Ralph Goodale

[Natural Resources, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with the hon. gentleman's demeaning of the Canadian fishery. Nor would I agree with the obvious attempt embedded in his question to pit one part of the country against another part of the country, one type of science against another type of science.

Canada is determined to be one of the most innovative nations on the face of the earth. We have indicated that we intend to double over this coming decade our investment in research and development. Canada will be among the leading nations on the face of the earth in the creation and dissemination of knowledge, and we will make the appropriate decisions.

[Natural Resources, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the facilities at Chalk River perform a number of important functions in the Canadian innovation system. They are obviously important in terms of Canada's strong reputation in the field of nuclear science. They perform functions in relation to other dimensions of science that are also important.

Those facilities are in need of refurbishment and renewal for the future. We have been considering the various options that are available to us to accomplish that important objective for the future. We will make a decision in due course based upon sound science and fiscal responsibility.

[Natural Resources, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the government is in the process of considering a number of major science initiatives across the country.

They are not initiatives that are scribbled down on the back of an envelope or that are paid for with a dollar or two out of petty cash. These are major projects. They need to fit within the entire innovation agenda of the Government of Canada. They cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and the government is determined to make the right decisions based on sound science, due diligence and fiscal responsibility.

[Natural Resources, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, while the former member of parliament for that constituency, Mr. Clouthier, was arguing very strenuously for government support for the Chalk River facility, I never heard one peep, not one chirp, not one jot or scintilla of advice from the Reform Party or the Alliance Party in favour of that project. I welcome its newfound interest in the last three weeks.

[The Environment, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, obviously this will take discussion and negotiation with the United States. We believe very much that, in respect of the North American energy situation, there is an important opportunity for Canadians to pursue which can bring economic growth, jobs and technological sophistication to our country.

At the same time, we will also pursue our other parallel objectives that relate to renewable energy, alternative fuels, energy efficiency, energy conservation and sustainable development, all of which are characteristics of an intelligent society.

[The Environment, May 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has repeatedly said that it is in Canada's interest in our relationships with the United States to secure credits accruing to Canada for the clean energy exports that we send to other countries, particularly the United States, when that replaces a more carbon intensive source in that country. Obviously the search for carbon credits to Canadian advantage is very much a part of our agenda.

[Agriculture, May 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, a couple of years ago we amended the Canadian Wheat Board Act in a very fundamental way. Those amendments were based upon lengthy consultations with farmers and others. The clear message from those consultations was that farmers wanted a Canadian Wheat Board that was more democratic, more flexible and more accountable to producers.

That has been provided by the fact that for the first time ever there is a board of directors with 15 members, 10 of whom are directly elected by farmers. It is farmers who should make the decisions, not politicians in the House of Commons.

[Natural Resources, April 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I invite the hon. member to read the budget proposals of the Alliance Party or the Reform Party before she arrived here.

She will discover that those proposals would have gutted the Department of Natural Resources, gutted AECL and destroyed any possibility of that kind of research for the future.

[Natural Resources, April 30th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I point out that while members of the opposition in the last parliament were critical of all sorts of government spending, it was a member of the government, Mr. Hec Clouthier, who fought day in and day out to advance the cause of the CNF in Chalk River. He continues to do so today.

This is a big science decision. It involves many hundreds of millions of dollars. The government is giving it very careful consideration and will announce its decision at the earliest possible moment.

[Nuclear Fuel Waste Act, April 25th, 2001]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-27, an act respecting the long-term management of nuclear fuel waste.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)