the member for Red Deer whom I compliment on his speech. He certainly brought some interesting ideas to the Chamber. I was very happy to listen to him today.

In particular I was very pleased with the words that he used in his opening remarks. He talked about this being the ground of co-operation, the ground of compromise. Those are the grounds on which I believe the country was built. We live in a very diverse nation. Different people from coast to coast have relied on co-operation and compromise to see them through from day to day and year to year.

The country was built on those grounds. I am very pleased to see the hon. member recognize those grounds at this time. I can only hope the same rules will apply to other issues in the Chamber when we are dealing with issues of great concern to the diverse peoples who live within our borders.

My question deals with the issue of the Oldman dam that the member for Red Deer raised. Bill C-13 now provides some triggers that automatically gets the federal government involved in a project assessment. When I asked a similar question of the parliamentary secretary earlier today, he talked about the federal government being timid in the past in its approach to some of the issues guarded by the provinces.

Could the member for Red Deer indicate whether he believes the federal government has a right to intervene when some of these triggers are in place and provincial governments hesitate and resist federal government involvement in the projects they are promoting?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the comments from the hon. member. He has spoken on numerous occasions in the House on the environment, business and the economy. I always listen carefully to what he has to say.

I want to indicate that the matter that I was raising about it taking a year for the government to bring this bill in was in relation to the difficulties that ministers have sometimes in dealing with cabinet on environmental issues.

In the half minute available to me, I want to say that the minister probably could have brought in the bill in the first quarter. Consultation with environmental organizations and industry was concluded relatively early in the process. But the process of getting the new regulations through cabinet was a very difficult task. Again I commend the minister but it shows that cabinet is still a very powerful body when it comes to dealing with issues like this.

If the government has the will to see that the environment will be a first priority, then the system works. If this government or the next government chooses not to have the environment as its top priority, then the system does not work. We have to ensure

that parliamentarians and Canadians all have an opportunity to respond to power when there is abuse. I just wanted to clarify that matter.

The member also indicated the accounting that occurs in the country. He talked about green accounting. I wonder if the member could tell me if he supports the principle of green accounting when we look at the way our country is developing. It is not an efficient economy based on GNP, growth and development. An efficient economy is one that is based on preservation and conservation as much as growth and development. Is that important to the member?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Yes, but it took a year.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, the member spoke about the involvement of the current Minister of the Environment and gave her a considerable amount of credit for moving the bill forward when other ministers had been unable to do so.

I agree that the current Minister of the Environment has done what few have been able to do in the past, but I recognize what some of the problems are. One problem is simply that the bill came before cabinet on numerous occasions, just as the regulations came before cabinet on numerous occasions. The minister and others had to argue with other cabinet ministers concerning the ability of the cabinet to move the bill forward. Ministers with economic portfolios have always had a stronger say in cabinet than ministers of the environment.

I wonder if members recognize that one of the amendments provides for the greater authority of cabinet to have the final say on projects; not the panel, not the Minister of the Environment, but cabinet. Is the member prepared at committee to have a look at the structure of cabinet where the economic ministers have a very strong say in the kind of environmental legislation or regulations we have in our country?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I was quite pleased to hear the hon. member's commitment to the environment. Anyone who lives in western Canada is well aware of the beauty that exists, but all of us know that the environment involves much more than beauty. It is home, it sustains us. Anyone who lives on this planet knows that without the land, the air and the water to sustain us we are nothing. I am very pleased to hear of the hon. member's commitment to matters of environmental concern.

My question deals with intervener funding which is one of the amendments to the act. The member expressed support for intervener funding and outlined her concerns about additional spending with regard to intervener funding. While I believe there are probably arguments to be made in this regard, I would like to ask if the member has given any thought to the process of intervener funding.

Who would she consider should examine the list of possible interveners? Who would suggest to the panel which interveners would be funded? Should a panel be struck to do this? Would the panel itself make this decision? Should the Minister of the Environment or perhaps the President of the Treasury Board be responsible for making this decision?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member puts a lot of stake in consultation. I applaud him for that because I believe that consulting is an important part of governing.

This bill contains just three provisions. One of those provisions is the opportunity for participation by Canadians through an intervener funding program or a participant funding program. That is a very important part of the consultation process inherent in environmental assessment.

The amendment in front of us provides a very vague approach to participant funding. Can the member give us any indication as to whether he would be supportive of a more specific intervener funding program to ensure that there are adequate resources available to those who wish to participate in the process and those who wish to be consulted during the process of environmental assessment?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to put a question to the member for Outremont who I think spoke quite well on the bill and other matters. It is partly the other matters that I want to address in my opening comments before I place my question.

The debate through most of today centred around issues within the province of Quebec. With the exception of comments earlier in the day the government speakers have all represented Quebec ridings this afternoon so far, including the parliamentary secretary, the member for Davenport-I apologize, Mr. Speaker, I just realize the member for Davenport is from Ontario. I have to rephrase my question.

The comments today have centred around the jurisdiction of the province of Quebec. The member for Outremont rightly speaks for his constituents and the people of his province. I believe the question of jurisdiction while it is an important one is not the only question that we have to deal with in this House.

I had expected members of the Bloc Quebecois at least in one of their speeches today as members representing the Official Opposition to raise some of the issues which are important to the rest of Canada, issues that are over and above the questions of jurisdiction.

The member for Outremont must be aware that the province of Quebec would have to participate in joint panels if this bill came into force with the amendments put forward today.

How would the member for Outremont advise the members of his government to deal with the province of Quebec in matters where confrontation might exist over the issues of not only jurisdiction but of the joint panels that must be created under the auspices of the act?

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act October 31st, 1994

Mr. Speaker, in response to the member's earlier comments about the Fraser Valley and air quality, I am wondering if he has opinions about other issues, that perhaps a federal environmental assessment could be done in relation to the Alcan project in British Columbia or the Clayoquot Sound issue in British Columbia. Are these also issues on which the member believes a federal environmental assessment process could be entertained?