Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I would seek unanimous consent of the House to proceed to petitions now and to resume debate on this important issue afterwards.
Lost his last election, in 2011, with 36% of the vote.
Committees of the House April 29th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I would seek unanimous consent of the House to proceed to petitions now and to resume debate on this important issue afterwards.
Official Languages Act April 22nd, 2004
Madam Speaker, my colleague makes frequent reference to the members for Compton—Stanstead and Brome—Missisquoi and I understand his concern about getting them re-elected in the region. But that is not what is important. It is the population that is important.
The situation we are experiencing in the Magog and Sherbrooke region involves two countries. It is wrong to say that the International Joint Commission is only involved at the end of the process. Under the Boundary Waters Treaty, actions can be initiated when there are real concerns relating to the environment, of course, when these involve boundary waters.
At this point in time, I believe the government ought to be wanting to intervene. Where the environment is concerned, it is not enough to count on the good faith of the parties, particularly outside parties. The Minister of Foreign Affairs must therefore step in promptly and take some concrete action.
Official Languages Act April 22nd, 2004
Madam Speaker, the expansion of the landfill site in Coventry, Vermont, which threatens, obviously, the drinking water supply from Lake Memphrémagog, involves two countries. As a result, the public is entitled to the support of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Last Monday, the minister told me that the Vermont authorities had assured us that comments by Quebec will receive the same consideration as the ones made by Vermont. This is not necessarily very reassuring, since in Vermont, on the one hand, people will earn significant additional income from the operation of this expanded this landfill site, while on the opposite side of the border in Quebec, there is a significant risk of groundwater contamination, thereby threatening the drinking water supply.
The minister also told us that the Memphrémagog RCM and the City of Sherbrooke are involved in the process and are considering asking for party status, and that they would be entitled to full privileges, including the right to appeal once the decision is made.
The minister also told us that we will be able to present our position to the appropriate American tribunals. If this is not sufficient or if we do not have the opportunity to properly present our case, obviously, we can appeal to the International Joint Commission, but only as a last resort.
Meanwhile, the minister's officials are content to gather information, act as observers and let the people in the area muddle though on their own. They also say they will intervene if this does not work and that they would be ready, at that point, to approach the International Joint Commission.
That is not what people expect. All the steps taken by the people in the area and the stakeholders from the Memphrémagog RCM and the City of Sherbrooke are very costly. They expect the minister to do his share, in view of the foreign aspects of the situation.
Here is my first question. Will the minister provide financial aid for all these proceedings between the two countries, and also assist the community, the City of Sherbrooke and the Memphrémagog RCM? In addition, all of the interventions by these people require a lot of expertise. Will the minister provide them with technical support?
The situation of Sherbrooke and the Memphrémagog RCM involves a great many actions. It is a situation that could be described as a test case. Is the minister aware of all the similar situations that exist all along Canada's and Quebec's borders? If so, will he take action to prevent this happening again?
If the International Joint Commission were to intervene, it could, under the Boundary Waters Act, establish a clear and precise policy covering landfill sites near waters and rivers used for human consumption.
I would like to have some answers from the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The Armenian People April 21st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, my colleague has obviously alluded to the Competition Act.
For a long time now the public has been under the impression that it is being had. Furthermore, a member of this House, the Liberal member for Pickering—Ajax—Uxbridge, at one time had the support of several Liberal members when he made public a report indicating that there was collusion in the oil industry. However, the Conference Board analyses stated that there was no collusion.
The public still feels that it is being taken for a ride. There is no doubt that the world price of oil has an influence. Often, however, the increase at the pump does not reflect this. We also know that there are speculators, which makes the price fluctuate quite a bit. The price also varies considerably from one region to the next and this is not always related to transportation costs.
Profit margins are being created at the processing and refining stage. Given that all the oil companies post the same prices on the same day, it is practically impossible that there is no collusion. Having a petroleum monitoring agency would have been good for the public and helped the government regain the public's trust.
The Armenian People April 21st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the trucking industry is suffering quite a bit from the often unjustified increases in the price of gasoline that also put an unnecessary strain on consumers' budgets. We know that the government is doing very little about the negative effects of increased gasoline prices.
On March 23, 2004, I asked the minister about this. I asked him whether he would agree to create a petroleum monitoring agency, as recommended by the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. To my surprise, the minister said that prices should be and are determined on the market price.
In the meantime, the government has officially announced that it rejects the request by the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology to create a petroleum monitoring agency in order to protect consumers from abuses by the oil companies.
In the government's response there are two important factors that need to be taken into consideration: of course there are market forces, but there is also the very important factor of the democratic deficit within the decision presented by the government.
Regarding market forces, the government says it must not get involved in the process. However, as hon. members may know, since 1970, through subsidies or indirect benefits to the oil industry, the government has invested $66 billion. If that is not interfering in market forces, then I do not know what is. During that same time, only $326 million was invested in clean energy. The government recently gave the oil and gas industries $250 million. Yet, we all know full well that the oil companies have not stopped making huge profits.
There should also be serious concern about management in the petroleum industry and about the GST and other taxes that are collected. No one will forget the 1.5¢ in GST added to the price of gasoline. That is yet another example of indirect interference in market forces. Nor will we forget that the government, on the eve of the election in 2000, gave everyone $125. Thus we see that the government has a serious management problem. We know very well that it was not just people who bought gasoline who received that money. There were also people who did not really need it.
We also know that when the committee passed this recommendation, all the Liberal MPs were in favour. The Prime Minister often says that he wants to eliminate the democratic deficit and yet he does not listen to his own members.
Therefore, concerning the management of the petroleum industry and the government's involvement, what I am really asking the minister this evening is why he refused to create this petroleum monitoring agency. I repeat; it was a one-shot request. It could have enabled the government to find out how petroleum prices are managed.
The Environment April 20th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of the Environment was asked yesterday whether Canada would soon be defining its position on chrysotile, he treated us to such a confused answer that it is impossible to know with any certainty whether Canada plans to include or exclude chrysotile asbestos from the list of products banned under the Rotterdam Convention.
Can the minister give us a clear reply to confirm that there is no question of Canada supporting any kind of chrysotile ban under the Rotterdam Convention?
Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act April 19th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I understand the Minister of Foreign Affairs' position, but one must also understand the environmental context.
I was a city councillor once. There was a land fill site near a river. Therefore, we must examine the situation as a whole and take into account the authority of the International Joint Commission which has the power not only to solve problems, but also to answer questions and see how two countries can agree on future development and not only on this one project.
It is always risky to build land fill sites too close to rivers and streams, especially when they are a source of drinking water. It is a good thing that the public, the City of Sherbrooke, the RCM and the government are discussing the issue, but we can we make sure that an independent study is conducted in order to develop specific policies for the development of land fill sites in areas where there is drinking water?
Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act April 19th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, obviously, this adjournment debate stems from the question I asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs on March 30. However, this debate must be put in context and the situation explained. It concerns the Coventry landfill site.
In Coventry, Vermont, a landfill site is located about 760 metres from Black River, a tributary of Lake Memphrémagog. This lake provides drinking water to over 155,000 people, 125,000 of whom live in the town of Sherbrooke alone.
It is important too to remind members that, according to the regional county municipality of Memphrémagog, various samples taken in 2001 and 2003 upstream from a former landfill site in the same area attested to the ongoing contamination of the groundwater by volatile organic compounds.
This landfill site is set to receive 370,000 tonnes of garbage per year, up from 240,000, a matter that greatly concerns the residents of Sherbrooke since this lake is where they obtain their drinking water, as well as people living along the banks of Lake Memphrémagog.
When I was apprised of this situation on March 1, I immediately wrote the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I received an answer from the Minister of the Environment but not from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. So, I pursued my inquiries on this issue.
On March 30 I asked the minister if he intended to intervene with the International Joint Commission which was established by the Boundary Waters Treaty. When I asked the minister if he could guarantee the House that he would refer this issue to the International Joint Commission in order to ensure a safe supply of drinking water for the people of the Eastern Townships, first, I sensed that the minister was not all that aware of the situation and, second, he referred to the Joint Commission and said that there were two parties and both must agree.
Nevertheless, the act clearly says:
—whenever either the Government of the United States or the Government of the Dominion of Canada shall request that such questions or matters of difference be so referred.
That is a brief extract to say that Canada could intervene if it were aware of the urgency of this matter. We are not assuming at this time that U.S. standards are not being met or are not adequate. However, there is a real fear. Already, right now, we know that the RCM of Memphrémagog and the City of Sherbrooke are investing time, energy and money.
We wonder what the minister will do with this case and what form his intervention will take, since quite a large source of drinking water is at stake. There are some well-grounded fears, considering what I mentioned earlier, concerning samples that have been taken and have proven beyond a doubt that some nasty liquids have found their way into Lake Memphrémagog.
And so, will the federal government undertake to defray costs in some way, and to help the two parties, whether the City of Sherbrooke or the RCM of Memphrémagog, to be well represented, and to ensure that the situation is resolved and safe for everyone?
The Environment April 2nd, 2004
Mr. Speaker, although the Minister of Foreign Affairs is now aware that, by virtue of the International Boundary Waters Treaty, one of the contracting parties can make a reference to the International Joint Commission on any aspect with the potential to impact negatively upon it, he still appears to be unaware of the urgency of the matter. The public is concerned. The region needs to invest time and money in order to make its views heard and protect its sources of drinking water, but in the meantime the minister claims to be discussing the matter with the United States, rather than taking action.
If the minister steadfastly refuses to refer the matter to the International Joint Commission, what assurance can he give the public, and on whose authority?
The Environment March 30th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, because of the international nature of this issue, the Boundary Waters Treaty allows either of the contracting parties to refer matters to the International Joint Commission.
How much longer will the government wait before it refers this to the commission, in order to do all the studies that would ensure a safe water supply for some 150,000 residents of the Eastern Townships for whom Lake Memphrémagog is their drinking water reservoir?