Ralph Goodale

[Nuclear Technology, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, there are a variety of safeguards in place with respect to current or future nuclear trade including the requirement of a bilateral nuclear co-operation agreement between Canada and the recipient country and including the imposition of the terms of multilateral agreements such as the non-proliferation treaty which involves complete inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and all international safeguards that apply under the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Only countries that are prepared to sign on to these safeguards are allowed to do business with Canada.

[Foreign Affairs, June 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is comparing two different points in time, 24 years apart, and two quite different sets of rules.

Based in part upon the experience in the 1970s, Canada substantially toughened its nuclear non-proliferation requirements. Bilateral arrangements are required with any recipient countries. Signing onto the international non-proliferation rules is required. International inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency is required.

Anybody who wants to do business with Canada must adhere to those requirements.

[Income Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 1998, June 3rd, 1998]

moved for leave to introduce Bill S-16, an act to implement an agreement between Canada and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, an agreement between Canada and the Republic of Croatia and a convention between Canada and the Republic of Chile for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income, be read the first time.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

[Agriculture, May 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the members of the other place for the work they have done on Bill C-4. They have proposed a number of changes in the legislation which by and large enhance and improve the legislation.

They have made some technical recommendations with respect to a particular role for the auditor general at that moment in time when the corporation ceases to be a crown corporation and becomes a mixed enterprise, while it is going through that rather delicate transition. We have that recommendation under advisement, but I would say at this time that I am reasonably well disposed to that idea.

[The Environment, May 28th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the commissioner's comments relate to that period before Kyoto. Since Kyoto and consistent with the commissioner's advice, Canada's first ministers have all agreed on a collaborative approach. All energy and environment ministers are now assembling the national implementation strategy.

We have both a federal and a national secretariat to co-ordinate the activity. We have allocated $60 million more to energy efficiency and renewals. We have committed $150 million more to building the foundation for longer term action and to trigger early action. The plan is well under way and Canada will meet its commitments.

[Nuclear Testing, May 14th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it really is remarkable the depths to which the opposition will stoop to try to score what appears in their eyes to be a point.

When Canada discovered in 1974 that India had made a nuclear test, we immediately suspended all our nuclear activity with them. We toughened and strengthened the safeguards. We invited India to sign the new safeguards. India declined and we terminated all our nuclear activity with them more than 20 years ago.

[Natural Resources, May 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we are very interested in the potential of district energy systems and have in fact been instrumental in the founding of the District Energy Association of Canada.

We have worked on such projects as the Oujé-Bougoumou project in an aboriginal community in northern Quebec. I personally think the prospects with respect to other projects, including in the national capital region, are promising. It is one of the solutions we intend to pursue with respect to climate change.

[Nuclear Testing, May 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I want to make this very clear. After the first deplorable test by India back in 1974, Canada suspended all nuclear trade with India. We then developed a much more stringent non-proliferation policy in the mid-1970s.

In 1976 Canada terminated all nuclear trade with India after it became clear India would not comply with our non-proliferation policy.

Any reactor, researcher or otherwise sold or provided to any country today would have to adhere to those much higher standards that apply in this day and age.

[Varennes Tokamak, May 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in the course of the government's program review process some very difficult decisions had to be made about priorities.

It was determined in that process that fusion research which has a payback that is at least 30 to 40 years in the future could not at this time be a priority.

Over the course of the last number of years we have invested something in the order of $90 million in the facility at Varennes. We provided an additional $19 million to assist with an orderly shutdown.

Unfortunately, in terms of establishing priorities and living within the confines of fiscal responsibility, tough decisions have to be made.

[India, May 12th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Candu technology sold to India in the 1960s and 1970s was in fact not used by India for the production of its first nuclear weapon back in 1974. After that Indian weapon test in 1974, Canada suspended all nuclear trade with India.

Thereafter the non-proliferation standards were also strengthened and total trade was terminated. This demonstrates that more than 20 years ago Canada was acting decisively to express our dissatisfaction with the kind of conduct that the hon. gentleman mentioned.