Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Won his last election, in 2019, with 50% of the vote.
Questions on the Order Paper April 29th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Supply April 23rd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the hon. member's comments. Earlier I listened to the comments of the hon. House leader for the Alliance Party who indicated that he would be open to an amendment. I want to ask the hon. member a question in relation to that.
I know there is great interest in the subject today. There is an interest on both sides in seeing that children are properly protected. There is an acknowledgement on that side that this is not so much about the exact wording of the legislation. That is the intent that we are hearing from the Alliance.
I saw an article today in the National Post , written by the leader of the Alliance, Stephen Harper, as well as two other members of the Alliance. It states:
What Canada really needs is to immediately embark on a well thought-out, consultative approach to dealing with these issues. Canadians deserve to have their elected government--not their appointed courts--set policy on issues as important as these.
Does the hon. member think that his party would, and would he personally, accept an amendment that reflected those words?
Supply April 23rd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the hon. member's speech. I have a question. I would like him to clarify a little more, because I am left confused about what his party's position is on this motion in relation to the age of consent. We know that the age of consent for many things has been 14 since about 1890, but for exploitative relationships, cases where there is prostitution or child pornography or an adult is in a situation of trust or authority with a child, and it seems to me that covers most of the kinds of things we would be concerned about, the age is in fact 18.
My question is this: Is he saying that if two 15 year olds have consensual sex that is going to be a criminal offence? That is what I would like him to clarify. Is that what he wants? Does he want to make those people criminals? Is that what he is after here?
Questions on the Order Paper April 23rd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
An act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals and firearms) and the Firearms Act April 22nd, 2002
Madam Speaker, as I said, I am anxious to see an agreement reached between Radio-Canada and its employees and I am glad to see that they are negotiating. I believe that they are now at the bargaining table and I hope that they will soon reach an agreement. I am confident that they will do so.
An act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals and firearms) and the Firearms Act April 22nd, 2002
Madam Speaker, I wish to thank the member for Acadie--Bathurst for his question. I am pleased to reply on behalf of the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
As members will fully realize, Société Radio-Canada is an autonomous organization that is responsible for its own administration, its own operations and its own daily activities. That means, then, that it and it alone is responsible for negotiating collective agreements with its employees. The Government of Canada cannot and will not interfere. Radio-Canada and le Syndicat des Communications de Radio-Canada are currently at the negotiating table, working in good faith. We are hopeful that the parties will be able to reach a new collective agreement very soon.
Until that agreement is reached, I realize that many Canadians are very sorely missing the service they have come to expect from Radio-Canada. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is something that is very near and dear to the hearts of millions of Canadians who rely on it for news and information, not to mention entertainment and sports. Because we are in the hockey playoffs, some Canadians are perhaps keenly feeling the effects of this labour dispute, without question.
The CBC is perhaps the strongest single force for culture in the country, the most powerful connector of Canadians from coast to coast. It is indeed the voice of our country and it thus plays a unique and valuable role.
We do hope that Radio-Canada and le Syndicat des Communications de Radio-Canada reach a mutually beneficial agreement very quickly so that Canadians all across the country can once again turn to this very crucial institution which is so much a part of their daily lives.
The CBC has been serving Canadians since 1936. It is a crown corporation governed by the 1991 Broadcasting Act and is subject to the regulations of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. CBC is also subject to all federal labour laws, including the Canada Labour Code, the Employment Equity Act, the Canadian Human Rights Act and so on. It meets all its obligations, and it must meet all its obligations as a federal employer.
Its services include: four national radio networks, CBC Radio One and CBC Radio Two in English and La Radio de Radio-Canada and La Chaîne culturelle FM in French, which broadcast information and general interest programs as well as classical music and cultural programs; two main television networks, CBC Television and Radio-Canada Télé; and two self-supporting specialty cable television services, CBC Newsworld in English and Le Réseau de l'information in French, which broadcast news and information programs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
As Canada's largest cultural institution, CBC touches the lives of Canadians on a daily basis. As Canada's national public broadcaster, CBC provides services in English, French and eight aboriginal languages and is accountable to all Canadians.
CBC has instituted a set of strategic directions to ensure that it is and is perceived to be a well managed company, operating in the best interests of its shareholders, the Canadian public. CBC makes these efforts in order to ensure distinctive programming of the highest quality across all its services in French and English across Canada. It also aims to generate cashflow to reinvest in its core business programming by leveraging its non-broadcasting assets and operating more efficiently.
It is indeed the voice of our country.
An act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals and firearms) and the Firearms Act April 22nd, 2002
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the points that the hon. member has made and I would like to conclude with a few more points on this issue.
Canadian officials have been reviewing and will continue to review this issue and to review and analyze the reports that have been done by observers on vessels. I mentioned the fact that there are concerns about this process. It is important the government engage with its NAFO counterparts in trying to strengthen measures. I do not know if the member is actually advocating that there should be unilateral action of some sort taken. If so, perhaps he could be clearer about that than he was this evening. I did not hear him say that, but I am not exactly clear on what it is he has in mind that the government should do. I think it is very important. If he is going to complain about what the government is not doing, he should make it clear what he thinks the government should do.
In addition to the Leonard J. Cowley, other Canadian Coast Guard vessels are sometimes utilized for NAFO patrols. DFO has an agreement with the Department of National Defence as well, whereby naval vessels conduct--
An act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals and firearms) and the Firearms Act April 22nd, 2002
Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my hon. colleague from St. John's West for raising this important question. This issue of foreign overfishing is certainly of concern in particular to Atlantic Canadians, but to all Canadians generally. I know the hon. member is interested in what the government's position and response are, so let me provide him with the answer in terms of what that position is.
Canada is increasingly concerned by the current level of non-compliance in the fisheries being conducted by foreign vessels in the NAFO regulatory area. At the most recent NAFO meeting in Helsingor, Denmark, Canada presented detailed information showing an increasing trend of non-compliance by vessels of some NAFO member countries. This information was based on a detailed assessment, conducted by Department Fisheries and Oceans staff, of reports provided by observers deployed on board the foreign fishing vessels.
In addition to the observer reports, Canada has continued to maintain an extensive monitoring program in the NAFO regulatory area, including aerial surveillance, at-sea boardings and inspections conducted by the Canadian fisheries officers in their role as NAFO inspectors. This monitoring activity requires a significant financial commitment on the part of the Canadian government but I am sure my colleague would agree that the information gathered is invaluable in assessing the nature and extent of the non-compliance problem.
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans aerial surveillance program is delivered through a contract between DFO and Provincial Airlines Limited, or PAL, of St. John's, Newfoundland. This is a worldclass fisheries aerial surveillance program using state of the art technologies for tracking, monitoring and recording the activities of foreign fishing vessels.
The members of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans recently had the opportunity to visit the Provincial Airlines facility in Halifax. I understand that the members were very impressed with the capabilities of the aircraft and the overall effectiveness of the aerial surveillance program. I am pleased to say that additional funding has recently been provided by the government to allow for increased utilization of PAL aircraft on both coasts.
Canadian aerial surveillance along with the mandatory NAFO requirement for satellite tracking of fishing vessels allows Canada to closely monitor the number of foreign fishing vessels operating in the NAFO regulatory area, as well as the movements and fishing activities of those vessels.
In addition to air surveillance and satellite tracking, there is a mandatory requirement for independent observer coverage on vessels from NAFO member countries while fishing in the regulatory area. The reports provided by these observers provide invaluable information regarding the level of compliance with the NAFO rules and conservation measures. Canadian officials have been and will continue to review and analyze these reports very carefully to identify trends and non-compliance issues that need to be addressed.
Patrol vessel coverage is another key element of our overall NAFO surveillance and enforcement program. One large offshore vessel, the Leonard J. Cowley , is currently dedicated to NAFO patrols. Canadian fishery officers, acting in their role as NAFO inspectors, conduct boardings and inspections of foreign fishing vessels to verify compliance. The information provided by observer reports and aerial surveillance allows us to conduct these inspections in a cost effective and strategic manner.
As members can see, the government is taking efforts in this regard. It remains a concern, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans will continue to pursue these efforts.
Questions on the Order Paper April 22nd, 2002
Madam Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Privilege April 22nd, 2002
He was brought to the bar.