Nicole Demers

[Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, November 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, given his expertise, I would rather the hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell had shared his views on the relevance of Bill C-21. Since he preferred using his time to criticize members who spoke before him, I will have to rely on my own wisdom in considering this bill.

Allow me to voice my opinion on the part of this bill proposing a new Canada not for profit corporations act designed to place corporations within a more modern and more centralizing governance framework. This bill would amend parts II and III of the Canada Corporations Act and rely more on the Canada Business Corporations Act.

The point I wish to raise today is very similar to the one my colleague opposite just raised. It concerns fairness to the directors and officers of not for profit corporations.

Before coming to this place, I sat for years on the boards of many non-profit organizations. I did so because it had become increasingly difficult to recruit competent volunteer directors because of the load of responsibilities put on them.

These may include responsibility under the provisions of certain pieces of legislation with respect to environmental damages, responsibility for salaries or unpaid source deductions, civil liability for breach of fiduciary duty, and even responsibility for their own negligent acts. Being a volunteer director demands a great deal more than the recognition and support you get in return.

But the new not for profit corporations legislation provides for several levels of limitations on the liability of directors and officers. For example, incorporation limits liability by establishing a body corporate that can be held responsible; clearly defined standards of care do not hold responsible directors who act honestly and in good faith; directors may use the defence of reasonable diligence. They are provided with a remedy against unfounded complaints.

There are new provisions to indemnify directors against costs, charges and expenses incurred in respect of an unfounded proceeding or of incidents which the corporation believes to warrant indemnification.

One should be careful before enacting such a provision. Highly qualified officers who know the system well might exonerate themselves by invoking the due diligence defence and thus make the members of the organization pay collectively for their errors.

On the one hand, the Canada Corporations Act does not list the fiduciary responsibilities of directors and officers of not for profit organizations and contains no other provision on standards of diligence governing their behaviour and management. On the other, the Canada Business Corporations Act provides that every director and officer of a corporation in exercising their powers and discharging their duties shall act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the corporation and exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.

The new Canada not for profit Corporations Act provides that standards of care will be modeled on those in the Canada Business Corporations Act. A clear statement of the duties and responsibilities of the directors will facilitate the hiring and retention of qualified board members.

The proposed standards of diligence, which have been well defined by the courts, provide an extra tool to the not for profit organizations that have more objective standards and remedies. These objectives criteria streamline standards of diligence for directors of not for profit organizations incorporated under federal law across Canada.

When the bill was drafted harmonization with other Canadian acts was taken into account, but the acts that may differ, such as the Quebec Civil Code, and other provincial acts, should also be taken into account. The objective criteria of the standards of diligence afford protection to directors as well, by allowing them to cite due diligence as a defence. This provision was not in the Canada Corporations Act. It protects directors who have acted properly, but not those who might have acted improperly.

Obviously, any bill seeking to increase efficiency by allowing organizations to incorporate according to an as of right system and abolishing the letters patent system of incorporation is worth considering especially if it also abolishes ministerial discretion regarding the incorporation of an organization and, on top of that, makes it possible to hire competent directors and officers who will no longer be afraid of being unduly prosecuted.

Following the brief examination that we were able to do, the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of the principle underlying Bill C-21. However, we must be diligent ourselves to ensure, first, that there will be no interference in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction and, second, that this legislation will be harmonized with the Civil Code of Quebec.

A standardization of the management of not for profit organizations is beneficial, respecting Quebec's jurisdictions, of course, especially since the new act would take into account, in the establishment of management mechanisms, the financial means and the size of the organization. Thus, it still offers a flexible framework to make these regulations.

However, referring the bill to committee for further study seems justified to us, because it will be possible to hear certain witnesses, namely stakeholders from the field and experts who will be able to enlighten us on certain controversial points or on questions.

Some provisions of the bill remain to be clarified, among other things, the issue of possible interference in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction in terms of the establishment of not for profit organizations whose activities come under Quebec's jurisdictions, for example, day care centres, as well as the harmonization with the Civil Code of Quebec, if such a bill is passed.

Also, even though the rules and responsibilities of directors are tightened, there is no real code of ethics with respect to the financial management of the organizations. This is a very important point. Organizations that do not establish a code of ethics do not understand the importance of being accountable to their members and of having a strict code of ethics that defines how they should conduct themselves vis-à-vis their members and their mandate. This is very important.

I hope that members of the House will vote to refer the bill to committee.

[Supply, November 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I lean more toward the motion as presented than to the Danish example. This example is one of the things that has stirred up a great deal of comment from all countries, even one study. The European Commission has struck a European Food Safety Authority Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies and mandated it to produce an opinion on the presence of trans fats in foods for human consumption. This was done because the opinion of the EU member states on this differed from that of the Danish authorities.

The Danish government used public health as the basis of its argument to justify passage of this legislation. It claims there is a fairly clear connection between the consumption of trans fats and cardiovascular disease, stroke, certain types of cancer and type 2 diabetes. Yesterday we met some young people who have type 1 diabetes, but type 2 we know can be remedied. That is very important.

In my opinion, the NDP motion is both important and of great interest.

[Supply, November 18th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking my colleague from Beauport—Limoilou for giving me this time to express my opinion on the motion put forward by our colleagues from the New Democratic Party.

Naturally, we all want to be in good health and to have a good quality of life. To that end, we have to make wise and healthy food choices. But these choices are neither obvious nor easy to make, as my hon. colleague said earlier.

When we go grocery shopping, we all do our best to select wisely, but we sometimes cannot understand what the labels say and do not always have a calculator handy to determine how much trans fatty acid there is in the food we are looking at.

A study has shown that adult Canadians consume approximately 8.4 grams of trans fat per day, as my hon. colleague indicated earlier, while younger people may consume up to 10 grams a day. As he also pointed out, the human body is not designed to digest these fats. Not only is it not designed to digest them, but it does not use them as a source of energy either.

This means that these fats we consume are not only harmful but they also get stored in our bodies, eventually making us obese. I must say that our young people are certainly likely to end up with arteries full of lipids by the age of 30 or 35, putting them at risk for coronary heart disease at an earlier age than our parents.

I must admit that I did not use to pay much attention to those things and, whenever my grandchildren came over to visit, we fed them what grandchildren like to eat, because we want them to be happy when they visit.

When I learned that, among the more than 4,000 processed foods containing such trans fats, there was french fries, chips, donuts, pizza crusts, cakes, muffins, TV dinners, crackers, cookies and granola bars, I wondered what I was going to give them to eat. This left very little on the list of their favourite foods. These were part of their regular diet when visiting grandma. Going to grandma's meant eating junk food. But I realize that this is not doing them any good.

Therefore, I am very pleased to see a motion proposed that would limit these fats in our food industry. If we look at Denmark's experience in 2003, we see it did not entirely eliminate trans fats, but permitted trans fats in oils to a limit of 2%, or 2 grams per 100 grams. I think that is very reasonable and would keep part of the taste our children want and would have a better effect on our cardiovascular health.

We must not be fooled; these trans fats cause a greater increase in the rate of bad cholesterol. I have it, too, so I know what my hon. friend was talking about. When my doctor told me that, I was not very happy either, but I do know the causes, I must admit.

Thus, not just one thing causes a reduction in good cholesterol. And I like it. This kind of cholesterol helps my nerves remain calm, because it helps in processing vitamin E which is very good for the nerves. So good cholesterol is very good for that.

According to the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2,000 heart attacks per year could be prevented if trans fatty acids were banned and thus at least 1,000 human lives saved. I think that is very important.

The Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation has issued a number of recommendations on this issue, including that: accurate information about the nutritional value of foods and the health effects of lowering trans fat be made available to the public, to help consumers make informed and healthy choices; trans fat in processed foods be replaced as soon as possible and where feasible by healthy alternatives such as monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats rather than with equal amounts of saturated fat; and Canadians consume a healthy, balanced diet that includes foods from the four food groups in Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy Eating.

I have to admit that this is very hard. In addition to not necessarily being aware of all the problems trans fats can cause, there is also the fact that some people are illiterate. When they do their shopping, in all good conscience they cannot even read the labels warning them about potential problems if they consume the ingredients in these foods.

We do not take the number of illiterate people into account often enough, not in Quebec and not in Canada.

We recently received little cards to send to our constituents who had learned to read. These people, who learn to read with great determination and effort, do not necessarily have the ability to understand the significance of the food described on food product labels.

This affects not just those of us who are used to these things, because we often talk about it, but it affects other people too. It affects children who go to the grocery store or to restaurants at lunch time. They do not know or understand what trans fats are. We have to do more to help them than just list these items on labels. It is a good idea, but it is not the ideal solution.

In early 2003, the Canadian agri-food industry was given three years to label the saturated fat content but not the quantity of trans fat in every product, while smaller companies had up to five years to comply with this new legislation. Five years means they have until December 2007. That is a long time.

Despite these deadlines, some responsible companies, such as Frito-Lay in Alberta, have not only complied, but have already announced they will eliminate trans fat from their ingredients. That means we can keep eating Doritos and Tostitos. My grandchildren will be very happy about that, but I have to stay away from such food.

On a more serious note, currently in North America roughly 50% of adults are overweight or obese. Cardiovascular disease is the primary cause of death in Canada and Quebec. People suffer from many diseases caused by factors we cannot control. However, when we can do something to fight the diseases that afflict are fellow citizens, I think we must do so diligently.

That is why we agree with the NPD motion. We will work together with all the other political parties in this House that want Canada to take a firm stand by limiting the quantity of trans fat allowed in food and follow the example of Denmark where the limit is 2g per 100g of fatty oil in food.

[Armenians, November 5th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on November 14, I will have the opportunity to take part in the festivities for the 10th anniversary of the Armenian Community Centre in Laval and the founding of the Sourp Kevork Armenian church.

The centre promotes the rights and interests of the Armenian community in Laval. By teaching Armenian culture to young people, this centre contributes to preserving cultural identity. As well, through their charity work with the disadvantaged, they are contributing to their host country, Quebec.

The committee espouses the same values as the Bloc Québécois: justice, equality and respect.

We are very proud that in April 2003, Ms. Dalphond-Guiral succeeded in obtaining the passage of Motion M-380 to recognize the Armenian genocide of 1915. We share in this goal of not forgetting this nation's great suffering and its rights and freedoms.

I want to congratulate the Armenian National Committee on its 10 years of service to the community.

[Social Programs, November 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on the eve of the last election, it was a done deal; the only thing missing was the figures.

How can the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development explain that, six months later, he is still negotiating the terms of this agreement?

[Social Programs, November 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, last month's agreement on parental leave was described by federal and Quebec spokespersons alike as a historic agreement. All that was left to finalize was the financial aspect.

Could the minister tell the House what, all of a sudden, is stopping him from signing this historic agreement as soon as possible?

[Assistance to Hepatitis C Victims, November 2nd, 2004]

Madam Chair, I have been listening to the debate for the past two hours or so. I may be a bit naive, being new in this House and having trouble understanding certain things that are going on. We all seem to be in agreement that a serious injustice has been committed toward these fellow citizens who became the innocent victims of tainted blood. We all seem to agree that there have indeed been victims and we would like to provide some compensation. We are, however, having a hard time reaching agreement as to how to do that, and when. That is what I have trouble understanding.

It seems to me that, if the government is one of the bodies responsible for the funds, and the two others are representing the victims, an understanding ought to be reachable.

This is of major concern to me. I can sympathize with the victims and their families, because I have a hemophiliac son. So far, I have been fortunate not to suffer the torments some parents have suffered. I do, however, know the torment we parents feel knowing that our child can at any moment fall victim to hepatitis C, HIV or any other blood-borne disease. I understand very well that this is not easy.

As all those letters were read earlier, I could understand and feel the rage of the people who wrote them. I could also feel their despair. I believe the minister when he says he wants to correct the mistakes that were made. In my mind, when there is a desire to do something, when there is a will, there is a way. I think that the best way of achieving a solution is by taking on this challenge together. Earlier, my hon. colleague from Hochelaga asked the minister to meet the challenge of finding a solution by the recess, around December 17 or 18. For a new member and a new minister , I think this makes for a fine challenge. All of us in this House seem to agree that we want compensation to be provided to the victims of hepatitis C, especially since some of them have been suffering for than 20 years, since 1980 to 1983.

An hon. colleague referred earlier to similarities between this situation and that of veterans from the first and second world wars who had to wait for years for any compensation. My father was one of these veterans. My father was one of 14 survivors at Casa Berardi. I can attest to the fact that he fought for 20 years, just to get hearing aids, which he finally got two weeks before he died. I can appreciate how long it takes, how terribly long the battle can be. One must never give up and say it cannot be done.

We in this place have a duty to these victims. We must not wait for the victims to be on their death bed before giving them what they are owed. The right to quality of life, to maintain this quality of life and to maintain life is a basic right.

I think I will conclude on this, because I am getting very emotional. I hope that our colleagues in this House will accept the challenge of my colleague from Hochelaga and decide to compensate these victims by December 18.

[Quebec Coaches Week, October 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow I will be attending and speaking at a luncheon conference hosted by the sports Laval regional organizing committee and the Laval regional recreation and sports unit, as part of Quebec coaches week. Michel Larouche, a diving coach and one of the spokespersons for the week, will also attend.

While we do need to recognize the important contribution coaches make in the development of sports in Quebec and the quality of their work with athletes of all levels, we need to recognize above all the chronic lack of funding to enable them to continue their extraordinary work with young people.

The government must develop a real sports policy and establish goals for achievement on the national and international scene.

The hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, a former chair of the international mountain bike committee, joins with me in wishing all our coaches the opportunity to continue sharing their passion for sport with young people in conditions that meet their needs—

[Supply, October 28th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech of my colleague and the one made by the hon. member for Saint-Lambert. I was not here earlier, I was at the Standing Committee on Health, but I took the time to listen to their speeches when I returned.

I too was impressed by the quality of the debates and the comments that were made. I know that my colleague talked about the elderly and people who are at risk. This matter is also a major concern of mine.

I know that, in Quebec, we have social economy programs to help the elderly. I know that these programs are in trouble because of cuts that were made in social and health services.

Could my colleague tell us how this has impacted these programs and if solving the fiscal imbalance could solve this problem?

[Quarantine Act, October 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to outline our position on Bill C-12, which sets out to prevent the introduction and spread of highly communicable diseases that can have a devastating effect on the people of Canada and Quebec, such as the Ebola virus, anthrax, and SARS.

The concern about the spread of communicable diseases is nothing new. The first Quarantine Act was enacted in 1377 by the Republic of Venice.

In 1832, the Parliament of Lower Canada passed legislation making Grosse Île, Quebec, a quarantine station in order to prevent the spread of cholera.

This station was under the jurisdiction of the Government of Lower Canada from 1832 to 1841, of the Province of Canada from 1841 to 1867 and of the Government of Canada from 1867 until it was closed in 1937.

Between 1867 and 1918, until this responsibility was turned over to the Department of Heath and Welfare, in 1919, the Department of Agriculture was in charge of the quarantining of immigrants. Given the casual attitude of the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food on the issue of mad cow disease, I am glad to know that this department is no longer in charge of quarantines.

While we agree that Bill C-12, which improves the 1970 act, should be sent to committee before second reading, we must keep in mind that health is the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. However, we recognize that infectious diseases, such as SARS and the West Nile virus, do not stop at the borders. This is why we agree that Bill C-12 should be sent to committee, as long as the measures do not duplicate those that may have been taken previously by Quebec.

However, there are several of these clauses that concern us and for which we would like to suggest some changes or additions.

When the first International Sanitary Conference took place in Paris in 1851, the basic principle of protection against international propagation of infectious diseases was outlined: maximum protection with a minimum of restriction.

Here, the current Quarantine Act was designed when maritime transportation raised more concern than air transportation. However, in the last few decades, air transportation has increased much more than maritime transportation. As evidence of this, last year's events—SARS, the West Nile virus and the flu—showed that outbreaks of infectious diseases are increasing more rapidly than ever.

You will agree that to continue to abide by the principle stated at the 1851 Paris conference, we need to react more quickly, methodically and appropriately to the introduction and spread of communicable diseases. Such a reaction must be supported by fair and adequate legislation.

The existing Quarantine Act was promulgated in 1970. It was passed for the very first time, however, in 1872. It helps protect Canadians and Quebeckers from the introduction of dangerous, infectious and communicable diseases. It prevents those diseases from spreading beyond Canada.

While the existing act is somewhat flawed, we must first ensure that the new act will not ignore basic values such as human respect and dignity.

For instance, whereas under the 1970 act an officer had to have reasonable doubt regarding the health of a traveller before having the individual undergo medical screening, clause 14 of Bill C-12 provides for a completely different mechanism.

Any person authorized by the minister may, to determine whether a traveller has a communicable disease or symptoms of one, use any screening technology that does not involve the entry into the traveller's body of any instrument of other foreign body.

This clause provides for efficient screening methods for all travellers, whereas under the existing act, screening can only take place if there are reasonable doubts.

This authority appears quite broad at first glance. It should be limited through the addition of something like “any medically appropriate technology”.

As far as data management at the first screening stage is concerned, the identity of travellers should be protected. If a traveller were found to have the symptoms of a communicable disease, he would be the only one to be advised. It would only be when such symptoms are detected that personal information could be obtained.

Also, with regard to the disclosure of personal information obtained, clause 56 should contain provision requiring the minister to seek assurances that such information would be held in confidence and that it will only be used for the purposes of the act.

We also have problems with certain clauses which are liable to lead to incursions into provincial areas of jurisdiction, in particular the one allowing the Minister of Health to enter into an agreementwith a public health authority, particularly if this refers to medical personnel.

Then we have clause 30, which states: “The Minister may, on the Minister’s ownmotion, review any decision of a quarantineofficer to detain a traveller and orderthe traveller’s release”.

It would be appropriate to delineate this power in such a case, for instance that the minister's decisions could be based on reports by a committee or group of experts.

Finally, we also have some misgivings about the concept of interim orders, just as we did before when the government wanted to make them part of the Public Safety Act in connection with the infamous military zones.

We need proof that this approach is necessary, particularly since the bill appears to already cover a broad range of possibilities and sets out the powers for those it designates as screening or environmental health officers.

As you can see, we are not spoilers, contrary to what many people might think. We have made a careful and comprehensive analysis of Bill C-12, and it is both our right and our duty as members of Parliament to make sure that decisions made here are an appropriate and respectful reflection of the needs of our fellow citizens in Quebec and Canada.

In conclusion, despite the concerns I voiced earlier, we should not forget that all of this must be put in context with the purpose and the schedule of the bill. The list of diseases it contains is impressive. They are extremely contagious and could have a devastating effect on the public in Canada and in Quebec.

To deal with this kind of disease, precautionary and public health measures should be upgraded from time to time. We must remain alert. Bill C-12, which will supersede the former Quarantine Act, promotes a good principle, even if parts of the bill should be examined in committee to make sure we do the utmost in the fairest and most efficient way.

Health is an exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. But the Bloc admits that communicable diseases such as SARS and the West Nile virus do not stop at our borders. That is why the Bloc will support the referral of Bill C-12 to committee, with the caveat that the measures taken must not duplicate those in Quebec.