Larry Bagnell

[Petitions, December 12th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition deals with child pornography. The people who signed this petition believe that the creation and use of child pornography is condemned by a majority of Canadians, and that the courts have not applied existing laws so that every case has stiff penalties for child exploitation. They call upon Parliament to outlaw materials which promote or glorify pedophilia or sado-masochistic activities with children.

[Petitions, December 12th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I have two petitions to present. Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, cancer, muscular dystrophy and spinal cord injury are still diseases. Progress has been made on research with adult stem cells with no immune rejections or ethical problems.

My first petition calls on the government to focus its legislative support on adult stem cell research.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I will not have time to do my 20 minute speech which was next, but I would like to get a couple of points into my question.

I understand the member's hesitancy of speaking after the passionate speech from the member for Acadie—Bathurst who asked if we are proud of our $100 billion tax cut, the biggest one in history. I would say, yes, we are definitely proud that a majority of that went to people who were not high income people and proud of the child tax credit that helps poor people.

He also said that people would rather have jobs than employment insurance and of course, I agree. He talked about the gas pipeline in New Brunswick and hopefully he will support our pipeline along the Alaska Highway that would create many jobs for British Columbia and Yukon.

One of the points that no member has talked about today is the balance in the EI. There are years when we must pay out more, when the economy is much worse than it is now. The government then must pay in which means balancing that fund with the fact that we must pay extra now.

I want to applaud the member that just spoke for the most part, until the last 30 seconds. It was one of the best speeches in the House today because I have always had the same thoughts about education that he had, that it is one of the key issues, especially in the changing world. I wonder if he could talk about advanced provisions to use the fund for education and for the disabled. I had a constituent approach me who thought we could change the rules because a disabled person may get weak and may not get his number of weeks in and maybe we--

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2002]

The Alliance member too.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2002]

Is the member not interested in helping people with disabilities? He is only going to heckle.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I guess the member's colleague was in a jovial Christmas mood in saying that when there is a fund there is a fund and when there is not a fund there is no money in the fund. The member was laughing. I think the member was stating the obvious. In different debates, a number of members on the other side have made this confusion. Under the Financial Administration Act of Canada all the revenues come in to one source and then Parliament decides what the government expenditures will be and then they go out. Every time the Government of Canada gets a revenue it does not go into a separate bank account or fund.

The question I want to ask relates to disabilities. A constituent approached me a couple of weeks ago and suggested that people with disabilities--

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite just said that she was waiting for the question from my hon. colleague, but we are in questions and comments. We can make comments. We do not necessarily have to ask a question.

However I do have a question. The member made a good point that if one is buying a car, one wants to get the full worth back, not just 55% or something. In the case of Canadians, right now we get about 79% back in services because 21% goes to paying off interest on the debt.

During her speech the member said and it sounded to me that she said, with some disdain, that if the government has money it decides to pay down the debt.

Is it the official Bloc position that we should not be paying down the debt? Or, did I misread the mood of the statement and it was not with disdain, and it really would like to pay down the debt?

[Yukon River Salmon Agreement, December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday after 17 long years of negotiations the United States and Canada signed the Yukon River Salmon Agreement.

I had the pleasure of accompanying the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to Washington, D.C. where he officially signed the agreement with the U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs, Paula Dobriansky.

Key elements of the agreement include the formation of the bilateral Yukon River Panel, Yukon River Joint Technical Committee, abundance based harvest sharing for upper Yukon chinook and chum salmon, and the Yukon River Salmon Restoration and Enhancement Fund. Additionally, this agreement provides direction for coordinated management, rebuilding plans, habitat protection, restoration and enhancement.

As the minister said, this agreement is an important achievement as it will provide long term certainty and stability for salmon fishing in the Yukon River.

I would like to thank the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Minister of Foreign Affairs for their hard work in achieving this agreement. It bodes well for the future of Yukon residents and our American friends and neighbours.

[Kyoto Protocol, December 3rd, 2002]

An hon. member is asking how? The answer is obvious, by cutting gas emissions from vehicles and oil burners, and by cutting coal and diesel fuel emissions. There are lots of particulates that go with those. They cause emphysema, lung diseases and asthma which hurt our relatives, our families and our health care system.

Could the member give us examples of how companies in Manitoba have cut energy and made money?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I must comment on the totally uninformed rant made by the member for Fraser Valley. Fortunately I do not think the rest of his party has such a lack of understanding of the agreement.

It was good that the member brought up the importance of Kyoto and the reduction of smog. The member opposite mentioned oversimplification. Unfortunately the former critic in health had the same misconception, and I must admit I had the same misconception when I first heard about Kyoto. It just relates to carbon dioxide and a number of other gases. One would think that it does not relate to smog, but when we cut those greenhouse emitting gases smog is also cut. There is a tremendous cut in smog when companies successfully cut greenhouse gases--