Marlene Jennings

[Canada-U.S. Relations, November 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to recognize the strong relationship between Canada and the United States. Our unique bond is based, among others, upon our shared values of democracy and of human rights and freedoms. Our close relationship can also be exemplified through trade.

Trade and cooperation between Canada and the United States have produced tremendous benefits and economic prosperity for individuals on both sides of the border. Approximately $1.8 billion worth of goods and services cross the Canada-U.S. border every day. In 2003 alone, two way trade in goods and services surpassed $441.5 billion, making the Canada-U.S. trading relationship the largest in the world.

Canada's friendship with the United States has brought to both our countries great new wealth and prosperity. May this unique bond between our two nations continue to prosper in the years ahead.

[Food and Drugs Act, November 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about this bill.

I believe, having read Bill C-420, that it does not, as it is written, meet the needs of Canadians and would in fact require the development of a new framework for natural health products as foods. This would come at a considerable cost for government and industry alike, but also for the consumers.

Indeed, as the parliamentary secretary who spoke before me mentioned, this bill does not ensure the same degree of safety and access to product information as the current natural health products regulations.

Passing this bill would go against the wishes of Canadians and the Standing Committee on Health, which, in 1998, held sessions on how to regulate such products.

The Natural Health Products Regulations, which came into force in January of this year, are the result of recommendations made in 1998 by the Standing Committee on Health which identified a need to draft a new regulatory framework just for natural health products.

Canadians have asked for suitable regulation of natural health products that are used for therapeutic purposes in order to ensure safety. Comprehensive public consultations were held in preparation of the current regulations, and more than 150 witnesses appeared before the Standing Committee on Health. Health Canada held its own consultations by handing out more than 21,000 workbooks, responding to 2,300 phone calls and visiting 11 towns from one end of the country to the other, giving some 2,100 participants the opportunity to express their opinion on this matter.

The current regulations reflect the opinions and concerns expressed by Canadians during this process, and these regulations take into account the various points of view expressed by consumers, industry representatives, doctors and specialists in the field and other stakeholders.

The regulation has only come into effect in January of this year. That regulation is the result of extensive consultations, both by the health committee in 1998 and by Health Canada. I would ask the members of the House not to support this private member's bill, and to allow the regulation the time to show its worth.

[Question No. 13, November 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on May 3, 2004, the Clerk of the Privy Council informed the public accounts committee that, on about three occasions over two years, deputy ministers had come to him to say that they had strongly advised a minister that something the minister wanted should or could not be done. He also made it clear that this was not to be interpreted as meaning that ministers wanted to do anything illegal and that, indeed, in every instance, the actions taken were consistent with the law.

Moreover, as deputy of the Prime Minister and head of the public service, and to promote effective management of the public service, the Clerk of the Privy Council must be in a position to receive full and frank information about internal governmental operations. As well, ministers must be in a position to express freely their opinions and views, and to share them with their deputy ministers in confidentiality. This point was also made before the public account committee. These important principles are recognized in the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act.

Asking the Clerk of the Privy Council to disclose opinions or views that a minister may have expressed on a confidential basis, in a context such as here where all actions taken were consistent with the law, would draw him into a political role and be contrary to the convention of neutrality of the public service.

Disclosure of such information would therefore prejudice both the confidential nature of the discussions and the importance of protecting the neutrality of the public service.

[Supply, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, ADM has offered not once but several times to extend the leases that it has with the farmers until the end of its own lease with the federal government. It would allow ADM to determine exactly what are the needs of Mirabel in view of future development. Also, it would allow the use on an agricultural basis to continue on those lots. Unfortunately, Union des producteurs agricoles has rejected that offer.

[Supply, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, once again members of the Conservative Party show how they take only certain things that were said and do not present the entire thing.

I clearly stated, when I talked about what happened in Ukraine, that the supreme court of Ukraine under the constitution has the legal authority to examine complaints about the election process and to determine whether or not that election process was legal. That is the rule of law. If that supreme court is unable to render an impartial decision that is based on the rule of law, then we have a failed society and a failed democracy.

My point was to state that we have a rule of law in this country. What the Conservative Party, in unholy alliance with the Bloc, is suggesting is that we violate the rule of law, that we break a legally negotiated and agreed upon lease which was signed by a Conservative minister.

[Supply, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I find it curious that the hon. member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel had the gall to say earlier, during the debate on this motion, that we should terminate the lease with ADM, sell back the land to the farmers and, if we are mistaken about the needs of Mirabel airport and economic development, the government would simply have to expropriate again. That is some way for the member to show compassion.

The member has the gall to accuse me of having no compassion, while, in the same breath, he talks about selling the land back, terminating the lease and flouting the law. He says that we should have no problem with that and that if we are wrong we simply have to expropriate again. Nice solution.

[Supply, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the hon. member asked me and in fact criticized me for daring to say that this is an unholy alliance between the Conservative Party and the Bloc. It was a statement made in this House and I will respond to that statement.

I find it interesting that only last week the deputy leader of the Conservatives accused the government of working secretly with the Bloc. In Sunday's Halifax Herald the member for Central Nova attacked the Liberals for voting with the Bloc to defeat the Conservative supply day motion on offshore oil.

It is quite interesting that the member would take issue with what I had to say. I find it interesting as well that the deputy leader of the Conservatives could not respect his own word, a signed agreement. However, on the other hand, it is not surprising that the Conservative Party deputy leader, who is unable to respect a written, signed agreement, would call on the government to not respect the law. It is not surprising after all, the more that I think of it. Shame on the Conservatives. We are a society of the rule of law. Shame on the Conservatives. Shame on the deputy leader of the Conservative Party.

[Supply, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to take part in the debate on the Conservative motion that reads as follows:

That the House call on the government to take the appropriate measures to sell the 11,000 acres of arable land back to the families and farmers whose land was expropriated to build the Mirabel Airport.

Before getting to the substance of the motion and the reasons why I will not support it, I would like to give an historical overview of the whole situation and explain how we arrived at the decision to expropriate and then at the signing by the Conservative government and ADM of a long term lease transferring to ADM all the ownership rights.

I would like to put the development of Aéroports de Montréal into context in terms of its historical and geographic importance.

The Montreal airport known as Pierre Elliott Trudeau has been part of my riding since the last revision of the boundaries of our federal constituencies. The district that will soon become the municipality of Dorval is included in my riding of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine. So I know what it is to have an international airport in an urban setting, and I also know the problems it creates for the neighbours, all those people who live in the area.

Historically, Montreal has always been a gateway to North America. First, by sea, then by roads, rail and finally air. Montreal's history is intimately tied to transportation and business development. Located near the mouth of the St. Lawrence Seaway, where the Richelieu River and the Ottawa River meet, Montreal has become a passenger transportation and business hub in North America.

As the continent developed, Montreal reinforced its position as a transportation hub. Montreal has always been and will remain a link between North America and the rest of the world.

The climate after the Second World War fostered Montreal's accelerated development. The city's geographic location, technological progress, industrialization and government policies helped heighten development. This situation eventually resulted in air traffic volume that surpassed the needs of the city and it became a transcontinental transportation hub.

Commercial aviation in Montreal therefore follows this tradition of international trade. Airlines from all over the world have made it one of their key destinations. Let us not forget that commercial aviation is essential to tourist, industrial and service companies.

To understand the situation at Mirabel, the evolution of aviation in Canada must first be explained. In the 1950s, piston aircrafts like the Constellation and the DC-7, were used for almost all links between Europe and North America.

The first transatlantic crossings were made only after the DC-8 and the Boeing 707 were introduced. We were entering a new era in the world of transportation

In the 1950s, the governments of the time studied the future needs of the Montreal area in terms of air transportation. They concluded at the time that a new international airport was needed in Montreal.

This conclusion was mainly based on information collected through a study conducted shortly before Expo 67. This study revealed that the more long-term needs necessitated the construction of a new international airport. Forecasts at the time indicated that at that pace, despite the expansion projects, the Dorval airport, now known as Pierre Elliott Trudeau, would reach another saturation point around 1985. A new airport was the conclusive solution proposed by this study in order to meet the future needs of the city.

Sainte-Scolastique, which at that time was made up of 14 cities and villages that were later merged to form one municipality called Mirabel, was chosen as the location for the new airport. Construction of the airport started in June 1970. Two 12,000- foot landing strips, taxiways, one terminal, one control tower and service buildings were built at a cost of $350 million.

The airport opened on October 4, 1975. Mirabel is the last international airport of this size to be built.

The government of the time set its sights high for this project and a 98,000 acre area was reserved for the construction of this airport. The purpose of the buffer zone around the airport was to ensure that the airport's needs did not conflict with the urban development needs. Mirabel was built 45 minutes from downtown to allow this new airport to develop without disturbing the neighbouring population.

Shortly after Mirabel commenced operations, some major events rattled the aviation field. Considered a technological wonder, the Boeing 747, which was highly popular among airlines, significantly affected air transport around the world. As a result, it became more difficult for some destinations to make a profit on this aircraft in light of the low passenger volume and the required infrastructure.

Air carriers also reviewed their operations and eliminated long-haul flights with stopovers, giving preference to longer direct flights. With a view to profitability, air carriers concentrated their flights in airports that were likely to attract the most traffic

Later, the liberalization of air transport to the United States also had major repercussions, depriving Montreal of significant domestic traffic. Air carriers could not longer serve the United States by extending their service to Montreal. To remain competitive, carriers eliminated stopovers like Montreal.

The economic conditions of the 1990s also had a significant impact for a number of international air carriers. The events of September 11, 2001 also contributed to the upheaval in global aviation. In Canada, these major upheavals translated into the merger, closing or downsizing of a number of national and international air carriers and noticeably slowed down this sector of our economy.

For example, in the first quarter of 2002, the number of passenger flight departures at Mirabel alone dropped from 94 to 56 a week. ADM therefore made the necessary decisions in this context in order to maximize profits in airport facilities and provide sound management.

Let us get back to the past. In 1985, as a result of changes in the aviation industry and at Mirabel, the Treasury Board approved the terms and conditions of a program to resell 80,000 acres of excess land and the implementation of an agricultural renewal program.

In 1988, 784 acres of expropriated land was added to the 80,000 acres. Then, 11,000 acres of airport reserve land was leased long term and an agricultural renewal program was offered to the lessees.

A special committee was set up to establish the terms and conditions of the lease program and the agricultural renewal program. This committee recommended that a 20-year lease be signed, with the option to renew for consecutive 5-year periods until these lands are required for airport needs.

Finally, in 1992, the management of the airports was transferred to the société des Aéroports de Montréal, known as ADM. This helped establish a framework, which clearly defined the federal government's role in airport management.

As an aside, I would remind the House that this motion was put forward by the Conservative Party, with the support of the Bloc. This is an unhealthy alliance in my view. However, what the Conservative Party is not saying is that it is the Conservative government that transferred the management of the airports to the société des Aéroports de Montréal in 1992.

It is the Conservative government that signed the lease with ADM, transferring ownership of the land at issue to the corporation. ADM was given full management responsibility. It is therefore solely responsible for independently providing financial and operational management of Montréal Trudeau and Mirabel airports. ADM alone manages the 131 leases for the lands for which it is responsible and it also has exclusive authority to make decisions regarding the current and future uses of these lands. I repeat ADM has exclusive authority.

For its part, as owner of these airports, the federal government ensures the long term integrity and viability of the national airport network.

The government's role is in line with the national airport policy implemented in July 1994, which provides local groups with the opportunity to become owners and operators. This policy enables communities that take ownership of airport facilities to profit further from their airports, adapt the level of service to local needs and attract new and different kinds of businesses.

Transport Canada, through its role as a regulator, ensures the safety of the travelling public and contributes to the enhancement of airport facilities. This is the true role of government.

I mentionned earlier that, in my mind, the fact that the Bloc supports the Conservative motion constitutes an unhealthy alliance. Why do I say this?

First, I say this because there is a lease. Yesterday evening, in our emergency debate on the situation in Ukraine, several members of this House mentioned that the rule of law must be respected. Several members also said that the Supreme Court of Ukraine should look into the election irregularity and the decision announced by the central election commission in Ukraine. Election results seem to indicate that the winner was the Prime Minister, and not his opponent, results which are obviously being challenged by the Ukrainian people.

Now, today, Conservative and Bloc members are telling us to flout the law and to ignore the lease. While criticizing the government for having expropriated too much land, they suggest that we flout the law, terminate the lease and sell the land back. The member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel even had the gall to say,“If ever, to develop Mirabel, ADM needed more land, all the government would have to do is to expropriate again”. What nonsense.

The opposition criticized us because land was expropriated. It wants us to sell the 11,000 acres back to the farmers who are operating and cultivating these 11,000 acres under the terms and conditions of legal leases. Now, it is telling us to terminate ADM's lease and sell the land back. Moreover, the Bloc Québécois adds, “lf the government finds out it made a mistake, that is no problem. All it has to do is to is expropriate again”. What nonsense, and how dishonest.

They could at least be logical. If it was not appropriate to expropriate in the first place, they should chose carefully the solutions they propose and make sure the mistake they claim was made then not be made again.

Also, in his remarks on this motion, the Minister of Transport clearly stated that calls for proposals were launched by ADM for development projects, major economic development plans, in the area. ADM received some 30 proposals. Following prequalification, four companies were asked to develop detailed plans. These plans could involve thousands of jobs. Bombardier could eventually be interested in this.

But the Bloc Québécois, which always claims that it alone can represent the interests of Quebec, is ignoring all that. It prefers to engage in petty politics with the Conservatives on this issue. That is a shame and a scandal.

[Ukraine, November 24th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, I am quite honoured to take part in this debate and to share my views on the issue.

There may be many people who are watching the debate and asking why the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine is taking part in the debate on the elections in Ukraine. Why does this woman who is clearly of African descent care about this?

I only have a very small Ukrainian community in my riding, less than 1,000 people. It is a very active community. It is a community that has contributed much, on the NDG side, but most particularly on the Lachine side. However it is not determinant, in terms of my election for instance, at least not today.

The hon. member across the way made a very important point by saying that anyone who knows Ukrainians could not help but be engaged in this issue. I want to say that anyone who has had experience of the human condition, of the mistakes of the 20th century, the mistakes of the 19th century, the mistakes of the 18th, 17th, 16th and 13th centuries, long back, that carry into the 21st century cannot help but be engaged in the issue of free and democratic elections in Ukraine and the fact that it did not happen.

It has been explained quite clearly what happened in Ukraine in these elections. These elections were filled with egregious wrongdoings and that the results announced by the Central Election Commission of Ukraine simply cannot be accepted and are not being accepted by the people of Ukraine.

We can turn on our televisions daily, hourly, and see the hundreds of thousands of people who have massed in Kiev to demonstrate the fact that they do not accept the results. They feel that this election has been stolen from them. They are expressing their will for free, transparent, democratic elections that express the true democratic will of the Ukrainian people.

My father was an immigrant to this country. He came from the United States. When my father immigrated to Canada, he emigrated from the state of Alabama. In the state of Alabama, indeed in most states in the United States in the mid-1940s, people of African descent were not allowed to vote. Further to that, lynchings took place. Any person of the black race, of African descent, in many of the southern states in the United States, put their lives on the line if they demonstrated, verbally or otherwise, for their freedoms.

I do not have to have Ukrainian ancestry within me in order to be engaged in this issue. I could not have been prouder than today during question period when our Deputy Prime Minister stood and I will quote what she said:

“Considering the allegations of serious and significant electoral fraud from international and Canadian election observers, the Government of Canada cannot accept that the announced result by the Central Election Commission reflects the true, democratic will of the Ukrainian people. Therefore, Canada rejects the announced final results. The Government of Canada calls for a full, open and transparent review of the election process and Canada will have no choice but to examine its relations with Ukraine if the authorities fail to provide election results that reflect the democratic will of the people of that country”.

That was the statement of the Deputy Prime Minister today in question period in response to a question directed to her by the leader of the official opposition. I was proud.

However, the point has been made that Canada needs to monitor the response of Ukraine to the call by Canada and by other members of the international community and by the Ukrainian people themselves that these election results be reviewed. Ukraine must ensure that a free, transparent, democratic election process takes place that will allow the results to be the true reflection of the democratic will of the Ukrainian people so that the results can be seen as credible and worthy of acceptance and recognition and the international community and the Ukrainian people can embrace those results.

If that should not happen, I will certainly be one of the many voices calling on our government to take the next steps that would need to be taken, whether those steps be diplomatic or economic sanctions. It is clear. We have a responsibility. We are in the 21st century. Ours is a country that will support the emerging democracies and the fundamental freedoms of each and every person.

The way we do so is to support the emerging democracies. Ukraine is such a democracy. Ukraine has less than two decades under its belt as a free, democratic society. The mark of a true democratic society is the ability of that society and its institutions to put into place free, transparent election processes where people of the society accept the results.

We are talking about possible election reform within our country, but that reform does not come out of a view, of any Canadian, that the results of our elections are not a true reflection of the democratic will of this society. In no instance has anyone ever suggested that. What has been suggested is that, as a mature democracy, we may wish to explore other options in order to ensure a further diversity of views that will come out of election results. That is a debate for another day.

Constituents of Ukrainian descent here in Canada have participated as members of Canada's delegation of election observers, both in the previous election and in the present election. We are being told by the international community, and also by our own election observers, that they witnessed with their very eyes ballot stuffing, absentee voter certificates, repeated voting, irregularities in the ballot counting, last minute additions to voter lists on election day, and restrictions placed on voters' abilities to cast their ballots.

That is only a number of the egregious irregularities that our own election observers witnessed. Canada had no choice but to reject the election results announced by the central election commission of the Ukraine and call on Ukraine to undertake a true, transparent review of its election process and results, and ensure that election results reflect the true democratic will as expressed by the Ukrainian people in the election.

If that means calling another election, then so be it. If those mistakes are so egregious that we cannot accept the results, then it may be that Ukraine will need to call another election. Hopefully that will be decided by the supreme court of Ukraine and hopefully that court will be sufficiently independent, and objective that its decision will be accepted by the people of Ukraine.

The one true test of democracy is a society's ability to conduct elections in a transparent, rules based fashion and in so doing, demonstrate to both its people and to the international audience that the true democratic will of its people has been reflected in the election results. When the process is so tainted that the very validity of the results are called into serious repute, the government has no choice but to conduct a full open and transparent review of its election process and undertake an election process that will reflect the true will of its people.

I, our government, and every member in the House call on Ukraine to do it.

[First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act, November 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of Bill C-20, the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act.

As the Prime Minister said in reply to the Speech from the Throne, and I believe my hon. colleagues will agree, the urgent need to reduce the gap in the development opportunities between the first nations and other Canadians is clearly felt. Canada and the native people recognize that to be able to find a good solution to this situation, it is important to obtain complete statistical information as soon as possible.

Moreover, the main government activities like economic development, social programs, fiscal planning and public accounting all require accurate and relevant statistics. While more and more first nations get ready to take on the responsibilities of self-government, the first nations governments need complete and easily accessible statistical information to be able to take the best decisions possible for their communities.

This bill seeks to establish a first nations statistical institute to give decision makers and first nations citizens better access to the statistical information they need. This institute would take numerous practical actions to meet their needs.

First, the institute would help any first nation interested in meeting its need for local data for the purpose of research, analysis, and eventual decision making. The institute would be in a position to find, analyze and deliver statistical information that would be accurate, complete and appropriately tailored to the specific requirements of the communities or individual groups of first nations.

The first nations would thus have access to the same basic statistics as most other Canadians: statistics on housing, justice, natural resource management, culture, education, the working population and health, to name but a few.

Second, the individual first nations have difficulty setting up and maintaining the statistical systems they require in order to meet their responsibilities and their growing accountability obligations in decision making. These decisions affect the delivery of day to day essential community services, as well as the planning of major development projects.

The proposed statistical institute would help the first nations to develop the necessary ability to use the statistical information and create local information systems in order to better administer programs and funds. By improving the quality of statistics and their comparability with data from other sources, the institute would ensure that the first nations had the necessary statistical tools to help them become more autonomous.

Comparative statistics are essential to community planning and will be needed to attract private investment. It is important for both the first nations and potential investors to have this type of information, since it provides a specific picture of the situation of the first nations concerned and its economic growth potential. WIthout reliable comparative figures, it is extremely difficult to make any precise assessment of the situation of a first nation.

The institute would also have an important role to play in the rationalization of important information on the first nations now in the possession of the federal government.

Among the roles of the institute would be to access information contained in these data bases in order to provide the complete picture of Canada's first nations to which I have already referred. To that end, it would work in partnership with the first nations and the government in order to detect and remedy any shortcomings in the statistical information concerning the first nations, for the mutual benefit of the first nations community and the government departments and agencies.

More specifically, the institute will play a key role by integrating the first nations' perspective in the analysis of the data kept by various federal departments. This will help develop policies and programs that target more accurately the needs of first nations people. This will not only improve the accuracy and current level of information relating to first nations but, by increasing the level of confidence and by demonstrating the importance of quality information, it will also encourage and support the exchange of information between first nations and the federal government.

We must clearly show that the role of the statistical institute will not duplicate that of Statistics Canada but, rather, that it will complement it. For example, the institute will be in a good position to advise Statistics Canada on how to better represent first nations in the national statistical system, and it will also help it develop data collection tools and techniques that reflect and respect first nations' customs and culture. This means that many other first nations would be encouraged to participate in the data collection activities undertaken by Statistics Canada.

Moreover, first nations have numerous information needs that are not covered by Statistics Canada's mandate. The statistical institute will be in a position to identify these needs and will meet them by finding an appropriate source of existing data or by undertaking, alone or in partnership with first nations or statistical organizations, the collection of such data.

It is particularly important to support the real property tax and financing regimes established under the bill. Statistics on residents and commercial businesses on reserves would be useful to first nations to determine whether they should implement a real property tax regime. Moreover, statistical information is an essential component in the development of capital projects through the issuance of first nation bonds by the tax commission.

I will conclude by saying that there is an essential need to create the first nations statistical institute. This institute will provide first nations with statistical information that is adapted to their needs. It would work directly with first nations, first nations' organizations, and in partnership with the government and statistical organizations, to provide a complete, accurate and relevant picture of first nations in Canada.

I urge hon. members to support this bill. I thank all members for their attention.