Ralph Goodale

[Natural Resources, December 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the questioner refers to the rhetorical positions that have been taken by certain provincial governments indicating a willingness to resolve all matters. Quite frankly, if that willingness were there, they would have resolved it a long time ago.

It is because the provinces have not been able to resolve their differences that the Government of Canada has become involved in order to find a settlement so that this matter can be resolved at the earliest possible date. The Government of Canada is not delaying this matter. The delay rests with the provinces involved.

[Natural Resources, December 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the dispute that exists with respect to the offshore boundary between two particular Atlantic provinces is a matter that is entirely within the control of those two provinces to resolve.

It has become evident over the last number of months that they are not in a position to resolve that matter. Accordingly, I have appointed my own official agent to work with them to see if there is a way to resolve this matter. Failing that, the Government of Canada will put the matter to arbitration in order to ensure that Canadians can enjoy the benefits of those resources at the earliest possible time.

[Health And Safety, November 30th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the hon. gentleman that I take this matter of health and safety in the offshore just as seriously as he does. This matter is under active consideration now between the two governments and the relevant regulatory authorities. I will take every step within my power to assure that those regulations are in place at the earliest possible date so that Canadians can have the necessary assurance about health and safety.

[Agriculture, November 29th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, as I was beginning to say at the end of the previous answer, first, we have put together a safety net package with the provinces that totals $1 billion a year ongoing. On top of that, in 1998 and 1999 we have added more than $1 billion more to strengthen that safety net program.

In addition, in provinces like Saskatchewan we have topped up the NISA program by $75 million. We have triggered available payments of about $435 million. If the emergency program is fully participated in by the provincial government, $585 million more will be made available to Saskatchewan farmers.

[Agriculture, November 29th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy first of all to welcome the hon. gentleman to the House and congratulate him on his election victory in Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar.

Second, let me confirm that the government has a multifaceted approach to this problem. It is a serious problem that all of us should treat seriously. In part the answer lies in the aggressive fight that we are fighting and have fought previously in the world trade circles to ensure that the trade-distorting subsidies of other countries are brought down as rapidly as possible.

In the meantime we need to keep working on strengthening our farm income safety nets. We have put in a long term way, $1 billion into those safety nets. Another $1 billion—

[Agriculture, November 29th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, what the hon. gentleman should know is that the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, the Minister for International Trade, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and myself have raised this issue with the Europeans repeatedly, including commissioner Fischler, and with the United States, including the trade representative Charlene Barshefsky and secretary Glickman. We have also raised it with the Argentinians, the Brazilians and the Australians at the OECD.

If the hon. gentleman wants an all out assault by Canada on the subsidies of foreign countries, that began a long time ago and we will continue until we win.

[Plutonium Imports, November 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I think the hon. member is confusing two quite different things.

She referred to the report of the Seaborn panel, which of course refers to the management of nuclear fuel waste over the long term, to which the government has responded and further action will be forthcoming reasonably shortly.

As for MOx fuel, that is fully covered under the provisions of the Atomic Energy Control Act and the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act. We have made absolutely certain that every provision of that legislation is in force and will be respected in order to protect public health and safety.

[Nuclear Waste, November 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, all of the evidence and information indicates that this is not a dangerous procedure. In fact, even the Greenpeace organization has conceded publicly that this is a safe procedure.

The transportation routes and the emergency response plans have all been reviewed by the Department of Transport under all of the provisions of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act.

Canadians can be absolutely assured that every applicable Canadian law, rule and regulation to protect public health, safety and the environment will be fully and rigorously enforced, and this matter can be undertaken safely.

[Greenhouse Gas Emissions, November 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, for the long term we are working with 16 different issue tables involving 450 Canadian experts in a very open, inclusive and transparent way with the provinces and other levels of government to develop the long term strategy.

In the meantime, we have the climate change action fund. I am pleased to confirm that the Minister of the Environment and I announced this morning an incremental amount of funding of $9.6 million from the climate change action fund supporting 59 different projects across the country in public education, science impacts and adaptation, and in technology measures to make sure that Canada performs well in respect of its climate change commitments.

[Devco, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the process of privatization is an extremely important one. That is where the best hope lies in terms of long term commercial viability for the coal mining sector in Cape Breton, including the maintenance of the maximum number of good long term jobs.

In terms of consultation, that consultation is ongoing, partly in respect of economic development, partly in respect of the privatization process and partly in respect of other elements of this package. In response to the requests of Cape Bretoners, we have made very sure that we have consulted and we will continue to consult.