Jim Karygiannis

[Canadian Armenian Community, October 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, 2005 marks the 10th anniversary of the enthronement of His Holiness Aram I as Catholicos of the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia. To mark this occasion, His Holiness is conducting a pastoral visit to North America.

Last week I had the distinct honour of meeting His Holiness as he met with members of the Canadian Armenian community in Toronto. At that time, I presented him with a copy of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, translated by this government into Armenian.

This is a special time for the community members. With the spiritual leader of the church in their midst, they are engaging in dialogue with a man who promotes human rights, peace with justice, and greater communication among religious leaders.

[Question No. 167, September 26th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, In December 2002 the International Maritime Organization, IMO adopted the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code ISPS Code and other amendments to the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea Convention, 1974, SOLAS Convention to enhance the international framework for the deterrence, prevention and detection of acts that threaten security in the marine transportation sector. All IMO contracting governments, including Canada, have adopted the ISPS code in July 2004 and have the necessary national regulations in place.

The Canadian Marine Transportation Security Regulations, MTSR introduce new security requirements for the marine transportation industry under section 5 of the Marine Transportation Security Act, MTSA, and implement all provisions of the ISPS code.

(a) Yes, all 423 ports and marine facilities in Canada to which the MTSR apply have implemented the ISPS code. The MTSR applies to all Canadian ports and marine facilities serving vessels covered by the MTSR, engaged on a voyage from a port in one country to a port in another country. Others may be added in the future, as they are required to apply the MTSR.

(b) Canadian vessels, marine facilities and port authorities to which the MTSR apply are required to develop and implement a risk-based security plan developed from information obtained in security assessments of vulnerability and threat. Once submitted, the plans are reviewed by Transport Canada Marine Security Inspectors. An official certificate of compliance or international ship security certificate is issued upon approval of the plans.

The MTSR requires that audits be conducted by ports authorities and the operators of marine facilities against their approved and implemented security plans to determine whether there are any deficiencies or changes in security threats, procedures, responsibilities of personnel, operations or operator that require amendments to be made to the plans. Marine facility operators are required to perform internal audits annually or if there is a change in operator or modifications to the marine facility or its operations. There is no requirement for port authorities to conduct annual audits, although they are required to continually evaluate marine transportation security and to include a plan for periodically reviewing, auditing and updating the port security plan. If changes are required to the security plan following an audit, operators are required to submit an amendment to the minister of Transport for approval within 30 days. Port authorities and the operators of marine facilities may call upon independent sources to perform internal audits for their own purposes.

Transport Canada Marine Security Inspectors conduct inspections of marine facilities and ports to ensure compliance with MTSR, and ISPS Code requirements, including the continued validity and implementation of security plans. These inspections are conducted under the authority of the Marine Transportation Security Act. Independent sources are not used for these inspections.

(c) All Canadian vessels to which the MTSR apply are in compliance and have received an international ship security certificate, ISSC, and Canadian vessel security certificate, VSC. There are approximately 213 Canadian vessels to which the MTSR apply.

(d) Most countries have developed regulations and have implemented the ISPS code for their vessels and ports. Any foreign vessel wishing to enter into Canadian waters must have an ISSC issued under their flag state .

[Question No. 153, September 26th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to sponsorship, VIA Rail Canada Inc.(VIA) is routinely solicited by event organizers and agencies who manage events in various locations across Canada. Criteria used to determine whether VIA will sponsor events are a function of the location of the event, what other communication activities VIA has planned to coincide with the event in question, and whether the target audience for the event is consistent with VIA’s target market.

For the years 1994 to 2004, VIA entered into sponsorship agreements with the following companies:

With respect to joint advertising programs, the Canadian Tourism Commission (CTC) has a mandate to develop tourism industry-wide advertising programs to encourage Canadians and citizens of selected foreign countries to visit Canada. The CTC develops these programs and solicits industry participation through its advertising agencies. Up until 2003, the agencies for the CTC were Vickers & Benson and BCP Group Ltd.

VIA issued multiple purchase orders to participate in the industry-wide program, along with other companies in the tourism industry, as follows:

With respect to contracts for communication services, VIA entered into a contract with Publicité Martin following a competitive tender process and an agency review. Publicité Martin subcontracted work to Lafleur Communication Marketing.

[The 1918 Anti-Greek Riot in Toronto, June 21st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a turbulent time in our history. Between August 2 and 5, 1918, mobs of about 50,000 people took to the streets in Toronto waging pitched battles with police and destroying every Greek business they came across. The riots were the result of prejudice against new immigrants and the belief that Greeks did not fight in World War I.

Today, Mr. George Treheles, Mr. Michael Vitopoulos and Mr. Thomas Gallant presented a book entitled The 1918 Anti-Greek Riot in Toronto , documenting the causes and the results of the 1918 riot to the Library of Parliament.

I want to thank these gentlemen for writing and publishing this book so that this tragic event in our history is not forgotten. Although the riot took place in 1918, it brings into sharp focus the need for all Canadians to respect and accept the cultural diversity which makes Canada such a vibrant place to live and bring up our children. We must remember our history so we do not repeat our mistakes.

[Question No. 154, June 17th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, from 1994 to 2004, the criteria used by VIA Rail Canada Inc. in awarding contracts are:

The purchase of goods and services must be carried out in a manner that results in the best value to the corporation when considering price, quality, service availability and operational performances. Purchasing quality goods and services implies purchasing only those products for which VIA has a clear need and which are the least expensive to perform satisfactorily their intended function. In evaluating and selecting the least expensive product to perform the intended function, generally the following factors are taken into account: purchase price, life expectancy, operating and installation costs, risk of failure and additional costs associated with failure, et cetera. In evaluating and selecting service providers, consideration shall be given to the following: cost, past experience, solvency and reputation of firm, ability to deliver results on time, qualification of personnel, knowledge of rail passenger business, adherence to and understanding of the terms of reference.

There were no changes to the above criteria over the specified period, however additional internal procedures were implemented in 2003 and 2004 to strengthen the controls associated with the contracting for goods and services.

[Question No. 149, June 17th, 2005]

In response to (a), the Canadian Transportation Agency has received three formal applications concerning the Renaissance cars owned and operated by VIA Rail Canada Inc. Each of the three applications has raised concerns regarding limited amount of space aboard the Renaissance rail car.

In response to (b), none of the applications have originated from Atlantic Canada or as a result of travel on the Halifax to Montreal rail line.

In response to (c), one of the above noted formal applications has noted concerns about the purchase of rail cars designed for European rail networks and being used on the Canadian rail network.

In response to (d), the agency does not ask a person’s age when an application is received and therefore does not know if any of the applicants or if any of the persons who made inquiries or comments are senior citizens.

[Question No. 155, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, from 1995 to 2004, VIA Rail Canada Inc. did not pay any dividends to the government. VIA Rail Canada Inc. is a subsidized crown corporation and as such is not in a position to pay any dividends.

[Question No. 143, June 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, in response to

(a), no, however, Marine Atlantic Inc. conducted a financial audit in March for assets to December 31, 2004. An actuarial valuation is being completed and will be available after June 2005 for the period up to December 31, 2004.

In response to (b), no, excess funds were not used to purchase the MV Leif Erickson. The vessel was financed by a loan from the Government of Canada to Marine Atlantic Inc.

In response to (c), no, excess pension funds were not used to buy out union contracts.

In response to (d), yes, excess pension funds were used to provide the active Marine Atlantic Inc. employees with a two year pension contributory holiday.

In response to (e), the government is not planning for the privatization of the ferry service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques.

In response to (f) (i) the government does not have a position on this matter. Matters such as these are the responsibility of the Board of Directors or the corporation.

With respect to (ii) no, the government does not plan to request retroactive payments from Marine Atlantic Inc. to increase the amount of the pension of some pensioners.

In response to (g), no, the government does not plan to introduce specific legislation to protect Marine Atlantic Inc. pensioners/survivors.

In response to (h), no, the government does not plan to provide legal assistance to the pensioners who were previously employed at Marine Atlantic Inc.

[Fisheries Act, June 6th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, certainly my hon. colleague knows that we just do not wake up one morning and say we are going to take ownership. Certainly my hon. colleague is not suggesting that we jump in with both feet and say that we are going to disregard any governance and any authority whatsoever that needs to be done in environmental assessment. I certainly hope my hon. colleague is not suggesting that we do things in a haphazard way.

This government is taking all the necessary steps. Environmental assessments are being done. We are talking to all stakeholders. We do not have to deal with only one government but four. Two legislatures in the United States do not make the United States and/or Michigan, and they do not talk for all of the United States or Michigan.

There is a plan of action that looks right across our borders to what we are doing with the United States. This plan of action has been tabled in the House in Bill C-44. When it comes to second reading stage, I welcome the opportunity to discuss it with my colleague.

[Fisheries Act, June 6th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak about the future ownership of the Detroit River crossing. Before getting to this specific issue, I would like to explain the work that is being done by the governments of Canada, the United States, Ontario and Michigan under the umbrella of the Border Transportation Partnership.

The binational partnership was officially launched in 2001 to develop a long term strategy to improve in a coordinated fashion the movement of people, goods and services across the Windsor-Detroit gateway. This is also commonly referred as the binational process.

The partnership was established in recognition of the urgent need to find a way to coordinate and streamline three different legislated environmental assessment requirements: the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act; the Ontario environmental assessment act; and the national environmental protection act of the United States of America. This was done in order to identify a common solution for additional crossing capacity.

We have now entered the formal environmental assessment phase of the binational study process for increasing crossing capacity. The governments of Canada and Ontario have announced several initiatives to address cross-border transportation needs over the short and medium term until the new capacity is available.

The environmental assessment phase is expected to last three years, at which time the partnership will have concluded consultations and developed a preliminary design and plan for the expanded border capacity. Construction will begin in 2010, leading to the opening of additional capacity by the end of 2013.

While this timeline seems very long and is a source of frustration to many stakeholders, I would like to assure members that having this additional crossing capacity operational by the end of 2013 is a priority of the binational partnership. We are taking every step necessary to meet this target.

The binational partnership is considering the governance model for new crossing capacity. The partnership is looking at various governance models and accountability frameworks. We are reviewing and analyzing a number of models ranging from private to public sector ownership and operation.

Through the collaborative development of possible governance models, the four governments will be in a position to move quickly toward implementation, regardless of which corridor is selected during the environmental assessment process.

To complement the impending construction of a new or expanded crossing in the Windsor-Detroit corridor and elsewhere, such as the St. Stephen-Calais border crossing between New Brunswick and Maine, Transport Canada is also pursuing new provisions to the Canada Transportation Act relating to international bridges and tunnels.

There are presently 24 international bridges and tunnels between Canada and the United States. Historically, it has been standard practice to introduce special acts of Parliament for the approval and construction of each new international structure. This is a lengthy process and has resulted in a lack of consistency in the governance of the various bridges.

Currently, our international bridges are governed in some cases by crown corporations, international bridge authorities, or by a U.S. authority on the American side and a provincial department of transportation on the Canadian side. As well, two international bridges are privately owned and one is owned by a municipality.

The proposed amendments to the Canada Transportation Act, along with the examination of various governance models and accountability frameworks, will help us move seamlessly from the environmental assessment phase to the design, property acquisition and construction phases of the Detroit River crossing project. These actions will ensure that local, provincial and national interests are protected.