Ralph Goodale

[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.

[National Forest Strategy, May 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has repeatedly explained the impact of the current tax rules to the hon. gentleman.

Recently federal and provincial ministers and a variety of others interested in the forest sector have worked very hard on developing a new forest strategy for Canada for the next five year period. Over the course of those five years all of us will be working very hard to ensure that we maximize sustainable development in our forests, including in the woodlot sector. All worthy ideas will be taken into account.

[Varennes Tokamak Project, May 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has contributed some $90 million to this project in Quebec since 1981. In 1996 when the decision was taken not to proceed with fusion work the government undertook a lump sum payment of $19 million to discharge its further obligations with respect to the project. That additional sum of money was paid in 1997.

[Tokamak Project, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the scientific activity the hon. gentleman refers to is scientific activity that is perfectly legitimate and valid but has a return period that is some 20, 30 or 40 years into the future.

In terms of dealing with the climate change issues we must deal with in the next 5 to 10 years, obviously the timing horizon of 30 or 40 years into the future is not particularly helpful. That is not, though, to undermine or to demean the importance of fusion research and it is a subject matter that may well—

[Tokamak Project, May 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is very fortunate to have a very broad mix of energy sources and it is important that we use all of those sources prudently and wisely.

Some of those sources are still in the realm of scientific development. The one the hon. gentleman refers to is one of those. There is certainly interest in that subject matter but it is one of a very long term nature that does not seem to have a short term payback in terms of dealing with issues like climate change, say in the next five to ten years.

[Atomic Energy Of Canada Limited, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it was less than a week ago that this very member asked me in this House to ensure that the workers who would be laid off at Pinawa would be protected under the government's early retirement incentive program. In order to make sure those workers were protected under that program it was a legal requirement that they be notified with respect to their layoff status no later than March 31.

The notices which have been served are for the very purpose of ensuring that the affected workers can benefit from the maximum amount of protection available under the programs of AECL and under the early retirement incentive program.

[Forestry, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, forestry management practices per se are a provincial responsibility but there is an important federal role particularly with respect to science and technology and trade.

I am happy to say that typically the Government of Canada invests its natural resources research budget on a regional basis. With respect to science and technology, 16% in total flows to the province of British Columbia. Last year it was $34 million for important projects.

On trade, I am working with the industry, with union leadership, with the province and with foreign governments and buyers to secure the greatest amount of market access for British Columbia forest products, access that is not only stable for the present time but growing for the future.

[Disability Pensions, March 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in the last Parliament a very distinguished initiative was led by a member of this government who is now the solicitor general in producing a detailed analysis of many of the issues affecting disabled Canadians.

The results of that report were in evidence in the 1997 budget. They were in evidence again in the 1998 budget. The government takes those issues seriously. Many, many disabled organizations in this country have applauded these initiatives on behalf of disabled Canadians.