36th Parliament, 1st Session
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 52
CONTENTS
Wednesday, February 4, 1998
1400
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ARTS AND CULTURE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Sophia Leung |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | CONDITIONAL SENTENCING
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jack Ramsay |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BLACK HISTORY MONTH
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Jean Augustine |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jean-Paul Marchand |
1405
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | THE LATE MARK MACGUIGAN
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Shaughnessy Cohen |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | EATING DISORDERS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Paul Bonwick |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | THE OTHER PLACE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | CESO
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Sarkis Assadourian |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold |
1410
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Robert Bertrand |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. David Chatters |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bob Kilger |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Blaikie |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | TRIBUTE TO SENATOR GUY CHARBONNEAU
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. André Harvey |
1415
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Guy St-Julien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | FOREIGN AFFAIRS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Preston Manning |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Preston Manning |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Preston Manning |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INFRASTRUCTURE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Miss Deborah Grey |
1420
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Miss Deborah Grey |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gilles Duceppe |
1425
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gilles Duceppe |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Michel Bellehumeur |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Stéphane Dion |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Michel Bellehumeur |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Stéphane Dion |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BANK MERGER
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Alexa McDonough |
1430
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Paul Martin |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Alexa McDonough |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Paul Martin |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jean J. Charest |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jean J. Charest |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | SURTAX
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Monte Solberg |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Paul Martin |
1435
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Monte Solberg |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Paul Martin |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Pierre Brien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Stéphane Dion |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Pierre Brien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Stéphane Dion |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INDIAN AFFAIRS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Mike Scott |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jane Stewart |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Mike Scott |
1440
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jane Stewart |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BILL C-28
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Yvan Loubier |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Yvan Loubier |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INDIAN AFFAIRS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Myron Thompson |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jane Stewart |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Myron Thompson |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jane Stewart |
1445
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | VICTORIA BRIDGE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mrs. Pierrette Venne |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | MAPLE SYRUP INDUSTRY
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Denis Coderre |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Lyle Vanclief |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | CABLE SERVICE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jim Abbott |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Sheila Copps |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jim Abbott |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Sheila Copps |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BANK MERGER
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Lorne Nystrom |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Sergio Marchi |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Lorne Nystrom |
1450
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Paul Martin |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INFRASTRUCTURE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Casey |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Casey |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | STUDENT LOANS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Reg Alcock |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | NATIONAL DEFENCE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Art Hanger |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton |
1455
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BILL C-28
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Odina Desrochers |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mrs. Michelle Dockrill |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Ralph E. Goodale |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INFRASTRUCTURE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Borotsik |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | MONEY LAUNDERING
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Roy Cullen |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Andy Scott |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | TRANSPORT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Lee Morrison |
1500
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. David M. Collenette |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | POINT OF ORDER
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Bill S-4
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Lee Morrison |
1505
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Ken Epp |
1510
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Gilmour |
1515
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Don Boudria |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | The Speaker |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | THE LATE MARK MACGUIGAN
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Herb Gray |
1520
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Randy White |
1525
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Louis Plamondon |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Blaikie |
1530
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter MacKay |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | THE LATE MR. BRUCE BEER
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Albina Guarnieri |
1535
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Chuck Strahl |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Pierre de Savoye |
1540
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Blaikie |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter MacKay |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | THE LATE DAVID ORLIKOW
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis |
1545
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rey D. Pagtakhan |
1550
1555
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Miss Deborah Grey |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mrs. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral |
1600
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Borotsik |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | MEMBERS BENEFITS STUDY COMMISSION
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Don Boudria |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Motion
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Procedure and House Affairs
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
1605
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | CRIMINAL CODE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Bill C-305. Introduction and first reading
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Val Meredith |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | BANK ACT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Bill C-306. Introduction and first reading
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Denis Paradis |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | PETITIONS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Canadian Wheat Board
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Borotsik |
1610
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Procedure and House Affairs
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Motion for concurrence
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Motion
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | PENSIONS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Svend J. Robinson |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Motion
|
1615
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Randy White |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bill Blaikie |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. John Nunziata |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Chuck Strahl |
1620
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Bob Kilger |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. John Nunziata |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | PETITIONS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Rail Service
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter MacKay |
1625
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Public Nudity
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jim Karygiannis |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Family Rights
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Abortions
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Alcoholic Beverages
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Svend J. Robinson |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Goods and Services Tax
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Nelson Riis |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
1630
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Borotsik |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY DEBATE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Iraq
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | The Speaker |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jean J. Charest |
1635
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Peter Adams |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Don Boudria |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | The Speaker |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | GOVERNMENT ORDERS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INCOME TAX AMENDMENTS ACT, 1997
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Bill C-28. Second reading
|
1710
(Division 69)
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Motion agreed to
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Don Boudria |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | INCOME TAX ACT
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Bill C-223. Second reading
|
1715
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Grant McNally |
1720
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Scott Brison |
1725
1730
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Roy Cullen |
1735
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gilles-A. Perron |
1740
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Alex Shepherd |
1745
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Inky Mark |
1750
1755
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Steve Mahoney |
1800
1805
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jim Pankiw |
1810
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY DEBATE
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Speaker's Ruling
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | The Speaker |
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | ICE STORM 1998
|
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
1815
1820
1825
1830
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Preston Manning |
1835
1840
1845
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gilles Duceppe |
1850
1855
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Yvan Loubier |
1900
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Alexa McDonough |
1905
1910
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Angela Vautour |
1915
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Jean J. Charest |
1920
1925
1930
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Ms. Diane St-Jacques |
1935
1940
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Marcel Massé |
1945
1950
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Don Boudria |
1955
2000
2005
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rahim Jaffer |
2010
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jay Hill |
2015
2020
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton |
2025
2030
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Larry McCormick |
2035
2040
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mrs. Pauline Picard |
2045
2050
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Stéphane Bergeron |
2055
2100
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Joe Jordan |
2105
2110
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Nick Discepola |
2115
2120
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Laliberte |
2125
2130
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Yvon Godin |
2135
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. Lyle Vanclief |
2140
2145
2150
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Alex Shepherd |
2155
2200
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. André Bachand |
2205
2210
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. David Price |
2215
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Hon. John Manley |
2220
2225
2230
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. John Harvard |
2235
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. John Williams |
2240
2245
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Rick Casson |
2250
2255
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Mac Harb |
2300
2305
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Guy St-Julien |
2310
2315
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Odina Desrochers |
2320
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Maurice Godin |
2325
2330
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Clifford Lincoln |
2335
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. David Pratt |
2340
2345
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Werner Schmidt |
2350
2355
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jim Gouk |
2400
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mrs. Karen Redman |
2405
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Paul Szabo |
2410
2415
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien |
2420
2425
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Réal Ménard |
2430
2435
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. André Harvey |
2440
2445
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gerald Keddy |
2455
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Jason Kenney |
2500
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Yves Rocheleau |
2505
2510
![V](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/b_stone1.gif) | Mr. Gurmant Grewal |
2515
2520
(Official Version)
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 52
![](/web/20061116195450im_/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/common/images/crest2.gif)
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Wednesday, February 4, 1998
The House met at 2 p.m.
Prayers
1400
[English]
The Speaker: As is our practice on Wednesday we will now
sing O Canada, and we will be led by the hon. members for
Beauséjour—Petitcodiac and Acadie—Bathurst.
[Editor's Note: Members sang the national anthem]
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
[English]
ARTS AND CULTURE
Ms. Sophia Leung (Vancouver Kingsway, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I want to thank the Minister of Canadian Heritage for her recent
visit to Vancouver.
The minister participated in a discussion with 25 leaders of
arts and culture in B.C. This is the first such encounter in
B.C. to my knowledge. Our meeting was very productive and
revealed a need for further discussion on Canadian culture. The
people of B.C. want to have their say in creating the Canada of
tomorrow.
The participants were delighted to speak on cultural issues.
They value the minister's work as a champion for Canadian culture
and her willingness to engage in discussion on this important
topic.
* * *
CONDITIONAL SENTENCING
Mr. Jack Ramsay (Crowfoot, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the
Alberta court of appeal's scathing indictment of the Liberals'
legal loophole called conditional sentencing is completely
justified.
The court of appeal stated that the use of this skimpily drafted
legislation undermines respect for the law. This scathing
judgment is fully justified and here are just some of the reasons
why.
Darren Ursel received a conditional sentence after abducting and
sodomizing a young woman. Eric Robertson walked free after
pleading guilty to 11 counts of indecent and sexual assault. Just
last week a Montreal judge allowed two men to walk free after
they were convicted of forcefully raping a teenage girl.
In the face of this unacceptable use of conditional sentencing,
what has our justice minister done? Absolutely nothing, except
to say “Leave it to the appeal courts”.
We on this side of the House implore the justice minister to
immediately amend the law and plug the loophole. Deny rapists
and other violent offenders the benefit of this legal loophole.
Make the amendment before respect for the law—
The Speaker: The hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore.
* * *
BLACK HISTORY MONTH
Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, on December 14, 1995 the House of Commons declared
February as Black history month. Canadians have recognized that
African Canadian history is a part of Canadian history.
Across our nation community organizations, provincial
governments and hundreds of individuals will be commemorating and
paying tribute to the significant contributions which African
Canadians have made historically and will continue to make to the
economic and social development of our nation.
From the United Empire Loyalists to the newcomers of today,
Canadians of African origin have worked in the domestic trade,
the medical field, the agricultural sector and in the business
sectors of our economy.
I am proud to take this opportunity to commend every
organization and individual who is working to provide greater
public awareness by sharing with the broader communities the
diverse history of our country.
* * *
[Translation]
ICE STORM
Mr. Jean-Paul Marchand (Québec East, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I
wish to thank the people of Québec East for their solidarity toward
the victims of January's ice storm. Their generosity meant that a
very large number of people were able to receive assistance.
I would like to draw particular attention to the initiative of
Mayor Émile Loranger of Ancienne-Lorette, which provided assistance
to over 3,000 victims.
1405
The city hall served as the control centre for co-ordinating
free accommodations for 1,025 people from Saint-Hyacinthe and
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu in more than 15 hotels. In addition, some
thirty city employees and a number of volunteers were also involved
in the operation, canvassing numerous companies for assistance.
Thanks to all those who were so generous with their
assistance, Ancienne-Lorette's Operation Ice Storm Solidarity was
a resounding success.
Congratulations to all those involved.
* * *
[English]
THE LATE MARK MACGUIGAN
Ms. Shaughnessy Cohen (Windsor—St. Clair, Lib.): Mr
Speaker, earlier this month Canadians lost a wonderful judge and
former parliamentarian, the Hon. Mark MacGuigan of the Federal
Court of Appeal.
Mark MacGuigan represented Windsor—St. Clair which was known
then as Windsor—Walkerville in this House for 16 years. Others
will speak of him later today. Some spoke of him yesterday at a
memorial service. On February 14 there will be a memorial service
in Windsor at which others, including his constituents, will
speak.
Let me say this to those of us who are here and particularly
those of my colleagues who did not know Mark MacGuigan. For
those of us on the backbench who sometimes wonder what kind of an
effect we are having, I suggest that you measure your progress by
that of the late Hon. Mark MacGuigan. As a member of this House,
he was the father of our Constitution. He led those debates and
he led those committee discussions prior to 1982. As a civil
libertarian and as a backbencher, he also became the father of
our great charter.
* * *
EATING DISORDERS
Mr. Paul Bonwick (Simcoe—Grey, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today
I rise challenging my colleagues across Canada to join the
National Eating Disorder Centre in combating a quiet killer.
Eating disorders, like anorexia and bulimia, are affecting as
many as 20% of young Canadian women. Imagine colleagues, young
women in high schools, colleges and universities around this
country, two out of every ten of them are showing symptoms of
these diseases.
This unknown epidemic is destroying the lives of hundreds of
thousands of young Canadian women across this country. This
disease knows no boundaries.
Colleagues, please assist in educating your constituents about
these disorders, for recognizing these disorders is the first
step in defeating them.
In my riding we have felt the agony of losing some of our young
women to these deadly diseases. However organizations like the
Simcoe County Eating Disorder Association are determined to make
sure these tragedies do not occur again. Please take time to
learn about this disease that is killing our young women in all
parts of Canada.
February 1 to 7 is Eating Disorder Week in Canada. Please join
in.
The Speaker: My colleagues, I hope you will always
include the Speaker in any of your statements, rather than
speaking just directly to one another.
* * *
THE OTHER PLACE
Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz (Yellowhead, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the
patronage packed parliamentary senior citizens home, called the
other place, is due for renovations. The desks, paintings and
chandeliers can stay in the red chamber but the mouldy Tory and
vacationing Liberals must go.
Senator Ron Ghitter, the red Alberta Tory, should be the first.
This hand picked appointee should be shamed out of office. Last
year he only worked half time but still cost taxpayers a cool
$155,000. Mr. Ghitter sits in the seat once held by Stan Waters,
Canada's first elected Senator.
Senator Ghitter, do the honourable thing and let your name stand
in a Senate election.
* * *
CESO
Mr. Sarkis Assadourian (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr
Speaker, I rise in the House today to acknowledge the
contributions of two of my constituents to the Canadian Volunteer
Advisors to Business, CESO.
Mr. Ernest Nemeth has recently completed a CESO assignment to
Russia where he assisted in the development of export
opportunities for a light aircraft manufacturer. Mr. Jim Murray
was in Latvia assisting in the development and growth of a
plastics manufacturing firm.
CESO is celebrating its 31st year of providing assistance to
developing nations, emerging market economies and Canadian
aboriginal communities.
Congratulations to my constituents for their valuable volunteer
contributions.
* * *
[Translation]
REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold (Jonquière, BQ): Mr. Speaker,
yesterday the prime minister and intergovernmental affairs minister
received a basic lesson in democracy from two of their federalist
allies.
Claude Ryan and Daniel Johnson publicly disavowed Plan B of
the federal strategy, reference of the Quebec question to the
Supreme Court. Loud and clear, they affirmed the right of the
Quebec people to freely determine its own future.
1410
What is important, however, is that these two former leaders
of the 1980 and 1995 no campaigns clearly represent the emergence
of a consensus in Quebec on this matter. They felt obliged to
insist that the future of Quebec is in the hands of the people of
Quebec.
The federal government must face facts: the strategy of going
to the Supreme Court turned out to be a very bad idea. Since a
Quebec consensus is in place, reference to the Supreme Court is
pointless.
* * *
ICE STORM
Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, the people of Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle faced
considerable hardship during the days of the ice storm. We also
witnessed extraordinary generosity, and I would like to tell you
today how great it was.
We will not soon forget the generosity of the municipal
leaders and other representatives of social and economic groups.
We will long remember the spontaneous acts of solidarity, not to
mention everybody's incredible patience.
We have also realized that the spirit of self help is our
community's greatest asset in a fight to ensure our
survival—nothing less.
The Government of Canada will spend some $250 million to help
the victims.
We will remember that, at the height of the storm, over 15,000
regular and reserve military personnel were deployed to help local
authorities in all the regions affected.
In short, while I hope that no one will ever have to face a
catastrophe of such proportions again in the future, I want to
thank everyone—
The Speaker: I am sorry to interrupt. The hon. member for
Athabasca has the floor.
* * *
[English]
ICE STORM
Mr. David Chatters (Athabasca, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
yesterday I and my colleagues from this side of the House toured
the sugar bushes of eastern Ontario and met with many local
producers.
The massive devastation that this ice storm has left on one of
Canada's heritage industries is indescribable. These producers
are feeling abandoned and neglected and need immediate assistance
to prepare for the 1998 season. They also need long term
professional assistance to evaluate the long term effects on the
maple trees.
The maple sugar season is only 30 days away and action is needed
to be taken right now. I urge this government to act immediately
to save this unique Canadian industry from becoming a fatality of
the ice storm of 1998.
* * *
ICE STORM
Mr. Bob Kilger (Stormont—Dundas, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
residents of Cornwall and Akwesasne and the counties of Stormont,
Dundas, Glengarry, Prescott and Russell will always remember the
ice storm of 1998.
The government House leader and I join in congratulating the
municipal leaders and their employees, firefighters, police,
hydro crews, local radio stations and the numerous volunteers who
gave unselfishly of themselves to serve others in need.
We salute the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for
their invaluable assistance. They were proud to serve and we are
proud of them.
[Translation]
We could relate a number of stories of individual heroism
arising from this experience, but the bottom line is that Canadians
gave their all and were concerned for the welfare of others.
[English]
I agree with the hon. House leader and quote with sincerity,
“Never before has the spirit of community and mutual
responsibility been so deeply felt. Thank you all.”
* * *
MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT
Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker,
more and more Canadians are coming to the view that the
multilateral agreement on investment is not in the best interests
of Canada. These same Canadians are also concerned about the
secretive nature of the negotiating process and feel that there
is a need for more input from the Canadian public.
Canadians do not trust Liberal assurances about culture, about
the environment and other things threatened by the MAI that
Canadians value, like public services and the power of
democratically elected governments to act in the public interest.
The NDP stands with all Canadians opposed to the MAI and will be
doing all it can to work with the national campaign against the
MAI. The NDP calls on other MPs, a few of whom seem to be seeing
the light, to join us in the effort to make the Prime Minister
and the Minister of International Trade rethink their commitment
to the MAI.
Let us not permit the MAI to change the golden rule into a rule
that says those with all the gold make all the rules.
* * *
[Translation]
TRIBUTE TO SENATOR GUY CHARBONNEAU
Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi, PC): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for
giving me this opportunity to pay tribute to Senator Guy Charbonneau.
The Hon. Guy Charbonneau made an important contribution to Canada
as a captain in the Fusiliers Mont-Royal regiment during World War II,
as an entrepreneur and as a senator. Indeed, he held the position of
Speaker of the Senate for nine years, longer than anyone else since
Confederation.
His dedication to and involvement in democratic life in Canada
cannot go unrecognized. For 35 years, he was an active member of the
Progressive Conservative Party. He believed in democracy and in the need
for Quebeckers to have an alternative.
1415
It has been said that, with his passing, Quebec lost a faithful son
and Canada a loyal patriot. I agree.
I join with my colleagues in expressing support to his family and
friends and, on behalf of my party, extend my deepest condolences.
* * *
ICE STORM
Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for
me to stand in this House to thank the people of Abitibi at the
municipal level, in the health sector and the RCMs, the James Bay Cree
and the Air Creebec airline, Transport Canada and community
organizations.
During the ice storm and its disastrous aftermath, they provided
unending support by gathering wood and donating funds, food and
equipment for the storm victims in the southern part of Quebec.
I thank the volunteers, carriers, Hydro-Quebec and Telebec workers
and others who did not spare time or effort.
I also thank the people of Abitibi whose generosity brings home to
Quebec the strength and beauty of Canadian solidarity.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
[English]
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, a few hours ago Boris Yeltsin declared that the United
States might provoke global warfare if it followed through with
its threatened attack on Iraq. No one seems to know whether this
was a calculated definition of the Russian position or one of
those off the cuff comments the Russian president is inclined to
make.
Does the prime minister have a more accurate assessment of the
Russian position? And if he does, would he be willing to share
it with the House?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I have nothing new to say. I have been informed of the
statement made by the president of Russia. The situation remains
the same for us. I guess it is also the position of the Russians
that we should have a negotiated settlement.
As far as I know, Russia's position is that Saddam Hussein
should respect the resolution of the security council. This is
Canada's position also. Our efforts at this moment are to try to
resolve it diplomatically. The Russians, the French and others
are involved.
As for us, there has been no decision made by anybody at this
moment to go beyond trying to find a negotiated settlement.
Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, despite the confusion on the Russian position it would
appear that the Iraq issue is becoming more confrontational and
urgent by the hour. Yet this Parliament has not received any
in depth briefing on this matter and Parliament has not even
discussed the principles which should guide us in supporting or
opposing actions by the U.S. and the United Kingdom or the UN.
Would the prime minister agree that Parliament should have a
debate on this subject as soon as possible? Would he be willing
to ask the House to arrange a date and a time as expeditiously as
possible?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, as I said earlier this week, if there is military
intervention and Canada is asked to participate, there will be a
debate in the House of Commons before a final decision is made by
the Government of Canada.
Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, if it is demonstrated that Saddam Hussein is continuing
to produce weapons of mass destruction, and if this is done in
defiance of UN resolutions, and if diplomatic efforts fail to
stop it, then Canada is going to be asked whether it will support
or oppose military action to uphold the UN resolution. To
properly make that decision Parliament needs an update on the
state of readiness of the Canadian military for potential action
in Iraq.
Would the prime minister commit to having that information
available to Parliament at the earliest possible date?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, of course before we have a debate we will make sure
people are properly informed of the readiness of Canadians forces
to participate in a situation like that. There is no request for
Canada to participate and so no decision has been made by anybody
at this time. Everybody is working to convince Saddam Hussein to
respect the decision of the security council.
* * *
INFRASTRUCTURE
Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
back when he was transport minister, Doug Young gave $32 million
to build a road in New Brunswick.
When he got booted out of Parliament last summer, he bought that
same highway for a toll road for himself.
1420
Some hon. members: Oh, oh.
The Speaker: The hon. member for Edmonton West.
Miss Deborah Grey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate
that.
Back when he was transport minister Doug Young spent $32 million
of taxpayer money to build a road in New Brunswick. Then after
he got booted out of Parliament last summer he bought that same
highway to use as a toll road for himself and the ethics
counsellor says “that's okay with me”.
I want to ask this prime minister why are the ethics of his
government based purely on a wink and a handshake so much like
Brian Mulroney's ethical questions?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): I do not
know if we are celebrating a wedding, Mr. Speaker, but I want to
say that the member for Cumberland—Colchester has talked with
the ethics counsellor about it. He went to see him. All that
has been discussed with the member.
There is a post-employment code for public office holders. That
is a public document. Mr. Young has satisfied all these
requirements and the deal they are talking about is the
construction of a road by the provincial Government of New
Brunswick. The federal government has nothing to do with the
construction of this road.
Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, if
done properly, private-public partnerships for infrastructure
would be a really good idea.
What is so dangerous about the Doug Young scandal is that it
absolutely smears the reputation of these projects. The idea of
public-private roads should not be tainted by patronage and
corruption.
Yesterday the Minister of Transport expressed nervousness, saying
that he does not want—
The Speaker: I ask all hon. members to be very judicious
in their choice of words. I would like the member to go to her
question, please.
Miss Deborah Grey: Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to ask the transport minister if he thinks if the shoe
fits, wear it. Yesterday he said that he did not want such
flip-flops in the future. If it is not okay for the future, why
is it okay now?
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, when one cuts through all the rhetoric I think there
is a legitimate public policy question that has to be addressed
and that is, in future federal-provincial agreements how are we to
take into account the fact that tolls may be charged. I think
that is a legitimate issue to be debated in Parliament, perhaps
by the transport committee.
The hon. member opposite should not confuse public policy with
an attempt to smear an individual, a former member of this House.
* * *
[Translation]
REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker,
yesterday, Claude Ryan, leader of the No camp in 1980, and Daniel
Johnson, leader of the No camp in 1995, voiced their profound
disagreement with the reference to the Supreme Court.
For his part, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs kept
repeating that there should be a legal framework for the democratic
process of a referendum on the sovereignty of Quebec. But there is
already a legal framework.
1425
Does the Prime Minister realize that the 1980, 1992 and 1995
referendums in which he took part were always held within the
context of the law?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
the Referendum Act is a law governing popular consultation. It
cannot govern the separation of a province wishing to leave a
country that all citizens have an interest in keeping together.
As for democracy, when will the Bloc Quebecois realize that
the people of Quebec have twice decided to remain in Canada? When
will it respect the will of Quebeckers?
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker,
a few days before the referendum, I heard the Prime Minister speak
the following words in Verdun: “The question is clear. If you
vote Yes, you will live in another country, and if you vote No, you
will remain in Canada”. Now he says he did not understand this
question. We, however, know that, on two occasions, this same
Prime Minister did not keep his promises. We in Quebec know that.
The Prime Minister took part in three referendums in Quebec.
In so doing he, like his predecessors, Mr. Mulroney and Mr.
Trudeau, accepted and recognized Quebec's referendum process and
its legal framework. Why then does he refuse to recognize this
same legal framework today?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I said that a referendum act is for a popular consultation. But
the decision to separate Quebec without respecting the legal
framework is unacceptable. Everyone must respect the Constitution
of Canada because it is a democratic constitution protecting all
citizens of Quebec and of the rest of Canada.
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur (Berthier—Montcalm, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my
question is for the Prime Minister.
On the evening of the 1980 referendum, Pierre Elliott Trudeau said
“this evening we are experiencing both the most beautiful and the most
painful sides of democracy”.
By now trying to impose a new legal framework for the next Quebec
referendum, is the Prime Minister not in full contradiction with his
former boss, who recognized that the referendum of 1980 was held in an
eminently democratic fashion?
Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen's Privy Council for
Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it
is unfortunate that I do not have with me the speech made by the former
Prime Minister, but I would invite the hon. member to read it to the
end. The Prime Minister of the time made it clear that he had no
intention of negotiating anything resembling a secession based on such
a confusing question.
I would also ask the hon. member to read the Quebec Referendum Act,
which clearly states that referendums are consultative in nature. It is
for this reason that, according to the person who drafted the
legislation, Mr. Burns, no rules are set in terms of the majority
required, given the importance of what is at stake. The fact is that
referendums are only consultative in nature. They carry more or less
political weight, depending on the clarity of the question and of the
answer.
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur (Berthier—Montcalm, BQ): Mr. Speaker, not
only is the Prime Minister repudiating is former boss, he is repudiating
himself. On October 31, 1995, he said, and I quote: “In a democracy, the
people are always right”.
My question is for the Prime Minister. What has changed since 1995
for the Prime Minister to no longer accept the legal framework that
applied then and that he himself recognized?
Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen's Privy Council for
Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
the Prime Minister who was in office in 1995, and whom we are pleased to
still see in that position, said in this House, before the then Leader
of the Opposition—who is now the premier of Quebec and who did a
great deal of ranting and raving—that we had to comply with the
Constitution and that it was out of the question for Quebeckers to lose
Canada as a result of confusion. The Prime Minister even said “If you in
the BQ and the PQ ask a clear question, you will take quite a
beating”.
* * *
[English]
BANK MERGER
Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my
question is for the finance minister.
Yesterday the finance minister accused the NDP of hijacking the
bank merger process. It is the minister who is hiding behind a
task force that will not report for eight months. The task force
in fact told him not to wait. I will quote directly: “We do not
expect the world to wait for our final report. Changes are
taking place quickly. Decisions must be made. It would be
unrealistic to put everything on hold until our processes have
been concluded”.
1430
Why does the minister not stop behaving like a deer frozen in
the headlights and let Canadians have their say?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, these are indeed strange times. We have just seen this
cuddling up on the far right. Again we have an example of the
NDP seeking to lobby for their new found friends in the big banks
and seeking to have them jump the cue.
Let me simply say to the Leader of the NDP, she will not allow
her clients to jump the cue. We will establish public policy and
then we will decide the issues.
Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the
finance minister blabbers on about jumping the cue. He dismisses
the genuine concerns of Canadians as verbal diarrhoea.
If you ask Canadians should we change the existing federal
policy that big banks shall not buy big banks, they would say
“No way, no thanks”.
Is that why the Minister of Finance is afraid to let Canadians
have their say?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, quite the contrary. The reference to obiter excreta
really comes from what the hon. member was saying.
In fact let us understand very clearly that what we want is a
full public debate. We want to have the task force report. We
want to have the debate take place in this House and across the
country. The NDP are not going prevail against the will of
Canadians.
* * *
[Translation]
TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY
Hon. Jean J. Charest (Sherbrooke, PC): Mr. Speaker, the
Minister of Transport said that, when the amount of $32 million was
allocated for the highway in New Brunswick, he did not know that a
toll highway was planned.
Can the Prime Minister tell us whether it is the policy of his
government to charge for highways twice, or whether he does not
instead intend to ask the Government of New Brunswick to return the
$32 million taken from Canadian taxpayers' pockets?
[English]
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, this particular agreement was a normal
federal-provincial highway agreement whereby the federal
government paid $32 million to New Brunswick. It is a small
portion of the total cost of the highway.
Subsequent to that the New Brunswick government decided, in
these times of restraint, to engage the private sector and hence
the introduction of tolls.
What I have said is that there is nothing wrong with the
agreement, the rule under which this deal was made. There is a
legitimate issue that should be decided on, how we structure
future deals. That is something we should discuss in this House.
Hon. Jean J. Charest (Sherbrooke, PC): Mr. Speaker, the
minister also said yesterday and I quote “It was never envisaged
that a province or a private company would profit”. That is an
exact quote from the very same minister.
Patronage is taking its toll on the Liberal benches. I would
like to know from this Prime Minister whether or not he is going
to stand up for the Canadian taxpayer and demand that the $32
million be returned to where it should be? It should be returned to
the Government of Canada rather than taken from the taxpayer of
Canada.
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I have said publicly that the $32 million will not
be factored into the toll regime by the private company. That
answers the question.
I hope the hon. member can understand that.
* * *
SURTAX
Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, in
the 1986 federal budget the then finance minister Michael Wilson
slapped a 3% and 5% surtax on every Canadian taxpayer, calling it
a temporary deficit reduction measure.
Does today's finance minister agree with this 3% and 5% deficit
reduction surtax? Should it be eliminated immediately now that
the books are in balance or is he prepared to continue with what
amounts to a $3 billion rip-off of Canadian taxpayers?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, it is probably perfectly reasonable for the hon. member
to attempt to establish a position at this time.
We will be bringing down a budget in the not too distant future
at which time the government's budgetary plans will be revealed.
We do not have to take a back seat to this party or any other on
reducing taxes. We reduced them for families with children. We
reduced them for people with disabilities. We reduced them for
students. In each and every case this member and his party
opposed those tax reductions.
1435
Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
am sure the finance minister will want to explain to Canadians
their position on the GST, whatever it is this week. Income tax
was a temporary measure 80 years ago.
Now the finance minister is trying to weasel out of the fact
that their government is prepared to continue to keep the 3% and
5% temporary taxes introduced by the Tories.
We want to know why the government is not prepared to loosen the
burden for Canadians who are suffering under this huge $3 billion
a year rip-off.
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, what I guess we would like to know is why the hon.
member would swallow himself whole. Before Christmas all we ever
heard was taxes, taxes, taxes.
Now, all of a sudden, the percentage of taxes to be cut has
changed. His obsession with taxes has changed. No longer is he
interested in taxes. In fact, he is even suggesting to one of
his members from Manitoba that provincial income taxes should go
up.
One member from Alberta would suggest to compensate for the CPP
that personal taxes go up. When is this Reform Party going to
understand that we are going to reduce taxes? We do not want to
increase them the way they do.
* * *
[Translation]
REFERENCE TO SUPREME COURT
Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question
is for the Prime Minister.
Yesterday, Daniel Johnson, the leader of the Liberal
opposition in Quebec, clearly stated that it was up to Quebeckers
alone to decide on the wording of the referendum question.
Does the Prime Minister agree with this clear statement by his
main federalist ally in Quebec, the very individual he recognized
as the leader of the No camp in 1995?
Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen's Privy Council for
Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, the National Assembly obviously has the right to put
whatever questions it wishes. The Government of Canada, in Mr.
Ryan's opinion, has the power to determine whether it believes that
Quebeckers wish to cease being Canadians.
Mr. Ryan says we have the power, we say we have the
obligation, and the court will tell us whether we have the right.
Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Mr. Speaker, by
stubbornly going ahead with the Supreme Court reference, will the
Prime Minister or his minister admit that he is in the process of
losing all his federalist allies, including the leader of the 1980
No camp, Claude Ryan, and the leader of the 1995 No camp, Daniel
Johnson, and that now his only allies are the Reform Party, the
Equality Party and Guy Bertrand?
Hon. Stéphane Dion (President of the Queen's Privy Council
for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, many Quebeckers think that the last question was unclear,
that the procedure was unclear. We even know that it was
fraudulent, that the Quebec government wanted to use our savings as
Quebeckers, up to $17 billion of our savings, to try to prop up
markets shaken by secession.
We have nothing to learn about democracy from people who have
lied to Quebeckers.
* * *
[English]
INDIAN AFFAIRS
Mr. Mike Scott (Skeena, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, eight months
ago the minister of Indian affairs invited aboriginal Canadians
to write her personally about their concerns. She promised
confidentiality.
When Bruce Starlight wrote, that promise was broken and the
letter was leaked directly to Chief Roy Whitney, the subject of
the letter.
Yesterday the minister admitted that this may be a breach of the
oath of secrecy. My question is, who did the breaching? Was it
the minister and her office or was it Roy Whitney's golfing
buddy, the Prime Minister?
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I made it clear in this
House yesterday that I have asked for an investigation of the
process of this letter and how it travelled through my
department.
Indeed, I am outraged that the letter was received by Chief
Whitney, but we have a process in place to review this.
My question is how does the hon. member think anyone can take
him or his party seriously about the issues of aboriginal people
when what they want to do is cut a billion dollars out of the
budget of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development?
Mr. Mike Scott (Skeena, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, how can
anybody take this minister seriously after this breach of
confidentiality? The minister says that there is an
investigation under way and a government employee is doing the
investigating.
This smells more like damage control and whitewash than it does
a proper and sincere attempt to get at the truth. Will the
minister commit here and now to calling in the RCMP for a proper
investigation?
1440
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, let us be clear that the
gentleman who is going to do the investigation is outside the
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. He is a
man who has 20 years of experience in security and review. He
will do a complete and thorough job.
Again, if we want to talk about confidence, I have no idea how
the hon. member opposite intends to build any kind of confidence
with aboriginal people when what your party wants to do is cut $1
billion from education, housing and infrastructure for aboriginal
people. It is an investment which you do not view as being
important—
The Speaker: My colleagues, I would ask that you be sure
to address the Chair in your answers and questions.
* * *
[Translation]
BILL C-28
Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speaker, Bill
C-28 amends certain provisions of the Income Tax Act and proposes, among
other measures, to ease the tax requirements for Canadian businesses
that have subsidiaries involved in international shipping, in tax havens
such as Liberia and Bermuda. Oddly enough, this tax saving measure would
be retroactive to the 1995 fiscal year.
My question is for the Minister of Finance. Who asked him to make
such an amendment to the Income Tax Act, and how many Canadian
businesses will benefit from this measure?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
will answer the question because this is a very important issue.
I heard the comments made by Bloc Quebecois members, who are trying
to question the integrity of the Minister of Finance. Let me say that
this decision in no way puts the Minister of Finance in a conflict of
interest situation.
The companies currently held in trust will not benefit in any way
from the decision made by the Department of Finance to improve the tax
system. Bloc Quebecois members are totally wrong to try to tarnish the
reputation of the Minister of Finance.
Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I
simply asked a question. I did not tarnish anyone's reputation. And I
expect a reply to my supplementary.
Can the Minister of Finance tell us if the few businesses that will
benefit from this generous tax measure include Canada Steamship Lines,
which is fully owned by the minister and which has a number of
subsidiaries in Liberia and Bermuda?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
answer is no.
* * *
[English]
INDIAN AFFAIRS
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is
obvious that the Indian affairs minister has sent a message to
the grassroots native people. She has told them to shut up and
stop bothering her or they will end up like Bruce Starlight.
How many people had access to this confidential letter and who
are they?
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member will
wait, we will discover that as a result of the investigation.
The message that this party is giving to grassroots aboriginal
people is that we believe in the existence of aboriginal rights.
We understand that our role is to reflect those rights in
Canadian society. Through our statement of reconciliation and
our response to the royal commission, we have shown that we have
a plan and a vision to build harmony, which is a breakthrough for
aboriginal people in this country.
We see none of that in the platform of the party of the hon.
member.
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I am
afraid this investigator is a spin doctor. I do not think he is
an investigator. It ought to be the police. Grassroots natives
across this country know of the friendship between the Prime
Minister and Chief Roy Whitney.
Can the minister tell the House that no photocopies of Bruce
Starlight's letter went to any colleagues in cabinet or to the
Prime Minister's office, yes or no?
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we have a very strange
pattern that has evolved as a result of questions from that
party.
First of all, I would note that last fall the members for
Dewdney—Alouette and Edmonton North were forced to admit that
allegations they made in this House were false and without fact.
Today the member for Edmonton North is again smearing a former
member of this House, with no truth and no proof.
Yesterday in the paper the member for Skeena had to admit that
the accusations he is making about Chief Whitney are based on
something for which he has no evidence to support.
* * *
1445
[Translation]
VICTORIA BRIDGE
Mrs. Pierrette Venne (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, BQ): Mr.
Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.
In order to avoid total closure of the Victoria Bridge in
Montreal, which would penalize the 40,000 drivers who use it daily,
can the Minister of Transport make a commitment today to take all
the steps necessary to—
The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Transport has the floor.
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, we are involved in discussions at the present time with CN
on the Victoria Bridge, and I remain optimistic that it will be
kept open after March 1, to the benefit of everyone in Montreal.
* * *
MAPLE SYRUP INDUSTRY
Mr. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question
is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.
It is clear that the Canadian maple syrup industry, with its
$120 million of business yearly, has been heavily affected by the
recent ice storm.
Can the Minister tell the House what financial assistance is
planned to compensate the maple syrup producers for damage to their
trees, and what reassurances they can be given?
[English]
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, right after the heavy part of the storm
was over I personally witnessed the damage throughout rural
Canada, including that in the maple industry. The damage varies.
I can honestly say that it was severe to very severe in the maple
bushes throughout eastern Ontario and Quebec.
The support from the federal government, as we know, must be
instigated by the provinces and then the support through the
disaster funding assistance program agreement with the provinces
kicks in.
We have already mentioned some of the types of things that would
be covered such as the repair and replacement of pipelines, et
cetera.
* * *
CABLE SERVICE
Mr. Jim Abbott (Kootenay—Columbia, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
unfortunately Canadian consumers are getting dinged in Mr.
Rogers' neighbourhood these days. The cable giant is again
taking advantage of its Liberal sanctioned monopoly to punish
nearly two million Canadians across this country. This time
around the subscribers get to pay $2 a month for absolutely no
extra channels and no extra service.
Why does the government not stand up and put Canadians first
rather than last?
Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, there is a very simple way of ensuring that one has
no increase and that is to stick to the basic service.
Mr. Jim Abbott (Kootenay—Columbia, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
what she is saying is that Canadians will not have a choice. They
presently have an extra package and if they want to maintain that
extra package they are going to have to pay an extra $2 because
of the extra channels they do not want.
What are the choices? Is this a Liberal choice? Why do the
cable companies have the monopoly they have? Why does the
government not give Canadians the option? Why does this
government not give Canadians the opportunity to see competition
and do their job?
Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.):
We have, Mr. Speaker.
* * *
BANK MERGER
Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Qu'Appelle, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my
question is for the Minister of Finance.
The minister made a ridiculous statement saying the NDP is
trying to hijack the process in terms of public hearings and bank
mergers. How can he say that when the minister himself hijacked
the process in December when he signed a WTO agreement allowing
more foreign banks in this country?
Why did he sign off on that WTO agreement in December without
proper consultation with the Parliament of Canada, the people of
this country or a report from the task force on financial
institution? How could he do that?
Hon. Sergio Marchi (Minister for International Trade,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there were many consultations in terms of
the financial services agreement. It has been around a number of
years. We had our APEC conference in Vancouver. Given the Asian
crisis and the currency situation there was solidarity in saying
that the crisis is not going to go away by blocking or building
walls. It is by being more transparent, and that is exactly the
basis of the financial services package. It is a win for the
global community, as it is for the Canadian community.
Hon. Lorne Nystrom (Qu'Appelle, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my
supplementary question is for the Minister of Finance.
What the government did was pepper spray the people, not listen
to the people. Why is the minister supporting a committee of
Liberal backbenchers studying this merger? We all know he is
salivating to be prime minister of this country, but if he wants
to be leader of the country can he explain why Liberal
backbenchers can study the matter but Parliament and the Canadian
people cannot? Explain that effect on democracy.
1450
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, what I have said is that the government is not going to
decide on this issue until the task force reports and there has
been a public debate. Liberal members are going to study this
because they are concerned with this issue and they want to work.
The real issue is not why Liberal members are studying it on
their own; it is why are NDP members not studying it on their
own, why are Reform members and Tories not. The answer is that
the membership on this side of the House is one heck of a lot
better.
* * *
INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Bill Casey (Cumberland—Colchester, PC): Mr. Speaker,
my question is for the prime minister. I appreciate his earlier
mention but his own code of ethics states that at no time shall a
former minister act on behalf of a company in connection with any
ongoing proceeding to which the government is a party and on
which the minister advised the government.
In the case of the New Brunswick highway Doug Young was a
minister, he is now acting on behalf of a company, it is an
ongoing proceeding, the government is a funding partner and Doug
Young did advise the government.
Considering that, will the prime minister explain how his code
of ethics could possibly clear his former minister?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, it is because someone who is no longer a member of this
House has the right to work. I will ask Mr. Wilson if it is
wrong that he is the vice-chair of Dominion Securities although
he is a former minister of finance. What about Jake Epp, a
former minister of energy who is now senior vice-president of
TransCanada Pipelines? What about Don Mazankowski, a former
minister of transport who is now on the board for Greyhound? He
was also minister of finance and he is on the board of Great-West
Life?
There is nothing wrong with that as long as they respect the
post-employment guidelines.
Mr. Bill Casey (Cumberland—Colchester, PC): Mr.
Speaker, with all due respect, not one of those people wrote a
cheque for $25 million. In my meeting with the ethics counsellor
the other day he said there were many issues of concern that
should be of concern to the Minister of Transport. Maybe that is
why John Grace, Canada's information commissioner, said that the
ethics counsellor should answer to Parliament in the same way as
the auditor general.
Will the prime minister commit to having his ethics counsellor
answer to Parliament at least on this issue?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, the ethics counsellor met with the hon. member and
discussed the issue with him. He discussed the issue in public.
He met and discussed it with the hon. member. He appears in
front of committees. If he is invited to appear before the
committee he will tell the public what he said to the member in
private.
* * *
STUDENT LOANS
Mr. Reg Alcock (Winnipeg South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
Canadian Alliance of Student Associations has been tireless in
its pursuit of improvements to the student loan program. Today
the Minister of Human Resources Development met with CASA. Was
the minister able to assure it that getting an education will not
mean a lifetime of debt?
Hon. Pierre S. Pettigrew (Minister of Human Resources
Development, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the
member for Winnipeg South and all the members of the standing
committee for their hard work. I know they have met with
representatives of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations.
I had lunch with them today. They have made a very valuable
contribution to the options we are considering now in order to
improve our Canada student loans program. The prime minister's
millennium fund will also help thousands of young Canadians
pursue post-secondary education.
We hope to announce more details on these and other measures in
the coming weeks as we follow up on our youth employment
strategy.
* * *
NATIONAL DEFENCE
Mr. Art Hanger (Calgary Northeast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
Major General Romeo Dallaire has been promoted to
lieutenant-general. We in this House are all familiar with the
allegations surrounding the deaths of the 10 Belgian soldiers who
were executed while under General Dallaire's command. However,
the public has not heard about General Dallaire's decision to
send unarmed men on a reconnaissance mission, a mission that led
to the death of a Uruguayan peacekeeper and the wounding of a
Bangladeshi.
My question is for the defence minister. In light of these
incidents and allegations, would it not be more appropriate to
wait until these matters have been resolved before granting his
promotion?
Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton (Minister of National Defence,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, General Dallaire has acted in a proper
fashion. He has acted both on behalf of Canada and on behalf of
the United Nations in a very professional fashion.
1455
He will be appearing before a United Nations commission with
respect to the Rwanda matter. But I think he has acted quite
properly. The promotion is quite warranted.
* * *
[Translation]
BILL C-28
Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière, BQ): Mr. Speaker, clearly
Bill C-28 will benefit only Canadian businesses with marine
transportation subsidiaries located abroad in countries considered
tax havens. Some ten or so businesses will likely end up enjoying
hundreds of millions of dollars in tax savings thanks to taxpayers.
Can the Minister of Finance tell us whether CSL Self Unloader
Investment Bermuda, in Bermuda, will benefit from the tax measure
he himself introduced in Bill C-28?
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I am very surprised that the hon. member is rising to ask the same
question in an attempt to sully the reputation of the Minister of
Finance, when I already said no categorically.
* * *
[English]
CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Mrs. Michelle Dockrill (Bras d'Or, NDP): Mr. Speaker, in
reference to the notice of question given to him this morning I
ask the prime minister this. Is there a secret plan in existence
to privatize the Cape Breton Development Corporation or, failing
that, to shut Devco down, putting another 1,700 Cape Bretoners
out of work?
Hon. Ralph E. Goodale (Minister of Natural Resources and
Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, as the hon. member knows, a private sector firm has made
a proposal and is studying the feasibility of the concept. I
have not received—
Mrs. Michelle Dockrill: Yes or no.
Hon. Ralph E. Goodale: Mr. Speaker, the rudeness of the
member is rather startling.
The answer is a feasibility study is being conducted by a
private sector firm on its own initiative and no decision will be
taken by Devco or by this government until we get that
information.
* * *
INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): Mr. Speaker, my
question is for the prime minister.
Yesterday in this House the Minister of Transport rose and
stated that the government had entered into an agreement with the
province of New Brunswick; as a matter of fact it would respect
that agreement, a deal is a deal.
The helicopter deal was not a deal. The Pearson airport deal was not
a deal. Scrapping the GST was not a deal.
Will the prime minister please tell me today if the only deals
that are respected are those entered into with former Liberal
cabinet ministers? Is he prepared to tell Doug Young to go hit
the road?
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the question because it gives me another
opportunity to explain to the hon. member that we are talking
about a $32 million federal contribution out of a total deal of
$887 million. The federal contribution is not going to be
factored into the tolling arrangement now being charged.
In other words, the federal contribution is not financing the
tolls on that highway. I hope the hon. member can get that
through his head.
* * *
MONEY LAUNDERING
Mr. Roy Cullen (Etobicoke North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
G-7 financial action task force has been critical of Canada for
our failure to eliminate money laundering activities in this
country. International criminals are the beneficiaries of
inaction on our part.
Will the solicitor general please advise this House what Canada
is doing to address this serious problem of international money
laundering.
Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I am delighted to have the opportunity to respond to the
member's question.
Very specifically, the ministry is seized with the question of
money laundering. That is the reason I recently visited Vancouver
and visited the co-ordinating committee on organized crime. That
is the reason why last fall in our first ever statement on
organized crime I announced that this session we will be bringing
forward legislation to do just that.
* * *
TRANSPORT
Mr. Lee Morrison (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, ever since the Minister of Transport announced the
appointment of Mr. Justice Estey to do a review of the grain
handling system, the CPR and the CNR have been issuing a
blizzard of notices of discontinuance of rail lines. They are
trying to get in ahead of the deadline.
If they are allowed to continue this, breaking the spirit of the
Canada transportation act, if not the letter of the law, by the
time Mr. Justice Estey gets his report in there is not going to
be much left to report on because they will have chopped up
piecemeal the entire rail system.
1500
My question for the minister is will he use his ministerial
powers to have a moratorium on rail line abandonments until Mr.
Justice Estey has concluded his work?
Hon. David M. Collenette (Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is correct in the sense that
the railways are expected to follow the spirit of the law, if not
the letter of the law. I have every confidence that they have
been doing that and they will do it.
On the specifics, the hon. member made an allegation that
somehow the railways are engaged in this kind of activity. I
will certainly look into that and get back to him at the earliest
convenience. I do not believe that that is the case. I believe
that they are acting in good faith and that they want to
co-operate with Mr. Justice Estey and his commission.
The Speaker: That will bring to a close our question
period for Wednesday.
My colleagues, I want to listen to a point of order and then I
will go directly to tributes for the day. The point of order
will be presented by the hon. member for Cypress
Hills—Grasslands.
* * *
POINT OF ORDER
BILL S-4
Mr. Lee Morrison (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to Bill S-4, an
act to amend the Canada Shipping Act, which was sent from the
Senate on Monday, February 2.
Bill S-4 violates Standing Order 80 which states that “all aids
and supplies granted to the sovereign by the Parliament of Canada
are the sole gift of the House of Commons and all bills for
granting such aids and supplies ought to begin with the House as
it is the undoubted right of the House to direct, to limit and to
appoint in all such bills the ends, purposes, considerations,
conditions, limitations and qualifications of such grants which
are not alterable by the Senate”.
I would like to point out that while we in the official
opposition support the principle of this bill, we are against the
practice of introducing bills in the Senate for ethical reasons
and, in this case, reasons that breach the financial privileges
of this House as stated in our rules and as provided for in
section 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
1505
Specific to my argument is Bill S-4's attempt to enact proposed
amendments to part IX of the Canada Shipping Act which seeks to
substantially increase the limits of liability for owners of
ships, docks, canals and harbours. The federal government is a
major owner of ships, docks, canals and harbours. It will be
liable under the terms of this bill.
Bill S-4 substantially increases ship owners' limits of
liability anywhere from 300% to over 2,600%, depending on ship
tonnage.
The liabilities for the owners of docks, for example the
government, canals and ports and any persons for whose negligence
from such an owner is responsible would be increased to the
greater of $2 million or $1,000 times the tonnage of the largest
ship that has used the dock, canal or port within the previous
five years. If the loss or damage in question was the result of
their personal negligence where the damage had been intended or
where it had been known that the damage was probable, the owners
of docks, canals or ports would lose the benefit of even that
increased limitation. Therefore, not only does this bill
increase the limit of liability upon the crown but it removes the
benefit in a certain number of conditions.
On June 12, 1973 the Speaker ruled that Bill S-5, the Farm
Improvement Loans Act, was out of order because the bill, while
not in itself proposing a direct expenditure, did propose
substantial additional liabilities on public moneys. The Speaker
ruled that the bill infringed on the privileges of the House.
On September 23, 1991 the Senate Speaker ruled out of order a
Senate bill that sought to extend war veterans' benefits to
merchant seamen. The Speaker pointed out that the bill would
give rise to claims by merchant seamen and their spouses against
the government and would cause the government to incur
liabilities.
The proposed amendments to the Canada Shipping Act would
substantially increase the limits of liability upon the
government, as was the case with the merchant seamen bill and the
Farm Improvement Loans Act.
In the report of the special committee of the Senate appointed
to determine the rights of the Senate in matters of financial
legislation, it was concluded that the Senate cannot directly or
indirectly originate one penny of expenditures of public funds or
impose a cent of taxation on the people. This conclusion would
support the Speaker's rulings with respect to the Farm
Improvement Loans Act, the merchant seamen bill and my arguments
regarding Bill S-4.
This government by introducing this bill in the Senate has
ignored the fact that through the centuries the principle has
always been maintained that taxation requires representation and
consent. This government has not figured out that the only body
in Canada that meets this test is the House of Commons. The
elected representatives of the people sit here, not in the other
place.
Mr. Speaker, I therefore ask that you remove Bill S-4 from the
order paper since it violates the financial privileges of this
House.
Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I would like
to support my colleague's point of order by addressing
specifically the liability of the crown.
I would argue that the liability issue that my colleague has
referred to regarding ships in section IX of the Canada Shipping
Act is applicable to the federal crown despite the fact that this
is not expressly stipulated in the act. The presumption of crown
immunity from statute, in both its common law form and as enacted
in section 17 of the Interpretation Act, only applies to statues
which are prejudicial to the crown.
1510
Liabilities for crown owned docks, canals or harbours are not
imposed by the Canada Shipping Act, but arise from section 3(b)
of the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, which states: “The
Crown is liable in tort for the damages for which, if it were a
private person of full age and capacity, it would be liable in
respect of a breach of duty attaching to the ownership,
occupation, possession or control of property ”.
In the Alphonse Desjardins case, 1994, the Quebec Court of
Appeal ruled that other provisions of the Canada Shipping Act did
not apply to the crown, but that the provisions in part IX did
apply to the crown. In that case a boat owned by the crown was
charged with discharging pollutants into the St. Lawrence River,
contrary to section 664 of the Canada Shipping Act. The
application of an offence provision, such as section 664 in part
XV, would prejudice the rights and interests of the crown.
Another more obvious reason why section 664 would not apply to a
crown owned vessel is section 641 of the act, which declares that
“this Act does not, except where specially provided, apply to
ships belonging to Her Majesty”. There is no similar provision
for government owned docks, canals or harbours.
Bill S-4 unmistakably constitutes an indirect demand for supply
because it would leave the crown bound to make a demand for
supply.
The government House leader keeps reminding this House that my
party supported a Senate bill in the last Parliament. I would
like to point out that the official opposition plans on
supporting the principle of Bill S-4, Bill S-3 and Bill S-5. The
principle in these bills is not what is at issue here.
What is at issue here is the principle of democracy. It is
obvious from the minister's comments that he does not recognize
that the people of Canada are represented in this House and not
the unelected Senate.
Mr. Speaker, I conclude by saying that I ask that you consider
this argument which we have put forward today carefully and
remove Bill S-4 from our order paper as soon as possible.
The Speaker: I think we are bordering on debate, but if
there are other facts which hon. members would like to present, I
am prepared to hear them.
Mr. Bill Gilmour (Nanaimo—Alberni, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
also rise to support my colleague's motion.
Beauchesne's sixth edition, citation 11, comments on the
necessity to adjust the interpretation of our precedents and
traditions in the light of changing circumstances.
Mr. Speaker, when this issue was first brought to your attention
this citation was referenced in terms of the five parties which
presently sit in the House of Commons, as opposed to the two
which sit in the Senate.
I would also like to add the argument that when the Fathers of
Confederation drew up the Constitution Act, 1867, they included a
provision which restricted the Senate.
Section 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867, provides that:
Bills for appropriating any Part of the Public Revenue, or for
imposing any Tax or Impost, shall originate in the House of
Commons.
Back in the 19th century most of the work of Parliament
concentrated on the appropriation of money. Today the government
has grown so large and is so extensively involved in the
every-day lives of Canadians, it would make sense that this
restriction upon the Senate be expanded.
The reason for restricting the Senate back in 1867 was because
senators were unelected and unaccountable to the people. They
are still unelected and they are still unaccountable to the
people.
The evolution of our rules includes keeping the relevant rules,
discarding those rules which no longer make sense and adopting
new rules when new rules are needed. For example, members of
this House are protected by the privilege of freedom of speech
which goes back to the bill of rights of 1689. At the same time
we are guided by rules which were adopted only a few short months
ago which addressed the reality of five parties in this House.
The Senate issue today is more of a 20th century matter. Since
the present day Senate simply does not fit into a modern
democracy, we should consider bringing the Senate into the 20th
century. To begin this process the government could end the
practice of introducing bills in the Senate today. It is that
simple.
I would ask that the Speaker consider my remarks, as well as
those of my colleagues, and judge on them.
1515
Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, first this is not a question of
privilege as was alleged from the beginning. If it were a valid
point it would be a point of order. However, it is not a valid
point at all. The Senate does not rule the bill to be out of
order where it was introduced. The bill does not include a royal
recommendation.
In the submissions of the members who have raised this, there
are reflections on speeches of ministers, five parties in the
House of Commons and so on. This has nothing to do with whether
or not a bill requires a royal recommendation.
Finally, if the hon. members across are advocating a
constitutional change, may I suggest that a point of order will
not achieve it.
The Speaker: Yesterday a point of privilege was
raised on another bill and I am still gathering evidence on that.
I would like to juxtapose the bill that is being referred to, I
believe it is S-4, as the member said, and I would like to
satisfy myself and I am sure hon. members will give me enough
time. Just so we understand, this was raised as a point of
order, not as a point of privilege and I will treat it as such.
If there are no other points of order, I am going to proceed to
tributes. The first tribute is to a former parliamentarian, the
Hon. Mark MacGuigan.
* * *
THE LATE MARK MACGUIGAN
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the late Mark MacGuigan.
He was a person of remarkable talents and abilities, with
outstanding achievements as a scholar and professor of law, as a
parliamentarian and cabinet minister, and finally as a judge of
the Federal Court of Appeal. He had two earned doctorates, one
in philosophy and one in law. He taught in the law schools of the
University of Toronto and Osgoode Hall.
Two of his students at the University of Toronto were none other
than the present Minister of Finance and the member for Toronto
Centre—Rosedale. I am sure that they would be the first to say
that Mark's teaching helped prepare them for their current
achievements and that any deficiencies on their part are surely
their own responsibility.
It was not surprising that when the University of Windsor
decided to establish a faculty of law it turned to Mark MacGuigan
to be its founding dean. He came to Windsor in 1967 and by the
spring of 1968 he had organized the school and was making it
ready for its first students.
Pierre Trudeau was elected as Liberal leader in the spring of
1968. He called an election a few weeks thereafter and this led
to the long time member for Windsor—Walkerville, the Hon. Paul
Martin Senior, leaving the House of Commons to become government
leader in the Senate. Many Liberals in the riding urged Mark to
seek the Liberal nomination. He did so and went on to be elected
in that famous 1968 general election.
Although relatively new to Windsor—Walkerville when first
elected, he rapidly won the confidence of his constituents who
re-elected him four successive times. That he sought office as a
Liberal was not surprising. His father was a Liberal cabinet
minister and later a judge in his home province of Prince Edward
Island. Mark was proud of his island origins and Irish heritage.
The Minister of Finance in a church service yesterday told the
story that when as a child Mark was asked about his origins he
said he did not know but that he knew one thing for sure and that
was that he was a Liberal.
In the 12 years between 1968 and 1980, he set high standards in
the quality of his work as a parliamentarian. He showed what
many observers outside of this House do not sufficiently
recognize and that is what a member of Parliament can do and
achieve without first entering the cabinet.
He was chair of the special committee on statutory instruments
in 1968-69, joint chair of the special joint committees on the
Constitution of Canada in 1970-72 and again in 1978. In this
capacity he made important contributions to the development of
the concept of a Canadian charter of rights entrenched in a fully
Canadian Constitution and what this should mean for the civil
liberties of all Canadians.
1520
He was chair of the justice committee in 1975 and chair of the
subcommittee on penitentiaries in 1976. He was parliamentary
secretary first to the minister of manpower and immigration and
then to the minister of labour and multiculturalism. Finally in
1979 he was briefly opposition critic for the solicitor general.
With this successful parliamentary experience it should not have
been too surprising that when Pierre Trudeau formed his last
government in 1980 and he invited Mark into his cabinet, it was
not in some junior post but rather first as foreign minister,
then called the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and next
as Attorney General and Minister of Justice.
As foreign minister he was an active voice for Canada around the
world. As Minister of Justice he worked to bring the law closer
to ordinary Canadians and to serve them better through the
operation of our legal system.
He did not run in the 1984 election but was instead appointed to
the Federal Court of Appeal. There he brought his intellect and
legal scholarship to bear in an amazingly productive way. I am
told that in his close to 14 years on the bench he wrote some 300
judgments. Most of them represented the majority view of the
court and many have come to be considered as leading cases in the
fields they covered.
I had the privilege of serving in this House with Mark for some
16 years. In fact his riding adjoined my own in the city of
Windsor. There we shared countless platforms and events and
worked together on projects important to our community. Here in
Ottawa we worked together in our caucus and in cabinet.
Throughout, everything he did was touched by his personal
simplicity, his humanity, his natural down to earth friendliness.
He could speak. He could communicate on equal terms in the same
direct friendly manner with everyone he met, whether they were
foreign ministers of other countries, provincial attorneys
general, blue collar workers or newcomers to Canada in his own
riding.
Everything he did was inspired by his own deep religious faith,
influenced by the great Roman Catholic religious philosophers he
had studied in such depth, especially Saint Thomas Aquinas and
his modern interpreter, Jacques Maritain. This faith was the
basis for his commitment to the cause of human rights and civil
liberties.
He believed, as he wrote in his book which was published just a
few years ago, Abortion, Conscience and Democracy, that an
acceptance of a pluralistic society is God's plan for the world.
I cannot conclude these remarks without noting the remarkable
courage with which he fought against his final illness for
several years. He continued during all this time his vital work
as a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal.
We have lost in Mark MacGuigan a remarkable human being, a great
Canadian.
In 1995 Mark was awarded the Tarnopolski Medal for Human Rights
by the Canadian section of the International Commission of
Jurors. He reflected, I am sure, his view that his task and that
of all of us was and is, to paraphrase the words of the 82nd
Psalm, to judge the poor and fatherless, to do justice to the
afflicted and destitute, and to rescue the poor and the needy.
Mark MacGuigan was a loving husband, father and grandfather. On
behalf of the Government of Canada and the Liberal caucus, on my
own behalf and also on behalf of his successor from Windsor, the
current member for Windsor—Walkerville, I express sincere
condolences and sympathy to Mark's wife, his children and his
grandchildren. May his memory be as a blessing.
Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
I rise today to pay tribute to Mark MacGuigan.
Mark MacGuigan served Canada in such a way as to set a standard
for many Canadians to achieve. Not only did he serve in this
House of Commons but he spent many remarkable years as a federal
court judge.
Mark held portfolios in external affairs and justice before he
was appointed to the bench in 1984. He was well known for his
ardent support of the charter of rights and for his support of
freedom of choice in the abortion debate.
1525
We in this House are saddened by the death of a colleague who
stood by his convictions and stepped out in front of the crowd to
be heard.
Canada was changed forever by Mark MacGuigan's criminal code
reforms and amendments to modernize the divorce law as well as
the increased influence he had on reforms to immigration laws.
Today my colleagues in the Reform Party join with our colleagues
in all parties to salute a dedicated Canadian who served his
country so well. We also pass along our sincere regrets to his
family and many friends across Canada.
Farewell, Mark MacGuigan.
[Translation]
Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would like to
add my voice to those of my colleagues from the Liberal Party and the
Reform Party to regret the passing of this former Liberal minister.
This minister, who was the Minister of External Affairs from 1980
to 1982 and the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada from
1982 to 1984, was known as a competent minister, who showed respect for
his opponents, was a perfectionist and, more importantly, made himself
very available.
He was a native of Prince Edward Island. Like his father, who was
a minister too and a Supreme Court judge, he studied law. He taught law
at three universities.
Many MPs past and present were his students, and he is remembered as an
excellent professor and an outstanding communicator. This talent for
communication eventually led him to a career in politics. Following his
election in 1968, he sat in this House for 16 years.
I also remember him because, as a student and a young teacher
interested in politics, I followed his career. I was deeply touched, for
example, by the battle he waged for the American draft dodgers during
the Vietnam war. He wanted to amend the Immigration Act.
As a member of Parliament, he was a model in terms of both
attendance in the House and personal action of a member who believes in
a cause. After his years as a minister, he left the political arena in
1984, after participating in the leadership race following Trudeau's
departure. He was appointed a justice of the Federal Court of Appeal.
His career as a judge was successful as well. However, he will be
remembered mostly as a MP devoted to his constituents and a profoundly
human man.
In my name and in that of all Bloc Quebecois members, I would like
to extend our deepest condolences to all of his family and his party.
[English]
Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker,
I rise on behalf of all my NDP colleagues in adding our sincere
condolences to the family of Mark MacGuigan.
I had the pleasure of serving in this House with Mr. MacGuigan
from 1979 to 1984 and I remember him well.
We pay tribute this day to a distinguished career in the public
service, a distinguished career in academia, which was recognized
earlier by the Liberal member who spoke of his selection to head
up the University of Windsor law school, a distinguished career
in Parliament as a backbencher and as a minister, and a
distinguished career after Parliament on the judiciary.
I want to remember him in particular as someone who
self-consciously wrestled as a person of faith with the many
difficult questions that people of religious orientation have to
deal with in politics. He had to deal as a Roman Catholic with
various difficult issues having to do with abortion and divorce.
I understand he wrote a book on these subjects and how to deal
with these very difficult topics in a pluralistic society. I did
not know about that book until I read about it in one of the
obituaries. I now look forward to reading it because it seems to
me that he was wrestling, with his considerable intellectual
powers, with very difficult questions which all of us need to
address.
This is one of the aspects of parliamentary life that sometimes
goes unnoticed in the back and forth and the rough and tumble of
this place. We sometimes miss the fact that many of us, and in
this case Mark MacGuigan, wrestle at a competent and deep
intellectual level with a lot of difficult issues.
We pay tribute to someone who was willing to do that, to do it in
the public domain and to offer his life as a service to Canada.
1530
Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC):
Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the members of the Progressive
Conservative caucus to offer our sympathy to Mrs. MacGuigan, her
children and the children of the Hon. Mark MacGuigan.
I want to take a moment to give thanks for his life and for his
public service to Canada. Dr. MacGuigan's parliamentary career
brought him in contact with many issues that still resonate
around this House. He tried to improve the way this House does
its work. He was the co-chairman of the special joint committee
on the Constitution of Canada in 1971. He took an avid interest
in the statutory instruments committee and understood its
importance to the freedoms of all Canadians.
His ministerial career came at a time when Canada was examining
its place in this hemisphere. The justice system having to deal
with family relationships and the devastation caused by drunk
driving was one the many issues he touched upon in his
distinguished legal career. He was certainly an accomplished
jurist and legal scholar and professor, as touched upon by some
of the other members.
Mark MacGuigan leaves behind a record of achievement and respect
for others upon which he reflected at a 1971 convocation at the
University of Prince Edward Island where he said “institutions
and people change slowly and one must not allow impatience even
in the cause of righteousness to cause a lack of respect for the
freedom of others to believe and live differently from us”. Very
prophetic words.
As a dedicated thinker and tribune, he has come to the end of
his life. Canadians and this House are better for his
participation in public affairs. We mourn his passing.
* * *
THE LATE MR. BRUCE BEER
Ms. Albina Guarnieri (Mississauga East, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, on January 12, 1998 the long and distinguished life of
Bruce Beer came to a peaceful conclusion after 87 memorable
years. Residents of my riding of Mississauga East and others
throughout the Peel region as well as today's deputy prime
minister will affectionately recall a hardworking community
minded friend who embodied grassroots politics.
In 1962 Bruce Beer stunned political observers when he was
elected to the House of Commons and became the very first Liberal
to represent Peel county in the 20th century. Residents in Peel
remember his bubbly populist campaigns often quenched by his
supporters' chants of “we want Beer, we want Beer”, which was
obviously a winning slogan.
Peel residents showed so much respect for Bruce Beer that he was
victorious in four consecutive elections. The Right Hon. Lester
B. Pearson recognized Bruce Beer as a man who emerged from the
steepest challenges of the century to represent his community in
Parliament. Mr. Pearson appointed him as parliamentary secretary
to several ministers during his tenure, including finance
minister Mitchell Sharp.
At the age of 12 Bruce Beer put his own education aside to help
out on the family farm in difficult times and continued to
sacrifice his clear academic potential in support of his family
and community throughout the Great Depression.
Only at the end of that sparse era did Bruce Beer return to
academics. Earning many scholarships, Mr. Beer graduated from
the Ontario Agricultural College in 1939. For the next 20 years
Bruce Beer earned the confidence of the many diverse farming
communities in Peel. He was sowing the seeds of his future in
politics.
After his groundbreaking victory for the Liberals in 1962, Beer
continued to fight for the issues of greatest concern to his
constituents. His own experiences in the Depression led to a
staunch advocacy for farm loans programs and milk subsidies that
maintained the strength of the farming communities in southern
Ontario.
He was a fixture on the agriculture committee and was
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture for the
bulk of his career where he could have maximum impact on the
issues closest to his heart and community.
1535
Mirroring the transition occurring in Peel County during his
tenure as Peel's MP, Bruce Beer broadened his impact beyond
agriculture. While representing rural farming communities as
well as townspeople, Bruce Beer met the challenges of a region
engaged in rapid transition toward urban industrialization. He
received the post of Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Finance at a time of unprecedented economic and industrial
expansion in Canada and especially in Peel which has since
expanded from one to seven ridings.
Mr. Beer continued to serve his community after retiring from
public life in 1972, always making time to assist people in the
community.
Mr. Beer is survived by his wife, three children and six
grandchildren, who can all be proud to have known the man whose
potential and hard work eclipsed the world of challenges and lead
him to the House of Commons while never leaving his roots in the
farming communities of southern Ontario.
I am sure all members of this House join me in extending
heartfelt sympathies to Bruce Beer's family who can rest assured
that his memories will live on in the House of Commons as they
will throughout the region of Peel.
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
also rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Bruce Beer and to extend
sympathies on behalf of the Official Opposition to his family at
this time of grief.
I listened with interest to the tribute that was paid to him
just now and a couple of thoughts came to mind. One was this man
was elected four times to the House of Commons, no small feat in
and of itself.
I read through the obituary that was published in the Toronto
Star following his death and, Mr. Speaker, I thought there
are a couple of things that are very notable that you can tell
about a man that you have never met before from the tributes his
opponents pay to him. It was very interesting that one of the
tributes paid to him was by someone who opposed him. The quote I
think is worth repeating by a Conservative opponent who ran
against him in 1965 and of course lost. He stated he “recalls
Mr. Beer as a gentleman, honourable opponent and a good committee
member and I cannot believe I am saying this about a Liberal but
he was always approachable. I have never heard a bad word about
Bruce”.
Would it not be good, Mr. Speaker, if all of us in our political
life could go through four terms of office, if that was our case,
and have our political opponents say such kind words?
I think too that Mr. Beer came from a generation that had to
pull themselves up by their boot straps. As has been mentioned
already, he went to work at 12 years of age, working in the dairy
industry for 10 cents a day. There are stories that warm the
heart but must bring tears to the eyes too when we think of the
hard times that he must have gone through.
His daughter recalls in a fond way how her father would head out
the door always singing and quoting poetry. As he stomped off to
work, she said, “he would chant: Someone said it couldn't be
done, but he with a chuckle replied that maybe he couldn't but he
would not be the one who said it couldn't be done until he
tried”.
I think he was obviously a man of laughter and had much to offer
Parliament and Canada. We thank his family for the sacrifice
that he made during his elected life and we grieve with them at
his passing.
[Translation]
Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, BQ): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of
myself and my colleagues of the Bloc Quebecois, I wish to offer
condolences to the family and friends of Bruce Beer, who recently
passed away at the age of 87.
After graduating from the Ontario College of Agriculture in
1939, Bruce Beer began a career as an ag. rep. Elected for the
first time in 1962, he represented the people of the riding of Peel
until his retirement from active politics in 1972.
1540
During his time in Parliament, Bruce Beer was to serve as
parliamentary secretary to Minister of Agriculture John Greene and
Minister of Finance Mitchell Sharp, in the Pearson government.
In 1972, he decided not to seek re-election. He was appointed
judge of the Citizenship Court, and held that position until his
retirement in 1975.
As parliamentarians, we are all aware of just how demanding a
life in politics is, and Bruce Beer's family must be proud of all
his accomplishments.
[English]
Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker,
on behalf of my colleagues in the NDP, I would like to add our
sincere condolences to the family of Mr. Beer. We join in paying
tribute to a life which was long and well lived. He was held in
great respect by his community.
I did not have the honour of serving with Mr. Beer, but I
understand from a colleague who did that he had the respect of
all members of the House. He was a man who carried himself with
a great deal of dignity and acted in a way which attracted the
respect and admiration of all members of the House.
He was a great spokesperson for rural Canada and for his
constituents.
For all of these things we express our gratitude and we pay
tribute to him on the occasion of his death.
Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC):
Mr. Speaker, I want to associate the members of the Progressive
Conservative caucus with other members who have spoken in
offering our sympathy to Bruce Beer's wife, his children and
grandchildren, his sister and brother.
Bruce Beer was a member of this House during the turbulent
1960s, a period of great instability in the House of Commons. He
reflected this when he spoke to the House for the first time on
December 18, 1962, saying that he was not certain if he was
giving his maiden speech or his farewell sermon. He left that as
a question to be resolved posthumously.
As well, history will show that this was indeed his maiden
speech in a long and distinguished career in this House.
Re-election after re-election and several appointments as
parliamentary secretary to a number of ministers, including the
minister of agriculture, demonstrated Mr. Beer's competence and
popularity in his community.
An examination of Hansard reveals that Mr. Beer vigorously
championed the cause of farmers and rural communities, as well as
urban areas of his constituency.
He helped to build his community, his country, and his service
in this House reflects that. For that we are certainly grateful,
and for his family who shared him with the people of Canada.
* * *
THE LATE DAVID ORLIKOW
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North Centre, NDP): Mr.
Speaker, I feel extremely privileged to be able to pay tribute to
our dear friend and colleague, David Orlikow. I do so on behalf
of the New Democratic Party caucus, my leader, and particularly
those members from Manitoba, such as the member for
Winnipeg—Transcona, who had a very close association with David
for many years.
The constituency that I was elected to serve on June 2 is
largely David Orlikow territory. I am reminded of that daily by
his former constituents.
My personal goal is to achieve David Orlikow's high standards of
service and his great fighting spirit. My hope today is to do
justice to David Orlikow's memory on behalf of all of his
constituents in Winnipeg North who were served so well and so
faithfully by David Orlikow throughout his 26 years as a member
of Parliament.
It is not an easy task to try to convey in the fullest sense the
kind of contribution he made to our party, to his community and
to his country; nor is it an easy task to capture the sense of
great loss which we all feel at this time.
On behalf of everyone in this House I extend expressions of deep
sympathy to his daughter, Leslie, his grandchildren and all
members of his family.
1545
Politics and the pursuit of social justice were David Orlikow's
life work. He served in public life for 43 years and he served
at all levels of government: school trustee, alderperson, member
of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly and member of Parliament for
Winnipeg North between 1962 and 1988.
David Orlikow died on January 19, a few months short of his 80th
birthday, fighting to the very end. He was, as we always knew
him, a fighter for social justice, always demanding fair policies
when it came to immigration policies, refugee policies, workers
rights, always associated with the labour movement and free
collective bargaining and a very important part of our party as a
founding member of the New Democratic Party and a lifetime member
of the CCF and the NDP.
I am sure there is not a person in this Chamber who knew David
and worked with him or received one of his many phone calls who
did not end up feeling a great sense of admiration and respect
for David Orlikow.
We remember David Orlikow for his devotion to the people he was
elected to serve, the priority he gave to constituency concerns
and problem solving, his determination to achieve fairness one
case at a time, his tenacious, unapologetic, no frills approach
to getting the job done and his dogged persistence to pursue any
injustice or any issue he felt was important. Just look at his
record.
I did a quick count of all his House of Commons entries between
1962 and 1988 and came up with a staggering total of 2,906, and
he did it all without a lot of fanfare and not much media
attention. However, when he did get a headline we knew what
David stood for. We knew how he saw his purpose as a member of
Parliament. Speaking out against poverty, standing up for
equality and fighting the banks, that was David Orlikow. Imagine
what he would be saying today about the proposed bank merger.
That fighting spirit came through right to the end. He had
conversations with several of us, including the member for
Burnaby—Douglas, just days before he died about the need to
convince the Canadian government to extend compensation to all
the families of the victims of the Allan Institute and the CIA
brainwashing experiments.
Today we feel the loss of a great parliamentarian, a social
activist, a mentor, a friend and a colleague. Let us honour his
memory by recommitting ourselves to achieving David Orlikow's
high standards of political representation, public service and
human compassion.
Mr. Rey D. Pagtakhan (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime
Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today the government caucus
joins with the House in paying tribute to the memory of Mr. David
Orlikow who from 1962 to 1988 served as the member of Parliament
for Winnipeg North, the former constituency I had the honour to
serve since as his successor until the boundary changed in June
last year. It now constitutes a significant part of my riding of
Winnipeg North—St. Paul.
May I convey on behalf of the Liberal caucus and my constituents
my deepest condolences to his immediate family and relatives.
Mr. David Orlikow left this earth on the 19 ultimo when the House
of Commons was in recess. This week, as we begin another year
and another chapter in the books of parliamentary history, we
mourn the loss of a former colleague whose death reminds us of a
chapter in history we ourselves will eventually place in the
bookcases of this great House.
1550
In death, our true legacy is measured whatever the magnitudes. In
death, our time on earth takes on a more historical perspective.
We are reminded that we have had predecessors and we will have
successors. Our time in this Chamber is only for a moment. For
that moment we must fully dedicate ourselves to the best of our
abilities, creativity and industry; yes, to the best of our minds
and to the best of our hearts.
There is no assurance of longevity on this earth. There is only
the assurance of a lasting legacy of good work. As we reflect
today on the legacies of those who precede us, we are reminded of
the importance of our own work in the present, the fruits of
which will become the valuable legacies for those who succeed us.
We can never erase the moment when we took our oath and became a
member of Parliament. For all of us here, our personal legacy
began the very moment when we made the steadfast decision to
serve the Canadian public in the way we knew best, to serve in
Parliament, a place where we debate to reconcile competing
philosophies, logics, claims and priorities.
We do so best guided by thinking straight from the mind and
straight from the heart, as our prime minister has so eloquently
expressed on more than one occasion.
I am sure for David Orlikow it must have been a most rewarding
career, representing the former constituency of Winnipeg North
for 26 continuous years. The years of commitment he dedicated to
his constituents were hallmarks of his tenure.
Indeed it would be a daunting task to review page by page in
Hansard the story of his parliamentary career, but we know
he served his constituents well, for they elected him nine
consecutive times, a political record by any standard.
Allow me to share with members one intervention he made by way
of a member's statement on December 14, 1983 when he called for
legislation to “ensure workers some right of control of new
technology”. He was advocating that unless there was
opportunity for consultation in the workplace the result would be
a deplorable state of human and economic suffering.
He took the case of 15 Bell Canada telephone operators in
Midland, Ontario who were to be displaced a month later when
automation was to be introduced to the phone switchboard system.
Writing on this case for the May-June, 1996 issue of the
periodical This Magazine, author Heather Menzies observed
“nothing came out of the intervention”.
This judgment would later prove to be premature and in fact
wrong. Mr. Orlikow's effort may very well have planted a seed
for others who advance similar causes.
A little over a decade later, in September 1997, the Government
of Canada issued a report entitled “Valuing our People”, a
report in part about the new technology and workforce of the
future.
Allow me to quote a relevant paragraph from this document:
“Public service workplaces can be made more efficient and better
suited to the requirements of new technologies while improving
employees' quality of life. Employees believe that all it will
take is commitment, better use of state of the art technology
and consultation with employees”. Let me underscore those two
phrases, new technology and consultation with the employees.
Truly Mr. Orlikow had the foresight to recognize the future
impact of this linkage 14 years earlier.
Let me conclude by saying it was with this vision, the vision of
one David Orlikow, that won the support of his constituents for
more than two and a half decades.
His colleagues who knew him best said of him David was a
tireless defender of his constituents and champion of many causes
over the years. In tandem with his peer, Mr. Stanley Knowles, he
represented Winnipeg's colourful north in Parliament. I share
this sentiment.
Indeed as a member of Parliament, Mr. Orlikow contributed his
share. Mr. Orlikow knew and lived parliamentary life, secure in
purpose, serving his constituents for a quarter of a century plus
one year with unswerving commitment and dedication.
1555
Although his time in this House and on this earth has come and
gone, we know that what he had uniquely contributed as a member
of Parliament and as a citizen of Canada will forever be etched
in a chapter of the history books of this great nation.
Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
rise today on behalf of the official opposition to pay tribute to
a person who has served our country in this Chamber, Mr. David
Orlikow, who passed away on January 19.
It has often been said that every generation of Canadians stands
on the shoulders of those who have gone on before and built the
foundations of our country. I and my colleagues are aware of the
valuable contribution Mr. Orlikow made in the second half of this
century to public life in Canada. I would like to list a few of
his qualities and achievements.
First, his long record of public service. He served his fellow
Canadians for a total of 43 continuous years in elected office at
four different levels of government. That is truly remarkable.
From 1945 to 1951 he was a school trustee in Winnipeg. From 1950
to 1958 he was a Winnipeg city alderman. From 1958 to 1962 he
was a member of the Manitoba legislature. As mentioned earlier,
from 1962 to 1988 he was the member of Parliament for Winnipeg
North. That means he had 18 consecutive wins. That is an
achievement hard to match, a pretty good record.
Second, his involvement and advocacy in non-governmental
organizations. Mr. Orlikow worked with various NGOs from the
John Howard Society to the Elizabeth Fry, the Jewish Labour
Committee and the Canadian Labour Congress.
These activities further demonstrated his concern for the many
social issues that earmarked his parliamentary career. These
issues included poverty, illiteracy, human rights, services for
the disabled and workers rights. He fought tirelessly for
these issues.
Third, his faithfulness to his political roots. He was faithful
to the end to his political roots and the philosophy which he
readily acknowledged were in the eastern European political
traditions. He found these political expressions in voices in
the CCF and the NDP in Canada. He was an active member of his
party and sought to advance its cause and influence. He needs to
be remembered and to paid tribute to as somebody who fought
really hard for what he believed in always.
Fourth, he was a tireless worker on behalf of his constituents.
This is one area of all of our parliamentary work that I am sure
we would all aspire to. Mr. Orlikow was a great example,
apparently dedicating total Saturdays and other days, from sunup
to sundown, to have appointments with his constituents. It is no
wonder they re-elected him as many times as they did when he
offered that kind of service.
Finally, Mr. Orlikow was a husband, a father and a grandfather.
Those are the things which last far longer than any parliamentary
career.
Mr. Orlikow was predeceased by his wife Velma in 1990. He is
survived by his daughter and two grandchildren. It is to those
loved ones that we want to pay tribute, for no person is an
island. Each of us who serves in public life knows how valuable
and how important family and friends are. We would not be able
to be here and do the job that we do unless there are many people
who love us and support us back home.
I and my colleagues in the official opposition join in extending
our sympathy and prayers to the total family and to those people
who care about Mr. Orlikow.
[Translation]
Mrs. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Mr.
Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois, I would
like to offer my sincere condolences to the family of David
Orlikow, who died January 19 at the age of 80.
He was born in Winnipeg in 1918 and began his political life
in 1945 through involvement in his community first and then as city
councillor with the City of Winnipeg until 1958. After serving as
a member of the Manitoba legislature from 1958 to 1962, he was
elected to the House of Commons for the first time in the June 18,
1962 general election under the banner of the New Democratic Party
to represent the people of Winnipeg North.
He sat in this House for 26 years consecutively.
Mr. Orlikow is also to be remembered for his involvement in
human rights, as president of the Elizabeth Fry Society, as
secretary on the human rights committee of the CLC and as director
of the Jewish Labour Committee of Canada. His long career in
public service is a most honourable one, and his family and friends
should be proud of his accomplishments.
1600
[English]
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): Mr. Speaker, I
rise on behalf of my caucus and the PC Party of Canada and as a
Manitoban to pay tribute to a truly great Manitoban.
On January 19, 1998 one of Manitoba's longest serving
politicians died in the hospital of heart failure at the age of
79. David Orlikow was a member of Parliament for over 25 years
and served his constituents of Winnipeg North with great dignity
and professionalism. He gave over 40 years of his life to the
public, working for the greater good of Manitobans. Whether it
was in the capacity as a former MLA, alderman or school trustee,
he served the public to the best of his ability. His strong
belief in social justice led him to his political career where he
fought for human rights, immigration and the union movement among
other things.
David Orlikow was remembered best for his tireless commitment to
his constituents. He often spent long hours both in his office
and talking with his constituents trying to solve whatever
problems they may have had.
There is one word that would best describe David Orlikow and
that word would be dedicated.
Regardless of one's political stripe it is difficult not to
respect a man of his calibre. Unfortunately I was not able to
get to know him but David Orlikow will be greatly missed by all
who did have that opportunity.
There is an old adage that one cannot demand respect but one
must earn respect. In Mr. Orlikow's situation, he earned the
respect of all Manitobans.
I would like to extend my condolences on behalf of the
Progressive Conservative Party to the surviving members of the
Orlikow family.
On behalf of Manitoba, thank you for your years of public
service.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
[Translation]
MEMBERS BENEFITS STUDY COMMISSION
Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table in both
official languages a copy of the report by the commission studying
MPs' benefits.
[English]
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 81, I wish to designate
tomorrow as an allotted day.
While we are on the subject, I would ask if there is unanimous
consent for the following motion. I move:
That, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 81(16),
in the combined periods ending March 26, 1998 and June 23, 1998
the total number of opposition motions that shall come to a vote
shall be not more than seven.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Does the hon. House
leader have the unanimous consent of the House to move the
motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
(Motion agreed to)
* * *
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table in
both official languages the government's response to eight
petitions.
* * *
COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE
PROCEDURE AND HOUSE AFFAIRS
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
have the honour to present the 19th report of the Standing
Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership
and associate membership of some standing committees and one
standing joint committee.
If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in
the 19th report later this day.
* * *
1605
CRIMINAL CODE
Ms. Val Meredith (South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, Ref.)
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-305, an act to amend the
Criminal Code (selling wildlife).
She said: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to introduce this
private member's bill which would bring the offence of selling
wildlife parts under the Criminal Code. This is a concern that
many Canadians have with regard to the protection of endangered
species and the illegal taking of wildlife and the selling
thereof of parts such as horns et cetera for whatever reason.
This bill would have the penalties for the illegal killing of
wildlife and the selling of parts brought under the Criminal
Code.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and
printed)
* * *
[Translation]
BANK ACT
Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi, Lib.) moved for leave to
introduce Bill C-306, an act to amend the Bank Act (bank charges).
He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Act to
amend the Bank Act (bank charges).
This bill is important for several reasons. First, because it
is the first bill I have introduced in the House. Second, I would
like to tell you that this bill has its origins in Brome—Missisquoi.
It came about because of a series of meetings I have been
conducting for the past two years in the 42 municipalities in my
riding.
[English]
On Monday nights I hold town hall meetings all across my riding.
At two out of three of those meetings people have brought up the
subject of bank charges. This proposed bill relates to the
concerns of millions of Canadians. The banks should be
considered a public service in relation to consumers.
[Translation]
This bill also calls for transparency. I think it is
important that Canadian consumers be better informed about fee
increases. They must also be more aware of the new service charges
constantly being imposed on new products, as fast as the banking
industry can think them up.
I will quickly review the bill's principles. The bill
provides for a committee of the House to make a recommendation to
the government regarding the introduction of regulations setting
maximum charges.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
* * *
[English]
PETITIONS
CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): Mr. Speaker, it
is with pleasure that I present this petition on behalf of
constituents of my riding as well as other ridings in western
Canada. This petition deals with a piece of legislation that
will again be coming forward to this House, Bill C-4, the bill
that deals with the Canadian Wheat Board.
I will read the petition as listed. It says that Bill C-4 does
not make the necessary changes to the Canadian Wheat Board that
the majority of western Canadian farmers want to ensure that the
Canadian Wheat Board operates in the best interests of the
producers and that Bill C-4 opens the possibility of including
more crops under the Canadian Wheat Board's jurisdiction which
will adversely affect the marketing and processing of non-board
grains.
Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to withdraw the
parts of Bill C-4 which would allow for additional crops to be
marketed by the Canadian Wheat Board and that no more crops are
brought under the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly.
I wish to present this and table it in the House.
1610
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Hon. members, the
Chair got a bit ahead of the House. We are going to go back to
where we should have been, which is to the first reading of
Senate public bills. On motions, the hon. parliamentary secretary
to the leader of the government in the House.
* * *
COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE
PROCEDURE AND HOUSE AFFAIRS
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, if
the House gives it consent, I move that the 19th report of the
Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to
the House earlier this day be concurred in.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Does the hon.
parliamentary secretary have unanimous consent to move the
motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, if the
House gives its consent, I move:
That the membership of the Standing Committee on Procedure and
House Affairs be modified as follows: André Harvey for Norman
Doyle, and that Norman Doyle be added to and André Harvey be
deleted from the list of associate members.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Does the hon.
parliamentary secretary have unanimous consent to move the
motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
(Motion agreed to)
* * *
PENSIONS
Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr.
Speaker, following consultations with all sides of the House, I
wish to seek consent of the House to put the following motion,
with the support of members of the Liberal Party, the Reform
Party, the Bloc Quebecois, the Conservative Party and the
independent member for York South—Weston. I put this motion to
the House with my NDP colleagues on behalf of the 130,000 U.K.
pensioners living in Canada, 60,000 of whom are women.
I move:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should renew
its commitment to British pensioners living in Canada and
vigorously pursue an agreement with the Government of the United
Kingdom to provide them with uprated pensions to achieve benefit
parity with other U.K. pensioners.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Does the hon. member
have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The House has heard
the terms of the motion—
Mr. John Nunziata: Mr. Speaker, may—
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): There is no debate
on this.
I am going to start over again and ask for the agreement of the
House.
Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to
move the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The House has heard
the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to
adopt the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I am sorry, hon.
members, but I think we have to go back to this again.
Hon. members, after consultation with the clerk I am advised
that the hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas asked for unanimous
consent to introduce the motion. Unanimous consent to introduce
the motion was given. It was given as I understand it without
debate.
1615
The House gave unanimous consent to move the motion without
debate, as I understand it. The House then heard the terms of
the motion and the question was put.
I am going to put the question again just so we get it clear. Is
it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Carried. On a point
of order, the hon. House leader for the Reform Party.
Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
I just want to get this clear. Are we asking that the particular
motion go through and to what stage? If approved now, does this
motion go? That is the first question that I would like
answered.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The Chair has been
corrected. The hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas presented the
motion but there was no mention of any debate on the motion. We
received unanimous consent to present the motion and waive
notice, which is what we did.
The second aspect of the question of the House leader of the
Reform Party is what happens to the motion. It then becomes a
resolution of the House and that is the end of it.
What we have to arrive at now is an opportunity for the member
for York South—Weston to rise on debate but at some future date.
Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker,
unanimous consent was sought to put the motion and unanimous
consent was received.
All that remains to be done on the part of the Chair is to put
the motion, to ask whether it is the pleasure of the House to
adopt the motion, at which point it may be in order for a member
to say a word or two. Then the motion would be put to the House,
not at some later date but now. The idea of the consensus was to
get it passed and done with.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The Chair
appreciates the timely intervention by the member for
Winnipeg—Transcona. I will put the question.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Carried. On debate,
the hon. member for York South—Weston.
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. John Nunziata (York South—Weston, Ind.): Mr.
Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to make some very brief
submissions with respect to the motion. I would like to—
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): On a point of order,
the whip of the Reform Party.
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, this
is turning into a botch-up. We have to stop and correct it now.
After a motion has been tabled and has received unanimous
consent of the House, I do not think you can then move to debate
it. After it has had unanimous consent you cannot then debate
it.
There is no point debating something that we have all approved.
There is something in the order that you have to correct. We
cannot debate something we have passed or we will be here all day
debating it. We cannot do it in that order.
An hon. member: If you want to debate, we will debate it.
Mr. Chuck Strahl: I am sure, Mr. Speaker, you have to
look at that. It is not in the right order.
We cannot be debating something we have passed.
1620
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): On a point of order,
the hon. member for Winnipeg—Transcona.
Mr. Bill Blaikie: Mr Speaker, after asking whether it was
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion everyone said
“Agreed” and you said “Carried”.
The motion is carried. You cannot debate a motion after it has
been carried. The motion is passed and the matter is resolved.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): On a point of order,
the chief government whip.
Mr. Bob Kilger (Stormont—Dundas, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
just for clarification, I understood the motion was put forth in
a way that did not specify without debate. There might be some
technical procedural matter here that we are dealing with and it
is probably causing confusion.
Having said that, I wonder if we could get some indication from
the hon. member for York South—Weston, who is seeking the floor,
as to how long he might be. That might help us in getting on
with the matter.
On the basis of the member for York South—Weston wanting the
floor for a minute, would we be agreeable to letting him speak, I
would submit, and then carry on with the other business of the
day?
An hon. member: Agreed.
Mr. Randy White: No.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Hon. members, this
is going to be a long evening. With the co-operation of all
members, perhaps we can cut the Chair a little slack here and get
past this.
Perhaps the Chair should have asked whether the original motion
being moved was with or without debate. The fact of the matter
is that it was not mentioned. The chief government whip has
given us, the royal us, an opportunity to move beyond this, so I
would beg the indulgence of all members to allow then—
Mr. Jim Karygiannis: No.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): No, we do not have
unanimous consent. The motion is carried.
The Chair then asks for unanimous consent of the House to allow
the member for York South—Weston to make a statement. Is there
unanimous consent?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Some hon. members: No.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): There is not
unanimous consent. On a point of order, the hon. member for York
South—Weston.
Mr. John Nunziata (York—South Weston, Ind.): Mr. Speaker, this motion was
introduced on December 10 and through a miscommunication the
motion was not carried at the time, notwithstanding the fact that
I am in complete support of the motion.
The reason why the motion is back before the House today is
because unanimous consent was not given on December 10. However,
today, the hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas has sought unanimous
consent. It is a motion that is worthy of complete and unanimous
support in the House. I urge the prime minister and the
government to go to bat for British pensioners living in Canada
who have been discriminated against by the British government by
having their pensions frozen.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The Chair would
presume it is a fairly long stretch to call that a point of
order.
* * *
PETITIONS
RAIL SERVICE
Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr
Speaker, I am very pleased to present a petition on behalf of the
constituents of Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough and the people of
Nova Scotia pursuant to a call to parliament to initiate
passenger rail service in Cape Breton and Eastern Nova Scotia.
It asks for a return of that service to the people of that part
of Canada. I am very pleased to table it in the House today,
pursuant to the standing orders.
1625
PUBLIC NUDITY
Mr. Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I rise today to present a petition from my constituents.
The undersigned residents of Canada draw to the attention of the
House that incidents of explicit nudity in public places are
becoming more and more frequent; that each incident of nudity
harms the public, specifically children; that there are laws in
Canada to protect our children against this form of nudity in all
media but currently there are no laws protecting our children in
public places; and that there would be fewer such incidents if
certain legislative measures were taken.
Therefore the petitioners call upon parliament to enact
legislation to amend the Criminal Code, specifically sections 173
and 174, so that indecent act and public nudity provisions
clearly state that a women exposing her breasts in public is an
indecent act.
I add my voice to that too.
FAMILY RIGHTS
Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, I would like to present two petitions on behalf of my
constituents.
The first group of petitioners asks parliament to recognize the
fundamental rights of individuals to pursue family life free from
undo interference by the state.
ABORTIONS
Mr. Jake E. Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, the second group of petitioners supports a national
referendum to be held concurrently with the federal election on
the question of government funding for medically unnecessary
abortions.
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr.
Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by
several hundred residents of Burnaby.
The petitioners note that the Food and Drugs Act is designed to
protect Canadians from potentially harmful effects related to
food and drug consumption, that the consumption of alcoholic
beverages may cause health problems, and that fetal alcohol
syndrome and alcohol related birth defects are preventable by
avoiding alcohol during pregnancy.
The petitioners therefore call upon parliament to mandate the
labelling of alcoholic products to warn pregnant women and other
persons of certain dangers associated with the consumption of
alcoholic beverages.
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I would
like to associate myself with the previous petition.
Pursuant to Standing Order 36 it is my honour to present a
petition on behalf of thousands of people from the city of
Kamloops and the region around that city.
They point out that it is time the GST be reduced. The GST was
introduced because the government said we had a serious deficit
problem. That deficit problem has essentially been eliminated.
Therefore they call upon parliament to urge the government to
bring in legislation to begin phasing out the GST.
* * *
[Translation]
QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would ask that
all questions be allowed to stand.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Is it agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
* * *
[English]
MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, would
you be so kind as to call Notice of Motion for the Production of
Papers No. P-6 in the name of the hon. member for
Brandon—Souris.
That an Order of the House do issue for copies of all plans,
drawings, documents and proposals initiated by the crown, or by
others on behalf of the crown, surrounding the 1992 internal
managerial review that was conducted by the Canadian Wheat Board.
Mr. Peter Adams: Mr. Speaker, a search of the registry
files of the Grains and Oilseeds Division International Markets
Bureau did not uncover any plans, drawings, documents or
proposals initiated by the crown or by others on behalf of the
crown regarding the 1992 internal managerial review conducted by
the Canadian Wheat Board.
In his appearance before the standing committee in its
consideration of Bill C-4, an act to amend the Canadian Wheat
Board Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts,
first session, 36th Parliament, 46th Elizabeth II, 1997, Mr.
Lorne Hehn, chief commissioner of the Canadian Wheat Board,
indicated to the hon. member that he would not make the report
public because in conducting the internal review the board
indicated to its employees that it would guarantee confidence and
confidentiality of their comments made during the review. Mr.
Hehn also conveyed the same view in a letter to the hon. member.
I therefore ask the hon. member to withdraw his motion.
1630
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): Mr. Speaker, I
do not withdraw my motion. I wish to transfer it for debate.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Is it agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
(Transferred for debate)
* * *
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY DEBATE
IRAQ
The Speaker: My colleagues, at 2.15 p.m. this day, I
received an application from the hon. member for Sherbrooke for
an emergency debate. It is in order at this time that I consider
this request and I call on the hon. member for Sherbrooke.
Hon. Jean J. Charest (Sherbrooke, PC): Mr. Speaker, I
make this application pursuant to Standing Order 52 to discuss an
important matter, otherwise known as an emergency debate.
Mr. Speaker, you will find in the communication that I delivered
to you, that the argument is based on the following. Pursuant to
the provisions of Standing Order 52, I hereby give notice of my
intention to move a motion for the adjournment of the House to
provide the House with an opportunity to debate an urgent
situation developing in Iraq and the response thereto of the
Government of Canada.
It will be well known to you, Mr. Speaker, that the Iraqi
government has refused to co-operate with the inspection teams
mandated by the United Nations to eliminate the Iraqi ability to
produce and use large quantities of chemical and other weapons of
mass destruction.
In a statement to the British House of Commons on February 2,
1998, only a few days ago, the foreign secretary confirmed that
Iraq “has developed the know how and equipment to produce
biological and chemical weapons on an industrial scale” and that
“without effective UN monitoring, Iraq could produce enough
anthrax every week to fill two missile warheads and could within
weeks be producing a large volume of nerve gas”.
To date, ministers of the crown, ministers of the Government of
Canada, have failed to provide the House of Commons with a
statement of its policies on this urgent and life threatening
situation. As participants in the previous United Nations
military action against Iraq, Canadians could very well be
targeted by this action.
The Government of Canada has a duty to inform the House of
Commons of its policy, and the House of Commons in return has a
duty to consider and comment on that policy.
In light of the continuing refusal of Saddam Hussein to accept
diplomatic intervention and the increasing possibility, Mr.
Speaker, of a military intervention, it is appropriate, in fact
urgent, that you use your discretion to permit the House of
Commons to decide whether or not it wishes to debate this
question under the procedure authorized by Standing Order 52.
[Translation]
This is an emergency situation. I do not have to remind you of the
statement made today by the President of Russia, who said that a global
conflict was a possibility. Some tried to pretend that his comment was
meaningless. If so, it is even worse. The comment is from the President
of Russia.
Given the importance of holding an emergency debate to sound out
the opinion of the House, the rules provide that you can take this into
account. I urge you today to make good use of your discretionary power
and to allow an emergency debate.
In conclusion, after consulting the other parties, I believe our
colleagues from the Reform Party, the Bloc Quebecois leader and NDP
members also feel that it is important to express their views on this
issue, and I think you would get the unanimous consent of the House to
proceed in this fashion.
[English]
The Speaker: As I said earlier, my colleagues, I received
this letter at 2.15 p.m. today. The member of Parliament for
Sherbrooke has read the gist of what is in the letter. There is
no debate on this.
1635
Excuse me, I did not hear the final comment. Would the hon.
member for Sherbrooke please clarify. Did he ask that other
leaders in the House of Commons be allowed to comment in his
statement?
Hon. Jean J. Charest: Correct.
The Speaker: On that point, I will go to a point of
order.
Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise
on a point of order. This is the first we have heard of this. I
would be grateful if you would reserve your decision until we
have heard from the government House leader.
The Speaker: My colleagues, I was in the process of
saying that I find this to be, as all requests for emergency
debates are, an important matter. I am going to give myself a
little time to think about it.
I am going to make a decision on this before the end of this
sitting day. I understand that we are going to be seized with a
vote in the near future so I will reserve my decision on this
particular matter. I will return to the House this day with an
answer.
If I understand correctly, the hon. member who is the leader of
the Conservative Party has asked for unanimous consent to put a
motion to let the other leaders comment on this matter right now.
That is what they have asked for.
First of all, does he have permission to put the motion? Is
there the unanimous consent of the House for the member of
Parliament for Sherbrooke to put the motion?
Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I would not object if there were consultations along
party lines. I understand there is already an adjournment debate
for tonight but I would not mind a consultation between people so
that we could establish perhaps if it could be done some other
day. In terms of giving an agreement right now without
consultation, we will have to deny that.
The Speaker: I do not want the House to become too
embroiled in a debate. I think if the House is given a little
bit of time, it can resolve this matter.
There is no unanimous agreement to let the other leaders speak
in this matter right now, so that matter is settled. My decision
is that I will take some time to reflect on this matter. I will
come back to the House before this sitting day is over. This
matter will stay rested for now.
GOVERNMENT ORDERS
[English]
INCOME TAX AMENDMENTS ACT, 1997
The House resumed from February 3 consideration of the motion
that Bill C-28, an act to amend the Income Tax Act, the Income
Tax Application Rules, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the
Canada Pension Plan, the Children's Special Allowances Act, the
Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, the Cultural Property
Export and Import Act, the Customs Act, the Customs Tariff, the
Employment Insurance Act, the Excise Tax Act, the
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, the Income Tax
Conventions Interpretation Act, the Old Age Security Act, the Tax
Court of Canada Act, the Tax Rebate Discounting Act, the
Unemployment Insurance Act, the Western Grain Transition Payments
Act and certain acts related to the Income Tax Act, be read the
second time and referred to a committee.
The Speaker: The House will now proceed to the taking of the
deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage
of Bill C-28. Call in the members.
1710
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the
following division:)
YEAS
Members
Adams
| Alcock
| Assad
| Assadourian
|
Augustine
| Baker
| Bakopanos
| Barnes
|
Beaumier
| Bélair
| Bélanger
| Bellemare
|
Bennett
| Bertrand
| Bevilacqua
| Blondin - Andrew
|
Bonin
| Bonwick
| Boudria
| Bradshaw
|
Brown
| Bryden
| Bulte
| Byrne
|
Calder
| Cannis
| Caplan
| Carroll
|
Catterall
| Cauchon
| Chamberlain
| Chan
|
Charbonneau
| Chrétien
(Saint - Maurice)
| Clouthier
| Coderre
|
Cohen
| Collenette
| Comuzzi
| Cullen
|
DeVillers
| Dhaliwal
| Dion
| Discepola
|
Dromisky
| Drouin
| Duhamel
| Easter
|
Finestone
| Finlay
| Folco
| Fontana
|
Fry
| Gagliano
| Godfrey
| Goodale
|
Graham
| Gray
(Windsor West)
| Grose
| Guarnieri
|
Harb
| Harvard
| Hubbard
| Ianno
|
Iftody
| Jackson
| Jennings
| Jordan
|
Karetak - Lindell
| Karygiannis
| Keyes
| Kilger
(Stormont – Dundas)
|
Kilgour
(Edmonton Southeast)
| Knutson
| Kraft Sloan
| Lastewka
|
Lee
| Leung
| Lincoln
| Longfield
|
MacAulay
| Mahoney
| Malhi
| Maloney
|
Manley
| Marchi
| Marleau
| Massé
|
McCormick
| McGuire
| McKay
(Scarborough East)
| McLellan
(Edmonton West)
|
McTeague
| McWhinney
| Mifflin
| Milliken
|
Mills
(Broadview – Greenwood)
| Mitchell
| Murray
| Myers
|
Nault
| Normand
| Nunziata
| O'Reilly
|
Pagtakhan
| Paradis
| Parrish
| Patry
|
Peric
| Peterson
| Pettigrew
| Phinney
|
Pickard
(Kent – Essex)
| Pillitteri
| Pratt
| Proud
|
Provenzano
| Redman
| Reed
| Richardson
|
Robillard
| Rock
| Saada
| Scott
(Fredericton)
|
Serré
| Shepherd
| Speller
| St. Denis
|
Stewart
(Brant)
| Stewart
(Northumberland)
| St - Julien
| Szabo
|
Telegdi
| Thibeault
| Torsney
| Ur
|
Valeri
| Vanclief
| Volpe
| Wappel
|
Whelan
| Wilfert
| Wood – 143
|
NAYS
Members
Abbott
| Ablonczy
| Alarie
| Anders
|
Asselin
| Axworthy
(Saskatoon – Rosetown – Biggar)
| Bachand
(Richmond – Arthabaska)
| Bailey
|
Bellehumeur
| Benoit
| Bergeron
| Bernier
(Tobique – Mactaquac)
|
Bigras
| Blaikie
| Borotsik
| Breitkreuz
(Yellowhead)
|
Breitkreuz
(Yorkton – Melville)
| Brien
| Brison
| Cadman
|
Canuel
| Casey
| Casson
| Charest
|
Chatters
| Chrétien
(Frontenac – Mégantic)
| Crête
| Cummins
|
Dalphond - Guiral
| de Savoye
| Debien
| Desrochers
|
Dockrill
| Doyle
| Dubé
(Lévis)
| Dubé
(Madawaska – Restigouche)
|
Duceppe
| Dumas
| Duncan
| Earle
|
Elley
| Epp
| Gagnon
| Gauthier
|
Gilmour
| Godin
(Acadie – Bathurst)
| Godin
(Châteauguay)
| Goldring
|
Gouk
| Grewal
| Grey
(Edmonton North)
| Guay
|
Guimond
| Hanger
| Hardy
| Harris
|
Hart
| Harvey
| Herron
| Hill
(Macleod)
|
Hill
(Prince George – Peace River)
| Hilstrom
| Hoeppner
| Jaffer
|
Johnston
| Keddy
(South Shore)
| Kenney
(Calgary - Sud - Est)
| Lalonde
|
Laurin
| Lebel
| Lefebvre
| Lill
|
Loubier
| Lowther
| MacKay
(Pictou – Antigonish – Guysborough)
| Mancini
|
Manning
| Marceau
| Marchand
| Mark
|
Matthews
| Mayfield
| McDonough
| McNally
|
Ménard
| Mercier
| Meredith
| Mills
(Red Deer)
|
Morrison
| Obhrai
| Pankiw
| Penson
|
Perron
| Picard
(Drummond)
| Plamondon
| Power
|
Price
| Ramsay
| Reynolds
| Riis
|
Ritz
| Rocheleau
| Sauvageau
| Schmidt
|
Scott
(Skeena)
| Solberg
| Solomon
| St - Hilaire
|
Stinson
| St - Jacques
| Stoffer
| Strahl
|
Thompson
(Charlotte)
| Thompson
(Wild Rose)
| Tremblay
(Lac - Saint - Jean)
| Tremblay
(Rimouski – Mitis)
|
Turp
| Vautour
| Venne
| Wasylycia - Leis
|
Wayne
| White
(North Vancouver)
| Williams – 123
|
PAIRED
Members
Axworthy
(Winnipeg South Centre)
| Bachand
(Saint - Jean)
| Bernier
(Bonaventure – Gaspé – Îles - de - la - Madeleine – Pabok)
| Fournier
|
Girard - Bujold
| Minna
| O'Brien
(Labrador)
| O'Brien
(London – Fanshawe)
|
The Speaker: My colleagues, before I declare the motion
either way, I am talking to the people of Canada on your behalf.
From time to time we break in a new clerk who calls all the names
of our parliamentarians. Our new clerk, Marc Bosc, did it for
the first time today.
I declare the motion carried.
(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)
Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I
think you would find unanimous consent for something that has
been discussed among House leaders, that we immediately proceed
to private members' hour, as the government does not intend to
call business for today, and at one hour from now we commence the
adjournment debate.
The Speaker: Is there unanimous consent?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
[English]
INCOME TAX ACT
The House resumed from November 17, 1997, consideration of the
motion that Bill C-223, an act to amend the Income Tax Act
(deduction of interest on mortgage loans), be read the second
time and referred to a committee.
1715
Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
yesterday in the House we debated Bill C-28, on which we have
actually just voted. We discussed the ideas of Liberals on tax
reform. They propose to tinker here and tinker there, but in the
end we get a more complicated tax system with even higher taxes.
Bill C-223, which was moved by my colleague, the hon. member for
Portage—Lisgar, proposes a substantial tax break that will not
only benefit first time homeowners but the Canadian economy as
well.
The purchase of a first home is one of the biggest undertakings
in a person's life. It is a stressful time for a young couple. I
remember a few short years ago when my wife Wendy and I bought
our first home in 1989. I remember how hard it was to save up
enough money for a downpayment and after that point going to
visit dad to borrow a little extra. We all know what happens
when we borrow money from dad. Dad never forgets.
Mortgage rates at that time were quite high at 11.75%. We were
a single income family. I was working as a teacher. We were
working on a tight budget. It was very difficult. We lived on a
tight budget for many years just to be able to afford the house.
Some would say that as a teacher I was making a very good wage.
I would not disagree that teachers make a fair wage. But how
many more young people are working for less wages? They have a
harder time buying a house for the first time, to save enough
money for a downpayment to purchase a home.
Young people also have second mortgages before they even begin,
that being their share of the $600 billion federal debt which on
average is about $77,000.
Large amounts of debt have been racked up. Young people are
having to face that as well as all other obligations they are
encountering. This means the future of the next several
generations will be mortgaged. A percentage of every cent that
young people earn will be spent to pay for the irresponsible
spending habits of past governments.
I hope we will not squabble about a once in a lifetime tax break
for people who are just starting out. They are forming the
foundation for the next generation in this great country of
Canada.
The homebuyers plan is an option for first time homebuyers.
However they have to be able to invest in RRSPs. For many people
that is a luxury which is unattainable after they have paid for
rent, food, car insurance, heat, hydro and clothing, not to
mention that half of their salaries goes to taxes.
The CMHC program helps first time homeowners to pay for their
downpayments. That is a big help. However the service costs
several thousand dollars. The tax break called for in the bill
would help to offset that cost.
In reading some of the opposition to the bill it was quite
interesting to note that some people have questioned the motives
of the Reform Party for bringing the bill forward. The
government indicated the cost of the bill and the loss of tax
revenue.
We could argue that the benefits of putting this money back into
the pockets of individuals would be an enormous benefit to all
Canadians. Young Canadians would have a break when starting out.
They would have a tax deduction which would give them more
disposable income to put back into their local economy. It is a
common sense idea. It makes sense.
Young families that are just starting out would have more money
for big ticket items they might not be able to afford now, such
as appliances, furniture, electronics, or a new or used car. Tax
revenues from these purchases would offset the tax breaks, not to
mention the positive impact on the economy.
Many people commented on the bill when my hon. colleague
introduced it in the House. The Canadian Manufactured Housing
Institute has given it full support as it would generate greater
investment in the housing area. It would create spinoffs in
industry. It would help to stimulate the economy.
It has received favourable response from many others.
1720
I would hope we could lay aside any partisanship to take a look
at this idea as being a common sense way to give young Canadians
who will form the future generations of the country an
opportunity to establish a home, a place, an environment where
they can raise their families. As we know, this provides the
social fabric of society.
We should look at the idea contained in the bill as an
opportunity to have government policy reflect the values that
Canadians hold. Let our actions speak louder than our words.
I conclude by urging all members to give the bill serious
consideration. It is an opportunity to build Canada and to give
the young people across the nation an opportunity to get a good
start and to create a good foundation for future generations of
our great country.
Mr. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, PC): Mr. Speaker, it is
with great pleasure that I address the House today on Bill C-223.
The Progressive Conservative Party feels strongly about
encouraging the opportunities for Canadians to purchase their
homes. Our party introduced a home buyers plan where Canadians
could borrow up to $20,000 from their RRSPs for their first home
and first home loan insurance program through CMHC.
These initiatives have successfully assisted thousands of
Canadian families to buy their first homes. Thus the PC Party
has demonstrated unequivocally its commitment through action to
allowing ordinary Canadians to reach the goal of purchasing their
first home.
In 1998 we continue to believe that home ownership should be an
attainable goal for Canadians. The Liberal government policies
have made home ownership less attainable than it has ever been
before.
Excessively invasive government policies such as high income tax
rates, the highest in the G-7; payroll taxes which prevent the
growth of employment and frankly represent the single greatest
impediment to the growth of employment in Canada; and
interprovincial trade barriers, excessive regulations, have
contributed to a 6% drop in personal disposable income in recent
years. It is certainly an abysmal performance relative to that
of the United States.
High unemployment and lack of job security are the scourges that
affect the Canadian public at this time. Interest rates are of
little importance if there is little job security or if jobs
cannot be found when one is determining whether or not to
purchase a home. The biggest obstacle that stands between
Canadians and the attainment of their goals is the Liberal
government.
Clearly the best way to assist Canadians to achieve their goals
is for government to provide a plan for growth. We need to
reduce payroll taxes. We need to reduce income taxes. Our party
is calling for a broadly based income tax reduction which will
benefit all Canadians.
We trust Canadians. We believe putting more money in their
pockets will help them attain and achieve their goals. Lower tax
rates will contribute to higher job growth. Working Canadians
with higher disposable incomes will have more money to purchase
items they want to purchase such as homes and to pay for the
education of their children. This will better their lives and
the lives of future generations of their families.
Our plan for growth will work for Canadians and will put more
Canadians back to work. We need meaningful tax reform and we
need a holistic approach to tax reform. Taxes are designed to
pay for services provided by government. Effective tax policy
should be neutral. It should be non-directional. It should be
basically focused on the initial goal of raising funds for the
operation of government.
Why do people in Canada need to hire accountants or lawyers to
deal with their own government? It is fundamentally wrong.
Governments have overtaxed Canadians and then have manipulated
Canadians through egregious and excessive loopholes. These are
what I refer to as people control mechanisms which the government
utilizes to push people in a particular direction. Its
Pavlovian, paternalistic tax policy tries to control Canadians
and their behaviour.
The tax code is meant to raise revenue. It is not meant to be
directional in terms of affecting the spending habits of
Canadians.
1725
Yesterday I listened at length to Reform members pontificate
about Bill C-28. I believe that they too espoused a simpler,
flatter tax code.
Yesterday the member for Prince George—Bulkley Valley said that
the Liberals, instead of wanting to fix the tax code, were simply
making changes to make it more confusing for Canadians. The
member for St. Albert said:
Is it any wonder that Canadians are losing faith with their tax
system and the complexity of the Income Tax Act?
What a difference a day makes. I guess hypocrisy is only half a
mortal sin. It strikes me that Bill C-223 provides a subsidy for
a particular activity and to a considerable extent complicates
further a tax code that is already far too complex.
Will Reform table the costing of the bill? When Canadians need
a simpler tax code the Reform Party wants a more complex one. Tax
changes have to be holistic and are not developed in a vacuum or
in isolation. We cannot forget the most fundamental rule of
public policy, that is unintended consequences of public policy,
especially when considering tax policy. We have to be very
careful.
Targeted subsidies are a slippery slope. I thought the Reform
Party was opposed to subsidies. This is in effect a subsidy for
a particular group of Canadians and serves in some ways to
discriminate against many Canadians, the poorest of Canadians who
may not be in a position to buy a home but who would benefit from
broadly based tax cuts and from an increase in personal
deductions to about $10,000, which is part of our platform.
The Reform Party would like us to endorse bigger and more
invasive government. The Reform Party has suddenly decided to
side with the government. It is on the side of fiscal
interventionists. Why not provide a tax break to all Canadians?
The PC Party dropped taxes as a percentage of GDP from 14% to
13% from 1989 to 1993. That is what we did with personal income
tax. The Liberals have increased it since by 1% back up to 14%.
Reformers like to talk about a flat tax but while they talk the
talk of flat tax they walk the walk of fiscal interventionists.
Let us face it. A targeted tax break is better than no tax
relief at all. Let us take a serious look at the effectiveness
of mortgage interest deductibility and the risks, for instance,
in the U.S. example. I realize the Reform Party imports
wholesale a significant part of its platform from the U.S.
Republicans, but it would be better off to listen to Jack Kemp
than Jesse Helms on many of its policies.
The fact is that people like Jack Kemp and other advocates for
flatter tax codes would like to see the removal of things like
the mortgage deductibility of interest, which is essentially
diametrically opposed to the whole concept of flatter tax. I
assumed Reformers were flat tax people based on their platform
but that they may have changed as of late. Some of their other
policies have evolved as well. We can only hope their members
join in these policies.
If we compare ownership rates, Canada and Japan with no interest
deductibility have essentially the same ownership rate as the
U.S. with interest deductibility. The question is has it
affected the purchasing patterns of Americans significantly.
France and the Netherlands have lower ownership rates than Canada
with interest deductibility.
I will reiterate that a tax break in absence of an overall
holistic tax reform is better than no tax break at all. We
cannot argue with the intention of the bill to allow more
Canadians to purchase their first home. That is a very positive
goal for any legislation. However, we must not forget that the
most important goal for the House should be to simplify Canada's
tax code and reduce the tax burden for all Canadians.
In closing, we cannot forget the first law of public policy is
the law of unintended consequences. As many economists predict,
we are about to enter a level of unprecedented deflation. In a
deflationary environment, if we create government policy
incentives for individual Canadians to assume larger debt than
they would otherwise assume, potentially we might create a
situation that would actually punish many Canadians for wanting
to do the right thing.
A tax break is better than no tax reform at all, but let us keep
our eye on the ball and focused on what Canadians really need:
broad based tax reductions, tax reform and tax simplification.
1730
Mr. Roy Cullen (Etobicoke North, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
congratulate the member for Portage—Lisgar for his initiative in
proposing this bill. I am sure he is well intentioned. He would
like to give Canadians a tax break, he would like to stimulate
housing construction in Canada and he would like to re-emphasize
the importance of the home, the family, et cetera.
I am sure that none of us in this House would disagree with
those objectives, but the bill proposes that interest paid by a
taxpayer on the first $100,000 of a mortgage loan secured by that
first qualifying home acquired by a taxpayer would be allowed as
a deduction for tax purposes. I am afraid the bill falls short
of meeting the objectives proposed by the member when he
introduced this bill.
The bill raises a number of important questions but fails to
answer them. I am sure they are begging for answers but I am not
sure the bill really answers them. For example, is it
appropriate to give a tax break to a citizen who does not own a
home but who rents or who does not pay rent or own a home at all?
Why give a tax break to someone who owns a home versus someone
who does not own a home?
Why should first time buyers of a home receive a tax break
versus people who already a home? Does that make any sense? I
submit that it does not make any sense at all. Should our tax
system reward borrowing and penalize saving? I am not sure that
is the kind of incentive we want to build into our tax system.
If the mortgage interest were deductible clearly taxpayers would
be motivated to have the highest mortgage possible. They would
have more interest and more interest to deduct. Clearly we would
be encouraging Canadians to borrow more and save less. I am not
sure that is something we want our tax system to encourage. These
are some serious questions that really beg answers. Maybe the
member opposite will have a chance to address them but the
answers are not contained in his private member's bill.
It is unfortunate that there are more questions that beg
answers. Currently in Canada the capital gain on a sale of a
principal residence is not taxable. If we allowed the interest
to be deductible then surely the capital gain on the sale of a
principal residence should be taxable. The reason a capital gain
on a principal residence is not taxable in Canada now is that we
do not consider an investment in a principal residence as an
investment. It is the ownership of a private home. You cannot
have your cake and eat it too. You cannot be tax free in terms
of capital gains and have interest that is tax deductible.
There is the serious question of the cost of implementing this
proposal. If this proposal were implemented the annual cost to
the treasury would eventually be approximately $3 billion a year.
If the tax rolls were broadened to be at least within the
context of the member's proposal to be more equitable in terms of
not just first time home buyers but all homeowners, the annual
cost to the treasury could rise to $6 billion at a time when we
are looking at fiscal priorities. I could think of a myriad of
other good ways to give Canadians a tax break or to repay the
debt or to invest in some much needed social and economic
programs. First time home buyers already get some tax assistance
under the home buyers plan.
What the bill fundamentally proposes comes from a
misunderstanding of what Canadians want in their tax system. They
want a progressive tax system. That is the whole essence of our
tax system in Canada. Under this proposal individuals with
higher incomes would get a bigger tax break.
That is really contrary to the whole philosophy and the
principles behind the tax system in Canada, and I think quite
rightly.
1735
I am sure the member opposite gets a lot of his ideas from what
goes on in the United States. Yes, it is true that mortgage
interest is deductible for tax purposes in the United States, but
again capital gains in excess of $500,000 on a principal
residence are typically taxed. In addition, most Americans do
not really take advantage of the deductibility of mortgage
interest because they prefer to take the standard deduction
without any questions. Our personal income tax system in Canada
is far more progressive than the U.S. income tax system.
While I and a lot of my colleagues I am sure would like to
reduce the general burden of personal income taxes in Canada, and
we are working very hard toward that end, I am quite convinced
that this proposal is really not a very equitable or a very
efficient way to give tax relief to Canadians.
If we look at the United States and just to sort of emphasize
the lack of progressiveness in its income tax system, Americans
hit the highest marginal income tax rate when they get to incomes
of $300,000 plus. By way of contrast, in Canada when we hit
incomes of $150,000 or thereabouts we start to hit the top
marginal tax rate. That is by design. That is the way our tax
system works. We say that those people earning the bigger
incomes are able to share their wealth to some extent to help
those who are in less advantageous positions. That is the whole
philosophy behind the income tax system.
This measure is really not a very progressive step at all. I am
sure it is really counter to what Canadians expect from their
income tax system. For that reason I urge members of this House
to vote against this bill.
[Translation]
Mr. Gilles-A. Perron (Saint-Eustache—Sainte-Thérèse, BQ): Mr.
Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House this afternoon to speak on
Bill C-223, an act to amend the Income Tax Act providing for the
deduction of interest on mortgage loans, introduced by my colleague from
the Reform Party, the hon. member for Portage—Lisgar.
On the face of it, this bill looks like a good bill, in the sense
that it could indeed help boost housing starts. And as the old saying
has it “When home construction goes well, so goes the economy”.
The economy is going well because forestry workers are working in
the forest again, providing lumber mill workers with wood to cut.
Construction workers also have work. Everyone is working. This activity
also brings in revenue for the government. With fewer people on EI,
costs go down and, with more people paying taxes, revenues grow.
That aspect of the bill seems quite interesting. Another
interesting aspect is the opportunity for our young people, who are just
starting off in life, to get a nudge in the right direction from people
with grey hair like mine so they will be off to a good start. That does
sound good.
What I have more of a problem with is equity. Let us take a look at
equity in this legislation. Take for example a $200,000 house, on which,
as I understand it, the first $100,000 in mortagage would be deductible.
How much would this $200,000 house built in Montreal be worth?
Because of supply and demand, the same house would not be worth
$200,000 if it were built in Sept-Îles, Sherbrooke or remote areas like
Abitibi.
1740
And how would we manage to get equity for interest on this
first $100,000 deductible. That means the houses would not have
the same value. This needs looking into.
The tax deduction is the point of most concern to me. It
concerns me because again there would be two rates, one for the
better off and one for the less well off. Let me give an example
to explain what I mean.
A person with an income under $30,000 could get a tax
deduction of $140 per $1,000, while someone two houses further down
the street who earned $60,000 annually could, for the same $1,000
deductible, get $290 in assistance.
Why that difference of $120?
We in the Bloc are in favour of a refundable tax credit. This
refundable tax credit, at a fixed rate, could be far fairer for
everyone. That is why we have certain reservations, and will not
be supporting this bill, barring amendments in the tax provisions.
[English]
Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it gives
me great pleasure to enter the debate on Bill C-223. I would
also like to thank the member for Portage—Lisgar for bringing
this matter to the floor.
This is not the first time that this has been debated in the
House of Commons. The ill fated government of Joe Clark and Mr.
Crosbie made it part of its budget projections which eventually
saw it defeated. Subsequently not many people have sought to
reintroduce it.
I understand the member is interested in helping young families
get a start in life, a very admirable position to have. I do not
think it is going to attain the objectives he is interested in
for a number of reasons.
First, this would increase the complexity of the existing income
tax system. The thing that people mention to me is they want to
see a simpler and fairer taxation system. We will have one group
of taxpayers eligible for deductions and another group not.
I want to specifically talk about some of the problems of the
American system which allows the deductibility of mortgage
interest. I am certain the administrative people in the United
States would dearly love to get rid of the mortgage
deductibility. The tendency of the government there has been to
eliminate consumer deductibility for other forms of debt such as
car loans and credit card interest, which have already been
eliminated. The American system is tending to go away from the
concept of mortgage deductibility.
What this does is encourage people to be in debt. I have some
American friends who are quite amazed that Canadians eventually
pay their houses off through a process of saving. Canadians have
one of the highest percentages of home ownership probably in the
western world because of that. I know the member is talking about
first time home buyers, but it has been the tendency for
Americans that every five years when their mortgage comes up for
renewal they increase their mortgage. They increase it based on
the inflated value of their real estate because there is a tax
incentive to do so.
1745
As a consequence few people actually try to pay off their
mortgages and they live with debt risk. If there is a downturn
in the economy, these people, the very people the member is
interested in assisting, will end up losing their homes because
they are too highly leveraged and the incentive to save has not
been there.
Let us look at the experience in the United States. We have
talked about the difference between the wealthy benefiting from
this package as opposed to those who are not so inclined. Of
course it benefits people who own homes as opposed to those who
rent.
In the United States currently only 8% of new homeowners
recently polled cited the tax break as a reason for purchasing
their homes. In the United States only 6.2% of household
earnings between $10,000 and $20,000 per year claim the deduction
compared to 78.1% of filers who declared more than $100,000 of
taxable income.
We can see very clearly that the American experience is that the
high income earners are the ones taking advantage of this and not
those with low incomes. It is a regressive tax in the sense that
it favours higher income groups at the detriment of lower income
earners.
Previous speakers have mentioned that to some extent capital
gains on personal residences are taxed in the United States. Of
course Canada does not do that. If we introduce a process
whereby people are allowed to deduct the interest they pay on
their mortgages, it follows that we should also tax capital
gains. I believe we would find there would be a lot of reticence
if we moved in that direction.
This would be what we call a retrogressive tax. It would
increase the complexity of the tax system. It is a reward for
spending as opposed to saving. These all seem to run counter to
the things which government should be promoting in our country.
The Americans like this because they have a consumer driven
society. Basically we will find in the United States that their
savings rates are significantly lower than those of Canadians.
That creates a great deal of uncertainty in their lives. Indeed
many people live from paycheque to paycheque. I suppose we could
argue that this happens in Canada as well, but it is more evident
in the United States.
When the hon. member first opened debate on this issue he talked
about who would benefit. I am surprised at the reference he
made. He said that he had been informed by the banking industry
that it would be in favour of this. Why would it not be? After
all, if the banks are going to increase their mortgage business,
why would it not be a great business to have?
I suggest to the hon. member that the people he is trying to
defend, the first time homebuyers, are the very people the banks
want to get into their clutches. The banks will tell them not to
pay down their mortgages or save because the banks will lend them
the money. We know who will become wealthy from that. It will
not be the first time homebuyers, it will be the financial
institutions which will benefit.
In conclusion, while I am aware of the good intentions of the
member, I encourage my colleagues to vote against this bill.
Mr. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
am pleased to support Private Member's Bill C-223, an act to
amend the Income Tax Act by introducing a deduction for interest
paid on mortgage loans.
From listening to the former speakers, I believe they have
really missed the boat. This bill is about putting money in
people's pockets. When they have money in their pockets they
spend it. When people spend their money we have increased
economic activity. That is how the world operates.
I applaud the hon. member for Portage—Lisgar for introducing
the bill. It would provide for the deduction of interest paid by
a taxpayer on the first $100,000 of a mortgage loan, secured by
the first qualifying home acquired by that taxpayer.
In other words, that is the ceiling.
1750
If I can simplify this, for a mortgage amount of $100,000
amortized over 20 years at an interest rate of 7%, and the
government should take note that interest rates are unfortunately
going up today, with that mortgage a buyer will pay an estimated
amount of $84,632 in interest.
To simplify this for those members who do not like math, let us
divide $84,632 by 20 years. We come up with about $4,231.50. That
is potentially $4,231.50 more per year that a first time
homebuyer would have to spend on their children, on the purchase
of a car, on an RRSP, on things like dental care, on furnishings
and on the upkeep of their home. That is potentially $4,231.50
depending on the terms of the mortgage, a homebuyer could put
toward paying down a mortgage early, saving even more money.
No matter how we slice it, that is $84,632 more in the pockets
of the first time homebuyer. In other words, that is the
interest.
What is the philosophy behind this bill? It is simple but
profound. As I said in my earlier remarks, a dollar left in the
hands of a taxpayer, a consumer, a parent, a citizen, is better
used and more beneficial to the economy and all Canadians than
that same dollar put in the hands of the tax collector, a
minister or a bureaucrat.
Believe it. With a few more dollars in the hands of first time
homebuyers this bill will achieve the following. It moves
Canadians from renters to homebuyers. Instead of giving money to
a landlord, more Canadians would have the opportunity to invest
in themselves, their families and their futures.
In Winnipeg, the largest city in my province of Manitoba, 60% of
the homes sold from January to September 1997 were purchased by
first time homebuyers. According to an article reported in the
Winnipeg Sun on October 27, 1997, Terry Kozak, a Canada
Mortgage and Housing Corporation spokesman said: “A record high
of 25,000 Winnipeg renters could afford to purchase a home. The
added incentive of tax deductible interest would encourage
renters to take the plunge”.
The second point I want to make is that in 1995 under the
Liberal government, housing starts in Manitoba were down by
38.6%. Since then housing starts have seen very modest gains.
According to CMHC single family housing starts are up in Manitoba
by 10.7% compared to gains of more than 37% in Alberta for 1997.
But as I already mentioned, interest rates are headed up. That is
not good news for homebuyers. If the government is really
interested in sustaining the growth in housing starts, it should
pass Bill C-223.
The government should use this tax break for mortgage interest
to counteract mortgage interest rates going up. That is good
public policy. It is real compassion for families and other
potential first time buyers just getting started in life. If all
of us can think back 30 or 40 years, we will remember what it was
like when we did not have two nickels to pinch.
Even the columnist who is not a fan of the Reform Party, Brian
Mulroney's former chief of staff, Hugh Segal, agrees with the
objective of this bill. I quote from his column of September 13,
1997.
“Middle income Canadians would experience an increase in
disposable and discretionary income, there would be an easier
transition from renting to owning and the family home would for
once be the beneficiary of enlightened tax policy as opposed to a
victim”. He goes on to say, “It was right when finance minister
Crosby tried to introduce it almost 20 years ago”, as the former
speaker alluded to, “and it is even more right today”.
1755
My colleague has enunciated how there are many other benefits
with the economic spin-offs that this tax break would create.
There is no doubt we would see an increase in job creation,
certainly jobs created for carpenters, plumbers, electricians.
There would also be a big demand for the manufacturing sector to
fill these homes.
Money spent locally in communities usually turns around about
seven times. Every dollar that is spent locally spins around
seven times.
Real jobs are created when governments put more money into the
hands of the consumer. The expenditure of money is what makes the
economy go around. The people of Canada are waiting for tax
relief. I remind the House that we are the highest taxed people
in all of the G-7 countries.
I close by saying that it is time we passed this bill. It would
help first time homebuyers create their own homes and enhance the
quality of life for their families.
Mr. Steve Mahoney (Mississauga West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I am please to comment on this private member's bill.
First let me tell members in this House, some of whom may
represent rural or agricultural ridings, that the agricultural
product in my city of Mississauga happens to be homes.
When people ask what the population is of Mississauga, I
generally respond by asking “What time is it”. In times of
recession in this country we have experienced growth in our
community in the neighbourhood of 20,000 people a year. We
currently have approximately 600,000 people. Our ultimate
population will be 750,000 according to our official plan. Many
of those will be people moving into homes and we would call them
first time homebuyers.
Frankly, anything that is done that would legitimately assist a
first time homebuyer in the city of Mississauga, in the community
I represent, you would think would be something we would want to
support. What is really interesting when we examine this bill in
particular coming as a private member's bill from a Reform Party
member is that this is a spending bill. If we analyse it, it is
not a tax cut at all.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Steve Mahoney: Members think this is funny. Let me
share this with them and show them why the taxpayers of Canada
would see this as a spending bill.
Anything that provides a tax cut means there is a cost to the
federal treasury. The indications are that the cost of this at
the minimum, at the floor level, would be $150 million. To
maturity the cost could be as high as $3 billion. If we were to
go to the next step, which would be to take it further than just
first time homebuyers and expand it to include all homebuyers,
the cost could be as high as $6 billion to the federal treasury.
What the member is really asking for is to go to what
fundamentally is an American system. This does not surprise me
because all I hear when I hear Reform Party members stand up in
this place is the defence of the great U.S.A. and its tax system,
its safety system and social system. All they ever talk about is
how great the United States of America is.
It would be a real treat to hear a member of the Reform Party
stand in the House of Commons and talk about how great Canada is.
But we do not hear that. We hear, “Let us get the Star Spangled
Banner up there and tell everybody boy oh boy, the way to run
things is the way they run it south of the border”.
1800
I happen to think they are wrong, as they chirp away, not
only wrong but a dangerous policy.
There are ways to help first time home buyers. One very obvious
way that the members opposite neglect to recognize is the
interest rate in this country. Just think about the difficulty
that a first time home buyer would have in buying a home in my
community. The low end would be somewhere around $130,000 for a
townhouse up to $200,000 for a fairly modest three bedroom home
in a subdivision in my city. They would need a down payment of
approximately $30,000. They have to save that money. If they
were buying a semi-detached or single home with a maximum CMHC
insured mortgage, they would end up with a mortgage payment, if
the interest rates were at 10%, as high as $1,500 a month. That
is a lot of money for a first time home buyer to assume.
If they were to buy the smaller home then they would be able to
cut that down but it is still going to be $1,000 or more per
month. What people tend to forget when they are buying a
townhouse is that they have to add on common area maintenance
fees to the mortgage. Even for a townhouse at the lowest end of
the market in big city Canada, we are talking about $1,200 to
$1,500 a month in mortgage payments if the interest rates are as
high as 10%.
What has happened since this government took office in 1993? By
putting confidence back into the marketplace, by eliminating the
$42 billion inherited—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Steve Mahoney: The Tories do not like to hear about
this. They wave it off. They do not want to hear us constantly
remind the Canadian public about the legacy of Brian Mulroney.
However, the facts are that in 1993 this government started out
with a huge deficit which hurt us internationally. It hurt us in
the money markets and in the marketplace. People said you cannot
even manage your own household, don't talk to us about other
households.
We have managed this household. We have put this country on the
road to fiscal responsibility and have balanced the books. From
time to time the Leader of the Opposition stands up and admits
that but then says, like the poor hungry boy in Oliver, please
sir, I want more. That is all we hear. I have never heard such
whining and snivelling coming out of the parties representing the
west, primarily and the Reform Party, as we hear every day in
this place. Please sir, I want more.
What they are proposing with this bill is that they want more.
In what I can only hope is a noble attempt to try to do something
for first time home buyers, I am prepared to concede that at
least their intention is good.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear.
Mr. Steve Mahoney: Yes, go ahead and applaud yourselves,
trained seals all. In any event, I am assuming they are trying
to do something for first time home buyers but they are doing it
in the most ridiculous way because they are asking all the
taxpayers in Canada to foot the bill. They are asking this
government, if we were to adopt this private member's bill, to
assume the potential liability that could be as high as $6
billion if we were to take it to its ultimate extremes. We are
not prepared to do that. That is not the stated goal of this
government.
When I first looked at this I thought it would be great to be
able to deduct the interest on my mortgage. It is a laudable
idea. Anyone looking at it would think it was wonderful.
However, we do not pay taxes on capital gains when we sell our
principal residences.
That might have to change if that situation were to occur.
There is a bit of a quid pro quo there.
1805
The other aspect is when I look at the potential damage and the
cost and the fact that we would be asking non-first time home
buyers, renters, seniors, people who owned their homes for a
number of years, to subsidize this. It is wrong headed.
What makes more sense is keeping our inflation rate low and
non-existent, keeping our interest rates as low as they are
because that benefits all of us, whether we are buying a first
time home, an automobile, whether we are taking a vacation,
whatever it is. It allows us to get the true benefit of revenue
and money staying in our pocket because we keep interest rates
down.
If Reformers would understand that, they would understand that
this private member's bill, contrary to what they would say, is
nothing more than a spending program they are asking this
government to do, which I could not support.
Mr. Jim Pankiw (Saskatoon—Humboldt, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
the hon. member for Mississauga West referred to the
proposed bill as a spending program.
He said it was not really providing a tax deduction that does
not currently exist but a spending increase because anything that
provides a tax cut is a cost to the federal treasury. Therefore
providing a tax deduction that does not currently exist to him is
a spending program. It is twisted, perverse logic. It is bizarre
logic. It is Liberal logic. There is really no logic there.
I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Portage—Lisgar
for introducing this private member's bill. I would like to
speak about the fairness of it and his attempt to bring fairness
to younger Canadians who this would actually impact on.
Before I do, I am not quite done in my comments about the
discussion the hon. member for Mississauga West was engaged in.
He was singing praise for the fiscal management of the Liberal
government, but the truth is that in the past four years, under
this Liberal government, the national debt of our country has
increased $100 billion. Those are the cold, hard facts. There it
is. It is as simple as that.
Then he referred to not only the member for Portage—Lisgar but
to all Reformers as whiners and snivellers for trying to exercise
the representation of our constituents here and speak on their
behalf in an attempt to gain some tax relief for them.
They are burdened, as are all Canadians, by the level of
taxation in this country. We are trying to put forward measures
which would provide some relief of the over burdensome government
levels of tax, but the Liberals are referring to us as whiners
and snivellers.
In other words, they are saying that despite the fact that we
are among the highest taxed citizens in the world, we are whiners
and snivellers for complaining about it.
Earlier in discussion the hon. member from Kings—Hants, a
Conservative member, suggested it was not a good idea to provide
this tax cut for first time home buyers because it would increase
the complexity of the tax code.
I point out to the hon. member that the complexity of the tax
code doubled in the nine years the Conservatives governed this
country. I think it is a little hypocritical to suggest what he
did.
The most important thing I have to say about this bill is the
fairness of it. What I am getting at is that yes, the Liberal
government has increased our national debt $100 billion and yes,
the Conservative government prior in nine years increased our
national debt by $300 billion, and the Liberal government before
that, a further $200 billion.
1810
Now we are saddled with this $600 billion national debt that is
placed on the backs of our future generations. It is younger
Canadians who are going to have to bear that burden, being
saddled with high taxes for the rest of their lives to pay off
the mismanagement of past Conservative and Liberal governments.
Furthermore these same governments have mismanaged our Canada
pension plan so it now has an unfunded liability of $600 billion,
for which the younger generation is also going to have to bear
the burden.
If the hon. member from Portage—Lisgar is able to introduce a
bill that would at least provide a bit of tax relief to the
generation now burdened with the mismanagement of past Liberal
and Conservative governments, the onus is on us to support that.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): The time provided for
the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired.
The order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on
the Order Paper.
* * *
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY DEBATE
SPEAKER'S RULING
The Speaker: Colleagues, at 2.15 p.m. today I
received a letter from the hon. member for Sherbrooke asking for
an emergency debate. Subsequently I gave the floor to the member
for Sherbrooke. He encapsulated what was in the letter.
I have given very serious thought to this request for an
emergency debate today. It is my decision that it does not meet
all the contingencies for an emergency debate at this time.
The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been moved
pursuant to order made Monday, February 2, 1998.
* * *
[Translation]
ICE STORM 1998
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I am very pleased that the leaders of all of the parties,
especially the Leader of the Opposition, asked for or agreed to a
debate at this point to discuss the totally unprecedented events in
eastern Ontario, Quebec and the maritimes in early January.
1815
As you know there are times when nature reminds us who is
really the boss on our planet. Despite our advanced technology and
knowledge, we can one day find ourselves at the mercy of forces
beyond our control. It is a great lesson in humility. For several
million people in eastern Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Wolfe
Island and Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, the ice storm brutally
reminded us how vulnerable we are in the face of nature's fury.
There are times when we realize that our status as Canadians
goes far beyond our geography, our citizenship and our common
history. To be Canadian is to be a member of a living and active
community. Wherever we live in this great country, be we rich or
poor and whatever our political bent, we are all citizens. As
such, when things go wrong, we help each other, we work together
and we band together. As in the case of the floods in the Saguenay
and in Manitoba, the ice storm of 1998 triggered this natural
reflex in us.
A few weeks ago, no one would have believed that a continuous rain
around the freezing point would put so many cities and villages in the
cold and in the dark, for days in certain cases, and for weeks in
others. No one would have believed that complex hydro networks which
took years to build would be destroyed in a matter of hours, that giant
pylons would bend in no time flat under the weight of the ice.
Most members of Parliament, including myself—either by
personally visiting the affected areas or by watching the situation
unfold on television—were able to witness the damage, as did all
Canadians. Canadians quickly got over their shock and displayed a
profound desire to help the victims of that storm. When this winter
disaster struck, families, neighbours and, for that matter, all
Canadians came to the rescue.
[English]
Faced with untold misery and uncertainty, communities came
together. People reached out to one another. They lent a hand,
they cooked meals, they opened their homes. As the extent of the
crisis became clear, local and provincial governments quickly
marshalled their resources to assess damage, to organize
emergency food shelters, to co-ordinate volunteers, to provide
people with information concerning where to go for help and to
warn of the dangers.
Everybody wanted to help. There was no partisan politics
involved.
I met with the premiers of Quebec and Ontario. During the first
hours the premiers were all calling. The premier of Newfoundland
offered to send his line men. The same offer was made by the
premiers of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The premiers of
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia called to
ask what they could do. They told us that they had all sorts of
equipment available. Everybody wanted to come to the aid of the
people who were having difficulties. I would like to thank them
for that. It was a great sign of solidarity.
Locally the mayors and the aldermen started to work.
[Translation]
Mayors followed the situation very closely, as did municipal
officials. They spent days if not weeks with hardly any sleep, to
provide assistance to those in need.
1820
It was quite obvious that an exceptional effort was required,
because this was a truly exceptional storm. Very quickly, the
crisis took on national proportions and demanded a national
response. It required the resources of the entire Canadian
government.
When the governments of Quebec and Ontario called for help,
all the resources of the Canadian government were mobilized. We
were prepared to co-operate with provincial and local governments
to speed up the relief effort. We had to look after people's
safety and build co-operation.
We focussed on helping individuals, families, small businesses
and farmers.
The Canadian Armed Forces spearheaded the Canadian government's
effort.
At the peak of Operation Recuperation, over 15,000 regular and
reserve soldiers were deployed in all the regions devastated by the
storm. They helped the hydro teams restore power. They cleared
debris. They helped people get to shelters. They provided food
and beds, and blankets for those who needed them. They visited all
families that had not left their homes to make sure they were safe.
They provided assistance to everyone.
I was able to see that their mandate was to do what needed to be
done and ask questions later because this was a national emergency. They
did an outstanding job at helping local authorities and all the victims.
Equipment was airlifted from Vancouver and Victoria, and stops were
made in every provincial capital along the way to pick up the equipment
local authorities were making available to the storm victims:
generators, equipment provided by power companies in every province.
Planes even had to be chartered abroad for this purpose.
The American army was called in under the terms of an agreement we
have with them. I want to stress that the American army responded
immediately to assist the Canadian army in carrying out its duties.
In my opinion, this turned out to be a major source of help for the
Canadian army, which has so often been called upon to help abroad.
[English]
When they had the occasion to serve the Canadian people, I met
them and I know how anxious they were to do the right thing, a
spirit they have developed over the years travelling abroad in
difficult circumstances. They were very happy to help the
citizens of Canada who were in trouble at that time.
I talked with the soldiers who came from all over Canada. They
were in the local communities helping people. They came from
British Columbia, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Alberta and
Manitoba. Many of them were in Quebec and they could not speak a
word of French, but they communicated in their own way with the
people to help them restore order and gain comfort.
It was a great moment for them. All members of Parliament
should be very proud of what the Canadian forces did in those
troubled communities.
They did it with a sense of pride. It was a call to duty. Now
they have been re-deployed. Some are still there because the
problems have not been completely solved. They will stay there
as long as they are needed.
When they arrived in the villages and in the towns, the sense of
security, the sense of solidarity was felt by all the citizens.
Sometimes we have tended to criticize them, but it was good to
see that when they were needed, they did a fantastic job.
1825
[Translation]
In operation “recuperation”, the federal government did all it
could to help at the time. To date we have spent some $250 million
to help people in difficulty as the result of the catastrophe. We
have advanced $50 million to the Government of Quebec and $25
million to the Government of Ontario to help them with the
difficulties they face.
Obviously, we have not yet seen the final bill. It will be
enormous, unfortunately. However, Canadian solidarity will be
expressed once again, because up to 90% of the expenses incurred by
the provincial governments will be reimbursed by the federal
government.
That is what Canadian solidarity is all about. We help each other
out in difficult times.
The Minister of Human Resources Development made a fund of $45
million available to municipalities to help them do the necessary
clean up and repair work.
The Department of Public Works put all federal government
equipment at the disposal of the victims. The minister sent the
mayors—it was very urgent, he paid in advance—tax payments or
payments in lieu of taxes so that the municipalities would have
cash on hand to meet the unexpected obligations they must face.
Revenue Canada allowed all those importing generators and
other equipment from the United States to cross the border quickly
and will ask questions later to ensure that the laws have been
complied with.
The Department of Health, with emergency systems located
across the country, immediately gave the order to ship the
available beds, bedding and medicines to the devastated regions as
promptly as possible.
I believe the government did everything possible under the
circumstances, and when our fellow citizens are in difficulty, it
is our duty to spare no efforts to make their lives easier.
[English]
Canadians from across the land showed their solidarity. They
sent blankets, food and money. There were all sorts of
donations. The Red Cross has received $6 million in relief so
far. The donations came from everywhere, big and small. The NHL
gave half a million dollars.
On the plane when I was travelling with Team Canada the
businessmen raised $150,000. One of them got up and said that
there was a problem and everyone started signing cheques, despite
having had to pay at least $15,000 to be part of the team. Those
businessmen pitched in $150,000. There were all sorts of good
examples.
[Translation]
I would like to give particular mention to Kai-ya Belfry and
Linnea Clow, two 11th grade students from Prince Edward Island, who
were in Quebec when the ice storm struck and who gave their friends
back in P.E.I. the idea of collecting money for the disaster
victims, and to two New Brunswick children, two little boys named
Joshua and Christopher Ogden, who sent in part of their weekly
allowances. They sent in $2, a sizeable sum to them, and they sent
it in.
[English]
Six rail cars containing some 360 cords of firewood were
collected in Halifax, Windsor and Sydney, Nova Scotia. The member
for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke sent 12 trucks of his own
firewood from a business he has with his brother. There were
members of Parliament calling other members of Parliament
offering help. There was equipment coming from everywhere. The
member for Provencher collected generators to be sent to Quebec
and Ontario because of the situation, because they were needed.
The army was collecting and delivering them.
1830
Imagine how the farmer who had not been in a position to milk
his cows felt when he saw Canadian soldiers arriving with a
generator to help him do his job. Imagine him standing at his
barn door and receiving help from Manitoba, Saskatchewan or other
parts of Ontario.
Members of Parliament called members in affected areas to offer
help. That is something of which we can be very proud. Also I
should mention Ashley Franzon, a grade four student at James
Bolton Public School near Toronto, who organized a drive to
collect emergency supplies.
[Translation]
A francophone club from Windsor, Ontario, called Place Concorde,
organized a fund-raising event called “Brise-glace”. The Grand Forks
high school, in British Columbia, got in touch with the students of
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu to offer them assistance and even to invite
them to come to British Columbia during the storm, to share their
facilities. The CHMB radio station, in Vancouver, collected over
$15,000. Such a show of solidarity, support and friendship is simply
unprecedented.
That is why, my dear friends, even though the situation is not
completely back to normal yet, we say thanks to all Canadians on behalf
of those who benefited from their support.
I have always believed that while times may change, fundamental
values remain the same.
This extraordinary reaction on the part of Canadians, whether they
live next door or at the other of the country, reinforced my belief. I
will never forget all that was done. More importantly, the victims of
the ice storm will never forget it either.
This showed once again how lucky we are to be Canadians. In this
great country of ours, one thing is now very clear: the word solidarity
is not just a word, it is a reality.
[English]
Mr. Preston Manning (Leader of the Opposition, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, the official opposition welcomes the opportunity to
share its thoughts and feelings on the January ice storm. I do
not think of this opportunity—and I do not think many members
do—as a debate. It is a get-together of members of Parliament
from all sides of the House to express our thoughts and feelings.
It is a good thing to do.
I would like to use this opportunity to do four things. First,
I officially recognize the suffering and damage experienced by
our fellow citizens as a result of the storm. This is something
we do not always do as in the case of the droughts and floods in
the great Peace River country. It is something we should do and
should do more often. I welcome this opportunity.
Second, I welcome the opportunity to listen to the firsthand
stories and reports from MPs whose constituencies were directly
affected by the storm. All our members are from outside that
region so we welcome the chance to hear the stories. We have
heard some of them already but we want to hear some more.
Third, we want to join with other MPs—and the prime minister
has done it to a certain extent already—in paying tribute to all
those who endured the disaster and to those who came to their
rescue.
Fourth, I would like to comment on the role of parliament in
assisting Canadians to cope with natural disasters, not just at
the practical administrative level but at the emotional level or
at the level of the heart.
1835
The facts concerning the ice storm of 1998 are well known. It
is worthwhile taking a moment to state them in the House and for
the record as a measure of the scope and the severity of this
calamity.
Three eastern provinces experienced a five day ice storm, the
worst in half a century. Freezing rain froze on contact. Three
inches of ice coated streets, power lines, trees and buildings.
Trees, branches, power lines and utility poles snapped under the
weight.
By January 9 many towns and cities were officially declared
disaster areas. About 40% of Hydro Quebec's electricity
transmission network was damaged. Some 24,000 to 30,000 utility
poles were down. There were vast power outages, the triangle of
darkness south of Montreal perhaps being the worst hit.
People were without electricity, phone, heat, food and water.
Many rural communities also lost their plumbing, septic tanks,
wells and sump pumps. Flooding was a major problem in many
areas.
People from across the country donated mats, cots, blankets,
food, portable generators, firewood and money. Emergency
shelters provided help to over 100,000 people. The Canadian
military, as the prime minister said, deployed 15,000 personnel
to help people in need as well as to deliver supplies and
equipment.
Businesses and offices closed in downtown Montreal for over a
week and for days in the Ottawa area. The Retail Council of
Quebec estimated $180 million in lost sales due to power
blackouts by the middle of the month, with the final total being
much higher.
The Via Rail passenger service was out between Toronto, Ottawa,
Montreal and between Halifax and Montreal. Airports were closed.
The agriculture industry was particularly hard hit as dairy
operations were crippled. Livestock and cattle were killed. The
maple sugar industry was devastated.
I was raised on a dairy farm and I know what cows will do that
have never been milked by hand and have always been milked by a
milking machine when you try to milk them by hand. I do not envy
the people who tried to do that.
At the peak of the storm more than three million people were
without power, stretching from Ottawa and eastern Ontario through
southern Quebec.
By week two 800,000 to a million people in the region were still
without power. By week three 300,000 households were still
without power and some rural areas are still without power.
At least 20 deaths in Quebec alone were linked to the
devastation of the storm.
These are some of the sobering tragic facts, but they do not
tell the whole tale. That is also why we have met here to listen
to the firsthand stories and reports from those directly affected
and to hear the more human side. We can listen to statistics and
they are sad but it is the human stories that tell the whole
story.
Some of these stories we have already heard from fellow MPs and
from our own parliamentary staff. The official opposition's
director of communications, Jim Armour, and his young family were
without power for three weeks. Their basement was flooded. He
had very little sleep at nights for days on end. Jim somehow
still managed to try to keep up with his parliamentary duties
while all the time worrying and trying to cope with the disaster
at home.
There were thousands of public servants in this area who tried
to do that. They were coping with the storm while trying to deal
with keeping up their work to the best they were able.
Our grandchildren will hear the stories about the great ice
storm of 1998. They will hear about how people went without
electricity for weeks on end but were in no way left powerless
because there was another power at work. They will hear how in
the bitter cold and darkness the flame of human ingenuity and
compassion burned ever more brightly. They will hear how the ice
storm of 1998 changed the lives and relationships of people and
made them feel more acutely conscience of what is truly important
in life, the necessities we take for granted, and the value of
both individual initiative and community. We want to hear these
stories.
Fifth, the official opposition joins with other members of
Parliament in paying tribute to the heroism of so many. To all
those who endured this disaster we pay tribute to their fortitude
and resourcefulness. To the hydro personnel, the army personnel,
the Red Cross, the other relief people, the churches, and the
local governments that have worked so hard to assist the
suffering and repair the damage, we salute them tonight and we
honour them.
We realize the words we say here can add little to the regard in
which they are already held by those they helped and by their
fellow citizens. We say the words anyway because thanks is a
word we can never say often enough.
1840
Finally, a brief comment on the role of parliament in assisting
Canadians to cope with natural disasters. At the practical,
administrative level, natural disasters call for action on the
part of governments from the mobilization of relief efforts,
including mobilization of the army to the provision of
compensation. It is our duty to ensure that these tasks are
performed promptly and efficiently.
There is another role for elected members of Parliament to play
in such situations which I believe is equally important. That is
to express the feelings which people in one part of the country
experience when people in other parts of the country experience
pain and loss and adversity.
Parliament must not only think but feel. It must not only
deliberate but empathize. I fear, and I am talking about myself
as well as other members, that sometimes we think and deliberate
too much in this place and we feel and empathize too little.
Let us therefore take time this evening above all to express and
share the feelings Canadians experienced when this disaster
struck.
[Translation]
To my fellow citizens in Quebec who were hard hit by the
effects of this disastrous ice storm, I wish to express my deepest
compassion. I also wish to tell them that our party will support
any measures necessary to ensure their well-being.
I would like, if I may, to add a personal note. In times of
natural disasters, whether they be an ice storm, flooding in the
Saguenay or the Red River area, fires in southern Alberta, or the
recent storms and flooding in Nova Scotia, to name but a few,
Canadians from across the country come together and help each other
out in every imaginable way.
They do so spontaneously and with sincerity. Is that not a sign
that being Canadian really means something?
Why not give voice to the feelings we express during natural
disasters at other times as well? The country would be better for
it, more united by the feelings of its citizens.
[English]
What did Canadians feel? Let me summarize. Let me direct my
words to those directly affected.
Alarm was one of our feelings when we saw pictures of families
on television, parents who were scared, small children who were
bewildered; fear for the old and the vulnerable, many of whom
were stranded in unheated apartments; anguish when we saw people
forced to leave their homes; pain when we learned that people had
lost pets and livestock and suffered damage to property and
business; sorrow for those who lost a family member or a friend
to the storm. Our hearts are with them today.
We felt their frustration, anger and exhaustion when the weather
eased and then worsened, when the lights flickered on and then
they flickered off again. We felt the impulse to help in any way
we could. As we watched, we felt admiration for the way they
coped. We saw example after example of people making the best
out of a bad situation.
We were encouraged to hear the optimism in the voices of people
who called in to radio talk shows to share their experiences. We
felt amazement at the generosity of people who opened their homes
and their hearts to strangers, offering elderly neighbours,
families, kids, cats and dogs a safe and warm refuge for days,
even weeks, on end.
We felt thankful for the men and women who worked night after
night in shelters, preparing hot meals, serving coffee, welcoming
newcomers with open arms and encouragement. We felt pride
watching Canadian soldiers offering a gentle hand to people in
need.
Finally, as power was restored and their world lit up again, we
felt great relief. We could imagine the simple and profound
gratitude that they must have felt for their first warm bath and
a hot meal.
1845
While life slowly returns to normal for many, we know there are
others who are still suffering, struggling and coping. We
continue to think about them and to feel for them, feelings
evoked in the hearts of Canadians by an ice storm, alarm, fear,
anguish, sorrow, frustration but also admiration, encouragement,
thankfulness, pride and relief.
Is there a lesson in all this that we could carry forward in the
days ahead? I believe there is and it is this. If we, as
Canadians, would express our feelings for our fellow citizens
more frequently and more frankly, not just in times of natural
disaster or political crisis but every week of the year, this
country would be united not simply by laws or ribbons of steal or
concrete but by invisible cords binding Canadians' hearts each to
the other.
[Translation]
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I
will be sharing my time with my colleague, the hon. member for
Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, one of the ridings hardest hit by this
dreadful ice storm.
I am pleased to participate today in this emergency debate on the
ice emergency that affected a fair part of Quebec, eastern Ontario and
part of New Brunswick.
I would like to start by paying tribute to the thousands of
volunteers who were so generous with their time and effort. First, I
think we must take our hats off to the linesmen from Quebec,
neighbouring Canadian provinces and New England.
We must also salute the work of all Quebec civil emergency
personnel, the Armed Forces members from Quebec and Canada as well as
the Red Cross personnel, the fire and police services from the various
municipalities, the Sûreté du Québec and the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police.
The job done by CLSC employees should be acknowledged as well.
While visiting shelters, I noticed that people were discovering what a
CLSC is and all the services it can provide. I get the feeling that
CLSCs will get much more business once this crisis is over.
Town employees, and the mayors in particular, who played a key role
during this crisis, should be congratulated. They have made it clear, I
think, that, in organizing our society, as much power as possible should
be devolved to local authorities.
They know their people, and they are in a position to act quickly
and effectively, which this crisis has proven most eloquently.
In addition to those I have named, there are certainly many
more I have forgotten, who gave devoted service throughout this
entire crisis.
The majority of Quebeckers, many Ontarians, and some New
Brunswickers as well, have had to call upon their innate ability to
cope, as well as an exemplary solidarity. Their situations were
not always easy to deal with, but at the same time they offered
many families and friends an opportunity to lend each other a hand,
to join in solidarity, in some cases to forge new ties.
I saw many people who usually live alone, very often low
income people, sometimes seniors, and who discovered new
friendships in the emergency shelters, made new friendships. Many
of the workers and volunteers, said to me “There will certainly be
problems once the emergency is over, because these people will then
find themselves alone again, after experiencing this new situation.
There will have to be some very careful follow-up to help them out
when they go back to their isolation, after having experienced
something else during the emergency”.
That is one human factor the emergency gave us an opportunity
to discover. We discovered many things, but that is certainly an
important discovery.
I was affected personally for 36 hours, which is not much. I
was not one of the disaster victims for several weeks.
Some are still not out of the disaster situation. We have given a
home to relatives from Saint-Hyacinthe, to people from the Beloeil
region.
I visited most of the counties hit by the disaster, and the
emergency shelters in Montreal. I became aware of the
extraordinary morale, not only of the volunteers but also of the
disaster victims, an extraordinary morale in the face of adversity.
1850
I would first like to congratulate the members of the Bloc
and, naturally, the members of the other parties as well. I
mention those of the Bloc because most of us come from the
Montérégie region and from the centre of Quebec. I want to
congratulate the members from the other regions as well.
The member for Matane and the member for Lac St-Jean sent wood
to members in the regions affected by the storm. Members from the
Quebec City region took up collections throughout the weeks the
regions were without power.
I also appreciated the fact that throughout the crisis
everyone put their political opinions aside in order to get on with
a job much more important than political partisanship.
Testimonials of support, shipments of wood, arrivals of vital
supplies came from all over, from regions in Quebec and Canadian
provinces and from the northeastern United States. In a crisis,
Canadians and Quebecers and the vast majority of politicians can
set aside their differences and work together to help those in
difficulty.
The same was true during both the floods in Manitoba last
spring and the flooding in the Saguenay over a year ago. Quebecers
and Canadians gave expression to their deep sense of solidarity and
mutual help.
Solidarity has no borders. The people of Canada and Quebec
did a lot jointly as did the people of the United States and
Quebec.
Beyond the exceptional acts of solidarity, the horror of the
ice storm remains. Some regions have not yet recovered, and some
men and women are still without electricity. Our help went to
those affected by this catastrophe, the victims, and it must
continue to do so.
The Bloc Quebecois has done everything in its power to ensure
that the federal government helps everyone as much as possible, by
enabling the victims of the storm to receive employment insurance
benefits for the days of work they lost, ensuring that farmers get
help and having the mail delivered on the weekend, for example.
I would like to take this opportunity to mention the
invaluable co-operation of Canada Post. I was with the mayor of
Boucherville and the Bloc Quebecois member for Boucherville. There
was a problem with the mail in their region and, in record time, I
was able to reach the president of Canada Post, Mr. André Ouellet,
who called me back immediately to rectify the situation.
I would also like to mention the wonderful co-operation of the
Union of Postal Workers. The corporation had just come through a
strike and yet, a few weeks later, the union and management worked
together.
I must point out, however, that the Liberal government refused
to agree with the Bloc Quebecois' arguments regarding elimination
of the qualifying period, the first two weeks of penalty for
unemployed workers.
In this regard, I call on the Minister of Human Resources
Development to meet as soon as possible with the coalition of MPs
from regions affected by the storm, composed of members of the Bloc
Quebecois and two Progressive Conservative MPs.
This criticism aside, however, the co-operation between Ottawa
and Quebec City was, on the whole, exemplary and our two
governments responded to the call. This does not mean attention
should not be called to problems. It is our democratic role and
our role as the opposition to do so. That is why we are paying
special attention to farmers, especially owners of maple sugar
operations and apple growers, as well as manufacturers.
Quebeckers can count on the Bloc Quebecois to make suggestions
to the government regarding measures to ensure that everyone
receives equitable assistance.
Quebeckers and Canadians will not soon forget the worst ice storm
in their history. To a certain extent, we have all emerged changed
from this catastrophe.
We have become aware, for instance, of how tremendously
dependent we are on electricity. We have realized that we are
never alone in times of trouble.
I would like to pay tribute to the wonderful support of the
Quebec government, and of its leader, Premier Lucien Bouchard, who
laid out the facts and took the necessary measures. I also wish to
commend the president of Hydro-Québec, André Caillé, who directed
this large corporation during this extraordinary storm.
1855
Given the enormity of the crisis, the Quebec government, which
was co-ordinating emergency measures, managed the whole situation
very well. On behalf of the House, I wish to congratulate them.
Once again, I thank all volunteer workers, and assure all victims
of our complete solidarity.
Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I was
in the heart of what was called and will be remembered as the “triangle
of darkness”. I witnessed from close up the plight of those affected by
the storm in my riding. These people faced adversity with courage and
determination. Some of them actually continue to do so, since power has
not yet been restored everywhere in the vast riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.
It is in difficult times that real leaders emerge. Let me name a
few who did so in this particular case. There are many, but time does
not allow us to name them all. One of these leaders is unquestionably
the premier of Quebec, Lucien Bouchard, who displayed a real ability for
crisis management, and who acted like a true state leader by gaining
people's trust and promoting solidarity among all Quebeckers in the face
of a catastrophe.
Then there is André Caillé, who took measures to ensure that
Hydro-Québec's network, which could no longer serve 20% of
Quebec's population, would be rebuilt efficiently and in record
time.
There is also Claude Bernier, the mayor of Saint-Hyacinthe and
reeve of the Mascoutins regional county municipality, who behaved like
a field general and a true crisis manager. I humbly salute him now,
after putting myself at his service from the very beginning of the
crisis. He acted with remarkable effectiveness and efficiency throughout
this most difficult period.
I congratulate all the volunteers, the police forces, the fire
departments, the Royal 22e Régiment, with whom I had an opportunity to
work. I also want to thank the hundreds of volunteers who worked without
respite in shelters, in local community service centres, and for the Red
Cross. I must not forget all elected municipal officials, that is the
mayors and the councillors.
Without their input, without their contribution, we would never had
made it through this unprecedented emergency situation.
The crisis is far from over. Yesterday, the meeting I held in
my riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot with some 600 people from
business and industry reminded me of the harsh realities being
faced by the people of my riding. These 600 people from business
and industry told us that, in less than one month, they had lost
about $215 million worth of commercial and industrial sales.
Representatives of their workers came to tell us that, in less
than one month, from January 6 to February 2, they had lost in
excess of $42 million in earnings. The director of the
Saint-Hyacinthe industrial and economic corporation—whom I
commend in passing for his very great efficiency—indicated to us
that the unemployment rate in the greater Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot
region at the present time was in excess of 30%. These few
figures alone indicate the extent of the catastrophe and the work
that remains to be done to rebuild the industrial base and to
ensure that the work force reabsorbs this instant unemployment.
Yesterday these people were extremely vocal in expressing
their suffering, and they asked me to pass on their wishes to the
Canadian government. The first of these is for the Government of
Canadato reach a prompt agreement with the Government of Quebec to
put into place a true program for reconstruction of the industrial
base, one that would provide compensation for ice damage to
equipment and facilities not covered by insurance.
1900
With respect to stocks of perishables that were lost, we have been
asked if the federal government and the Quebec government could help pay
compensation for these lost stocks of perishables.
We have also been asked to help pay the difference between running
generators, which can cost anything from $200 to $2,000 to run depending
on the size of the business, and using regular electrical power. Indeed,
that is how it was done last year in the Saguenay region and Manitoba,
where a program was established for industrial reconstruction.
Labour representatives asked that we speak out and continue to
speak very loud and clear, to ensure that something comes of the fine
words the Minister of Human Resources Development had in the early days
of the crisis, that they actually translate into greater compassion.
When the Minister of Human Resources Development spoke of humanism and
flexibility, we all figured this meant he would not task every last HRD
employee to collect overpayments from the ice storm victims. These
people have already gone two weeks without pay or income of any sort and
lived on half the money they should normally have been bringing in for
three, four and even five weeks in some cases. Plus they have had to
face extraordinary expenses.
There is still some hope, however, because we just learned
moments ago—which explains my departure from the House—that the
Minister of Human Resources Development has agreed to meet tomorrow
with the MPs for Montérégie and mid-Quebec, the Bloc members and
the two from the Conservative Party. We hope that at that time
what the minister was saying at the beginning of the emergency will
be translated into facts and that he will give up chasing after
over-payments and harassing people who have already been sorely
tried by a disaster without precedent.
I wish to assure the people of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, on
behalf of my colleagues in Montérégie and mid-Quebec, that all Bloc
Quebecois MPs are at their service. All of our offices are open
every day to respond to their needs, to help them take the
necessary steps, to support them as well in the trials they are
undergoing. Please do not hesitate to call us, and please do not
hesitate to contact us.
We have been there from the start, and we will continue to be there
right up until the end.
[English]
Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I would
like to say at the outset that I am going to share some of my
time this evening with the member from Beauséjour—Petitcodiac.
Think for a moment. It is 3 o'clock in the morning. Power went
off three hours ago. The house is dark and cold, darker than
dark and colder than cold. The rain won't let up. The creaking
of the frozen trees and the cracking of their ice bound limbs
mark the minutes of the longest night of your life.
You tell yourself everything will be all right, you will make it
through. If only it would stop raining. If only it would stop
freezing. If only the power would go back on. Then it does,
like a miracle. The dark is banished, the warmth returns and you
breathe easy again.
It is no miracle. It is not even anything but the ordinary. It
is just another day and night on the job for public service
workers. That is what is extraordinary. Out there in the dark,
out there up some pole or down some ditch, out there scrambling
over iced fence lines, out there pelted by driving rain, out
there with the frayed high voltage wires, out there with the
exploding transformers, they are hard at work.
They think nothing of it. It is their job and they do it. They
do it night and day. They do it day and night until the power is
restored and until life is normal again.
[Translation]
Throughout the entire ice storm and throughout the efforts to
repair the damage, it was the same story. Everywhere we saw
ordinary people performing extraordinary deeds, and not for money,
never for the money. Not the soldiers, not the Hydro workers, not
the water and sewer workers, not the neighbours helping neighbours,
not the strangers helping other ordinary people, never for the
money.
1905
Extraordinary. Extraordinary because, in this time of world-wide
economics, when money seems to be the great motivator, money can
do anything, except magic.
But what has helped us here was not the power of money, but
the power of something far more important, the power of community,
the simple instinct to help each other, no questions asked. It was
extraordinary.
[English]
It was something much stronger and of greater value than money.
It was the power of community, the simple instinct to look out
for one another whether or not you could make a buck out of it.
That was extraordinary. It is extraordinary when we are told how
often that kind of thing does not matter anymore in our society,
how all the old values are quaint curios with no place in this
age of cyber space and virtual reality. There was nothing virtual
about the ice storm. It was about as real as reality gets. In
the face of that ice cold reality it was the values that made the
difference, the values of community, of caring and of compassion,
the value of social solidarity.
We should learn something from that. We should learn that there
is value in things that are not ever traded on the stock exchange
and that to casually throw them away, discount and diminish them
is dangerous to our well-being, our well-being as individuals and
our well-being as a society.
Another clear lesson from the ice storm is that we still count
on government a lot. Private enterprise may be very good at some
things but when the power is out and the cold is creeping in no
one calls McDonald's or Eaton's or mbanx. We call and count on
the services run by our governments. We expect and trust them to
get done what needs to be done when we need it, and it was done.
Some members of this House have made a career out of attacking
the institution of government, the very idea of government. They
complain loud and long about the supposed great injury big
government does to them. They attempt to rally support with
calls to get government off our backs. They want to downsize,
diminish, cut, slash, generally reduce government to nothing much
more than a credit bureau or a cheque clearing house. Tonight
their silence is deafening. No one is saying there was too much
government during the ice storm. No one wants government to turn
its back now.
The point is we all know there is a place and a use for
effective and efficient government and it is not just during ice
storms or floods either.
We appreciate and understand that government at its best is a
tangible expression of our desire to do right by each other, to
make an unfair and unjust world a little more fair and a little
more just. A strong, engaged and responsive government with a
well trained, well equipped and well motivated public sector is
necessary to create any chance for the kind of life we all want
and we all work for.
Our relationship to ourselves and to our government was, is and
should be much more than a cash and carry trade. That was not
evident before the ice storm. It should be now.
A long time ago Jean-Jacques Rousseau set out the ideas that led
us to form ourselves into democratic societies. He talked about
the social covenant we all enter into when we consent to live in
harmony together, each with individual rights and each with
responsibilities to one another. He warned that such an
arrangement could collapse into chaos when the social bond is
broken in our hearts.
The ice storm showed us that social bond is not broken in our
hearts, not yet anyway. It showed us how we must value and
jealously protect that bond ahead of anything we could ever lock
away in a bank. If we can do that we can be as certain of a
bright future for ourselves and our country as any people who
ever lived on this blue-green planet of ours.
[Translation]
Finally, I am thinking this evening of the victims of this
disaster.
1910
I would like to congratulate them on their courage and
solidarity in facing up to this crisis. They have been a source of
inspiration for the rest of the country, and we shall never forget
their struggle. Thanks to these men and women, we have had an
opportunity to witness a perfect example of the Canadian spirit,
the spirit of sharing, of solidarity, of community.
Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Mr.
Speaker, I rise in this House tonight with great respect to express
a few opinions on the ice storm that affected eastern Ontario,
western Quebec and the southern part of my province, New Brunswick.
I would also like to use this occasion to relate several
stories of the bravery shown during the recovery efforts. I would
also like to offer my best wishes to the victims and to civilians
and the military for their efforts.
The situation following the ice storm was the result of a huge
disaster that touched the hearts of Canadians from coast to coast.
The storm claimed its thousands of victims indiscriminately. No
one was spared, not even His Excellency the Governor General.
A number of my staff were affected by this natural disaster as
were a number of my friends.
Let me tell you what happened to a member of my staff, who was
visiting Hull. He was sitting in the living room with a friend
when suddenly a tree crashed through the living room window
destroying his car at the same time. So people who were not even
really involved in the situation became victims too. A nightmare
come true.
[English]
Let us hear of the heart breaking story of a dairy farmer in
Prescott-Russell who awoke to find his main barn in the midst of
collapse, not able to withstand the weight of the ice on the
roof. Animals were trapped inside.
He and his family had slept in front of the wood stove for the
fifth night. They awoke to hear a bomb like noise from behind
the house. Then they heard desperate cries from their herd. Cows
were dying as lungs were punctured, bones broken and flesh
severed. His livelihood was shattered. All thoughts of
prosperity were ruined.
That man loved his animals. He had suffered for five straight
nights and had to go back into the house, grab his shotgun and
put down 14 mature dairy cows, 9 of which were due to have calves
within the next four months. This caused even more inner turmoil.
The farmer had to leave the carcasses there to freeze.
He awaited the military to assist in the dismantling of his
fallen barn and the disposal of the livestock that had perished.
With the arrival of the military his worries were far from over.
He then had to find another farmer who, like him, was both
mentally and physically exhausted, had no electricity and little
manpower, to take in the surviving animals so they could be
milked and cared for to the best of the two men's ability.
He then contacted his insurance company, only to find that the
damage was not covered. He lost hope and even considered
suicide. My heart goes out to those people today.
[Translation]
I would also like to take time to thank the media—television,
radio and the newspapers—which really told the story to those
of us outside the crisis. We had an opportunity to see what was
happening, and people outside the provinces affected had an
opportunity to help those in despair. In this case, the media
served as a very effective tool.
They certainly did their job, and I think it important to recognize
that.
Some victims' problems did not end with the storm and the
return of electricity. Some people went back to work after the
states of emergency were over to find themselves without a job.
1915
They did not lose their jobs just because small businesses
closed for lack of sales, but because they did not turn up for
work, even though a state of emergency had been declared. These
people, who were trying to survive in intolerable conditions, were
unjustly forced onto unemployment insurance, adding to their pain
and suffering.
We often watch television and see the results of tropical
storms in the United States, without realizing that the same sorts
of disasters can happen in Canada.
Human beings were not the only victims of this disaster.
We saw parks destroyed, and wildlife dead because grasses and
foliage were completely ice-encrusted. These were the silent
victims.
[English]
Let us now talk about the unsung heroes who worked tirelessly in
order to give a minimum standard of life to those affected by
this storm. In Orleans and Kanata we had cadet squadrons who
assisted and boy scouts assisted in Nepean and Verdun. Many, many
workers ensured that shelters and emergency services were upheld.
There were the relentless efforts of several power companies
from across North America, including NB Power which still has
employees in the field to restore power.
[Translation]
I would also like to thank the workers of New Brunswick Power
for their efforts. Members of my own family are still in Quebec
today trying to restore things to normal.
[English]
Let us not forget to give credit where a lot of credit is due.
First in the Saguenay and Winnipeg floods the Canadian forces
worked relentlessly as well. Now their duty was required in
eastern Ontario, western Quebec and southern New Brunswick. Thank
you, thank you. God bless you for your commendable work. You
deserve to be proud and we deserve to be proud also.
It is very important to realize that the Canadian forces were
there. As my leader mentioned, with all the downsizing it is
very important to realize that there is a need for government
services in this country. All the national disasters that we
have seen are certainly proof of it.
We also have to look at the solidarity.
[Translation]
There was a great deal of solidarity. Everyone in the country
was very concerned by what was going on. We saw the efforts made
and people working together. They accomplished much and deserve
recognition.
This also shows that, even in communities less fortunate than
others in the country, people got going and did their share to help
regions affected by the storm.
It is hard to believe that the cause of so much trouble used
to be a way of life. We are so dependent on technology that we can
no longer even survive without electricity.
I think we have to tell ourselves that, in another era, our
parents and grandparents were able to live without electricity.
Today, without electricity, everything grinds to a halt.
Technology is certainly one of the causes of this disaster.
Once again, I want to say thank you to all those who helped.
Often, misfortune brings people together, and that is what we saw.
We saw that everyone banded together. They worked together. There
were three provinces in critical shape and I again wish to
congratulate everyone and wish all the victims the best of luck.
Hon. Jean J. Charest (Sherbrooke, PC): Mr. Speaker, I will share my
time with the hon. member for Shefford.
This evening, I hope to make a useful contribution to a debate that
will enable us to not only thank many people who deserve it, but to also
reflect on the lessons to be learned from these events.
When the hon. member for Shefford wrote to you to ask that an
emergency debate be held, she did so primarily to remind the House of
Commons that this tragic disaster is not over yet. Indeed, there are
thousands of people who are still without power and who are suffering
tremendously from the effects of this terrible ice storm.
1920
However, we also wanted to remind people that this disaster wreaked
havoc not only in Quebec, but also in Ontario and New Brunswick. In
fact, the riding of Saint John, which is represented by my colleague,
was also hit by the storm, as was part of Nova Scotia. In recent times,
other regions were also hard hit, including Manitoba, the Saguenay
region in 1996—in fact, the hon. member for Chicoutimi lives close to
the famous white house that we saw so often on television. Albertans,
particularly those living in the Peace River region, also had to face
major floods.
We felt that, by joining the other political parties that requested
this debate, we would have an opportunity to discuss these tragic
events.
First, I would like to make a comment which may seem somewhat
unusual. These events remind us that a country is shaped by its history,
its culture and its language. A country is shaped by people's memories
and common experiences. And hardships are part of these common
experiences. It is so true that, when we try to define Canada's history,
our common experiences, the two world conflicts are often mentioned
first. People talk about major operations such as Dieppe. Vimy Ridge is
one of these experiences that shaped, if you will, our common identity.
Unfortunately, the same is also true of natural disasters, when
Canadians have an opportunity to demonstrate the values they believe in.
The positive thing in all of this is that, when facing an ordeal,
Canadians remember the country they adopted, the country their parents
built, this vast land over which we have no control when it comes to
nature.
We are governed by forces that go way beyond the means of this
Parliament. And, from time to time, we have to bow to these forces and
admit that we are not as important as we think we are.
Fortunately for us, our solidarity saves us each time something
like this happens. Manitobans found in other parts of the country
neighbours they did not know they had. People from the Saguenay region
also discovered these extraordinary neighbours who lived in British
Columbia, in Alberta and in Sherbrooke. And all Quebeckers and Ontarians
who experienced this recent tragedy also discovered these distant
neighbours. To me and to others who witnessed this solidarity, it was a
great moment. These people went through tough times, but they were not
alone. They had support.
I want to thank all those who took on responsibilities during this
crisis because I was impressed by what I saw when I toured the region.
Sherbrooke, Fleurimont and Lennoxville, in my riding, were not affected
by the storm, but neighbouring communities, like Richmond, in the riding
of my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska, were. The ridings of my
colleagues from Shefford and Compton—Stanstead were also affected.
I was very impressed to see the importance of local leadership in
a natural disaster such as this one. This leadership has to come from
people like the mayor, the Knights of Columbus or other people in the
community. All of a sudden, the natural leaders among us step forward
and take control of the situation. And there was no shortage of leaders
in any of the affected communities and in other places where people
wanted to lend a helping hand.
Leaders were there to organize things and take control of the situation.
The other thing that impressed me was the degree of poverty that we
do not always see in our society, even though we suspect it exists. I
will give you a concrete example. I think this disaster helped us
realize how some people around us live from pay cheque to pay cheque.
1925
In the normal course of events, some people rely on the pay cheque
they get on Thursday or on Friday to buy groceries for Saturday and the
following days. If there is no cheque, there is no food on the table.
Many of us and of our fellow citizens were probably stunned to see
how many people live under such circumstances. When a natural disaster
strikes, these people are destitute. They do not have anything. Without
a pay cheque, they cannot buy groceries, period.
This brings up questions about the wealth distribution in our
society, the measures we take to help these people out and the
day-to-day lives of these people.
I want to thank the public officials concerned and the people who
work for the government services. We talked about the premier of Quebec
who did, I think, some good work. I also want to mention today that
Prime Minister Chrétien also did well, in my view. I think of some of my
colleagues. I saw on television members from the Liberal Party as well
as the NDP, the Bloc and the Reform Party who volunteered to help
victims.
At the risk of sounding somewhat partisan, but because of the
stronger ties between members of the same party, we tend to think about
our own colleagues.
The hon. member for Shefford got a lot of help from the hon. member
for Madawaska—Restigouche.
They knew each other, he called his colleague et sent her I do not know
how many cords of wood, a dozen truckloads.
They sent wood from Chicoutimi to every community. I visited
several communities. It seemed that every one I went to was receiving
wood from Chicoutimi. Do not ask me where they got their wood from in
Chicoutimi, but they kept on sending it.
The member for Tobique—Mactaquac was asked to locate a generator,
which he did. Again, I am talking about our own members.
I saw the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell with his
colleague for Ottawa-Centre. I saw Reformers, Bloc members, NDP members.
They all pitched in, and they should be recognized and thanked.
I also want to thank the media. We seldom have the opportunity to
do so.
But I want to tell them tonight that I do not intend to go overboard.
Neither do I intend to make this a habit.
I am thinking about radio stations, especially the CBC and
Radio-Canada, and private broadcasters. With TV, it was a bit
more complicated. You could see that it was a bit more
complicated to cover events. The print media too. I believe that
the media in general did a splendid job. They recognized their
responsibilities. They deserve our thanks and I take this
opportunity to say congratulations, bravo, we recognize the
tremendous job you did.
I also want to thank the Canadian armed forces. I met young men and
women who naturally and spontaneously came to their country's rescue.
They did it without any second thoughts. The prime minister said it
well: they did everything and anything. They did not come with a list
of things they would accept or refuse to do.
They did all the work. I think we are greatly indebted to them.
Mr. Speaker, you are telling me I have about one minute left if I
want to share my time.
I just wanted to draw some lessons. First, we should be able to
draw some lessons from these disasters in Manitoba, in Alberta, in Peace
River, in the Saguenay, to point out, at the federal level, assistance
and emergency problems.
[English]
There are lessons we must draw from the ice storm and from the
disasters in Manitoba, the Saguenay and in the Peace River area
of Alberta. The Government of Canada should establish a task
force or assign this issue to a parliamentary committee to draw
some important lessons from what has happened. Surely we have
learned a number of things. We should take advantage of this
opportunity to learn in order that we may do things more
effectively in the future.
Second, if there are going to be programs to help companies, as
a condition of receiving that help, those companies should tell
us or include some help for their own employees. In certain
circumstances their employees suffered a great deal.
[Translation]
If a company wants to receive some kind of assistance, why not give
it on the condition that it does the same for its employees? No one
expects to be fully compensated for everything that happens, but this
would be useful for the company and for its employees, and I think the
government would be well justified in saying “If you want the government
to give you a hand, we ask you to meet this criterion”.
1930
The third thing would be the role of the Canadian armed forces.
They played a very useful role. Why not examine that role?
Fourth, I humbly make a suggestion to the Government of Canada. An
inquiry will proceed in Quebec on these events. Perhaps there will be
others in Ontario or elsewhere. I think the federal government should
offer right away its co-operation and its assistance to these
commissions of inquiry.
I want to thank the member for Shefford, the member for Richmond—Arthabasca
and the member for Compton—Stanstead, who were in the centre
of the storm. Congratulations to our colleagues who gave a helping hand.
I also want to thank you, Mr. Speaker, as well as the House.
I hope to have the opportunity to return and relive these events to draw
some lessons from them.
Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, PC): Mr. Speaker, the ice storm
that has struck part of Quebec and eastern Ontario is one of the worst
natural disasters ever experienced in Canada after the Saguenay and
Manitoba floods.
But this event that had so many negative effects has brought out an
exceptional capacity for collective co-operation. Throughout this
country and even beyond its borders, human resources and equipment have
been mobilized to help the victims of the ice storm.
I would like to mention all those Hydro Quebec and Bell Canada
workers and their colleagues who came from all regions and who have
toiled under almost inhuman conditions to bring the situation back to
normal. I would also like to mention the Red Cross and emergency
preparedness personnel, and also all those who, throughout this country,
have sent us food, firewood, and basic necessities.
On behalf of those who have experienced such momentous changes in
their lives early in the new year, I want to thank all those people,
workers and volunteers who did not spare their time or efforts in order
to help.
In my riding of Shefford, we have witnessed this impressive show of
solidarity at all levels of society, from individuals up to government
authorities, including civil, community and private services. All
municipal leaders and their employees, together with volunteers, most of
whom were affected by the storm, have managed to set up emergency
coordination centres in record time to meet the needs of affected
citizens. In some communities, all families with wood stoves gave
shelter to other people. Local media got involved in a remarkable way by
providing the victims with the information they needed in a timely
fashion. Finally, all the people did their share by helping each other.
I must not let go unrecognized the spontaneous assistance we
received from the members for Madawaska—Restigouche and
Tobique—Mactaquac and their constituents, who organized a wood
gathering operation in their ridings to supply us with firewood.
Two convoys of ten fully loaded 51-foot trucks delivered the wood
for free, in spite of the distance, bad weather and treacherous
roads.
This generous initiative was followed by the intergovernmental
affairs ministry of New Brunswick setting up an emergency assistance
centre for Quebec, which was most helpful to us.
Again, thank you to everyone who generously offered and continues
to offer to help those affected by the ice storm.
I want to acknowledge the priceless contribution made by the men
and women of the Canadian Armed Forces; not only did they made us feel
safe because of their professionalism but the work they have done made
rebuilding the hydroelectric power system much easier.
This great mutual support, the courage and determination shown by
everyone in getting organized have contributed to limiting human losses.
This kind of solidarity in the face of adversity gives us hope for a
speedy return to our normal way of life and recovery of our economy.
The people of my riding have suffered greatly. Several
municipalities found themselves without power, telephone or water
overnight. Seventeen of the 20 communities in my riding have been hard
hit. Nearly half of the population of Quebec, or 10% of the Canadian
population, was affected.
The actions taken by the various levels of government ensured the
basic needs of the population were met.
The immediate effects of the storm were quickly dealt with, but the
damage to the hydroelectric power system was so extensive that many
families were not able to return home until just recently, and some are
still waiting.
As matters stand, power should be restored to the entire system
by February 8. The extent of the damage, with the many forms it
took, has been such that we have not been able to make a complete
and realistic assessment as of yet. All areas were affected to
various degrees, and the victims, whether private citizens,
organizations, businesses, self-employed workers, farm producers,
processors, maple bush operators, not to mention all the others,
are still in the process of taking stock of their losses.
1935
Some have still not got their power back, and still need help.
In this context, it is extremely difficult to circumscribe the
disaster. The government has taken prompt action to deal with the
most pressing needs, but a number of people in our riding do not
come under the present programs.
To give but a few examples, let us think of the very small
businessmen, the self-employed, the shopkeepers, not to mention the
workers who have had to shoulder the loss of two weeks pay.
Often both members of a couple have lost income, and these
were people who needed every penny to make it to the end of the
week, before the emergency.
For these families, we are talking about the loss of a month's
income, at a time when there have been extraordinary expenses on
top of their regular ones.
What can we say to the fledgling businesses that are still
precarious but showed sufficient potential to establish themselves
successfully? What can we say to these businesses which, even if
they have not had any direct losses related to the ice storm, rely
directly on businesses or industries that have been heavily hit?
What about a transport company that has nothing more to haul? What
about all the people who managed to save their furniture by using
their last available funds to rent or purchase those rare yet
indispensable generators?
I am thinking about the nursery owners, the pet shop owners,
the livestock breeders, the mill owners. Did they do the wrong
thing by saving their businesses from certain death? What can we
say to the business people who lost inventory and whose customers
now have less purchasing power?
What can we say to the restaurant operators in the same
situation? What can we say to the landlords who have lost, or will
lose, tenants. Every day that passes raises new questions that
fall under different jurisdictions. The answers that are, or will
be, given represent the sole hope of survival for many.
Assistance centres have been set up to answer these questions,
on the one hand, but also to act as clearing houses for all of the
needs, to break them down by category and to gain an overall view
which will make it possible for us to design concrete and effective
solutions to lighten the burden weighing so heavily on the victims
of this ice storm, and particularly to avoid any further fraying of
the economic and social fabric of our region.
These undertakings need time, and the consequences of the
emergency are still there, even if the power is back on.
The short term effects are being dealt with, but the other
much more serious effects that will become apparent over the coming
months and years require all our attention. Right now, the
approach is to make do with existing programs, which will not avert
the crisis. What is needed is a series of concerted measures, some
of which would be managed by the province, which would enable it to
compensate all those left in difficult financial straits by the ice
storm.
Could we not also envisage an alternative to EI to make up for
workers' lost wages for the first two weeks of work not covered by
EI? Could we not grant individuals a tax deduction for repairs not
covered by insurance and for the costs of renting generators?
Could we not, as business people and merchants in my riding
are requesting in a petition now circulating, examine the
possibility of the federal government matching the contribution of
businesses, up to $50,000, and investing the money necessary to get
them up and running again?
These emergency funds could be used to cover the additional
expenses incurred by manufacturers and merchants, for such things
as the rental or purchase of generators, and fuel.
Could consideration also be given to suspending collection of
the GST in the area known as the triangle of darkness for a period
of three to six months in order to ease the resumption of business,
which was hard hit by the ice storm?
Could we not also explore the possibility of creating an
emergency fund to which the federal and provincial governments
would contribute, for use in getting the economy back on its feet,
using solutions suggested by organizations representing different
sectors of the retail industry, agriculture, tourism and so on?
Would it also be possible for our government, through FORD-Q,
to match contributions from the provincial government as part of
its export assistance programs in order to help our export
manufacturers re-establish their business contacts and a climate of
confidence with their American clients?
Could we not also put pressure on the Insurance Bureau of
Canada to make insurance companies aware of our situation and get
them to treat claimants in a more open-minded and humane manner?
As I said earlier, it will take time to evaluate the impact of
the crisis in all its breadth and complexity.
1940
It is vital, despite the urgency of the situation, to use this
time to determine the appropriate measures, which, in the end, will
speed economic recovery and keep the social fabric in tact.
I therefore reiterate my proposal for the immediate creation
of a fund to provide assistance, which could provide money as
programs are created.
The money allocated could, for example, be used to pay the
interest on victims' loans. The balance would be kept to meet any
similar situation that might develop as the result of other natural
disasters.
Beyond our immediate concerns, I think it is time to initiate
discussions on a national plan of action in the even of natural
disasters. I do not want to take anything away from the fine work
done during the ice storm, but we should take a hard look at all
aspects of the crisis, at the municipal, provincial and federal
levels.
It seems to me that at this point, crises are managed on an ad
hoc basis without any specific strategy. The prime objectives
justifying such action are as follows. Initially, to study
objectively the disasters that have occurred in recent years to
identify the measures taken and to delimit the crises. Following
this analysis, we would be in a position to identify the strengths
and weaknesses of action taken to be better prepared in the event
of another catastrophe.
Parliament must also be involved in this issue, through a
commission or a parliamentary committee, and develop a plan.
I am using this debate to speak to you of a national
prevention plan for natural disasters. The plan could contain
provision for a special fund in the event of natural disasters.
Research could be done to establish the amounts needed to meet the
financial costs occasioned by such crises.
We should also develop a strategy, in co-operation with provincial
and municipal governments, that would provide functional emergency plans
for each municipality, identify the departments likely to be asked to
help, and define the organizations that, in the majority of cases, play
a prominent role, such as the army, the Red Cross and all the others
that I cannot name here because it would take too long.
Alternatives should be considered and, as members of Parliament, we
have a duty to offer our full co-operation with any effort aimed at
preventing and managing crises.
It is when faced with adversity that we can see the importance of
human solidarity and fully appreciate how lucky we are to live in a
country such as ours.
In the end, this crisis will have shown us that human nature embodies
the very best that exists, and we are confident that, together, we can
overcome any obstacle that could threaten the lives and prosperity of
Canadians.
I would like to conclude by thanking the members of my team,
Madeleine De Vincentis and Claudette Houle in the riding, and Anik
Trépanier in Ottawa. Their support and presence helped me provide
assistance to the residents of Shefford affected by the storm. I also
want to tell the people of Shefford that they can count on our support.
Hon. Marcel Massé (President of the Treasury Board and Minister
responsible for Infrastructure, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is true that
these crises give us the opportunity to see what a true country is about
and what the notion of solidarity means within a country.
I remember that, when the crisis began, during the first week, it
did not look like such a significant event, given the damages that could
be seen. It is only when Thursday came around that we realized that,
with the precipitation being forecast for Friday in particular, we were
facing a major catastrophe the likes of which we had not seen in a long
while.
On that Thursday, the cabinet was in retreat. Mr. Chrétien called
Mr. Bouchard to offer him the co-operation of the federal government,
and even at that point, the premier of Quebec was unsure of the scale of
the disaster.
However, the Prime Minister and the premier both came to an agreement so
that the armed forces could send out some troops by six o'clock that
night. It is only after Friday that we came to realize that 200 or 300
soldiers, or even 2,000 or 3,000 would not be enough, given the extent
of damages in Ontario, Quebec and the maritimes, and that we had to
deploy up to 15,000 troops.
This was for the army the largest ever deployment in peace time for
reasons of disaster.
1945
Besides the solidarity issue, I believe it should be noted that
disasters are increasing in number. We must now draw a few lessons from
this latest one. Among these is the fact that we now know we can and
must rely more on co-operation, mutual support and solidarity.
During the disaster, we thought for a while we would have to
evacuate large areas of Montreal.
[English]
I think what we have realized is that in fact in peacetime it
may be much more important to count on the support of a lot of
people. Perhaps a majority of people will not want to leave
their houses even when there is no power and it is extremely
cold. We have to have systems which will permit people either to
spend time in their houses and then go to a shelter or which will
permit people to have alternative sources of energy so they can
stay in their houses.
In a catastrophe people must count on their neighbours and their
relatives, on the citizens around them in their municipality,
their locality or their city, or they must count on citizens from
other provinces. That is one of the important lessons of this
crisis. We have seen that in a number of small instances.
For instance, there was a train which travelled from Halifax
with firewood. The train stopped at a number of places all the
way from Halifax to the blackout triangle in Quebec. It carried
wood to give to people at every stop, so that the citizens of the
country could give it to their friends, relatives and fellow
Canadians who needed it. That is when we realized the fact that
we all feel we are citizens of the same country.
[Translation]
This was one of the main lessons we learned from the crisis.
Besides the issue of solidarity and the importance of support from
neighbours, I believe we also learned that, as parliamentarians, in
times such as these, we must be present in such a way that we show we
are there not only to learn about people's problems and to help them
deal with them, but also to bring them the comfort of knowing they are
not alone in difficult times.
On the first Saturday, I flew in a helicopter with the prime
minister to survey the situation, especially in Ontario, in your area,
Mr. Speaker—
Hon. Don Boudria: And in mine.
Hon. Marcel Massé: And in yours; sitting in the helicopter, I was
stunned by the extent of the damage.
For the first time ever, I saw woods, over 2 or 3 kilometres, where 80%
of the trees had snapped, broken, splintered.
We could see that most sugar bushes were devastated, almost a
write-off for a great many owners and maple syrup producers.
When we arrived in the southern region, we saw the huge
transmission towers that had collapsed one after the other. At one
point, we could see 76 of them in a row, twisted on the ground like
spaghetti; the impression of a post-war disaster was very strong and I
was moved as never before.
1950
We saw how vulnerable we have become. Our energy infrastructure and
more particularly our reliance on electricity make us vulnerable.
Electricity has created a lifestyle to which we have become so
accustomed that, when the power goes out, we realize that we are almost
unable to live like our grandparents and our great-grandparents did.
Perhaps one of the lessons this storm has taught us is that we have to
learn how to use alternate forms of energy so we can at least heat our
homes and feed ourselves during a power outage.
It is certainly one of the lessons we have to learn from this crisis.
I want to take this opportunity to say how impressed I was with the
good work that was done by the armed forces. Everywhere we went, people
told us that they felt safe when our troops showed up. They felt the
presence of a well-run organization, an organization that can set
priorities, take action and solve problems. I think everybody in the
affected areas, regardless of their political preferences, was happy to
see our soldiers come to help people in need, whether these soldiers
were from New Brunswick, Alberta, Ontario or Quebec.
Finally, I also wish to mention the role played by the media. Maybe
it is something that was not emphasized enough during the crisis, but
there was an enormous amount of information available on the radio and
on television, information which allowed people in the areas affected by
the storm to know exactly when they could expect power to be restored
and when units from our armed forces would arrive to help them, and
which kept people elsewhere aware of what was going on.
Before I conclude, which I must do since I am sharing my time with
the hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, let me repeat, as a
Quebecker from a region that has also been without power, that I was
pleased to see that I could rely on fellow Canadians, that in a time of
crisis and hardship, I could stand by those around me, and that I could
also rely on my fellow Canadians to help me, regardless of political
party, language or province of origin.
I will end my remarks with a quote from one of the Prime Minister's
statements. He said: “We know that our communities stand together as
steadfastly as ever.
In times of hardship, thousands of people are capable of a great deal of
kindness and generosity between friends or neighbours, and between
Canadians from coast to coast.” I think that when this crisis is over,
this is what we will recall, that all Canadians are friends and stand
together.
[English]
Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, please allow me to start by
thanking the hon. Leader of the Opposition for proposing that we
have this debate this evening. I think the debate is timely. I
am pleased along with my colleagues to accommodate the request.
Again I thank him for his suggestion.
[Translation]
We will remember the winter of 1998 for a long time. Personally, I
was just back from holidays when the ice storm began in eastern Ontario.
1955
Normally, it is no big deal. After all, we are Canadians and, as
mentioned earlier, ours is a wintry country. Sleet and snow are not
unusual and it is nothing to get too excited about, except that, this
time, it was different.
As I remember, the day after the storm started, the power went out
briefly at home. The same day, the power went out at my son's place, and
when my wife and I set out to help our son, we realized that the power
was out in the whole area where he lives. Later in the day, the power
went out in several neighbouring villages. That evening, as I was
getting ready for bed, the power went out at our place too.
I was fortunate. At our place, we were out of power for only five
days; at my son's, it was six days. I did say that I was fortunate. It
may sound strange to those who were not affected at all in other parts
of the country but, under the circumstances, being affected during only
five days was almost a blessing.
Out of the 100,000 people living in my riding of
Glengarry—Prescott-Russell, more than 80,000 has no power. At
one point, in fact, no one did, but that was only for a few
hours.
[English]
Imagine driving from Ottawa to Montreal. Basically that rural
area is my constituency, just east of the city to Rigaud and from
the St. Lawrence River to the Ottawa River. To drive those
distances without seeing one light anywhere is very strange.
It is actually a bit eerie and even scary. But perhaps that is
secondary. What is more important is the fact that people did
not have that which is required to work and to live to a degree
in the modern society in which we function.
No sector of the economy was spared, be it transportation,
communications, finance, insurance, real estate. Everything had
shut down completely. Farmers were crying on the phone speaking
to me when they could reach me to tell me they could not milk the
cows, to tell me that they were doing their best to find ways to
melt snow to give water to the animals. I am sure many of them
stayed hours and hours and perhaps even more than a day without
even eating or even thinking of that because they were trying to
help their farm animals survive.
To see that people in rural areas and small-town Canada were
caught so much off guard by this condition is indeed a frightening
proposition. As I was driving from my son's house to our own
during the worst of that storm, I could not help but wonder
whether electricity was some sort of a Frankenstein that we had
invented and that the monster was eating us.
For a while I am sure many of my constituents thought that the
monster had actually won the battle. But the monster did not win
the battle because Canadians came to help one another. Canadians
came to the help their fellow citizens.
My own staff in my office started to work on the Monday after
New Years in January and worked continuously for 19 days. My
parliamentary office never closed, seven days a week. My home
became a form of dispatch centre for assistance. I put my
residential phone number in the newspaper here in Ottawa so that
people would know that they could phone and actually speak to us.
Virtually all the time either my wife, my daughter or I, in the
few hours I was there, answered the phone to try to keep the
resources and assistance coming to our area for the constituents.
2000
[Translation]
It has been tough. I would like to take a moment to thank the prime
minister. When the storm first started and I saw everything falling
apart, poles falling in front of me as I drove through my riding, I
realized it was no ordinary storm.
Luckily, there was a cabinet meeting the morning the power went out
at my house and I was able to immediately apprise the prime minister and
my cabinet colleagues of the situation in our area and to extrapolate
from there. It was a storm like none I had ever seen.
Of course, I did not know that conditions would worsen in the hours
and days that followed.
So, the cabinet, under the direction of the prime minister, saw fit
to put the armed forces on a state of alert, allowing them to get
prepared in order to be available to assist people in eastern Ontario
and Quebec.
[English]
At the height of the storm over three million people were
without electricity. In the beginning when I heard about 1,000
military people would be coming I was very glad. I was told that
possibly 100 or so would be in my constituency. Gradually some
15,900 members of the armed forces came, over 2,000 of them were
in Glengarry—Prescott—Russell. There were villages in my
riding where virtually the only traffic we could see were
military vehicles.
That was not be surprising for two reasons. First, many of them
were there to assist us and, second, they virtually had the only
vehicles that could travel in any case.
They did everything. They removed wires. They milked cows.
They split wood. They did all those things for all the people in
my area. I thank them.
[Translation]
Since I have only a few minutes left, allow me, on behalf of my
constituents, to thank the people who came to help us. I think of the
member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke who called me, saying he would
send truckloads of firewood to my home.
The prime minister mentioned that earlier in his speech.
I think of a young man, Denis Séguin, a former resident of my
riding, who now lives in Sarnia, who convinced his friends and others to
gather up some firewood, load it onto six railcars and send it to my
region.
I think of my close friends who decided to come and help me
personally, so I could be free to try to help my constituents, since, of
course, when I was in the basement of my home, I was not able to do much
for others.
I think of the media people.
[English]
I pay special tribute to CFRA and, by extension, to all the
others. CFRA became a form of the emergency measures
organization. Perhaps I should not use the floor of the House of
Commons to put a plug for a privately owned company but I will
anyway. It is just the way it was. CFRA and others did a good
job. We should all recognize that and I thank them.
I also congratulate those who put together a concert to be held
this Sunday in Ottawa at the Corel Centre.
[Translation]
Finally, when we got power back in my region, we decided to give
back a little that had been given us. We sent loads of firewood and food
to Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and that region. Companies such as Laurent
Leblanc Limitée, Pomerleau and others from the Ottawa area lent their
trucks for free. We loaded them with wood and I personally led the
convoy with my ministerial car.
2005
We went to Saint-Jean, to Saint-Luc, to Noyan, and elsewhere
in Quebec in order to try to share a little of what we had
received.
I wish to express my gratitude, to the people of
Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, who helped each other out, as well
as all the people of Canada who helped us out.
[English]
It was cold and it was dark but we knew we had the warmth of all
Canadians and their enlightened spirit to cheer us up in that
great moment of difficulty.
Mr. Rahim Jaffer (Edmonton—Strathcona, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Prince
George—Peace River and all future times of members of the
official opposition will be shared as well.
[Translation]
My faith in the dignity of the human race, and my feeling of
national pride have been bolstered by the testimonials I have heard
about Canadians coming together to help their neighbours during the
ice storm, a tragedy which left a large part of mid-Canada under a
frozen blanket.
This event has demonstrated the strength and generosity of the
Canadian people and has given us food for thought. We can reflect
on the importance of family and of community, without which still
more people would have suffered.
This terrible event has, however, also given us the
opportunity to reflect on which it means to be a nation. We have
heard the warm praises of our Armed Forces, who provided expertise
and manpower during the clean-up stage.
I too want to thank them for their good work.
We also heard praise for the public and private broadcasters and
the listeners who served as links with the communities hit by the storm.
They provided continuous information on when power would be restored,
while also giving survival tips.
Community groups and local charities also contributed by donating
food and money. Volunteers patiently listened to people who were often
scared, confused and lonely. They all deserve our thanks and our
respect.
I would like to tell my own little story to the House. Not only did
the ice storm bring people from central Canada closer together, it also
touched people in western Canada, where my riding is located.
An Edmonton businessman told my office about an idea which shows
that westerners were truly saddened by the devastation experienced in
central Canada. He wanted to send Ontarians and Quebeckers a message
telling them they were not alone in their efforts to survive the storm.
My constituent, who is not a wealthy individual, donated greeting
cards printed in French and in English. He owns a marketing company that
produces greeting cards, and he thought this was a unique opportunity to
take part in the relief effort.
These cards are currently being distributed in Edmonton's
elementary schools, and the message printed on each of them is simple
and sincere. It reads “Our thoughts and our prayers are with you. We
simply wanted to give you a warm thought to help you make it through the
winter”.
The children who received these cards added their own personal
messages. Some of these messages tell the victims not to give up and
embrace the good things in life, such as one's family and friends.
Others share stories about obstacles that were overcome and send
messages of hope.
2010
It is now my great privilege to deliver these messages of hope
to the children in the regions in Canada hit the hardest. The
opportunity was given to me by a generous businessman, who is not
prepared to sit still and do nothing while people he has never met
are dealing with the consequences of this tragic event.
I would like to think him not only for his generosity and his
community sprit and not only for giving me the opportunity to
provide some help but also for reminding hundreds of children in
the schools affected that we as Canadians are a family. Sometimes
we argue, but, when the going gets tough, we are always there for
each other.
[English]
Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George—Peace River, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, I am very pleased to rise tonight to say a few words in
this tribute to a disaster which is really a tribute to the
thousands and thousands of people who responded to the disaster.
People were touched by it all across the nation.
At the outset people might wonder how an MP from northeastern
British Columbia was touched by a disaster that took place in
southern Quebec, in eastern Ontario and in parts of the
maritimes.
Quite possibly no one in Canada was not moved by what happened
in January of this year. One thing all Canadians share is the
climate and the environment in which we live. As the member for
Glengarry—Prescott—Russell quite eloquently said, Canadians are
well aware of adverse weather. We have had to live with it all
our lives however long that might be. Whether young or very old,
if you have been Canadian you have had to experience adverse
weather and the disasters that come with it from time to time.
On a personal note, when I first heard the news I somewhat
selfishly thought of my immediate family. I thought of my
daughter, Holly, who is presently in university in Ottawa.
Although we were thousands of miles away, as concerned parents
the first thoughts of my wife and I were about her safety. We
wondered how she was making out and if the disaster and the power
outage had actually touched Carleton University and the residence
where she lives. We were immediately on the telephone calling
down here out of concern for her safety.
If it could be known, that same scenario was played out by
thousands of Canadians across the land who perhaps became aware
of it by watching television but very quickly became personally
involved in it out of concern for loved ones, friends and
acquaintances who were actually here experiencing this disaster.
I am reminded that the magnitude of the disaster was even felt
in the United States, and I would like to share a small story
with the House about this because it points to just how large a
disaster it really was.
My parents are, I guess, quite normal for Canadians; they are
retired now and have become snowbirds. They travel to the States
in the wintertime to get away from the terrible weather that we
sometimes have to endure in Canada. One of the things they have
noted in the times they have been in Arizona for the winter is
that they very seldom get any Canadian news on American
television.
They called home the day this disaster struck because it was
carried on the American news and they knew it had to be serious
for it to be carried in the States. Often even elections here
are not news there. When they saw that news of the the ice storm
was being carried on the American news networks they knew it must
be serious. They called home out of concern for the people down
there, to get an update and learn firsthand just how bad it was.
2015
I recall growing up on a farm in north eastern British
Columbia. Occasionally we suffered power outages there. I
think the longest I ever remember as a young child was an
overnight ordeal where we had to rely on friends, relatives,
someone to put us up for the night.
Mom and dad bundled up all five of us children. We went out
into the old station wagon on a cold, blizzardy night and off to
the neighbours, someone who had some power in their home.
I think Canadians from coast to coast to coast can relate to
what happened and to the trauma these people had to unfortunately
experience in a very small way. Certainly one night does not in
any way allow us the opportunity to share in the anguish, the
sorrow and pain and virtually the uncomfortable existence these
people had to endure for quite some period of time. It was weeks
for some people.
It is a tribute tonight to the resilience of Canadians to endure
and to show their best side in a time of adversity. I noted all
the speeches tonight, some of which have been excellent. They
really relayed to fellow MPs regardless of political party
affiliation what these people went through.
Also, not just the victims of the disaster but the volunteers,
the armed forces, even the media, everybody played a role trying
to overcome this crisis that struck. I am reminded also that in
time of crisis, it seems too often we are reminded of the real
important things in life.
One of those that came through to me as I watched the stories
unfold in the weeks that this crisis occurred was one of the
things we overlook most often, family, the importance of family
and friends. That came through to me when I watched the stories
unfold on television. It comes through tonight as we hear the
stories from MPs who had experienced it in their own ridings and
who had families and friends who experienced this.
It is important that there is strength of family, that there be
someone to count on and someone to help you through tough times.
Certainly that was my own experience with my two assistants here
in Ottawa. I think I could speak for every member in this House
in the sense that staff becomes family to us and friends, not
just employees.
I think all MPs would have been calling their staffs, concerned
about them, certainly understanding that they could not get into
work, that roads were treacherous. Many of them had their power
out.
One of my assistants lives in Aylmer, Quebec. She was one of
the quite fortunate one who lost power only for a brief period of
time in her home. She soon found that she was putting up a
sister, her family and pets and other people who were looking for
a place to weather the storm, as it were, in a time of need.
My other assistant who lives south of Ottawa had it a bit worse
in the sense that she was without power for almost two weeks. I
asked her about this experience and she says she has a much
better idea now of how residents of war ravaged countries must
feel when Canadian peacekeepers arrive in their towns or
villages.
She related to me how when the military came to her small
village south of Ottawa after it had been days and days without
power she almost wept. I think the prime minister referred this
evening quite eloquently in his speech to the sense that people
have that there is someone out there in their time of darkest
need when the military shows up to assist them.
I think the soldiers' presence made them feel that someone was
there for them. For Charmaine and her young family consisting of
a one and two-year-old, and for her neighbour's family, it made
them feel they had not been forgotten.
2020
It is essential to your emotional well-being to know officials
are truly aware of your plight in this type of natural disaster.
Whether that awareness comes when soldiers pull into the yard or
a hydro truck pulls up or just a mention on the radio in your
area, it is nice to know that somebody understands what you are
going through and is reaching out to assist you. It think this
can make all the difference in the world in a time such as this.
After growing up on a farm and being a farmer for some 20 years,
farmers, perhaps more than any other sector with the exception of
fishermen, understand how devastating mother nature can be
because their very livelihoods depend on the good graces of
mother nature.
It seems these past 12 months in Canada have been a series of
disasters if we look across the nation. Speaking for my region
up in the Peace River country, the farmers there are going
through some really tough times with two years of excess
moisture, the worst in 50 years, crops still in the field rotting
because they were not able to be harvested for the second year in
a row. I know there has been a devastating draught in the
maritime provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Last spring
there was the tragic flood in the Red River Valley.
Looking back on the last 12 months, culminating in January with
this tragic ice storm, it seems it has been a continuous series
of disasters in Canada. However, what has stood out above all
else is the sense that we are pulling together and that we are a
unified country. In times of greatest need that is when
Canadians will dig the deepest to help out.
There were so many examples of that generosity during this ice
storm, whether we watched it on television, whether we were there
to experience it firsthand or whether we were there to hear from
the people who had experienced it as we are tonight. I think it
really points to what a great nation Canada is that we can come
through a crisis like this stronger than ever.
Hon. Arthur C. Eggleton (Minister of National Defence,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the
member for Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington this
evening.
[Translation]
I am pleased to speak today to praise the fine work of the
Canadian armed forces in the recent ice storm.
[English]
As Minister of National Defence, this is a proud moment because
the men and women of the Canadian forces have been simply
outstanding.
The forces do so much day in and day out. They protect Canada's
sovereignty, secure our global interests and co-operate with
friends and allies in helping to maintain a stable and peaceful
international environment. However, as was evidenced by this
storm, they also do much here at home. They mounted an operation
in recent weeks which attracted the attention of Canadians and I
am sure it warmed their hearts.
The ice storm in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick showed
Canadians at their very best banding together in times of trouble
to assist their friends and neighbours. People worked together
to overcome adversity.
I think we can all be proud of their efforts.
2025
As government leaders I think we can also be proud of the high
level of co-operation between the federal government, the
provinces, local authorities, community groups and of course the
scores of individual Canadians.
While the provincial authorities were in the lead, the federal
government was there for support where and when it was needed,
just like we were able to do previously with the floods in
Manitoba and the Saguenay.
I also want to mention one of the unsung heroes of the ice storm
and of the disasters in the Saguenay and Manitoba. That is
Emergency Preparedness Canada, an agency I have responsibility
for. In these emergencies EPC co-ordinated assistance from the
federal government departments and agencies beyond the Canadian
forces and worked closely with the provinces.
Federal emergency operations and co-ordination groups worked
basically around the clock to locate, buy and transport emergency
materials such as generators in response to provincial requests
for assistance. Situation reports were issued twice daily by EPC
for the duration of the crisis. It also co-ordinated public
information across all federal departments and agencies
participating in the relief effort.
Even as I speak, EPC continues to co-ordinate federal efforts to
aid the recovery process. One of its key roles at this point
will be in the provision of financial assistance. The cheques
may be written by the province to many individuals, businesses
and farms, but let me tell all those people that most of the
money, as much as 90%, in backing up those cheques will come from
the federal government under the disaster financial assistance
arrangements, DFAA, co-ordinated by Emergency Preparedness
Canada.
But without the Canadian forces these natural disasters would
have had even more serious consequences. Let us remember that
some 8,700 forces personnel participated in relief efforts in
Manitoba and about 450 in the Saguenay floods. Almost 16,000
forces personnel participated in the ice storm crisis. This storm
highlighted one of the Canadian forces' most essential roles,
protecting the lives and the property of Canadians in times of
crisis.
Thousands of uniformed men and women are a sight not very often
seen in Canada's urban areas, but there they were during the
storm, military personnel from across Canada, from Newfoundland
to Quebec to British Columbia. I particularly was pleased to see
so many troops coming from western Canada, coming from Edmonton,
coming from Winnipeg and helping people in some of the most
devastated areas in the South Shore in Montreal in the province
of Quebec. That really brought a great many Canadians together
from coast to coast.
Operation recuperation, as it was termed by the military, was
the largest peace time deployment of the Canadian forces for a
natural disaster in our country. At its height, as I said a few
moments ago, we had approximately 16,000 men and women deployed
from bases across Canada including 4,000 reservists who took time
off school or off work to become a part of helping their fellow
Canadians. The number of forces personnel reached a high of
almost 11,000 in Quebec, almost 5,000 in Ontario and
approximately 400 in New Brunswick. Over 200 units of the
Canadian forces contributed.
These are soldiers, sailors, air men and women who directly
helped their fellow Canadians deal with this crisis. In
addition, there were another 6,000 civilian and military
personnel across Canada providing essential support to this
extraordinary relief effort.
They were packing the airplanes with the equipment. They were
helping the forces personnel in their transportation needs. To
them we also owe our thanks.
2030
The devastating ice storm left terrible damage in its wake and
brought with it unprecedented hardship for millions of Canadians.
It destroyed forests and crippled dairy farms and of course we
know it downed a great many power lines. The loss of electric
power to so many would be difficult to cope with at the best of
times, but when it occurs in the middle of winter, that hardship
is magnified tenfold.
The emergency was extremely costly in terms of human suffering,
property damage and disruption to commerce and industry, and it
is not over yet for some. As of this morning just over 300
Canadian forces personnel are still deployed in Quebec. Their
priorities remain to help Hydro Quebec in the restoration of
power, to support people that are in shelters and assist in local
patrols.
As of this morning there are still 7,000 Hydro Quebec customers
without power. In Ontario and New Brunswick of course full
restoration of power has now occurred.
Canadian forces personnel, I want to add again as I have said on
many occasions, will remain in the affected area until the power
has been restored. In addition, they remain on alert to respond
rapidly to new emergencies.
The ability of the Canadian forces to mobilize such large
numbers in a relatively short space of time and sustain this very
high level of effort is testimony to their preparedness and their
leadership. Our troops helped restore hydroelectric power. They
helped local authorities clear roads of fallen trees. They
helped set up emergency shelters. They distributed food and
equipment, including generators. They cooked meals for those in
need. They brought peace of mind and a desperately needed link
to the outside world when they carried out their door to door
checks on residents.
Their very presence brought comfort to hundreds of thousands of
Canadians. They helped people cope with a disaster with added
confidence and resolve.
Canada's military has a proud history of responding to those in
need anywhere in the world. Now once again Canadians saw for
themselves how crucial the forces are to the welfare of the
country. They demonstrated for all to see that they are truly a
vital national institution. We owe these fine men and women our
deepest and most heartfelt gratitude.
Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and
Addington, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for this
opportunity to take part in this take note debate as proposed by
the government's loyal opposition leader. I think it is a great
idea. It is something we will continue to do on the main streets
and in the coffee shops of Canada for years to come.
Canadians from all parts of Canada again displayed their love
and their caring for their neighbours and for all citizens of
this great country. Again Canadians showed that they knew there
is a better feeling, a feeling of giving. The feeling of giving
is even better than the feeling you get from receiving. Canadians
gave. They gave until they hurt. People helping people, that is
what this country is about.
The ice storm of 1998 has again reminded me personally of how
proud I am to call this country home. Certainly the spirit of
the people who built this country shines through this tragedy.
The pioneer spirit is alive today.
People in the central and northern part of my riding told me
about the thunderous night when the crowns broke free from the
tree trunks and about the devastation they witnessed in the
morning. Trees a hundred years of age and more are no longer
standing or else they have been severely damaged. Saplings are
bent over like the crescent of a moon. Their tips are still
frozen in the ice and snow. We are not going to know the extent
of this damage for a few years.
2035
People are starting to enter their sugar bushes. It is so risky.
The safety hazards are there. The widow makers, those branches
that are torn loose and hanging from the trees, have to be looked
at and caution has to be used.
Yes, the loss of income to our rural Canadians is very severe.
Small business as well as all rural citizens—and farming is a
very important business in this country—all these people were
affected and people were hurt. Again, farmers were the first ones
to share and to care and to look after the people in their
communities.
I hope there will be many books written about the human interest
stories. I am thinking about one couple, Ruth and Dudley Shannon
who are very active in the Frontenac Federation of Agriculture.
Like thousands of people in our areas they went around and
knocked on the doors of their neighbours' homes. There were no
lights anywhere. It was just to make sure everybody was okay.
Yes, rural Canadians are very resourceful but people do need
water to drink. These people, like many other people, said, “We
are dairy farmers. We are very fortunate. In our area we have a
generator and there is fresh water in the milk house. We will
leave the door unlocked. Come along and help yourselves”.
People were wonderful. Business people in our area displayed no
price gouging. People were there to help people. Volunteers came
together. Of course we often pay tribute to our volunteer
firefighters but we cannot do it enough. These people are
volunteers who every day and every week while on these
firefighting crews risk their lives.
Of course the minister of defence spoke just before me about the
military. It was heart warming to see their response. These
people went the extra mile. Around Sharbot Lake, Ontario along
the highway between Ottawa and Toronto the helicopters showed up
early following the crisis, following the devastation. It is a
very rural area but the fact that these birds were in the sky,
people knew that there was someone caring for them and it made a
big difference in people's lives.
All the municipal workers, the municipal politicians, everyone
worked together. Hydro workers risked their lives. There were
some tragic events following this. Telephone workers, police,
RCMP, people right across the storm's path demonstrated their
courage, their generosity and their determination.
I want to thank the Prime Minister who visited the farming
community of Wolfe Island which adjoins the riding. People there
appreciated his visit. They knew he was concerned. As always
the Prime Minister walked down the street and talked and listened
to the people.
Immediately after the storm several ministers visited our
riding. I was glad to see the Minister of Agriculture and
Agri-Food and the Minister of National Defence. They personally
assessed the damage. They had the opportunity to talk directly
with the Canadians who experienced the storm's violent intrusion
into their lives and livelihood. Their visits were very important
to my constituents.
I am proud to have been part of this Team Canada, the internal
Team Canada helping to ensure that this is a great country. I
also want to say thanks to a few colleagues. We should not list
people but the people who phoned me at home around the clock were
the Minister of Canadian Heritage, the Minister of Health, the
President of the Treasury Board, my seatmate the member
representing Erie—Lincoln, the members representing
Haldimand—Norfolk, Brant and also my colleague from
Guelph—Wellington. All these people offered help and assistance
and it came by the truckloads.
I especially want to thank the member representing Stoney Creek
because the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce sent truckloads, tractor
trailer loads of supplies continually into eastern Ontario. It
helped and also made our people realize that there are so many
people who care.
The federal government will cover most of the storm related
costs and that is the way it should be. We do turn the money
over to the provincial government.
I am very glad to see that the governments are acting quickly
because these people need the support now. To date I believe the
federal government's contribution is approximately $250 million
which has been designated for this purpose.
2040
Canadians can smile and tell stories even during disasters. The
military showed up at a home in North Frontenac. One of the
senior staff in this Chamber answered the door when this military
truck showed up in the middle of the night. A knock came to the
door and he answered it. The soldier said, “Sir, you have no
hydro”. “No,” he said. “How are you making out, sir?” This
gentleman who works with us here every day said, “Oh, I am
fine”. The soldier asked, “How long has your hydro been out,
sir?” “Well,” he said, “for about eight years”. He had no
hydro. However, people still have neighbours and friends and he
invited the military in to have a coffee. His own family was
helping in the reserves.
The thoughts and stories of people helping people in this
country again I repeat they make me feel so good. My heart goes
out to the people who are still suffering from this storm
especially in our neighbouring province of Quebec. It is very
hard for us to realize the disaster that still exists there
today.
We have to learn from this disaster. We all have to work
together in this country. I encourage all members of the House
to join me in recognizing the volunteers in our community who
make this country so great.
[Translation]
Mrs. Pauline Picard (Drummond, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for
giving this opportunity, this evening, to pay tribute to the thousands
of men, women and children of my riding, who were hit by the worst
natural disaster in the history of Quebec.
I also want to pay tribute to the mayors, all elected
representatives at the municipal level, and the volunteers. I want them
to know that they have my admiration.
I would like to congratulate and thank all those who were involved,
like the CLSC, the Tablée populaire Drummond, my colleagues from the
Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois, the people at Alcan, in
Jonquière, and all the others who have given us support and assistance.
I thank you with all my heart.
The people of the riding of Drummond have lived through this time
of crisis with courage and dignity, while showing an incredible amount
of solidarity to prevent or alleviate the dramatic consequences we were
confronted with throughout this terrible ordeal.
The storm broke out, we lost power, our river flowed over, but not
once did we run out of solidarity and mutual support. This ordeal we
have gone through together has taught us, in Drummond, that a
Quebecker's heart is stronger than any storm and sturdier than any
pylon.
While the power has been restored to most homes in my riding, the
crisis is not over. We managed to avoid the worst of disasters, that is
to say the loss of many lives, but we are still confronted to the very
severe consequences of this tragic episode.
From a public health point of view, there were numerous cases of
fractures, respiratory infections due to flu, exhaustion and depression
caused by stress. One thing is sure, the consequences of this crisis on
public health will be felt for a very long period and will cause
additional expenses to the Quebec health system. The federal government,
and especially the Health Minister, should demonstrate the necessary
openness to accept compensation claims under the financial support
agreements in case of disasters and share with the government of Quebec
the additional costs incurred by the public health system.
Our area was spared human life losses, mainly because of the
efficiency of emergency measures taken by municipal leaders working with
scores of volunteers.
2045
During the worst of the crisis, the mobilization of all resources
available was necessary and made possible to avoid the worst. However,
as the crisis gradually decreases, we can witness the seriousness of
human tragedy affecting those who lost their jobs on a temporary or
permanent basis.
In the Drummond area, there are about 450 industrial businesses,
mainly small and medium-size businesses. Most of them remained out of
power until January 26, for a period of three weeks. It is the same for
many businesses who have practically lost their January sales. Many
businesses have suffered serious damages to their facilities, as well as
their equipment and machinery.
Industries have lost contracts, customers and markets, mainly export
markets, which they had worked many years to secure.
Even if they have resumed their activity, those businesses are now
facing a slowdown of their production. It will be weeks and even months
before they can regain their production capacity, but some other
businesses find themselves in a desperate situation.
Reluctantly, industries have to lay-off some of their employees for
an indefinite period. Consequently, this unprecedented storm is
transforming itself into a real economic catastrophe for an area such as
ours.
In my county where agriculture is also very important, producers
have incurred heavy losses, particularly maple syrup producers whose
maple groves and equipment have been severely damaged by the weight of
ice. Again, there will be very serious economic consequences.
Farmers suffered damages to their buildings and machinery. They lost
some animals while others are sick. They had to throw out milk, and
cattle could not be delivered or had to be killed. They lost fruits and
vegetables kept in storage and spent a lot of money on generators,
gasoline and the like.
Although some means are being devised to compensate farmers for
their losses, it will not cover everything and it will leave a gaping
hole in the economic activity of the farming industry. This loss of
economic activity will come in addition to the various other losses
suffered by our regional economy.
As we can see, our regional economy is deeply affected by this
tragic ice storm. Without adequate cash assistance, it will be a long
time before the regional economy reaches again the momentum it had
before the storm.
Thus, the federal government must go beyond the compensation for
emergency measures which are part of the financial aid agreements in
case of disaster.
On behalf of my constituents of Drummond, and the citizens of the
devastated areas of Quebec, Ontario and New Brunswick, I ask all members
of this House to, please, express their solidarity with the victims of
the ice storm, the most severely affected of whom being those who lost
their livelihood temporarily or permanently.
I ask them to help me convince the Department of Human Resources
Development to use the employment insurance account, which it manages
not owns, to help the disaster victims who are unemployed, by doing away
with the two week waiting period. By adding a special clause dealing
with disaster insurance in the employment insurance act, the minister
would allow the measure to apply in exceptional circumstances.
The minister can count on our full co-operation in getting this
amendment through quickly.
Rarely is consensus on an issue reached broadly and naturally.
However, this appears to be the case with the use of the employment
insurance fund to help workers hit by the storm who find themselves
out of a job on the first day not worked.
Employers, employees, unions and management associations have
called for it. Municipal politicians, economic development
organizations and community, charitable and first aid organizations
are calling for it. Editorial writers are writing about it and
officials in the Department of Human Resources Development are
saying that such an arrangement would be easy to carry out with the
full co-operation of employers.
2050
Such a consensus should soften the stand taken by the
minister, whose ambiguous statements have so convinced everyone of
fact and fiction that our offices and those of the department are
still jammed with calls from the public and employers who swear
they heard the minister say the opposite of what they have just
learned.
If the minister decided to go forward by reversing, I would be
the first to understand, support and congratulate him. He would be
showing us that he has understood how the government can make fair
use of a fund surplus that does not belong to it but rather to
employees and employers.
It involves nothing more than a simple operation permitting a
healthy injection of funds to restart the economies of the regions
hit by the storm. The funds are available and belong to those who
amassed them. I hope the minister grasps this.
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Verchères, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would
like to begin by saying what a very great honour and very great
pleasure it is for me to take part in this debate.
As I heard my colleagues speaking about this terrible ice
storm, it brought back memories, some painful of course, but also
some highly emotion-charged ones, because during those long days of
cold and darkness we experienced a warmth, a solidarity within the
affected population, one rarely equalled in the past.
If I may, I will take advantage of these preliminary minutes
to salute the populations affected, to salute their courage, their
exemplary patience during this emergency situation.
I would also like to salute the volunteers who worked long
hours for many days to help the disaster victims, although in very
many cases they were victims themselves, with problems in their own
homes, collapsed roofs, burst pipes, and concerns about finding
accommodation for their own families.
I would also like to salute, to congratulate, to thank, the
elected officials and employees of the 12 municipalities in my
riding, which I will list if I may: Boucherville, Sainte-Julie,
Varennes, Saint-Antoine-sur-Richelieu, Saint-Amable,
Saint-Marc-sur-Richelieu, Saint-Charles-sur-Richelieu,
Saint-Denis-sur-Richelieu, the villages and the parishes, Calixa-Lavallée,
Verchères, and Contrecoeur.
All of us have seen those pictures of the locomotive taken
from its tracks and parked in front of the Boucherville city hall
in order to supply power to the emergency measures centre.
For a few days, this locomotive became the symbol of Boucherville and of
the federal riding of Verchères. However, this symbol was first and
foremost an illustration of the resourcefulness showed by the people who
survived the crisis.
I want to salute the various government officials and my fellow
members of Parliament, particularly those of Jonquière, Repentigny, and
Kingston and the Islands, who personally contacted me to offer their
help.
I also want to salute and to thank Hydro-Quebec workers. In this
regard, I would like to recount an anecdote from the Boucherville
shelter. In a news conference held twice each day, we provided
information to storm victims.
At one point, a resident came to the microphone and said: “Madam Mayor,
from the comfort of my home I did not really know what a lineman was.
Now, I can tell you what it is. I can tell you what it is, and I can
tell you that they do a darn good job”.
2055
I would like to thank the members of municipal police forces
who took part in this operation, as well as members of the Sûreté
du Québec, the RCMP, and the Canadian Armed Forces. I would like
to mention the close co-operation between all these groups, which
do not necessarily have anything in common that enables them to
work well together but which, on this occasion, showed themselves
to be strong team players, demonstrating tremendous solidarity that
made them very effective in the field.
I would also like to thank all those who took in friends and
relatives or sometimes just fellow victims during this dark period.
I would also like to pay tribute to all the people throughout
Quebec, in neighbouring provinces, and in the northeastern United
States, who came to help out in the affected areas or who sent
supplies, vital equipment, firewood, generators, and on and on.
The solidarity shown during this crisis will forever be a
source of inspiration, motivation and determination to us.
At the peak of the crisis, over 75% of the federal riding of
Verchères was plunged into darkness. My family and I took in
relatives for several days until we too fell victim to the power
outage and had to leave our home as well.
I would like to take this opportunity to pay special tribute
to the team in my riding office who agreed, in completely appalling
conditions, to hold the fort and continue to provide service to the
public.
I say hold the fort because we have worked under conditions that are
almost unthinkable: without electricity, without heat, without running
water and with only very limited telephone services. I take this
opportunity to thank Gaétane Voyer, Hélène Clavet and Pierre-Luc Vallée,
who worked selflessly throughout this difficult period.
I think about all those people who are still in the dark, who are
still without electricity at this very moment. We have a tendency to see
this crisis as a thing of the past. But there are still people who are
suffering in the areas affected by the storm. Such is the case in
Drummond, in Verchères, in almost the entire Montérégie and central
Quebec region, in a large part of the Eastern Townships and eastern
Ontario and in part of New Brunswick. In those regions there are still
people without electricity.
There are still people who desperately need help.
This leads me to reflect on the debate we are having tonight. When
I was told there would be an emergency debate on the ice storm, I was
happy. I was excited. I was thrilled because holding an emergency debate
made sense to me since there were still people who needed our help. If
the purpose of this emergency debate is indeed to find ideas and reach
a consensus on how to help those who are affected, then I applaud this
initiative.
However if, as I have unfortunately heard to some extent this
evening, this debate is merely an opportunity to congratulate ourselves
and say we did a good job, everything is fine and we are no longer
needed, then you can count me out.
You can count me out because I do not think that is what we are here for
tonight. We are here tonight to find ways to help the people affected by
this disaster.
My colleague from Drummond mentioned the terrible difficulties
faced by businesses that lost stocks, that lost clients, that lost
profits. These businesses need our help.
2100
I am also thinking about those workers who found themselves
temporarily out of work. The possibility of having the waiting period
waived so they could be handed a first cheque on the spot was so
enticing it was reported in the newspapers. There was also a possibility
they would not be asked to pay back the amounts by which they were
overpaid.
Of course, it may sound somewhat trivial to discuss whether or not
those affected by the storm should be asked to pay back overpayments in
EI benefits. But you must realize that any unemployed person who had to
contend with the roof of his or her home caving in and pipes bursting,
causing untold damage, spent whatever little money he or she had
available, including the advance payment cheque.
These people are now living in the fear of having to pay back the money
they received.
We have to show compassion for those who have suffered and are
still suffering. I therefore urge this government, and the Minister of
Human Resource Development in particular, to be compassionate in making
adjustments to the employment insurance plan, which, I agree, is very
strictly regulated. The minister does, however, have the discretionary
power to make the necessary adjustments to alleviate these people's
hardship.
I think there is every reason to take measures to adjust or relax
the various assistance programs to which new money has been allocated
because of this emergency situation, including the job creation
partnership program, the targeted wage subsidy program and the time
sharing employment program.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I urge you and all the members of this
House to bear in mind that the crisis is not behind us and that today
still we must show that we care about those who were and still are
affected by this crisis.
I will conclude on this, hoping that my colleagues will take my
lead in asking that the government show compassion for these people.
[English]
Mr. Joe Jordan (Leeds—Grenville, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
will be sharing my time with the hon. member for
Vaudreuil—Soulanges.
I want to focus on some of the short term and long term effects
of this storm in my riding. I start out by saying that while
Leeds—Grenville was certainly not the hardest hit, we did
unfortunately have three storm related fatalities and our prayers
go out to the families of those individuals.
I welcome the opportunity to participate in this evening's
discussion. I recognize and commend the co-operative actions of
all parties that made it possible.
I will resist the temptation to ramble on about the direct
correlation between technological sophistication and human
dependence. I will simply point out, however, that as a person
in my riding who hooked up a bicycle to a furnace demonstrated,
low technology still has its place.
Leeds—Grenville is a rural riding. Loss of power in a rural
area results in not only a loss of heat and electricity but also
means no water and no telephone, resulting in a situation where
communication is difficult at a time when it is most critical.
I make special mention of Mr. Bruce Wylie and radio station CFJR
that boosted the power of its signal and served as the primary
source of information for the people of its listening area.
Particular sectors of a rural economy face specific problems.
Dairy farmers who did not have back-up capacity were faced with
immediate energy needs to operate automatic milking machines, to
power water pumps and feed conveyors and to ventilate barns.
Interruptions of regular melting cycles can lead to long term
production drops. If the delay is more than 36 hours there are
serious health consequences for the animals.
The power outage also affected our capacity to process milk and
a great deal of product was dumped in the early days of the
storm.
Beef operations faced similar problems with water, feed and
ventilation but also had the additional risks associated with
calving during a power outage.
Perhaps the sector most directly affected in both the short and
long term is the maple syrup industry.
I do not want to dismiss the damage to plantations and orchards,
but in Leeds—Grenville they seem to have fared a bit better as
the trees are spaced to encourage deep root systems and short
stocky crowns.
2105
Sugar bushes felt the direct effect of the storm for a number of
reasons. Historically these stands of maple trees were left in
the areas of the farms that were not suited for regular crops.
This resulted in access issues and low levels of topsoil. In
many cases these trees were already under stress and an
additional four centimetres of ice was more than they could
handle.
A sugar maple tree takes anywhere from 40 to 60 years to get to
a point of production. Certainly other sectors lost assets but
no other sector faces these kinds of replacement issues and
costs.
There is also a capacity issue. Large evaporators require large
quantities of sap for quality processing. This means that
reducing production may just cause further problems.
There is also a critical need for technical information
concerning strategies and the implications of dealing with
damaged trees. The challenge for maple syrup producers this year
will be to get to the trees that can be tapped for the sap is
already in the tree.
Pipeline operators will need to replace lines that are frozen in
the ground and bucket operators will need help clearing trails.
The challenge in subsequent years will be in the quantity of sap
as reduced crowns will have a direct effect on the photosynthesis
process necessary for sap production and will affect these sugar
bushes for many years to come.
Another aspect of the economic impact is the fact that many of
these sugar bushes had tourism components which directly and
indirectly contribute to a great number of other businesses.
I recognize the efforts of Human Resources Development Canada
for making moneys available for local labour market partnership
agreements. I am proud the first of these that has been put in
place in Leeds—Grenville is to help address the needs of maple
syrup producers through the Eastern Ontario Model Forest
Organization.
While the retail sector lost income, local businesses opened
their doors to people by candlelight. I had a personal
experience in Gananoque where a service station was giving gas on
verbal credit. Larger companies freed up employees to work in
shelters and continue volunteer firefighting activities. In
Leeds—Grenville the co-ordinated actions of the firefighters
were critical. The custom nature of their equipment did not
allow for the use of replacement workers. These individuals and
their families endured long hours of stressful, dangerous work.
Both time and knowledge prevent me from thanking all the
volunteers, but as MPs from other affected regions have pointed
out the individual acts of courage and compassion were certainly
one of the silver linings to this storm cloud.
Ontario Hydro worked miracles on the operational side, but in
the case of rural areas communication was a problem. They are
certainly aware of this and I will not belabour the point.
Initial indications are that banks and insurance companies are
being creative and flexible in providing much needed assistance.
As the crisis evolved in Leeds—Grenville and areas received
power, to a person, every mayor and every reeve, there was
absolutely no hesitation to redirecting resources to the
townships. I recognize the excellent co-operation that I
experienced from both provincial and municipal politicians
through the United Counties Council. The storm did more to
further the cause of municipal amalgamation than any provincial
regulation, and perhaps there is a valuable lesson there for
legislators at all levels.
I was particularly struck by a call from a mayor from the
Saguenay region. The area was sent money from the Brockville
area during the flood and he wished to reciprocate.
Emergency measures twinned towns with unaffected regions, and my
riding benefited directly from Kitchener and Cobourg. As the
storm brought people together, the allocation of compensation has
the potential to tear them apart. The need for emergency
assistance in Leeds—Grenville is over. I urge the appropriate
officials to take the time necessary to ensure that the long term
compensation criteria and strategies are both transparent and
equitable.
I am particularly concerned about the loss of employment income
to families. We went to great lengths to ensure that UI and
social assistance recipients were accommodated, but let us not
forget that they did not miss a cheque. The real test of the
value of compensation is how it will affect the small business
person or the family living paycheque to paycheque. Let us
ensure that they do not fall between the cracks.
In terms of federal assistance efforts my riding experienced the
direct benefit of a number of agencies. The military saved lives
in my riding by checking homes on a daily basis.
People were reluctant to leave their homes and the military
undertook these checks along with community volunteers. As a
commanding officer commented, this is the 98% of the military
that we have not heard about over the last five years.
2110
The value of the reserves was also evident. The pool of
talented reservists was critical. I appeal to all employers to
recognize the valuable contribution they made. The local coast
guard adopted a whatever it takes attitude and the men and women
at the Prescott base worked around the clock. Revenue Canada put
emergency measures in place at border crossings and emergency
goods were flushed through the system.
Thanks to the creative efforts of customs officials at both
Ogdensburg and Ivy Lea international bridges, truckers were
handed maps of eastern Ontario and western Quebec showing shelter
locations and drop off points.
Correctional Service Canada supplied provisions from its kitchen
and also labour from off duty employees. Health Canada provided
cots, blankets and stretchers for the shelters. Public Works
advanced grant in lieu of taxes payments to address short term
cash flow to municipalities. Agriculture Canada co-ordinated the
distribution of generators and struck deals with the U.S. Food
and Drug Agency to clear unpasteurized milk for processing in the
United States and to relieve or waive the usual agricultural food
process permits for feed coming back up. Human Resources Canada
was quick to make funds available for clean up.
Much of this government involvement and certainly similar
actions that occurred at both the municipal and provincial level
were not always a result of policy but of action by ministers and
bureaucrats who found creative strategies to meet real needs in a
timely fashion.
In conclusion, while the ice storm represented nature at its
worst, the response of Canadians represented humankind at its
best. On behalf of the citizens of Leeds—Grenville I thank all
Canadians for their support and prayers during this crisis.
[Translation]
Mr. Nick Discepola (Vaudreuil—Soulanges, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
it is an honour for me to take part in this discussion—which to me
is not a debate—in order to have an opportunity to testify to the
courage and solidarity that exists everywhere in Quebec, and
particularly to pay homage to the hundreds and thousands of
volunteers in the riding of Vaudreuil—Soulanges.
My riding is part of the Montérégie region. Jokingly, people
were saying that maybe we should change our name to Montérégie-Nord.
We were a bit neglected. It took emergency measures ten days
to discover that there had also been an emergency situation in the
riding I have the honour to represent.
The region, and the riding as a whole, took charge of things.
They gave an example to be followed in future, which I shall
explain. All of the stakeholders got together, held meetings to
plan how to deal with the problem. This was a disaster, and all
the problems that can go along with one cannot be foreseen. One
just has to adapt.
I would like to start with heart-felt congratulations and
thanks for all of the mayors and municipal councils, as well as the
administrations of these 24 towns and cities. Without the co-ordination
and devotion of these mayors, these councils, the
volunteer firefighters, we might have seen results far different
from the ones we see today.
We came through relatively well in our area because, as a
region, we took charge of things, thanks to the concerted efforts
of mayors, reeves and all elected representatives on both the
federal and the provincial level, regardless of political stripe.
The mayors made themselves available, heart and soul, night and day.
I would like to mention two in particular, although I am aware
this does a disservice to the others, but they are exemplars of
devotion and of how people who were victims of the disaster themselves
devoted themselves to their community.
Mayor Richard Leroux of Rivière-Beaudette, in a corner of our
riding, right near the Ontario border, was affected himself because
he neglected his own home.
2115
His roof collapsed, and the damage was worth between $7,000
and $10,000. Also, Michel Kandyba of Pincourt is today facing
$30,000 worth of damage.
We always tend to criticize elected officials, but I take off my
hat to the 24 mayors, especially the reeve, Mr. Luc Tison and the
mayor of Saint-Polycarpe, Normand Ménard. On Wednesday, day 12, it
was nearly minus 20 in the riding. I will not forget that. They
were announcing two days of minus 20 and below. There was no wood
in the riding.
Everyone was busy contacting people everywhere, and the mayor of
St. Polycarpe, Mr. Ménard, volunteered to co-ordinate the
distribution of wood, thanks doubtless to the co-operation and help
of the Canadian armed forces.
We have been talking about solidarity, and in our riding it
was exemplary. Not only did neighbours and towns and cities join
together, but everyone helped everyone else. This was the finest
example I ever saw and perhaps the last I will see as a member of
Parliament.
[English]
We had to adapt to these changing circumstances. It was almost
a crisis and management by crisis and we had to adapt on an
hourly basis. However, the mayors, the elected officials and the
hydro officials, everyone had one common objective. I share part
of my riding, the Soulanges area, with a PQ member of the
national assembly and the other part of the riding with the
leader of opposition, Mr. Daniel Johnson, and we put aside our
differences for the betterment of our citizens. It worked very
well.
If I had one recommendation for future plans it would
essentially be that the control of a disaster be at the top level
but that the dissemination of information has to be at the lowest
possible denominator which is at the mayoral level. They are the
closest to the people.
Time and time again I saw examples of how either civil
protection people came into the riding not knowing the riding or
hydro officials who were brought in from other areas did not
understand the needs. However, when they talked to the mayor the
mayor was able to tell them who was away on vacation or which
house was only a temporary summer home and their hook-ups were
not necessary. Their knowledge of their communities was proven
invaluable.
We also showed how Quebeckers and Canadians can be ingenious. I
would like to thank publicly the officials at Canadian National
railways who provided us with a locomotion engine, an engine that
we were able to hook up with the efforts of Hydro-Quebec and the
co-operation of CN officials. This engine was taken off the
railway tracks, put on the side and hooked up to feed 80 homes
and 4 shelters. It was a very proud time for us to see that
occurring.
I know I only have a few more minutes but I would also like to
take the time to thank the many people in the riding.
[Translation]
I have already mentioned the volunteer firefighters. They
poured their heart and soul into helping and looking after people's
safety, sometimes for 18 or 20 hours a day. The Red Cross, the
Canadian armed forces, we cannot say enough. I would, however,
like to single out three officers. They are, first, Major
Wadsworth, Warrant Officer Cooke and especially, a good friend —
because we became friends—Lieutenant-Colonel David Fraser, who
helped us hugely in our riding. He also spoke French and came from
Edmonton.
The employees of Hydro-Québec, the RCMP—520 officers helped
with public security.
2120
There is also Correctional Services, the other department for
which we are responsible. Do you know that minimum security
inmates also helped Hydro-Québec teams remove branches, and so on?
I would particularly like to mention the Verdonck family, with
their distribution centre and Belcan agrocentre. This rural
business threw itself heart and soul into distributing generators
that came from all over the place. Some were even received from
the Kitchener and Owen Sound areas. One individual Greg Haney who was
especially hard hit and who had been without electricity for two
weeks could have taken a generator home with him and hooked it up.
Instead, he gave it to farmers and others who were worse off.
I could not have managed without my staff, Monique, Sylvie and
Jean. There were also my colleagues from elsewhere, from the
Beauce and Gaspé regions, from Kitchener, from New Brunswick, who
sent wood during this crisis. I would like to thank my family, and
my wife Mary Alice in particular, because they did not see me for
two weeks, as well as the hundreds of thousands of volunteers.
They put their hearts and souls into helping their fellow citizens.
[English]
We always have memories. This is an event in history. We
always look back and remember, just like when President Kennedy
was shot, where we were.
I have beautiful memories and I have destructive memories of
seeing the tree tops and the maple orchards destroyed. It is as
if someone took a lawnmower and cut the tops, an estimated seven
thousand square kilometres of them.
I have two beautiful memories. One is seeing young children
about 10 or 11 years old in Ste. Marthe skating on the ice in
farmers' fields waiving to a helicopter from the Canadian Armed
Forces, thanking it for coming to help them. The other is
St-Télesphore, a very French Canadian village, celebrating and
singing in English happy birthday to a nine year-old girl
celebrating her birthday in a shelter.
It shows that in times of need Quebeckers, Canadians, come to
the aid of each other. I want to salute all these people in the
riding of Vaudreuil—Soulanges and, more important, all Quebeckers
and I thank all Canadians for their help.
Mr. Rick Laliberte (Churchill River, NDP): Mr. Speaker, I
will be sharing my time with the hon. member for
Acadie—Bathurst.
I would like to congratulate the House for taking the time to
reflect on the ice storm of 1998.
I represent a riding, Churchill River in northern Saskatchewan,
which was far removed from the present ice storm and the harsh
realities that the citizens of Quebec, Ontario and New Brunswick
experienced.
With the blessings of modern day media we had a chance to see
the images and hear the stories of people's daily routine
disrupted. Their safety was compromised, their whole educational
process put on hold and their health and basic necessities
unavailable to them.
I also think of the cause of it. If we look at an ice storm,
raining for numerous days in the middle of winter, it is a
climate disruption of huge magnitude. The news is quick to say
that the intensity of El Nino is blamed for our present day
climate disruptions such as forest fires and grass fires at the
foothills of Alberta and the rain and the floods which are
happening on the coasts of the United States.
If we take a second look at these climate disruptions, just
before Christmas we had a major debate and a major international
conference in Kyoto dealing with the human effects of greenhouse
gases on climate change.
2125
These are the messages. We have to read these. What are we
preparing ourselves for?
I am proud to be Canadian when I see all the efforts made by the
provinces, neighbours, the communities, the municipalities, the
provincial governments in Quebec and Ontario, all putting their
efforts into getting the basic requirements back in order.
I had an opportunity after leaving Parliament Hill last night to
travel to Montreal and the South Shore. The impact of being
without hydro is causing a real struggle. There are still
communities and families without power and therefore the basic
necessity of heat.
It is now time to pick up the pieces. Members have mentioned
the environmental impact with all those trees snapped off at the
beginning of their higher reaches. They now have to be cleaned
up. Imagine the manpower required to clean the ice off the
equipment and get some of the productivity going again on the
farms, for the maple producers and the many industries in those
regions.
I have taken notes tonight that I will take back to my
constituency to try to learn how we would handle a disaster or
catastrophe in our area. What would we do?
For example, travelling through St. Jean this morning, family
farms all over the place were affected. Family farms are an
integral part of the economy of Quebec, the prairie provinces,
Ontario. They have become dependent on hydro. Hydro provides
heat and light.
A few decades ago the wood stove played a major role. It was a
legacy from family to family and from generation to generation.
Why isn't the wood stove a basic necessity of a home now? A lot
of our young people are moving to the cities. You cannot haul
your wood stove into an apartment. Look at the family farm.
Why are we compromising family industries? Let us caution the
people in Quebec and Ontario who have been hit hard and are
thinking of giving up their farms or businesses because of the
effects of this catastrophe. Let us extend what assistance we can
as a nation, as a province and as a neighbour.
While sitting in the warmth of my home in northern Saskatchewan
watching the daily news report, a constituent walked in and asked
how can they could help. I was astounded. I had no network to
tap into. The army was moving into the region.
What came to my mind is why do we not have a network of
communities in Canada. Why could home town not be paired off
with a sister community in Quebec or in B.C.? If we had a hard
time as was experienced in this past month, we could reach out
for help and safety. If there are hard times in our community
some time in the future, we could call on this sister community.
That came to mind when I was in Big River and had coffee with
students in a Katimavik program. The students had just moved in
to start a new program in that area. There were students from
British Columbia, Quebec and Ontario. I asked them about the ice
storm. They shared stories about phoning home to check on the
safety of their people who were in shelters and that the elderly
were taken care of. They were assured they could continue.
That was a message for me as well. Katimavik is a youth corps
program bringing our youth together to work on community
projects. Community projects will be required to clean up the
forests and the communities. There are many branches hanging off
the trees. If the kids climb those trees, those big branches are
going to fall. Safety will be compromised.
The youth corps should be looked at in Canada, an environmental
youth corps to clean up and give us a support structure built on
Katimavik ten times more than what it is now.
2130
The reserves were talked about. There are no reserves in my
area. The military is removed from a different sector into
another part of the province or the neighbouring province. The
reserves should be expanded in this country so that when people
are in times of atrocities or catastrophes we can feel a part of
it.
A network of experience could be brought together if we could
communicate. The CBC News and the CTV News really communicated in
terms of bringing the news into our homes.
We have to look at our resources in the House of Commons, in the
provinces and in our communities. On behalf of the people of
Churchill River, we offer our support if there is any way we can
help pick up the pieces at this time.
The ice storm is similar to a fire. When a major forest
fire has impact on a province, neighbouring provinces will send
fire crews to fight the fire. There are fire crews all along the
boreal forest. The crews are outfitted to camp and be
self-sufficient. They have communications systems. Why could
they not be mobilized into this area to pick up the pieces of the
ice storm of 1998?
That is what I offer. Thank you for this opportunity to listen,
to gain from the knowledge and to take the experience back to the
region I represent.
[Translation]
Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We
are here this evening to talk about the hardships experienced by
residents of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick during the
terrible ice storm that hit in January. We are here to pay tribute to
the millions of Canadians who were without power for several days or
even weeks and, in some cases, for over a month.
This evening we heard several stories of courage displayed by storm
victims, that is men, women and children who, in difficult
circumstances, showed such great human qualities as sharing, compassion
and patience.
It is often said that we now live in an individualistic society where
personal interests take precedence over collective ones. It was clearly
not the case during the ice storm.
Thousands of Canadians united their efforts to ease the suffering
of residents of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick whose
lives were totally disrupted by the terrible storm. We witnessed
tremendous efforts in the communities that were affected. People came
from neighbouring cities and provinces to prepare meals, share food,
lend generators or donate firewood. This generosity reflects the very
best in what we think of as Canadian values.
In my riding of Acadie—Bathurst, hundreds of volunteers
co-ordinated their efforts to send money, wood, food and other
resources to storm victims.
Thanks to the co-ordination provided by the municipalities and community
groups, these resources got to those communities where they were needed
in no time.
I would like to thank all the people of my riding, who, like their
fellow citizens across the country, have shown a great deal of caring
for those in need.
A word of caution, however, about the genuine generosity shown by
Canadians. Some of my colleagues in this House have used this generosity
displayed for Quebeckers to raise the national unity issue. The people
who gave their time, their resources and their money did not do so for
political reasons; they acted out of sheer generosity. To come and
colour their noble actions by playing politics is insulting.
I drove in the triangle of darkness and saw the electrical poles
that had fallen in the streets, in the fields and even on houses.
2135
Town after town, village after village, I saw the darkness so
many Ontarians, Quebeckers, Nova Scotians and New Brunswickers had
to face. We have never seen the likes of this crisis in Canada.
Unfortunately, we were not prepared for it, and now it is our
responsibility as legislators to ensure that the infrastructure is
in place in the future so we may quickly react to an emergency.
In my province of New Brunswick, victims suffered longer in
the dark because of jobs lost due to cuts in transfers to the
provinces. Fewer workers were available to react immediately to
the power loss.
It is pretty straightforward. If there are fewer workers, there
are fewer people to repair the damage caused by the storm.
[English]
The cutbacks at NB Power have meant that people in south New
Brunswick had to wait longer in the dark. It is yet another
example of how the Liberal cutbacks have hurt Canadians. Larry
Calhoun, business manager for the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers Local 1733, and John Cole, business manager
for IBEW Local 2309, had this to say about the recent storm:
In all fairness, it wouldn't matter how many line workers were
standing by; in a storm like this one it's going to take a while
to get back to normal.
Now, having said that, let us say as well that there is
absolutely no question that in New Brunswick, the reduced NB
Power workforce resulted in citizens being left in the dark
longer than would have previously been the case. You don't have
to be a rocket scientist to understand this. When the lights go
out, it's because power flow has been disrupted. When that
happens, crews are dispatched to find the source of the problem
and fix it. In a storm like this one, the problem is often a
tree which has toppled onto a line. Finding that often entails
driving along a road until you see it. The fewer crews you have
doing the hooking, the longer it's likely going to take to find
it.
[Translation]
With the reduction of the debt and the deficit at the top of
the legislative agenda, we forget that government cuts directly
affect people's lives. Our job is to find ways to improve services
to consumers, to reinvest in jobs that will ensure better support
in such situations.
At the provincial and municipal levels, we must develop a
specific strategy to ease suffering at critical moments. The
Quebec government stressed the importance of establishing a plan
for emergencies. Yesterday I got a letter from a constituent
suggesting such a plan. I will read you a few lines from the
letter, which underscores the lack of preparedness.
She writes “They have been holding meetings for years about
emergencies, but there are no generators, no place to take in
people, no food reserves in a handy place, no little stoves that
could be set up homes that still have fireplaces. This is all
discussed within the family, because you have to think and act
rapidly. You cannot know what is going to happen”.
She continues, setting out a concrete strategy to minimize
people's suffering, while creating jobs at the same time. “There
are people who heat with wood, but have no firewood. So many
unemployed and so many people I know who have not had work for
three years should have had the right to cut wood on crown lands to
stockpile for use in an emergency. Those people should have had a
chance to earn and to accumulate unemployment insurance stamps so
that they could live too”.
That suggestion is only one of many we now need to look at.
With the emergency situation lifted a bit, efforts must now be
focussed on reconstruction of devastated areas. Along with these
efforts, a strategy needs to be developed to ensure that we are as
prepared as possible for a similar situation in future.
Canadians have shown incredible courage and generosity during
this disaster. Now it is time to ensure that we do everything we
can to put the necessary resources in place for a better response
to this type of crisis. Canadians deserve that, at least.
[English]
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is certainly a privilege to make some
comments tonight on the ice storm of 1998.
2140
I was a farmer for many years, actually for 25 years. I farmed
right up until I came to this Chamber in 1988. I am no stranger
to some of the ups and downs that are part of the business of
agriculture but I do not think any of us were prepared for the
crisis that mother nature dealt much of eastern Canada in the
early part of this year.
When the ice storm hit and the lights went out, rural areas were
particularly hard hit. I am not diminishing the problems and the
realities of the urban areas, but the rural areas were hit hard
as well.
Indeed almost a month later as we stand here tonight there are
people still without power. It is my understanding that the
lights will be on by the end of the week. I sincerely hope they
are and that that is a reality.
In the week following the several days of ice, I visited many of
the affected areas as the minister of agriculture and rural
development for Canada. I visited many of the areas in Ontario
and Quebec at the time of the crisis. I visited with farm
leaders, the Prime Minister and with several of my cabinet
colleagues.
I witnessed firsthand the devastation. Not a utility poll was
standing for miles along the concessions. Transformers were on
the ground. As hard and as good a job as the television and the
newspapers did and as hard as they tried, they did a great job
but they could not give us the true picture of what it was like.
The destructive forces of mother nature were unbelievable. It
is humbling to see those huge transmission towers on the ground
like a heap of spaghetti. I spoke with farmers who had already
endured the blackout for a number of days. Some of them had
their power back on after seven or eight days which most of us
would think would be a long time without electricity. And it is,
no question.
I also spoke with farmers who were still struggling to keep
their generators and their operations going. They were sharing
generators. I know in one case an individual was taking a
generator to nine different dairy farms. Twice a day the
individual made the circle around until they could find enough
generators to help.
I used to have one of those generators. They are called
stand-by generators. They are built well. There is no question
that they are built well, but they are not built to run 24 hours
a day for five, six, seven, eight, ten, twelve, fifteen days or
whatever number of days they had to run.
I saw producers who were hurting and producers who were tired.
Their animals were suffering and yes, some of their animals were
dying. Some were forced to dump the milk from the dairy
operations because the delivery system, the pick-up system, et
cetera, just could not work.
Rural businesses were shut down. There are more businesses in
rural Canada than just farms. I am not diminishing the
inconvenience, the problems and the hurt on the farms but there
are a lot of rural businesses out there.
Rural businesses, suppliers to their customers and their
communities were spending hundreds of dollars a day. I am not
exaggerating. They had generators so that they could provide
feed to the livestock operations.
We talk about the just in time service in much of our industrial
areas. There is just in time service in poultry operations as
well because of the fresh feed that is brought to the farm every
two or three days. Those feed manufacturers had to be there.
Residents were taking in neighbours in the urban parts of the
communities up and down the concessions. I must say that one of
the things that impressed me so much was the sense of humour and
how everybody kept their chin up.
I am not being flippant about it but I had a couple of people
say that there will not be a family reunion this year. They had
15 or 20 members of their family in their home already for six or
seven days and they probably will not need a family reunion this
year.
The people did rally around each other, not only neighbours but
friends, family, volunteer firemen, service clubs, church,
municipal governments, provincial governments, the federal
government as well as people from communities across the border.
I saw utility crews from Massachusetts, Connecticut, Detroit and
I could go on. There were a number of them. There were hydro
crews in Ontario from all over the province of Ontario. There
were hydro crews in Quebec from all over the province of Quebec.
Everybody converged there to help.
I have to talk about leaving my riding on the Sunday night at
the end of the storm. I was driving out of the city of
Belleville and my wife asked why all the trucks were at the
hotel. I drove there.
2145
I am not embarrassed to say that tears ran down my face. I
counted 100 utility trucks from Detroit Edison in that parking
lot. They had already driven 375 miles and they had to drive 200
miles more before they got to the ice storm. That was hands
across the border.
I took the opportunity a few days later when I had a meeting
with my counterpart in the United States, Secretary Dan Glickman,
to thank him not only for that but for the co-operation between
the people in our department of agriculture and our food
inspection agency and the USDA and the U.S. Food and Drug Agency.
Within hours they took action to make arrangements for milk to go
into the United States to be processed there and come back into
Canada as a processed product. Milk was also moved into the
maritimes and into other areas of Quebec and Ontario.
I have admiration for the perseverance, for the resourcefulness
and for the community spirit and pride. It is something we can
all be proud of.
The disaster assistance arrangement with the provinces will go a
long way. I point out that it has to be kicked in by the
provinces and that is happening. Our department is working every
day with the provinces. We talked every day from the Tuesday
when the ice storm started with the people in the UPA in Quebec,
the Ontario Federation of Agriculture in Ontario, the Quebec
ministry of agriculture and the Ontario ministry of agriculture
to do all we possibly could.
The hurt is not over yet. We know that. It will be there for a
while. The worst is over but the clean up is yet to come. For
example, the Ontario Maple Syrup Producers Association estimates
that in eastern Ontario where the storm hit between 50% to 90% of
the sugar maples were damaged. In the province of Quebec over
30% were damaged. I saw maple syrup bushes, and I am not
exaggerating, where the trees were only utility poles. That is
all that is left. I know that mother nature is a great healer.
Time will tell whether mother nature can bring those trees back.
Just this morning I am sure a number of us heard a couple of
maple producers on CBC talking about their having to figure out
how to deal with the aftermath. There are a lot of specialists
out there and everybody has come forward. A lot of livestock
died but numbers do not tell the story.
People came together. We drove over 3,000 kilometres
encouraging people and thanking people. I stopped along the road
to thank utility crews from Pennsylvania as well as our own army
for helping with community activities. In one small town there
was a Salvation Army disaster unit at one end of the street.
There is one in Toronto and one in Montreal. This one was from
Toronto. The volunteer firemen and the army were there. They
were feeding people in the shelter. It was absolutely heart
warming to see.
Communities will be stronger after this storm. I think our
country will be stronger. As I said a number of times it is not
the method of choice to get stronger but our country will be
stronger.
I was touched. Each day I talked with my family back home. The
storm only missed our riding by 50 miles. I saw militia people
with pick axes and sledge hammers breaking cables out of the ice
so that the utility crews could put them back up a little faster.
I have another lighter story which I am sure some members have
heard. When I was with the prime minister in Winchester,
Ontario, a dairy farmer told him that a member of the Canadian
army helped him do his milking. The soldiers had brought the
generator to the farm and had to wait so that they could take it
to another farm. One of them said “I am not doing anything
right now while I wait. I might as well help you do your
milking”. Our military is there whenever and wherever we need
them. I am proud.
As I close my comments tonight I say a great big thanks. There
is no way we can stand here and thank everyone. I thank the
people for being patient. I thank the people for being
understanding. I thank them for keeping their chins up. I thank
the people from all over Canada.
2150
I take this opportunity tonight to thank the people in my riding
of Prince Edward—Hastings. As all Canadians did in the Saguenay
situation and during the Red River flood, we opened our hearts,
as Canadians know how to do, and our pocketbooks. We provide
hard goods, soft goods, food and prayers for people in such
situations when needed.
I give a big thanks to everyone. It will take a while yet to
get over it, but with the determination of me, my colleagues, the
House and all other Canadians we will do it.
Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am
certainly very appreciative of the minister of agriculture for
sharing his time with me. I am sure some of our viewers are
wondering why the member for Durham would be speaking on the ice
storm but it has affected me and my riding in a multiplicity of
ways.
When the ice storm first struck I immediately received a phone
call from friends and associates living in the Winchester area.
The minister just talked about Winchester and the devastation of
the storm there. The call was that they needed generators and
generator capacities.
We have an agricultural community in my riding, a dairy
producing area. The call went out to ask some of our
constituents if they could find generator capacities to share
with these people in eastern Ontario. I am very proud of the
people in my riding who immediately rose to the call. I was
fortunate enough to take a truck and to have the local chamber of
commerce provide a trailer. I took my staff and we went into the
area of Winchester to drop off a number of generators.
It was my good fortune to go to some of the farms affected by
the storm and physically take these generators off the truck and
install them. It was not so much the mechanics of all this but
the human interest.
I remember a particular dairy farming operation in a place
called Moose Creek. I drove into the driveway. The house was
totally in darkness. Little children were looking out the
drapes. This was their first contact with the outside world for
over a week. Just the smiles on their faces and the fact that
they knew other people cared about their problems were certainly
uplifting for me. It was uplifting for all the people in my
riding and others who tried to help and create those bonds which
make us a truly great nation.
I said that the storm had affected me in a multiplicity of ways.
I mentioned the hamlet of Moose Creek in the riding of one of my
colleagues, the member for Stormont—Dundas. I went into its
local community centre which was being used as a shelter and
talked with the people there. There was a lot of anxiety. These
people had been without hydro for about a week. As a matter of
fact, by the time this had culminated we had about 30 generators
in the area under my control or under the control of the people
of Durham. It was interesting to talk to some of the people in
the shelter and to hear about what they had gone through and
their anxieties.
We live in a so-called modern world and we take a lot of things
for granted. We will go home tonight to sleep in a nice warm
bed. We will get up in the morning and turn on the lights. This
is what we expect. All these things had been taken away from
these people which caused a great deal of anxiety in their lives.
The connection was the human beings who tried to reach out and
make a difference.
There were military people from the regular forces in Petawawa in
the community centre. They told me how they were trying to pump
out people's basements that were full of water because their sump
pumps had failed to work. They were making a tremendous
commitment.
2155
I have two sons in the reserve forces, one with the Cameron
Highlanders in Ottawa. I lost track of him for over a week. They
were down in Maxville and Vankleek Hill doing the same thing I
was trying to do, but they were doing it a lot more effectively
and efficiently than I was. I was allocating generator capacity
between households by moving one generator between six
households. We had to move it every two or three hours so all
the houses could have a bit of heat.
This all seems rather absurd as we approach the 21st century. I
am sure people will look after the fact into how we could have
handled things differently. We could have had manual overrides
on our furnace systems to prevent such occurrences. The fact is
that people were thrown into the situation. As we speak here
tonight many people are still without hydro.
My son was involved in the command operation in Maxville. People
were suffering. A fellow named Richard who was helping him said
that it would be nice if Maxville had new Canadian flags. A lot
of its flags were old and tattered. They felt much more a part
of the country than they did before this happened.
The Reform Party often criticizes our flag campaign. I was very
pleased to approach the Minister of Canadian Heritage to say that
the people of Maxville needed 20 flags. I asked her to give us
20 flags to make those people feel a little happier about being
part of this country. I am happy to say she forwarded them to me
and they are now in Maxville. It made them feel very much part
of this great country.
The minister of agriculture said that it was almost over in the
sense that people being reconnected. It is not over as far as
the hurt, the anguish and the pain that have been suffered and
will be suffered by these people. A small business operator who
lost a month of income but has a mortgage suddenly has a
significant problem on the doorstep to meet that mortgage
payment.
Consider the insurance business. Many of these things were
considered to be acts of God. Many were uninsurable. Our
government and the provincial governments are attempting to deal
with disaster relief assistance. In reality, when the smoke
clears, these people will have major financial difficulties.
There will be a grey area in which insurance companies will
question the insurability of events.
Maybe a big insurance company or a big bank with lots of assets
can be very generous. However situations will arise in which
smaller insurance companies and financial institutions will not
be so generously inclined. Suddenly these goal posts about what
is claimable and what is not or how to assist a business person
or a person who is making a car loan payment will become big
problems.
2200
I am very happy to say that the caucus on this side of the House
has provided for a number of these organizations to come and
visit us tomorrow. I want to give a personal appreciation for the
Conference Board of Canada, which is going to appear before our
caucus tomorrow; the Canadian Bankers' Association, which is
going to provide members in the relief areas; the Caisse
Populaire of Quebec, which is coming here to say how it is going
to deal with these problems; and the Insurance Bureau of Canada,
which is sending all its representatives to tell us on this side
of the House at least, as parliamentarians, how they are going to
deal with these people not only today but in the future and solve
some of the problems that are going to exist.
[Translation]
Mr. André Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska, PC): Mr. Speaker, the
Government House Leader said that it is a terrible thing to lose power.
Our party has experienced that and it is actually something unpleasant.
But what is even more difficult is to lose electrical power, and that is
what happened to people in Quebec, in parts of New Brunswick and in
Ontario.
We are holding a special debate tonight. People always say that
whenever someone has a good idea, the same idea also appears elsewhere.
Last week, the Conservative caucus decided to propose a special debate
on the ice storm in Quebec and our reformist friends had the same idea.
It is very encouraging to see that bright ideas cross the mind of people
quite rapidly.
Of course, the present debate is an occasion for gratitude and
thanks. Therefore I would like to thank the government, particularly the
Prime Minister, but most of all the minister responsible for Human
Resources Development in Canada. I must say that my colleague from
Shefford and myself have had to contact the minister on a regular basis
and he often returned our calls a few minutes later.
I would also like to recognize the work of the President of the
Treasury Board. We have not seen him often on the front pages of
newspapers or on the television, but he was present.
I also would like to mention all the leaders of the parties
represented in this House, MPs, MNAs, elected representatives at the
municipal level, especially in my riding of Richmond—Arthabaska which
I am honoured to represent.
However, I have a slight problem with what is going on tonight. I
feel people are a bit too quick to pat one another on the back. It seems
to me people are taking for granted that everything is back to normal in
Quebec and Ontario, which is not really the case. One should be
cautious. In an emergency debate, one has to carefully weigh one's
comments. True, people did a tremendous job, the armed forces were
absolutely stupendous, but my riding was outside the infamous triangle,
and it was the mayors of towns and villages who had to clamour for help.
Event today, there are still some villages that have been forgotten.
What is obvious is that following the natural disaster which hit
the provinces of Quebec and Ontario, and parts of New Brunswick, the
human tragedy is far from over and the economic tragedy is getting
worse. I believe we should not be blind to this. It is not right for us
to behave this way, going around patting one another in the back, saying
what fine people we are et thanking everybody when there are people in
the province of Quebec who cannot watch us because they are still
without power. There are people who cannot pay the banks, either because
that have not worked or because their business has been closed. We must
be cautious.
There are many flaws in the system. We talked about the banks
earlier. At the beginning of the ice storm, several branches did
not co-operate with storm victims. These people will have to
lodge complaints against Canadian bankers. After, the situation
changed, thank goodness.
There is a problem with insurance companies too. This is not
covered by wage insurance or mortgage insurance. Unfortunately, now that
the holiday season is over, people have received their credit card
statements, municipal taxes will soon be due. So people have a problem.
2205
We must admit there was some confusion. We realize that we were in
an emergency situation, but there was confusion. Earlier I had some
kind words for the minister of Human Resources Development, and I stand
by them. Nevertheless, there again, but certainly not consciously,
there was an incredible confusion. I would say that it was total chaos.
People did not know whether or not they were admissible to employment
insurance.
Nothing is settled yet. Some people applied for employment
insurance, but later received a phone call from a federal official
saying: “We are sorry, you should return the money, you were not
entitled to it”. There are situations like that in Quebec.
The problems created by the ice storm are far from over, but we will
have to work fast to deal with them.
There are different categories of disaster victims. There are the
residents of the infamous triangle. There are the victims of my riding
and there are what I would call the “indirect” victims, those who were
lucky enough to have power but worked for a company which, on Quebec
Hydro's request, had to stop its operations. These people did not get
any pay.
As the hon. member for Sherbrooke and my colleague from Shefford
were saying, we tend to forget these people. We must learn from all
this. Hundreds of phone calls were received by the constituency offices
located in the affected regions. What could we say to these people? We
were trying to help them, but the answer we gave them were often
inconsistent and unclear.
Yesterday, the human resources development minister tried to
clarify the situation and I must tell you that, in my riding, it is even
worse. What is clear is this: to get employment insurance, you must wait
at least two weeks, you must have stopped working for two weeks,
otherwise, you cannot get anything. It this clear? It is clear. You will
get a cheque faster, but your waiting period of two weeks will remain.
The message is clear.
This does not solve the problem. The solution that was suggested
does not apply at all.
Also, my colleague and I, with, of course, the hon. member for
Sherbrooke, who was asking daily about the situation, tried to see what
was coming. We knew that power was coming back, but not the money, not
the solutions.
We talked earlier about small businesses.
Programs must be set up quickly. Some people tell us that all the
investments Hydro Quebec will make will revitalize the economy, but,
unfortunately, small businesses, those that create economic growth in
Canada, will have some difficulty pulling through.
The working capital of these businesses is affected. Working people
are no longer motivated. We see cases where people have to negotiate,
have to work on weekends and have to do unpaid overtime. There is also
a matter of human dignity in this. No rule has been established.
I must tell you one thing. People were comparing the situation with
what was going on here in the capital. Thank goodness, public servants
have a good collective agreement. People were asked to stay home, but
they were getting paid.
In my own area, in the riding of Shefford and elsewhere, people were
asked not to report to work, but they did not have any money to get by.
Canada must be ready to cope with such disasters, but it was not.
Although I am sure everyone did their best.
The finance minister's prebudget consultation document contains a
resolution to maintain a balance. And the last resolution in the
document says everybody should be aware of the need for emergency
preparedness. The government has to realize that we need a special fund
with a specific set of rules for natural disasters. The document
mentions earthquakes, but it might as well mention floods, ice storms,
and so on.
The time has come for the government to implement its own
recommendations and be aware of what is going on.
People in my party and probably all hon. members in this House are in no
mood to hold another emergency debate next year over another ice storm,
drought or flood elsewhere. We should move quickly to remedy this
situation. We should pass legislation and heighten public awareness of
this issue.
Let us talk about insurance companies, for example. I mentioned
that a moment ago. Why did we overlook that? It should not be that
costly. It is simply a matter of amending policies to get limited
coverage of mortgages and salaries. Nobody ever thought about that.
2210
There is a whole structure we have to put in place. We never
thought about it but, after three disasters within two or three years,
I think it is time to stop talking. We must stop patting ourselves on
the back and try to find real solutions. Whether the reason is El Nino,
greenhouse gases or anything else, or whether it is punishment for our
sins, who knows, we will have to find real long-term solutions for those
who are suffering tremendous hardship.
I ask the members of this House to show solidarity and the
government to see that solutions can be implemented quickly so that, in
the event of another natural disaster, people will never have to go
through what they did during the ice storm.
Let us try to always remember one thing: it is the most vulnerable
who suffer the most. We hope the government will heed our call. Once
again, I thank all those who gave a helping hand and I hope the next
step will be to take concrete action, pass legislation and set money
aside to help those in need.
Mr. David Price (Compton—Stanstead, PC): Mr. Speaker, I thank my
hon. colleague for sharing his speaking time with me.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the people of my riding,
Compton-Stanstead, the people who gave their knowledge, their equipment
and their time to help their neighbours during the crisis.
The riding of Compton-Stanstead came out a little better than other
ridings in the Eastern Townships. I want to tell this House about the
people from our area who got together and formed groups to load trailers
with wood and drive to the stricken areas.
The municipality of Compton alone took in 60 people and fed and
housed them for almost three weeks. And I want to take a moment
to talk about the La Branche family from Saint-Isidore. They
wanted to help. So what did they do? They gathered 25 people and
went to cut and split wood. They had with five pick-up trucks and
two logging trucks. In one day they went through 10 of those
files that are used to sharpen chainsaw chains and, in fact, they
went through 15 chainsaw chains. In one day.
They got back home
at 9.30 at night, rested for a little while, and when I called
looking for some volunteers, Marc-André La Branche and his wife
got in their logging truck and drove 350 km. They arrived in
Saint-Hyacinthe at 3.30 in the morning to unload five truckloads
of wood that had just arrived from the riding of my friend and
colleague from Tobique-Mactaquac, in New Brunswick.
This is a story about people wanting to help people, not asking for
anything in return, but just helping their neighbours.
In fact, the help that came from Tobique-Mactaquac included donated wood
and truckers who donated their time. The gas too was donated.
So Canadians from areas that were not as badly hit came to help other
Canadians.
I want to thank everybody who helped with these donations and donations
of food, wood and generators and opened their homes to the victims.
I want to thank the Canadian forces personnel who gave people a
sense of security—that they were going to make it through.
I also want to thank the municipalities in the region who sent
their staff to help. The municipality of Coaticook had a hydro crew
there every day all through the crisis.
There was major damage to the riding's sugar bushes. In fact, one
of the most terrible things, one of the saddest things to see in the
aftermath of the ice storm was the tops of the maple trees broken off.
When spring comes and the thaw starts, those trees that are alive today
will bleed to death.
I travelled all through my riding and, like everyone who saw the
ice storm first hand, witnessed some savagely beautiful sights. It was
beautiful and yet unbearable.
2215
[English]
The damage is so extensive that many areas have not made an
accurate evaluation. All the areas that have been hit and the
victims, whether they are individuals, groups, organizations or
businesses, are still figuring out what they are going to do.
Some of them do not have power yet and still need help. The
government has taken measures to react quickly and respond to the
biggest and most obvious needs. For some, it is very hard to
find closure. The crisis is not over.
Existing programs are not enough to solve the problems. What we
need is a series of measures supported by the province and by
Canada to help all those who find themselves in a difficult
situation.
Municipalities should, for example, have a plan in place for
emergency situations and the province has a role to play ensuring
that municipalities are ready in time of need. When I say a
plan, I mean a realistic plan that takes people into account
because a crisis like the one we went through in Quebec is not
about governments, federal, provincial or municipal. It is not
about money or insurance. For some the end of the day has not
yet come and the lights are still not on, but at the end of the
day, the crisis like the one we went through is about people.
People count and we owe it to people of our ridings to do what we
can to see that everyone is better prepared.
How can we do this? First, like I mentioned, there needs to be
a physical plan. Second, and this takes foresight, this
government must establish an emergency contingency fund. This
fund must be established and allowed to grow.
If we think Canada will not see any more natural disasters we
would be irresponsible. For that reason we must establish an
emergency fund that can be accessed in times of crisis.
Third, there must be a clear appeal process that is outlined and
in writing. There are thousands of victims of this ice storm who
still do not know how they will come out of it and how it will
affect them. They are waiting on governments to let them know
how they will fare. That is unacceptable.
There should be some mechanism somewhere that tells people
exactly what they can expect to see in the way of aid or
compensation. It must be clear and it must be consistent.
Before I close I want to say another word about the Canadian
forces who did such an incredible job during the ice storm and
who invariably come to the aid of the government in times of
need. I want to thank the men and women who instilled confidence
in the communities just by being there.
Is it not a shame that this government does not give the
Canadian forces the same confidence and support that the Canadian
forces give their government? It is a shame that since 1994
Canadian forces have been cut by 23%.
This government does not properly equip our forces. This was
demonstrated most clearly when we had to ask the United States to
lend Canada cots and generators. How long can the Canadian
forces be expected to perform their jobs so admirably when the
government does not treat them with the respect they deserve?
[Translation]
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to all those who helped out.
[English]
Hon. John Manley (Minister of Industry, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for
Charleswood—Assiniboine.
I am very pleased to join my colleagues this evening in this
special debate arising from the ice storm and how Canadian it
really is to have a special debate based on the weather.
Noted journalist Robert MacNeil of the famous MacNeil-Lehrer
Report wrote in a short article on his native country:
“Unconsciously Canadians feel that any people can live in a land
where the climate is gentle. It takes a special people to
prosper where nature makes it so hard”.
This January Canadians were reminded of the challenges that we
face as a nation in mastering living in this harsh environment.
In this time of need for a country and for its people, Canadians
have responded with courage, generosity and determination.
At the peak of the blackout, more than 2 million users in
Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada were without power. Property
damages resulting from the storm have been estimated to be in the
range of $500 to $700 million and the economic costs of lost
production run as high in estimates as $5 billion.
Economic impacts are only part of the story. It is harder to
measure the discomfort, stress and pain of the tens of thousands
of people who were forced to abandon their homes and businesses
for days and weeks.
2220
I want to talk briefly about the people in my riding and how
they were challenged by the storm.
The community of Ottawa South was hit by the storm in much the
same way as were others in cities across eastern Ontario, Quebec
and parts of Atlantic Canada. Many experienced the loss of
power. Many spent nights sleeping in front of fireplaces to keep
warm or sought refuge in shelters. Many lost branches and trees
to the thick, heavy ice.
In my riding the area of Alta Vista was particularly hit hard,
with many trees in the neighbourhood falling victim to the storm.
Of course, we consider ourselves to be lucky, especially in
comparison to those in rural communities who have suffered
extensive damage to their homes and properties. Our hearts and
thoughts continue to be with them as they start the process of
attempting to salvage their livelihoods. I encourage everyone to
continue to do their part to support our rural neighbours.
I had my own firsthand experience seeing the level of damage in
the rural areas across eastern Ontario in a Department of
National Defence helicopter with my colleague, the Minister of
National Defence. I visited several rural and urban communities
to survey the devastation in my region.
During the fly-over in eastern Ontario I was struck, in
particular, by the sight of broken telephone poles, trees bent to
the ground, branches strewn across the snow.
[Translation]
We went to several towns and cities, including Metcalfe,
Brockville, Kingston and Perth. In every community, we were welcomed by
the local MP, the mayor and the city councillors, and everywhere we
went, representatives of the Department of National Defence briefed us
on the situation in the area.
In Metcalfe, I met an employee of the National Research Council,
which comes under my department. He was working as a volunteer, cutting
firewood alongside members of the Canadian forces.
In Kingston, where the storm really wreaked havoc, the city hall had
been turned into a shelter and the council room into a communications
centre.
During our helicopter tour, we saw one of the most upsetting scenes
at dusk, where only a few lights glimmered here and there in the dark,
while whole communities were getting ready to spend another night
without any heat.
[English]
Anyone who passed over or through eastern Ontario or Quebec
could see the enormity of the problem we were facing, but I was
heartened during my trip by the evidence of the different levels
of government working together to solve problems. I want to
thank, in particular, Bob Chiarelli, the regional chair of the
municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, for his quick action and
decisiveness in acting on this issue.
At the regional headquarters of the Red Cross I observed the
volunteers and staff undertaking a number of different tasks.
There was a Radio Net centred there which allowed the Red Cross
to keep in touch with people working in the field throughout
eastern Ontario. The headquarters was also acting as an inquiry
centre, taking requests for firewood, for food and for
generators.
During the first four days of the ice storm they distributed
over 1,500 blankets and fed 3,600 people each of those four days.
The Red Cross also acted as a match-making service of sorts,
linking people who needed things to people who were able to
donate them. They made over 500 of these matches. They found
people willing to provide shelter for others, cook meals for
people, and even those who were willing to provide milking cows
and hay for horses, or take strangers into their homes.
People in this community have also helped financially. The Red
Cross has raised locally in Ottawa around $500,000 from third
party contributions. Money was raised separately from a 1-800
line. Money was raised by people taking contributions at
Senators games, at local malls and at community centres.
I want to thank and acknowledge the volunteers and the staff for
their hard work during this period of crisis.
During my visit to the Red Cross headquarters I was struck by
the number of people who were volunteering their time to help
their fellow citizens.
The Red Cross registered 1,200 people to volunteer to help in
just the first two days of the storm.
I am happy to say that my own teenagers and their friends joined
in this effort.
2225
I would also like to mention the individuals, businesses and
other organizations in our community and across Canada who
contributed to the relief effort. From individual acts of
kindness to neighbours, to cash or in kind donations they have
all been instrumental to the effort that has gone into helping
Canadians through this crisis.
I also want to mention the few, and it is a very small number,
who used the crisis to take advantage of others. Through
Industry Canada's competition bureau consumers who believe they
have been victims of price gouging have been calling and
reporting their experiences. We will provide consumer
organizations with the intelligence gleaned from this phone line
so that consumers can be better informed of who to look to for
support and who to avoid giving their patronage to.
I am proud to say that my industry portfolio worked on many
fronts to help Canadians meet this challenge. Throughout the
state of emergency Industry Canada, along with other federal
departments, provincial authorities and the telecommunications
industry, contributed to the support of telecommunications
operations and to maintaining the telecommunications
infrastructure. This effort included co-ordinating the
deployment of generating sets, including four giant generators
transported from Vancouver to Montreal, enhancing the reliability
of vital cellular sites and supplying fuel for telecommunication
systems.
In addition to authorizing the use of microwave links by
Hydro-Quebec, Industry Canada authorized more than 50 radio
channels for use by DND, the Sûreté du Quebec and the Montreal
urban community police.
Industry Canada worked with utilities and Revenue Canada to
expedite the passage through Canadian customs of essential
equipment imported from the United States, for example telephone
poles coming in from Alabama. Industry sector branches monitored
the storm's impacts on their industry clients on a daily basis
and provided support by tracking sources of essential equipment.
[Translation]
In Saint-Hubert, the head office of the Canadian Space Agency
became an emergency shelter where people could spend the night, get a
warm meal and take a shower. All in all, the agency welcomed about 4,500
people, 350 of whom slept there and more than 4,000 people showed up to
warm up, take a shower or get a warm meal.
The Canada-Ontario Business Service Centre and its Quebec
counterpart called Info-entrepreneurs used their 1-800 numbers to
provide businesses with information about the help available to them.
Today, my colleague, the Secretary of State for the Federal Office
of Regional Development-Quebec, or FORD-Q, announced a series of
measures to help things get back to normal in the areas devastated by
the ice storm. Businesses who deal with FORD-Q will be able to postpone
the reimbursement of the contributions they received as part of the
department's programs.
[English]
The Business Development Bank of Canada announced flexible
repayment arrangements for small business clients in eastern
Ontario, Quebec and the Atlantic provinces who experienced severe
ice storm damage.
Four weeks later we continue to see the images on the news of
significant challenges, in particular in Quebec on the south
shore where there remains much to be done and there are still
many people without electricity.
The examples that I have given today and those that I have heard
from members who preceded me in this debate demonstrate a very
positive story, a story of Canadians from coast to coast rallying
to help their neighbours in a time of dire need. It is a story
of individuals, businesses, communities and governments pitching
in to help Canadians through a very difficult time.
Modern technology has brought many benefits to humanity. It has
made life in this harsh northern climate comfortable if not easy.
But the events of the past month have afforded us a salutary
reminder of the power of nature and our vulnerability in relying
on technology for our most basic needs.
I am happy to add that the difficulties we have endured together
have also reminded us that we are members of a large and generous
family.
Like any family, we have our share of differences, squabbles and
jealousies, but when times are difficult it is good to be part of
a big family whose members are willing to come to one another's
aid.
2230
Mr. John Harvard (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased
to join this debate on the federal role in helping people who
were hit hard by the recent ice storm. I am proud that the
federal government was quick off the mark in getting the ball
rolling and working with the provinces and Canadians in the
affected areas.
Once again the people of Canada have rallied around and helped
their neighbours. We have seen this spirit three times in recent
years; first with the flooding in the Saguenay region of Quebec,
then last spring with the Red River flood in my home province,
and now this ice storm.
Manitobans were extremely grateful with the help they received
last year and I am proud of the way they have responded to this
crisis. For example, Manitoba Telecom Services sent people and
equipment to help restore telephone lines. Manitoba Red Cross
helped gather supplies and money for storm victims. The
Mennonite Central Committee and the Winnipeg Free Press
started collections for money, blankets and clothing. Banks and
credit unions were also at the frontlines of assistance.
I could go on, but to be brief, I would like to thank
Manitobans, indeed all western Canadians for their support to the
communities hurting as a result of the ice storm.
The federal government also reacted quickly. Agriculture and
Agri-Food Canada was one of the departments whose proactive
efforts played a key role. The department started by taking
steps to help prevent further damage and to help those in crisis.
It followed up by working with provinces, industry organizations,
banks and others involved in the crisis.
The most immediate concern in the early hours and days of the
storm was getting power to farms, dairy, hog and poultry.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada staff worked closely with the
generator committee established by Emergency Preparedness Canada
to track down and assure the distribution of generators in both
Ontario and Quebec.
As well, the department provided and moved generators from its
research centres in St-Hyacinthe, Ottawa and southern Ontario.
The second biggest concern was getting the dairy processing
capacity back on line. The department worked with the Canadian
Food Inspection Agency, the Canadian Dairy Commission and the
Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to get
temporary authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration to export unpasteurized milk to the U.S. for
processing and return it to Canada.
In all, 1.35 million hectolitres of milk were moved to Michigan
and some milk was also moved out of Quebec to New Brunswick and
Prince Edward Island. Unfortunately about 13.5 million
hectolitres of milk had to be dumped because the trucks could not
get to the farms to pick it up, or if they could, there was no
power to run the pumps.
Thankfully these efforts and many others are now largely
complete with the return to more normal operations throughout the
regions affected by the storm. However, we cannot forget that
there are still thousands of people without power.
These storms affected a massive area with a huge concentration
of food production. At the height of the crisis, one-third of
Canada's milk supply was affected. In Quebec alone, 50% of milk,
40% of hogs and 60% of the maple industry were affected. Based
on the 1996 census of agriculture, there were 10,471 farms in the
area of eastern Ontario affected by the ice storm.
To date, much of the concern is focused on damage experienced by
dairy and maple producers. Approximately 25% of all farms in
this area raise dairy cows and 5% have taps on maple trees. Other
major commodities produced in the region include beef and poultry
with 44% of farms reporting beef cattle and 11% reporting hens
and chickens.
One of the more pressing concerns is getting the maple sugar
industry up and running again. We have only four to six weeks
before the sap begins to run in March in eastern Ontario and
Quebec. Some of the affected trees will produce sap this year
and then die. Some have been destroyed already and some will
only recover over time.
2235
In the interim the Minister of Human Resources Development
recently announced measures to help the maple sugar industry.
Producers have already begun to sign up and are being encouraged
to apply to their local HRDC offices.
Federal emergency assistance to hire labour for clean up is
available now under existing programs, including up to $40
million under the Employment Insurance Act for targeted wage
subsidies and job creation partnerships and up to $5 million
under youth initiatives.
I referred earlier to the disaster financial assistance
arrangements. It is important to understand that under DFAA it
is the provincial and territorial governments that must first
develop and implement disaster relief measures. They must
indicate what they consider to be eligible and make the
compensation payments to individuals and communities.
The minister issued a news release on January 21 that outlined
some of the damages that could be claimed under the DFAA
guidelines if provinces choose to cover them. The following
would be eligible for cost sharing with the provinces if the
provinces cover these costs: asset losses such as livestock;
costs incurred by farmers who had to dump their milk during the
crisis; reimbursement of the value of milk; costs of renting
generators and other storm related costs such as diesel fuel,
repairing assets damaged by the ice storm like barns or lost
inventories because of power outages, animals that died as a
result of the storm; and costs associated with moving
agricultural products out of affected areas for urgent
processing.
All those affected in rural communities are eligible for
compensation under provincial programs. Again it is up to the
provinces to decide what is covered and to do the actual
compensation. We will share the cost. Federal departments
quickly initiated the ongoing discussions with the provinces.
From the beginning Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada has been in
constant contact with key farm organizations and remains in
contact with the Quebec and Ontario ministries. The Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food has been in touch with his provincial
counterparts, ministers Julien and Villeneuve. I assure the House
that relationships with and among the provinces are very
positive. Regular contact is being maintained at the officials
level with Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
It is this government's objective to ensure interprovincial
equity by gathering information on what each province is planning
to cover. The provinces decide on the level and type of
assistance to communities and individuals. Officials from
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada have met and remain in contact
with the provincial ministries of agriculture in the affected
provinces. They are providing assistance to the provinces
regarding DFAA and possible subsidiary agreements. The federal
government continues to work with the provinces to identify gaps
in the assistance provided by DFAA to small businesses impacted
by the ice storm.
Quebec has experience with DFAA and the negotiation of
subsidiary agreements as a result of the Saguenay flood in 1996.
Ontario is inviting Quebec to meet and to share this knowledge
and experience regarding the DFAA and subsidiary agreements. The
federal government encourages the provinces to work together.
The full nature of the damage by the storm has still to be
tallied. It will take some time to do so but the federal
government will continue to work closely with the provinces and
farm organizations much as Canadians from across this country did
to help those affected by the storm.
Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I will
be sharing my time, as will all other members of the official
opposition from here on in.
I am pleased to continue the debate regarding the ice storm that
severely damaged eastern Canada including eastern Ontario, Quebec
and so on. It has been a tragedy of monumental proportions. It
is only appropriate that we in the House of Commons take time to
recognize the difficulties and the duress that many people in
this part of the country have been operating under.
At the same time we recognize how the country and the nation as a
whole rose to the occasion to deal with the issue, and to deal
with it in a wonderful Canadian way so that we could all stand up
afterward and be proud of the way we tackled this natural
disaster that befell this part of the country.
2240
As someone who represents a riding in Alberta, St. Albert, it
was hard to appreciate the difficulties that were building here
as the rain and ice continued to build up and the damage
continued to get worse and worse day by day.
I happened to be visiting Colonel Selby at the Edmonton garrison
on the day they received the order to move the troops. At that
time I started to appreciate the magnitude of the disaster which
had developed over a number of days in this part of the country.
It made me proud that the soldiers who reside in and around
Edmonton, many of whom reside in the city of St. Albert, were
moving out at a moment's notice to go to Quebec, Ontario and
other eastern provinces to lend their assistance, talent,
expertise and hard work to ensure that Canadians would suffer as
little as possible during this tragedy.
I would like to pay tribute to all the military personnel who
participated, especially those from St. Albert. They loaded all
kinds of equipment on trains and aircraft and willingly came here
at a moment's notice.
I remember watching on television how some members of the
military were helping hydro workers put back the power lines.
They said they did not have the expertise to go up the poles to
connect the wires but they could do whatever was required on the
ground to ensure that every available technician and qualified
personnel could get up the poles to restore the power.
It was wonderful to see Canadians from all across the country,
the military from western Canada, the lines men, Quebec Hydro and
Ontario Hydro, working together to do their best. They worked
around the clock in many cases. They worked until they were
exhausted to ensure their customers were well served and to
ensure that they were doing their best to bring heat, light and
power back to Canadians across a very large area.
We saw how difficult it was for the old people, and the young
too but especially the old, to leave their homes, but they had no
choice. It was cold and they were freezing. It must have been
very difficult for them to go into the shelters. My heart goes
out to them in their time of difficulty and for the trauma they
went through. We see it on television, people around the world
having to go into shelters because of natural disasters and civil
disorder, but we do not see it often in Canada. My heart goes
out to them, especially the old folk. They were trying to do the
best they could in these shelters, while at the same time
recognizing that many, many people gave of themselves. They set
their normal work aside, they set their normal lives aside to
pitch in.
My staff in Ottawa phoned me to say the office on Parliament
Hill was closing down because of the ice storm. I said, “Good,
get out there and do some good. Help your neighbours. Do what
you can”. When I give speeches back in the riding I tell people
it does not matter what you do for your community as long as you
do something. I can assure you that there was no end of things
that people could do during the ice storm here in Ontario and in
Quebec to alleviate the problems they and their neighbours had.
I would also like to recognize the farmers. They had a very
difficult time. They had milk cows that needed to be milked. As
someone who grew up on a farm many years ago, I remember how it
is to milk a cow by hand but that is not the way it is done
today. We need electricity to keep the machines running. The
poor cows suffered and the milk industry suffered and the farmers
suffered. They suffered not only the physical hardships but they
suffered the economic hardships too.
I am glad to hear the Minister of Industry talk about the
programs that are being made available to them, to other people
and to other industries that will allow them to get their lives
back in order.
2245
The worst weather can bring out the best in people. I think I
mentioned earlier that we heard stories of how communities helped
communities and how neighbours helped neighbours. It was just
wonderful to see Canadians pulling together as a nation and as a
community. Would it not be wonderful if we could have that
attitude prevail over all times so that we do not fight among
ourselves, we do not squabble among ourselves? We should work as
a community and as a neighbourhood.
Far too often we act as little islands unto ourselves. We go to
work and we go home. We ignore our neighbours. We do not even
know our neighbours. But when disaster strikes it brings out the
best in people and they pull together.
Those people across the country who were not affected gave of
themselves. They gave materials and money. They made donations
to try to make the problems less difficult for those in the storm
areas. I would also like to pay tribute to those people who gave
generators, money and clothing. That was important. We all
pulled together.
I was talking to the hon. member for St. Catharines today. He
told me that when the ice storm hit this part of the country and
farther east generators were sent from St. Catharines. Then it
was hit by the ice storm and had to import generators from the
United States. Many people pulled together to help each other.
It will take a long time for some people to recover. We have
heard that the maple industry has been very hard hit because the
trees have been destroyed.
I arrived here for the reopening of Parliament a few days ago
and I could not believe the devastation in and around Ottawa as I
was coming in from the airport. Trees were broken. Some of the
younger trees were bent over. The tops of them were on the
ground. Perhaps they will never recover. Broken trees were
everywhere. I was quite startled at seeing the extent of the
damage.
I cannot imagine how difficult it must have been for the people
to live through the tragedy of the ice storm of 1998.
As we put our lives back together, as the communities heal
themselves and as the trees grow back, the ice storm of 1998 will
be something that people will speak about for generations to
come. The young people of today will be able to tell their
grandchildren how they participated. As time goes by the
difficult memories will erode and the memories of how people came
together will come to the fore. They will look back at the ice
storm of 1998 and say “I was there. I worked hard. We as
Canadians pulled together and did a wonderful job for the
country.”
My heart goes out to those who suffered. I also pay tribute to
all Canadians who participated in helping this country survive
the ice storm. It was a wonderful day for those who
participated. I believe that Canadians will move forward from
here, having learned a bit about themselves, and that will be for
the better.
Mr. Rick Casson (Lethbridge, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is
with a great deal of pleasure that I join the debate tonight.
The winter of 1997-98 is not one we will easily forget. Mother
nature has reminded us of her tremendous power and of the
importance of men and women reaching out to each other on an
individual, community and national basis as we struggle to
rectify what nature has done to us.
The winter of 1997-98 has shown in its wrath extreme conditions,
from the out of control prairie fires in Alberta to the severe
ice storms in Ontario, Quebec and the maritimes. It is somewhat
of a story of fire and ice.
To what do we owe these natural disasters? Some say it is El
Nino. Some say it is man made, something we are doing to our
ecology, that the equilibrium is out of whack. Whatever it is,
one thing we must all agree on is that we showed once again what
Canadians can do together in the face of diversity.
We witnessed courageous acts in the last couple of years during
the floods in Manitoba and Quebec. People were helping people
with time, food, shelter, medical help, supplies, money, the list
goes on and on.
2250
When the ice storms of 1998 hit, the courage and determination
of our fellow Canadians shone brightly against the vast blackness
in powerless towns and cities. The ice storms of 1998 reminded
all Canadians of how dependent we have become on the comforts of
modern day living but, more important, of how much we have come
to depend on each other.
I would like to talk a bit about what happened in southern
Alberta in my neighbouring constituency of Macleod. A fire came
raging out of the foothills, swept out across the prairies and
devastated over 100 square kilometres of ranch land. It took out
homes and buildings, it destroyed livestock and wildlife, it
destroyed the feed supplies of all the ranchers in the area for
the entire winter and for the years to come. It destroyed miles
and miles of fence. It did this with a fury that few people have
ever remembered. It burned to a black ash an area that was once
green and vital. There were no feed supplies. There were no homes
for some. Buildings were gone. There was livestock lost. Wildlife
was gone. There was a bleak and disturbing sight left.
The next day as I toured the area the dust had already started
to blow off this fragile environment. The wind continued to blow,
the dust blew and it looked very much like the 1930s. One day the
air was black, the next day it was brown. This reminds us how
fragile this world is.
After the shock had worn off and the people had started to pull
together, it was amazing to look back and see what had happened,
all the municipalities that had pulled together, the neighbours
who had come in to fight the fires. Strangers came from miles to
help. That continued from the day of the fire on and on. I am
sure many of these stories have been repeated in this area during
the ice storms of this winter.
There are pictures of a gymnasium in Grantham full of clothes
and food and supplies donated from all over the country. People
like Joey Hurlburt from Fort Macleod organized relief measures.
The community of Claresholm raised over $100,000 in one day by
sponsoring a dance and an auction in a community event. I know
many of these stories will be repeated again and again in this
part of the country when the ice storm of 1998 is remembered.
Just this week we toured an area of some sugar bush out at
McDonalds Corners. It was shocking to see the devastation of the
maple trees and the rest of the forest and the economic impact
this is going to have on the woodlot operators, the farmers in
the area and certainly the maple syrup industry.
I would like to thank the room full of Wheelers for hosting us,
the room full of tired people who have been working steady during
the storm and since to try to replace their lives and their way
of life.
In Canada we are kind of spoiled by the bountiful fruits of our
land. In the maple syrup industry every year there is a harvest
which seems to just flow and is always there. But unlike other
crops, it is going to take many years to rejuvenate, as it
probably will for the scarred landscape in southern Alberta.
Given some time and some loving care, this can be replaced.
I have been encouraged by the support I saw when we were out at
McDonalds Corners and I have been encouraged by the support that
has been shown in southern Alberta, private industry, governments
of all levels, municipal, provincial, federal, coming together to
help.
The minister of agriculture told a rather stirring story earlier
when he saw 100 trucks lined up after the ice storm to help
repair the damage here, and they were all from across the line in
America. This truly was an international effort to help out what
has happened here. To those people who continue to suffer our
thoughts and our prayers certainly go out to them.
The immediate life threatening crisis is over and one of my
colleagues compared it to a funeral in a family where everybody
comes around to be with you at the time of crisis. A few days
later you are left alone to deal with your own thoughts and your
own problems.
2255
This is one thing that we have to guard against, that we do not
forget that this has happened. We have to continue to help these
people with the right amount of supply and effort going to them
to help restore their lives and to help them cope with this
terrible situation.
At this time I would like to extend heartfelt praise to our
military, to the troops who worked so hard and so unselfishly to
help out the people. The hydro workers worked day and night,
seven days a week until they just dropped in their tracks, along
with the people who came from across the border. It was an
incredible sight to witness. It certainly shows what people can
do when they get together and put forth effort.
Once the extent of the damage was realized, action was taken and
the donations started pouring in. There were emergency shelters,
food, donations of time and effort. There were people delivering
generators.
In our area of southern Alberta I know people would be leaving
the next day after the fire to go out to try to take care of
their livestock and to assess the damage. They would come home
and there would be a truckload of feed there for the livestock.
They never knew where it came from. It was not asked. No one
wanted to be recognized.
These are the kinds of stories that Canadians are famous for.
Canadians can support one another in times of need and never ask
for anything in return.
It is with deep empathy that I say to Ontarians, Quebeckers,
maritimers and those in southern Alberta that throughout their
ordeals we in western Canada watched the dread of the storm and
of the fire as they ran their course. As always, our prayers and
our thoughts were with them.
Our prayers are with the families as they try to cope with lost
loved ones. We can heal the wounds of broken power poles and
destroyed homes and grow new trees but we cannot replace the
people we love who were lost. Our hearts go out to them.
It is moments like these when the generosity and kindness of
Canadians helping Canadians from coast to coast to coast knows no
bounds that leave me feeling very proud to live in this great
nation and very proud to be a Canadian.
Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is
amazing that we have a debate about the ice storm tonight when in
fact my view is that this debate should be about electricity.
If we did not lose electricity in eastern Canada perhaps we
would not be having this debate at all. The loss of electricity
has caused most of the problems we are faced with.
It is incredible that electricity can be the cause of so much
happiness in our society. It helps us to refrigerate food in the
summertime. In the winter we cook with it. We use it in order
to shave, drive cars, trains and so on, but it can be the cause
of much misery once electricity is not around. It is an
extremely addictive source of energy, happiness but at the same
time a source of sadness.
I grew up in a home where we did not have electricity. We did
not have fridges. We did not have stoves. We did not have
televisions and we did not have electric shavers or cars. We
managed.
That was about 35 or 40 years ago. When this ice storm hit, the
first thing that came to mind was what happened 35 years ago. It
hit me. I said, my God, no way in this day and age would I be
able to live like I was living 35 years ago.
I woke up and felt that something really needed to be done. I
do not want to congratulate the government. I do not want to
congratulate any department of federal, provincial or municipal
government because frankly we are each doing our job. We are
doing what is expected of us as elected officials, as levels of
government, departments, ministries and municipalities.
2300
I congratulate ordinary people who came together to do
extraordinary things. On the very same day that the ice storm
hit and the electricity disappeared, a radio announcer indicated
that my office was receiving blankets to assist one of the
outlying areas. Within minutes of the announcement a car pulled
up in front of my office and a lady walked in with a blanket she
had in her trunk. She wanted to do something.
This story repeated itself over and over. In a matter of three
and a half days or so we had in excess of 23 trucks, vans and car
loads of contributions from people throughout the community who
wanted to help those in need. They filled my small office on
Booth Street. In excess of 250 volunteers phoned my office from
eight o'clock in the morning until eight o'clock at night to give
their names. They wanted to assist.
Those are the people I want to thank. They made a difference in
our community, in our regions and in our country. This is what I
call a true Canadian. The devastation ranged in the hundreds of
millions of dollars. I said to myself that it would take months
and months before all the poles would be repaired and electricity
restored.
I have seen devastation in other countries. I know the time and
effort it takes to reconstruct damage done by man or by nature. I
was extremely proud of the speed and the way in which individuals
in different departments and at different levels of government
came together to respond to the needs of the people and to
reconnect the electricity in our region and in other regions
across the country. This made me proud of the country and the
people who live here.
Rather than talking about the ice storms and what nature has
done we should be celebrating the fact that in times of crisis
Canadians have passed the test and communities have come together
to make it happen.
I want to thank some individuals such as the member for
Glengarry—Prescott—Russell. He did an exemplary job in pulling
his people together. He tried to do everything he could, day in
and day out, to make it easier for the people of his riding.
In my constituency of Ottawa Centre there were problems. Our
electricity was restored in a few days. My heart went out to the
people living in the outskirts. Some of them are still suffering
the consequences of the ice storm and lack of electricity.
In closing, I thank my staff, Liz Johnston, Tim Sen, Paula
Franco, Alison Deakin and Shari Duffin. They are ordinary
people who have done extraordinary things during a time of crisis
in my constituency. They manned the office seven days a week to
assist people in my constituency, in the city and in the
outskirts of our region.
I thank them publicly.
2305
I also thank every person who made a difference, in particular
Mr. Bob Chiarelli and his staff, the people at the region, the
municipalities, the Ottawa police, other police forces, hydro
workers and our neighbours to the south, the Americans. At the
time when they had a crisis in New York State it was moving to
see them coming here to give a hand to people in eastern Canada,
Quebec and eastern Ontario. I thank them publicly for their
assistance as a neighbour in time of crisis.
I am proud to be a Canadian and I am proud to live in and to
represent such a wonderful community.
[Translation]
Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, true, we in
northern Quebec, in Abitibi, were not affected by the ice storm, but I
must tell you that when I got back to my Val-d'Or residence last
Saturday, January 10, around 11 p.m., after an evening that my wife and
I spent with the people of Barraute and Senneterre, I noted several
phone calls on the device next to my telephone.
In fact, I took note of all the calls I received Saturday night,
and on Sunday morning, January 11, around 8:30 a.m., I was back at my
rigding office in Val-d'Or.
I took the time to immediately call back some numbers and after dialling
the first one, that is, 824-3326, I recognized the voice of somebody I
know very well, that is, Réginald Béland, from Val-Senneville, who is a
fabulous volunteer of the Val-d'Or area and who told me of his concern
to help the ice storm victims.
Together with him and on his advice, I immediately took action,
Sunday morning, around 9 a.m., I called Jean-Marc Lavoie, of Domtar
Corporation, at his Val-d'Or residence. Further to our discussions and
at my request, Mr. Lavoie called me back to confirm that Domtar in
Val-d'Or was giving the people of the south 8 to 10 vans filled with 2 by
4s, that is, dry wood for the people of the south—some kind of
firewood. These vans were 46 feet long.
So, on Sunday morning, thanks to quick decision making by Domtar
executives in Val-d'Or, we were ready to help the people affected by the
storm.
It is true that we live in the North and that we were spared, but
we made it a priority to ensure the security and protection of the
people in southern Quebec. As we know, in an emergency situation,
municipal governments are on the front lines and we immediately noticed
the work done by the Vallée-de-l'Or and Abitibi RCMs.
Many Abitibians were part of the solidarity movement. They may live
far from Montreal and the St. Lawrence River, but they nonetheless felt
affected by the disaster that hit further south. In no time, people from
the Abitibi came out in droves to help their fellow citizens.
Several municipalities and organizations released their employees
and sent volunteers to help collect and ship non-perishable food,
firewood, generators and other essential items. Besides municipalities
and community organizations, several companies from Abitibi also did
their part by providing services, sharing their expertise, transporting
goods, making donations, etc.
The Val-d'Or ham radio club launched its Operation Chaleur to
collect funds in collaboration with area firefighters. Hydro-Québec sent
57 people, or almost all its linemen from Abitibi and James Bay, to
areas without power.
Techno Lignes Abitibi of Sullivan sent eight work crews in the
Laurentian region to assist Hydro-Québec. Eighteen workers from
Barraute, Amos and Val-d'Or worked on the construction and maintenance
of power and telephone lines.
2310
The people of the federal riding of Abitibi answered massively to
the ice storm operation launched throughout Quebec by the government of
Quebec and Premier Lucien Bouchard. There is one fact that must not be
kept unknown in Quebec: it is the agreement passed with the management
of various companies.
I wish to mention in particular the general manager of Kepa
Transport, Mr. Gilles Lapointe.
It must be mentioned that, in cooperation with the Chisasibi Crees, this
company owned by the James Bay Crees sent a 46-foot trailer loaded with
45 cords of firewood to the Saint-Hyacinthe area, over 4,000 kilometres
there and back—2,000 kilometres each way—, free of charge, just to
help the people.
I would like to thank the James Bay Crees as well as the Chisasibi,
Mistissini, Waswanipi and Oujé-Bougoumou Crees for the help they gave
the people in the south.
As for the sponsoring by the Vallée-de-l'Or regional municipality,
the firewood blitz started immediately on January 12.
Loading points were set up in Val-d'Or, Senneterre, Malartic,
Rivière-Héva, Dubuisson, Vassan and Val-Senneville, thanks to the
excellent co-operation of Louis Bourget, director general of the
Vallée-de-l'Or RCM, and Yvon Frenette, member of the Val-d'Or
city council. We can report tonight on the results of Operation
Ice Storm in Abitibi.
The Val-d'Or area of the Vallée-de-l'Or RCM sent more than 80
volunteers, 39 46-foot trailers full of firewood, one ten-wheeler and
one other truck. Domtar, which had told me on Sunday morning that it
would provide eight to ten trailers, ended up providing 19 46-foot
trailers to help people in the southern part of the province. It was all
good, dry firewood. From the Senneterre area, 12 trailers; from another
area of the region, eight trailers; and from Val-Senneville, one
trailer.
According to the reports from the municipalities served by the
RCM and from Domtar, that firewood was delivered to
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Venise-en-Québec, Hudson, Rougemont,
Granby, Vaudreuil, Dorion, Saint-Polycarpe, Carignan, Beloeil,
Chambly, Mont-Saint-Grégoire, Farnham, Saint-Hyacinthe,
Saint-Athanase and Iberville.
We can also mention that, throughout Operation Ice Storm, we had
extraordinary companies who gave volunteers free meals all week long,
namely Rôtisserie Saint-Hubert, Val-d'Or Pizzeria, Métro Supermarché
Pelletier Inc., Cafétéria chez Vic, Tim Horton, PizzaBella and Brasserie
Le Pub.
We also received donations from everywhere. The volunteer work that
was done and the help that was provided are also worth mentioning. A
trailer cannot go anywhere without a tractor. The following companies
provided trailers and a driver, free of charge, to deliver firewood to
the areas affected by the storm further south.
There was Cabano Kingsway, Papineau Transport, Kepa Transport, Transport
Maybois, Transport du Nord-Ouest, Transport Bergeron, and R.S. Métal.
Tractors were provided by the following companies: Entreprises René Paré
et fils, Excavation Émilien Fournier, Transport René Hardy de La
Morandière, Construction Val-d'Or, and Alain Guillemette.
Chapter 2218 of the Knights of Columbus from Amos, a town in the
Abitibi regional county municipality, also participated in Operation Ice
Storm. They sent some 900 cords of firewood to the southern part of the
province. Four generators were provided. Donations totalling $20,850
were made. A whole trailer and 169 boxes of non-perishable food were
sent. That is 65,000 pounds or 33 tons of food.
I also wish to thank the media, both print and electronic, for
their unconditional support. Without them, the relief effort resulting
from all this publicity would not have been possible.
Citizens, along with several organizations and businesses from the
Abitibi regional county municipality, were actively involved and many
donations were made.
2315
It is an honour for me to thank the people of Abitibi, those from
the municipalities, the health sector, the regional county
municipalities, the Crees of James Bay, Air Creebec, Transport Canada,
who throughout the ice storm and its terrible aftermath, worked
relentlessly to help with wood, lodgings, donations, food and equipment.
A big thank you to all the volunteers, transport companies,
Hydro-Quebec and Télébec workers, and all those who unselfishly
gave their time and efforts. I thank the people of Abitibi whose
generosity reminds us of the strength and beauty of the
solidarity of Canadians in Quebec.
The people of Abitibi are sending a message to their neighbours to
the south. They want to tell them: “Congratulations for your courage,
we are thinking of you, all our best”.
Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I will be
sharing the time allotted to me with my colleague, the hon. member for
Châteauguay.
Quebec is going through the most serious socio-economic disaster of
the century. The media provided steady coverage during the worst part of
the crisis to show the solidarity displayed for Quebec, Ontario and New
Brunswick, the three provinces that were the hardest hit by the storm.
At this time, I would like to thank the major leaders who
distinguished themselves during this crisis. First and foremost,
Premier Bouchard of Quebec, who has shown outstanding leadership
in co-ordinating all emergency and solidarity operations.
I also thank also Hydro-Québec chairman André Caillé, who, with his
team, provided Quebeckers with hourly updates on the situation, while
looking after those affected by the storm and immediately taking the
necessary steps to have the Quebec hydroelectric power system repaired
and rebuilt.
I thank the mayors, who, while unprepared, brilliantly rose to the
challenge, those in charge of the Quebec emergency preparedness
organization and the many public health workers.
I also want to mention the massive involvement of police
forces—the Sûreté du Québec, the RCMP, municipal police and
Canadian Armed Forces—in providing assistance and, more
importantly, a sense of security to the victims.
I would like to mention the immediate response of employees of
American hydroelectric companies, who did not hesitate to come and
help out Hydro-Québec linemen. They were impressed by the warm
welcome they received from storm victims, and especially by their
great understanding in the face of the crisis.
As well, I was deeply touched by the gestures of solidarity
from Quebec, whether they took the form of collecting wood or food
supplies or responding to the numerous requests from the Red Cross
and emergency measures organizations.
I pay tribute here to the initiative taken by the people of
Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. The images transmitted on national
television showed us the great generosity that characterizes this
lovely region of Quebec.
I would now like to give you a few examples of solidarity from
the riding of Lotbinière. More than 1,000 cords of wood were
collected in one week.
And here is an interesting anecdote. On Sunday, January 18, under
the direction of mayor Jean-Guy Bergeron and police officer Gérald
Laganière, dozens of volunteers turned out to collect 1,200 pounds
of meat in 90 minutes at Laurier-Station. Now that is something.
Another example of generosity was the 86-year-old woman who
handed over the contents of her pantry to a volunteer. She said:
“Tomorrow I will be going shopping again, I have the means and,
above all, I have electricity in my house”. These generous actions
forged new ties of solidarity. A ceremony will be held next Friday
evening to thank all these volunteers from the riding of Lotbinière
for their exceptional contribution.
However, although the media have focused during the last few
days on the number of subscribers to whom power has been restored,
we must not forget the impacts and consequences of this ice storm
that have not yet all been tallied up, although we know that they
could reach hundreds of millions of dollars.
2320
If we take a more rational look at such a crisis, we can divide it
into three phases. The first one is the reaction phase, which is the one
we have been witnessing since the crisis began, and which hon. members
have been describing since the beginning of this special debate.
We have now reached phase two, which is a more in-depth assessment
of the situation. The comments we hear and the news reported by the
media are just the tip of the iceberg.
In this sad assessment, we must not forget the businesses which
have been paralysed since the beginning of the crisis and which are on
the verge of bankruptcy, as well as the thousands of workers who are not
working.
The Montérégie and central Quebec regions are currently going
through harrowing times. Hundreds of people wonder whether they will
still have jobs tomorrow.
Moreover, we must not forget other businesses located outside the
triangle of darkness. I am referring to those businesses and their
employees who, following Hydro-Quebec's requests, closed their
operations for one, two and even three weeks, thus incurring major
losses.
The full evaluation of this catastrophe is not yet completed, but
we can already start thinking about the third phase, which has to do
with the measures necessary to provide greater assistance to storm
victims.
Even if negotiations are already under way, storm victims are
anxious. They are eager to find out about turnaround times and, more
importantly, about the new moneys to be allocated to deal with the
crisis.
The ice storm is not a regional or provincial problem, but a
national one.
It is, therefore, time to make major decisions of solidarity which
must involve both the federal government and the governments of the
three provinces affected by this national crisis.
Now we come to some solutions and suggestions for the federal
government. First of all, we repeat our request to the Minister of
Human Resources Development that he clarify, for once and for all,
his position with respect to the waiting periods for employment
insurance and the payments in advance which his department has
promised to make. Even after his statements this week, even here
in the House, the ice storm victims still have trouble
understanding the minister's logic in the situation they are
experiencing.
The maple syrup producer assistance program, which will hire
the unemployed for pruning and replacement of the collecting tubes
in the maple trees, is not sufficient.
The minister would need to make this program more flexible so that
more skilled and more efficient labourers could be hired so that
better work would be done in storm-ravaged areas.
In the aftermath of this third natural disaster, the federal
government now needs to give more serious attention to the
greenhouse effect, which constitutes one of the determining factors
behind this country's climate changes.
It is time for it to respond to the insistent calls for action
from the environmental groups. Experts had warned us of the
dangers of these climatic changes. We have borne the brunt of
them, we have experienced them.
On behalf of the population, I am therefore demanding that the
government be more stringent when this entire matter of greenhouse
effects is debated. The federal government must take stronger
action.
In closing, I again congratulate all those who took part, at
home in Quebec, and throughout the country, in the finest
undertaking of solidarity of the 20th century.
Mr. Maurice Godin (Châteauguay, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased
to take part in this special debate on the ice storm for a number
of reasons. First, I myself suffered the effects of the storm for
seven days; five days in my office, and in the riding between 3 and
28 days. I will therefore speak about the riding of Châteauguay.
I will give my impressions of the storm as it unfolded, the
strengths I noted and the areas we will have to improve for the
well-being of the population in the future.
There are, in my riding, three agglomerations that also form a
triangle. To the west, Châteauguay, Léry, Mercier and
Saint-Isidore; to the east, Saint-Constant, Sainte-Catherine and
Delson; and to the south, Saint-Mathieu, Saint-Rémi,
Saint-Édouard, Saint-Michel and Saint-Jacques-le-Mineur.
2325
Although the Châteauguay-Ste-Catherine points of the triangle
were without electricity, the major damage to Hydro-Québec's
systems was in the municipalities of the St-Rémi point of the
triangle, and it was these municipalities that were without
electricity the longest. I therefore pay tribute to the mayors of
the riding of Châteauguay, who worked tirelessly for their
municipalities.
I sympathize with all these storm victims. I found seven days
without electricity long and difficult. I therefore have a great
deal of respect for those who lived with this problem for four
weeks and longer.
On behalf of the constituents of Châteauguay, I would like to
extend my sympathy to the families in Quebec and in other provinces
who lost loved ones during this storm through illness or accident.
I would also like to thank all the volunteers, often without power
themselves, who directed operations and brought assistance to the
most disadvantaged in our community in the large shelters.
Thank you to both levels of government for quickly putting
disaster funding in place. Thank you to the army, to police
forces, to municipal councils, to performers, to people from other
areas, and also to the employees of Hydro-Québec. Having worked
with that organization for 35 years, I know first hand what
motivates these people: pride in serving their fellow citizens.
Rebuilding a network covering several kilometres in a few weeks
calls for determination, courage, hard work and pride.
I remember the smile on the faces of these two linemen, Messrs Laberge
and Marien, and their pride at having restored power to my home, at 5.30
a.m. on Tuesday.
I thank the people in charge of communications, Messrs Crête and
Hébert, for their availability and for patiently hearing my demands.
When power was restored, my staff and I acted as liaison between the
victims and Hydro-Québec and we visited every affected site as well.
In 1962, I had seen another ice storm, as an employee, but it was
not as bad as this one, because the transmission systems between the
distribution centres had not been affected. So, I knew that, however
extensive the damage to the network, Hydro would act methodically and
diligently to restore power to all users.
Hydro-Québec chairman André Caillé and Premier Bouchard were great
at reassuring the public with their leadership and control over the
situation. This was a serious situation, but at no time did these men
let on that there was any doubt in their minds. We can say that, when
Quebec is allowed to make its own decisions, it produces excellent
results. This is a most interesting finding, given the major decisions
that lay ahead.
The municipalities have done a great job, in spite of the fact that
their emergency plans were not always up to date. Emergency planning was
deficient in some instances, but one would have had to work miracles to
respond to requests for assistance from 300 municipalities all at once
with a staff of only 40 or so employees.
In the future, responsibilities in that area should be devolved to
the RCMs. The fact of the matter is that those municipalities that had
first line equipment and whose emergency plans were up to date made it
through pretty well.
It is too early to assess the cost of the losses in the riding of
Châteauguay; estimates are currently being made. One thing is sure
however: almost no one was spared by this disaster. I am thinking of
employees, farmers, businesses, sugar bush operators, greenhouse growers
and the municipalities in particular.
2330
Let us hope that the programs the government is proposing will
respond to the needs of the people without too much delay, that the
1998 budget surplus will be used to compensate losses and not to
create new health and education programs. The people need it.
Unfortunately, the federal-provincial accord on disaster
assistance was not the only official voice for these programs
throughout the crisis. In recent days, a number of federal
ministers have felt the need to propose assistance programs to the
public that do not always meet a need.
Their guidelines were very muddled or did not reflect the remarks
of their officials, such as the employment insurance program on the
subject of the grace period and the waiting period. The members of
the Bloc Quebecois will draw this to the attention of the minister
tomorrow at noon.
In closing, I want to tell the people in my riding that they
may contact my riding office for further information. I will be
happy to give them all the support I can in solving their problems.
Quebec will come away enriched from this exercise of
fraternity, generosity and solidarity. To the great builders, many
thanks, the future is ours.
[English]
Mr. Clifford Lincoln (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.): Mr.
Speaker, I would like to give notice that I will share my time
with my colleague from Nepean—Carleton.
[Translation]
Despite the late hour, I wanted to share in the discussion of
this motion on the ice storm. I wanted to express my profound
gratitude to the people and the officials of my riding for their
devotion and their remarkable community spirit through these
difficult days, which forced so many people to leave their homes
for shelters.
The fact that we overcame this crisis in each of our regions
in total harmony and discipline is thanks to the values of
generosity and mutual support in our communities.
[English]
I would like to pay a very special tribute to all my fellow
citizens of Lac-Saint-Louis, but above all to our mayors without
whose leadership, commitment and efficiency the hardship suffered
by so many would have been far more significant. May I express my
profound thanks to Mayors Malcolm Knox of Pointe Claire, Peter
Yeomans of Dorval, John Meaney of Kirkland, Roy Kemp of
Beaconsfield, Anne Myles of Baie d'Urfé, Bill Tierney of St. Anne
de Bellevue and George McLeish of Senneville.
[Translation]
I would also like to thank Marcel Morin, the mayor of Pierrefonds.
A small part of this city is in my riding, the largest part being in the
riding of my colleague from Pierrefonds—Dollard.
[English]
May I also thank all the city councillors in all our towns and
municipalities, the city managers and their staff, all of whom
carried out sterling work. I do not want to forget our
firefighters, our police men and women and all those officials
who performed so tirelessly and courageously in extremely
difficult and often dangerous conditions.
May I say a very special word of thanks to the thousands of
volunteers all across our cities and towns who helped to make
their fellow citizens safe and comfortable. They deserve our
immense gratitude.
[Translation]
I visited several shelters in my riding, and the spirit of
co-operation and generosity that I saw there was remarkable.
Everybody seemed patient and cheerful despite the inconvenience.
I want to mention the remarkable work done by our hospitals. Having
spent some time at the veterans hospital in Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, I
was able to see how the staff and volunteers reacted to this crisis with
compassion, dedication and efficiency. An entire wing of the hospital,
which had been closed up to that time, was reopened and reequipped to
receive senior citizens from several regions.
2335
A shelter was set up for veterans and their families who were
driven from their homes by the storm. Some staff members worked close to
a week without respite. The hospital, which usually serves about 2,000
meals a day, served more than 5,000 meals a day during the crisis.
One evening, I talked to three Hydro-Quebec workers who told me
they had worked 16 hours a day every day under virtually impossible
conditions. All these hydro workers from Quebec as well as from other
provinces and from the United States deserve our gratitude.
[English]
The Canadian Armed Forces performed way beyond the call of duty.
All the mayors in my riding had only effusive praise for the
tremendous dedication and efficiency of all the members of the
armed forces. On behalf of the citizens of Lac-Saint-Louis may I
thank them most warmly as I do the Prime Minister, the Minister
of National Defence and all the ministers and their staff for
their contributions to the substantial federal effort.
[Translation]
Next Monday, I will attend a meeting with provincial MPs and the
mayors from my riding to review the crisis in order to see what can be
learned from it and to make recommendations that I will pass on to the
ministers concerned.
Among the suggestions that we will be examining is a possible
governor general citation that could be awarded to volunteers and other
individuals who distinguished themselves through their contribution
during the crisis.
[English]
It would be an excellent idea also if through Trees Canada young
trees were provided by the federal government to the
municipalities for distribution to citizens for reforestation. It
seems that among the deciduous trees, white oaks and lindens
resisted the most strongly to the ice storm.
Many lessons will result from the ice storm. Municipalities
which were well prepared with emergency action plans, with
trained personnel and with adequate emergency equipment coped
with amazing efficiency despite the tremendous hurdles and
difficulties. However in outlying areas and small municipalities
the crisis caught many unprepared.
We came out of this experience with the realization that we have
a considerable task ahead so as to fully prepare our communities
for a sudden emergency and to maximize the co-ordination of our
efforts.
[Translation]
We must certainly plan a greater diversification of our power grid
and support systems in case of a crisis.
[English]
Climate change and El Nino are not a myth as the ice storm and
the recent severe weather disruptions in California and Florida
have shown. We have no choice but to be fully prepared for the
worst. Serious difficulties and crises have a way of bringing
out the very best in all of us. Suddenly we are all human beings
and fellow citizens sharing a common cause facing the hardship.
Gone are the quarrels, political and otherwise, which tend to
divide us so often day in and day out.
So amid the discomfort and hardships suffered by so many, let us
remember the moments we have shared in mutual generosity and
friendship. Let us celebrate our communities and the remarkable
community spirit which inspires them.
The crisis has shown me that the great values that make Canada a
special country are there to the fore.
Mr. Speaker, may I once again thank all the volunteers and all
those who helped to make our lives so much better during the
crisis.
Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
am certainly very pleased to participate in the discussion this
evening on the ice storm. It is an event that few of us who were
close to it will ever forget.
I am sure my riding of Nepean—Carleton was like many others
that were hit.
Some areas in Nepean got away with a power interruption of a few
minutes or hours. Other areas, like the rural southern part of
my riding which contains the townships of Osgoode, Rideau and
Goulbourn, were down for more than two weeks.
2340
The ice storm was a rather graphic lesson for all of us about
the power of nature. Just when we think we have a measure of
control over our environment, along comes a storm like this to
drive home the message that our systems are not fail safe, that
we are vulnerable and that we better have a healthy respect for
mother nature.
The evidence of the devastation wrought by the ice storm was
very much apparent with hydro poles that had snapped off and
trees that were bent and broken. I counted 10 to 12 hydro poles
down on a short stretch of Donnelly Road in the southern part of
my riding. On the southeastern corner around Marionville the
steel towers carrying high voltage lines had crumpled into heaps
of twisted metal one after another after another.
Inasmuch as the damage was clearly visible by day it was only
really at night that one got a full appreciation of the problem.
I can clearly recall driving out of Barrhaven in the Nepean area
on Thursday, January 8 to visit a friend in Manotick and to make
a few other stops in the rural area. This fellow had sent his
family off to a hotel and was hunkering down with a transistor
radio, numerous candles and a wood stove. He was determined to
make sure his pipes did not freeze and to maintain a vigil on the
home front. He was not unlike many others who were beginning a
routine like that.
Driving south in my riding that evening was extremely eerie.
Everything was in darkness, no street lights, no traffic lights
and very little traffic. The odd candle could be seen but even
these were few and far between. I thought one soldier who had
done a tour of duty in Yugoslavia summed it up pretty well when
he arrived on the scene. He said that the place looked just like
Sarajevo without the bullets.
During the course of the ice storm I made it a point to travel
around my riding. I visited the shelters and worked with
municipal officials wherever I could to provide assistance and
information. In the face of all the hardship and destruction, it
was encouraging to see so many people demonstrating strength,
resourcefulness and generosity all the while maintaining a sense
of humour.
On one of my road trips to the southeastern corner of my riding
there was a banner up along the main street of the small village
of Kenmore which read “10 days and counting, never surrender.
The Kenmore Quilting and Chainsaw Club”. I saw a lot of people
with a lot of spirit during the ice storm but the people in
Kenmore definitely take the prize for originality and good
humour.
It was the average person who really made the difference in the
aftermath of the storm. These volunteers did an absolutely
incredible job. They were the unsung heroes of the ice storm. I
saw them in the shelters cooking and serving the meals, washing
dishes, tidying up, comforting the elderly, playing with kids who
were getting a little stir crazy and who just wanted to go home.
Volunteers were out transporting large generators from farm to
farm and hooking them up, making sure cows would be milked and
watered.
There were those who organized neighbourhood watches to ensure
people's property was protected. There were those who checked on
elderly people and delivered firewood and those who made sure
basements did not flood by providing small generators for sump
pumps.
In the little village of Vernon there were people like Roy, Bill
and Jeff Porteous, Cecil van Wylick, Roy Mills, Tom Dalgliesh and
Hubert Bray working away in the kitchen of the Vernon Community
Centre where people like Heather Bellinger, Carol Acres and Kay
Porteous were preparing thousands of meals.
The same situation with ordinary people rising to the challenge,
pulling together and helping each other was played out day after
day throughout my riding in communities like Richmond, Munster
Hamlet, Ashton, North Gower, Kars, Burritts Rapids, Osgoode,
Greely and Metcalfe.
Not only did neighbours help neighbours but communities helped
other communities. Barrhaven, which was an area relatively
unscathed by the ice storm, mobilized. The Cedarview Alliance
Church set to work preparing meals for hydro crews and ended up
shipping canned goods and hot meals to shelters in Kars, Osgoode,
Vernon and other places. A number of people working in the
shelters made it a point to say to me, “David, when you get back
to Nepean, be sure to thank those people in Barrhaven for us”.
The people at the municipal level in my riding really excelled
during the ice storm. As I am sure is the case elsewhere, each
municipality in our area has an emergency preparedness plan.
During the 10 years I spent in municipal government our emergency
preparedness plan spent a lot of time collecting dust between
periodic and infrequent reviews. However, it was nice to see
that when a real emergency hits, these plans generally work
pretty well.
They definitely are not absolutely perfect in every respect and I
anticipate there will be some fine tuning with some of them, but
generally they did the job that they were intended to do.
2345
I would be remiss if I did not mention some of the people at the
regional and local levels who put in very long hours, working
around the clock in some cases, and who did exceptional work. Bob
Chiarelli, our new regional chair, and his chief administrative
officer, Merv Beckstead, were first rate. Doug Thompson, the
mayor of Osgoode, and his CAO, Moira Winch, were superb. In
Rideau township Mayor Glenn Brooks and his CAO, Gary Dillabough,
were excellent. Mayor Janet Stavinga and her CAO, Bob Townend,
did a fabulous job. Finally, in my own municipality of Nepean,
Mayor Mary Pitt and her CAO, Bob Letourneau, also did a great
job.
I know it has been mentioned before in this discussion but I
will mention it again. The personnel of the Canadian forces made
us truly proud and they have our profound gratitude. Brigadier
General Hillier, who was co-ordinating the military effort of the
region, sensed the level of appreciation when he said that while
he recognized that the people of Ottawa—Carleton were becoming
attached to his troops, he wanted to caution us that they were
not available for adoption.
The troops were everywhere, in trucks, in helicopters and on
foot. They cleared debris, worked alongside hydro workers and
police and provided a level of comfort and security that people
desperately needed. More than once I heard people say thank God
for the army.
When Major Bernie Derible of the Royal Canadian Dragoons packed
up his troops and left the village of Metcalfe there were people
on both sides of the street waving emotional goodbyes. The local
firefighters and the Dragoons changed colours and then the
firefighters lined the street to give them a salute as the army
trucks rolled by. They were given a send off befitting an army
of liberation. Their work, their energy and their enthusiasm
certainly did not go unnoticed in my riding.
While life has returned to normal for most people, for some the
nightmare of the ice storm continues. One of my constituents,
Mr. Peter Raats, had his four year old barn collapse on January
23 from the combined weight of ice and a new accumulation of
snow. His insurance company refuses to cover his loss. During
the storm he milked 200 head of cattle by hand until he got a
generator and even then it only worked for one day before it
broke down. Mr. Raats' latest setback occurred on Sunday. While
tearing down a part of the collapsed barn he fell through the
roof and broke his hip.
In ice storm fashion, his neighbours have rallied to his side.
Led by a local RCMP officer, Gary Clements, a special support
fund for Mr. Raats has been set up at the Royal Bank in Metcalfe.
For those who might be interested in helping out with a donation,
the account No. is 5012976. I should add that the fund will be
independently audited and any donations exceeding the target
amount of $200,000 will be turned over to the Red Cross.
Donations of voluntary labour to help rebuild Mr. Raats' barn are
also certainly welcome.
In closing I would simply like to say a sincere thank you to all
those both inside and outside my riding of Nepean—Carleton who
assisted in the relief and reconstruction effort. The response
of Canadians from coast to coast was absolutely magnificent. I
know that the sense of community in my riding was strong before
the ice storm. I can assure this House that it is even stronger
today.
Mr. Werner Schmidt (Kelowna, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is an
honour to rise in the House today to talk about the issues that
have arisen as a result of the ice storm.
It was my privilege to go to the county of Lanark, south of this
city and a little east of Ottawa, and look at the devastation the
ice storm had caused in the maple sugar bush country. It was
heart rending to see what had happened to the trees in that area.
In some cases the tops of the trees were broken off and in other
cases huge branches had broken off. The extent of the damage was
absolutely phenomenal in certain areas. It was tree after tree
after tree. I compared it to some of my experiences and
observations in Alberta when a tornado went through and the tops
of the trees were broken off. In this case the ice had broken
off the tops of the trees.
We went through this area and asked ourselves what was so
significant about what happened there.
The tops were broken but was that all that had happened? The
sap flows up and down the trunk of the tree, of course. It
became clear to us as we went through the various tours. We went
to one sugar bush farm, right to the trees and began to look at
the branches.
2350
The operator told us very clearly there were tiny little
branches on which the leaves form that were broken off. Fifty
per cent or more of the crown of that tree was gone and if the
branches do not generate leaves, then indeed the life of that
tree is in jeopardy. Nobody knows at this point how many of
those trees will survive this storm.
We looked at the trees but what really hit home were the people.
We saw the people meet at a place called Wheeler's Pancake
House. We met in a big assembly room. About 75 or 80 maple syrup
farmers were there.
It became painfully obvious that these people are suffering.
They are suffering today. There were many who were
inconvenienced. There were many who suffered while the
electricity was off but these farmers are suffering now because
their livelihood is in jeopardy.
We ask ourselves what is being done. What can be done now? I
want to pay tribute as well to the armed services and other
personnel who helped to bring the power back into the lines. The
issue now for these farmers is what do we do now to take care of
the problem they have.
There are three kinds of problems identified. Many of these
farmers have a network of pipes along which the sap is collected
to a central spot and there the water is boiled off and the syrup
or sugar is made.
Many of these pipes are covered with ice and snow. Because they
froze and the ice is there it is very difficult now to take it
off these pipes. These people need help to get the pipes out of
the ice and snow and there may not be enough manpower to get this
done before the sap starts flowing within the next three or four
weeks.
Also, they need money to put the taps into the trees and to make
sure it is possible to get that sap when it comes. They need to
get to the trees. When we looked at the way the branches had
fallen down between the trees, it became very obvious it was
almost impossible for the farmers to get to the trees in order to
tap the trunks and to do the work that had to be done without
removing the branches that were in the way.
Clearing needs to be done. There are three problems with this.
There is money needed along with machines and manpower to do the
job. What will happen to these people?
We need to go beyond this as well and ask ourselves how long it
will be before the income they are losing this year will be
replaced. In some instances, if the trees die, it will be
between 40 and 50 years before they are restored to the stage
they were at.
We need to look at this and ask ourselves what happened, what
has been demonstrated as time goes forward. This illustrated
that people get together. We saw 75 or 80 people come together
in a group, not asking the government to help them but what they
could do to work together to solve the problem.
I forgot to mention that I am splitting my time with the member
for West Kootenay—Okanagan.
The Ontario Maple Producers Association was represented at this
meeting, the local chapter. The one thing that impressed me with
this group was that its members clearly articulated the problem.
They took responsibility for trying to solve that problem. They
knew what should be done. They had asked themselves what should
be done, what the cost would be, who was the most in need and how
they could go about solving the problem.
Of particular significance was that they said they had all kinds
of administrative creations done by federal governments,
provincial governments, municipal governments and so on but
wanted to distribute the funds and assistance given to them
themselves.
2355
They felt they knew who the people were who were applying for
this assistance, who needed it the most. They were not going to
use this money for administration. It was going to go to the
people, the farmers who really needed the help.
I commend these people at the grassroots level who came to us
with specific reasons why this should be done this way. They
told us what needed to be done, how much money it would take and
how best to solve this problem. They came up with a rather
creative solution, one which I wanted to pass to the minister of
industry just a moment ago.
This farmer said “We need the money now. We haven't got time
to go through all the red tape that is necessary. We need that
money today and tomorrow. How would it be if we got an indication
from the government that this kind of help will be available
through various disaster funds and between now and then some
bridge financing might be created as an interest free loan for
that time period?”
These are the kinds of suggestions these people came up with.
They do not want a handout. They are proud people. They want to
help themselves.
What have we learned from this disaster? I think we have
learned that Canadians care. People care for each other. There
is compassion. There is a love for one another. That has been
demonstrated clearly and powerfully.
The other thing that has happened that I am proud of is that
these people have demonstrated very clearly, without a shadow of
a doubt, that the strength of Canada does not lie in its ability
to generate electricity or its ability to apply the various
technologies. What it has demonstrated more clearly than ever
before is that Canada's strength lies in the willingness of the
people to care for one another from one end of Canada to the
other.
In Kelowna, for example, the Flightcraft people donated a huge
Purolator courier service aircraft filled with containers of
relief goods for the people in Ontario. That is what happened. A
bond developed among Canadians that will make Canada stronger.
There was a strong demonstration of intellectual ability, skill
and the ability to be motivated as well as a spiritual quality
that binds us together.
I hope this disaster which hurt all of us, some very much more
than others, will bind us together and make us a strong nation.
Mr. Jim Gouk (West Kootenay—Okanagan, Ref.): Mr.
Speaker, much of the presentations this evening focused on the
devastation of the recent ice storms and of the hardship that its
victims have had to endure, and rightly so.
Whenever Canadians are subjected to such overwhelming
difficulties, their stories must be told. This is true no matter
where in this vast country this occurs, be it Ontario, Quebec,
Atlantic Canada, Manitoba with the floods, Swift Current, the
Peace River country, or in my riding where last year's flood
caused millions of dollars in damage as well as the loss of life
of a resident.
There is another side to these stories of devastation, a warmer
and more encouraging story of one part of this country reaching
out to another.
Nestled near the geographic centre of my riding of West
Kootenay—Okanagan is the town of Grand Forks, British Columbia.
Grand Forks has a population of about 4,000 in the city and
another 3,500 in its rural area. It is set in a valley
surrounded by forested mountains. It sits right on the American
border approximately half way between Vancouver and Calgary.
Grand Forks' principal activities include forestry and farming.
Grand Forks is not a rich town. Unemployment is around 11 per
cent and forestry based employers are looking at layoffs due to
major provincial problems in the forest industry. However, Grand
Forks is very rich in one ingredient that surpasses all others,
open hearted generosity.
An idea began with one teacher from Grand Forks secondary
school. Emilie Belak had been following the story of the ice
storm and its tales of hardship endured by those who had lost
their power, heat and water. She proposed that some of the
students from the affected eastern area be invited to Grand
Forks.
2400
Others added to and promoted this idea which ultimately resulted
in 74 students from the hard hit area of St-Jean-sur-Richelieu,
many of whom were reduced to the point of living in rescue
centres, being hosted by the Grand Forks community. Thus began
what was dubbed “Operation Freeze Lift”.
Many people were involved in making this possible.
Transportation was made possible by the generosity of Canadian
Airlines and Air Canada, with much of the initiative in securing
this again undertaken locally by B.C. forestry dispatcher Cindy
Munns.
With much prompting by school principal Denny Kemprud, the B.C.
provincial education department contacted Quebec's deputy
minister of education who delivered the Grand Forks offer
directly to a candle lit meeting of South Shore's Monteregie
school division.
Many other people were involved in making this event possible,
far too many to name in the time allowed for this presentation.
In actual fact the entire town was involved in making it
possible. In excess of 200 families offered to take students in
and many businesses generously offered gifts and services
throughout the students' stay.
In all, 74 students and their teacher-chaperons arrived in Grand
Forks mid-January. These people travelled to Grand Forks
anticipating their first regular access to power and hot showers
in two weeks. As stated by one of those involved, they were not
prepared for the overwhelming generosity and friendliness of the
people of Grand Forks.
The students attended classes at the school and when they were
not in class they were taken skiing, hiking, shopping, to movies,
sports and other special events. These activities were done as a
group but there were also many other individual activities
provided by the host families.
Last Friday the teachers, students, host families and others who
had played an important role in making this all come together
were guests at a luncheon hosted by local Russian Doukhobor
Society members who make up a significant portion of the
population. I attended that luncheon and listened to visiting
students talk, tearfully at times, of their gratitude to their
hosts and to others in the community.
Politics were not part of this visit. Although the national
unity situation may well have been on some people's minds, it was
rarely raised. Even though it was not discussed, the impact of
this western generosity will be felt for many years to come.
One of the teacher-chaperons who teaches art and religion stated
that Grand Forks is a lesson plan for a school course in values,
ethics and morals, and she now plans to write that course.
Another of the teacher-chaperons stated that it would be hard to
leave such a remarkable town which was so sincere and so
generous. She had no doubt that most of her students would leave
with a different view of the west.
One of those students best summed up this opinion by saying
“When part of this country is in trouble, that another part
would help is something” and then after a moment's thought he
added “strengthening”. It is an example of one member of the
Canadian family helping another member of that family when they
are in need. Like in any other family there is a time to pursue
individual needs and there is a time to pull together.
Grand Forks made this great gesture solely out of its natural
generosity, but it is a prime example of how we are part of a
national family. Family members can be independent without
rejecting the family they belong to.
This wonderful small British Columbia town should serve to
inspire all Canadians to recognize that despite whatever
differences we have we also have common bonds.
I and all of my constituents in West Kootenay—Okanagan offer
condolences to all those who have suffered as a result of the ice
storm. I am sure all of my colleagues in the House join in
offering our heartfelt thanks to the generosity of the people of
Grand Forks.
Mrs. Karen Redman (Kitchener Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Mississauga
South.
The ice storm of 1998 will go down in history for many reasons.
It truly was a disaster of historic proportions. To the people
who experienced deprivation and loss inflicted by the storm I
extend my sincere sympathy.
There remains much to be done to restore full power and to
recover from the losses to person and property, especially in the
rural areas of Quebec and eastern Ontario.
2405
In the face of a natural disaster of such proportion immediate
and targeted action is required. I am proud of the speed with
which the government mobilized operation recuperation. Over
15,000 regular and reserved troops went to assist those
communities affected. This is the largest peacetime mobilization
of soldiers in Canadian history.
An army of hydro workers from Quebec Hydro and Ontario Hydro
came to rebuild the power lines of a system devastated by ice and
the elements. It is work that still continues.
I commend the partnership of local levels of government and the
provincial governments which have acted decisively in providing
leadership to recovery efforts.
Helping hands were extended from across the nation and across
the United States border to help in any way they could, from
providing the much sought after generators to volunteers who
staffed mobile kitchens and cleared away debris.
It is difficult not to be overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of
this event. However, individual Canadians reached out to fellow
Canadians to offer help and demonstrate sense of community that
exists in the country. The efforts ranged from donations of
money to actually travelling to the devastated regions.
In my riding of Kitchener Centre help was focused on two Quebec
ridings and one in eastern Ontario. The local media played a key
role in alerting the community to specific items such as wicks
for kerosene lamps and baby diapers that were in short supply.
Kitchener firefighters used a centrally located station as a
collection depot. The food bank of KW and the local Red Cross
collected food items and supplies. The Indian Canadian
Association of Kitchener—Waterloo raised several thousands of
dollars when a young man from that community asked his father
“what can we do?” The KW Humane Society travelled to the
affected areas and brought back animals for shelter and adoption.
Grant Transport shipped large quantities of heating oil and chain
saw oil which was donated by Monarch Oil. Erb Transport sent
daily runs of trucks containing supplies into Montreal for
distribution to outlying areas.
These are just a sampling of the initiatives that were carried
out by my community, a demonstration of the concern and goodwill
that the people of Kitchener feel for their fellow citizens who
were affected by this disaster.
I take this opportunity to express my gratitude and acknowledge
the hard work and dedication of everyone involved, including
especially members of my staff. I am heartened by their action
and humbled by the generosity.
The devastation caused by the ice storm of 1998, the damage to
the landscape and the loss of property which continues to still
be tallied will take years to recover from. The turmoil in human
terms and the loss of loved ones are emotional issues that will
only be dealt with by individuals with the passage of time.
However time can never dim the individual acts of heroism and the
collective goodwill and charity which Canadians extended to
fellow Canadians.
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): Mr. Speaker,
just a little over six hours ago the House adjourned its
proceedings to conduct this special debate on the ice storm,
Canada's greatest, largest, natural disaster in its history.
Having listened to the eloquent stories and speeches by cabinet
ministers and members of Parliament on all sides of the House,
Canadians might be wondering why this debate is being held. It
is important that we reflect a bit on the purpose of the debate.
There is no question from the comments that have been made
before the House already that this is the time to recognize and
acknowledge the performance of governments and agencies at all
levels; the federal government, all its departments and all the
different things they contributed; members of Parliament in their
various ridings; provincial governments, MPPs and their agencies;
regional governments; and municipal governments.
There is no question that the performance was exceptional. They
are to be thanked and recognized for the assistance provided to
Canadians in their time of need.
2410
It makes me think that in Canada we have a diversion in which we
like to jostle elected officials. At a time like this Canadians
will recognize that all levels of government performed
exceptionally well at a time of great need.
The debate is also about recognizing volunteer organizations and
the unsung heroes, the individual volunteers we have heard about
today. They rose to the challenge and did not wait for the
invitation. They did some exceptional things.
Today I heard stories that I want to remember. I know Canadians
want to remember them too. They are about young children who
were sending in their allowances to assist with the financial aid
and about people who stopped their lives, their businesses, and
brought truck loads of goods, supplies, wood and equipment. These
stories are very important to remember.
I think about organizations such as the Red Cross which has gone
through a very difficult time. Yet it was a leader in providing
and co-ordinating assistance and aid to Canadians in need when
they needed it. They were there and the Red Cross should be
thanked.
I think about our military. The Minister of National Defence
spoke very eloquently about the special contributions, the
experience, the expertise, the calming influence and the
controlling influence they brought to the situation to make sure
the job was done well. We know that the military has gone
through a very difficult time as well in recent months. However
today we recognize, acknowledge and celebrate the fact that we
have one of the best military forces available for Canadians when
needed.
There are two other reasons I believe we are having this debate.
It is very important for Canadians to understand that as long as
there is one Canadian that still has need related to this tragic
disaster the job is not complete. The support will continue. All
levels of government and all Canadians will continue to provide
support for the needs expressed by people who are affected.
There will be scars and lasting damage. It will take decades
for some things to be repaired and there are some things that
will never be repaired. However Canadians are moving on. We are
getting the job done and we are doing it well.
If Canadians want to help there is a way that they can do so.
The Red Cross is still raising financial donations to assist with
relief for those in need. If Canadians would like to make a
contribution they can call 1-800-850-5090. They can also contact
their local Red Cross agency or even their own member of
Parliament who would be more than happy to make sure their
contribution gets to the Red Cross to be used to purchase the
things other Canadians need.
The final reason we are having this debate concerns the
chronicling of history. As I said, this is the largest natural
disaster in the history of the country. It not only demonstrates
the character of Canadians, the preparedness of Canadians and the
will to care and to be there when others are in need. It has a
lot to do with defining Canadians.
Many years ago there was an effort to try to define what is a
Canadian and what are Canadian values. One of the conclusions
was that Canada was so diverse in its geography, its people and
its cultural heritage that it was very difficult to put into
words and capture the essence of Canada.
2415
Events like this, events such as the Saguenay flood, events that
took place in the Peace River, the floods in Manitoba and this
tragic ice storm that affected much of Ontario, Quebec and New
Brunswick, those are the things that show what Canadians do when
there is a challenge. Canadians rose to that challenge. They
came forward and demonstrated Canadian values.
We define Canada not in words. We define Canada by our actions.
We are chronicling those actions in this debate so that we will
never forget how important this country is and how proud we are
today, as we have been time and time again, of the way that
Canadians have responded to the needs of their neighbours,
friends and fellow Canadians across the country from sea to sea
to sea.
When I saw members of Parliament come here and talk about the
individual stories, it really touched me to hear how they wanted
to say thank you to the people in their communities for those
special things. We are here to say thank you to individuals, to
organizations and to all Canadians for their caring. Whether
they could participate in the relief effort or not, the fact is
that Canadians right across the country demonstrated their
concern for their fellow Canadians. That is what this is all
about. We are defining Canada, not in words but in the story of
the heroic actions in Canada's greatest time of need.
[Translation]
Mr. Jean-Guy Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic, BQ): Mr. Speaker, if I
may, I will share my time with my distinguished colleague, the member
for Hochelaga—Maisonneuve.
I would like to join with all the speakers who have taken part in
this emergency debate on the ice storm to thank and congratulate people
who had to deal with what could be called a historical storm, the storm
of the century.
I am thinking especially about the Premier of Quebec, Lucien
Bouchard, the president of Hydro-Quebec, André Caillé, the head of
public security, the Prime Minister of Canada, the leaders of the
Canadian army, all the mayors in areas hit by the storm, who without any
training whatsoever were able to deal with this storm the extent of
which could not be properly assessed, even from the air, in a helicopter
or otherwise. One could only have a limited view of things. Nobody in
this House is yet aware of the real impact of this ice storm.
I would also like to congratulate people in my riding, volunteers
for collecting wood, of course, and money, but also for the love and
caring they were able to show for those hard hit by the storm.
I am thinking especially of teachers in the Amiante regional school
board who, without a word of protest, agreed to have scores and scores
of children from the infamous “triangle of darkness” come at a rate of
one or two per classroom, to take French, history, maths and English.
They did not look at their collective agreement. They just said:
“Welcome in our classroom”.
2420
I would now like to deal mainly with the problem of our maple
producers, since there are some 2,000 in my riding, with between 1,000
and over 100,000 tapholes. I had the chance to take part in two meetings
with major groups of maple producers. The first meeting, organized by
producers themselves, was held at Stornoway, at the junction of roads
108 and 161, where demonstrators symbolically barred traffic on both
roads to raise the awareness of both levels of government. The second
meeting took place on my initiative in Thetford Mines, where over 150
maple producers gathered to get some information.
I would like to ask the federal and provincial governments for some
financial support that could compensate our maple producers for the loss
of their working capital. An example. In a egg producing farm where, for
example, 20,000 hens had suffocated to death as a result of the power
failure, there would be a compensation for the loss of these 20,000 hens
that I would call working capital. The maple producer who has 20,000
tapholes and whose maple trees would be to all intents and purposes dead
within a year or two could not be compensated since this is not
considered as working capital in the same sense as the animals that
would have died as a result of the ice storm.
I recall a case that I think would be worth sharing with my
colleagues who are here in this House. A couple from
Sainte-Cécile-de-Whitton who sold their dairy farm, their quota,
to go into maple production, own over 100,000 tapholes.
If you do some quick calculations, you will find out that at a minimum
of $20 per tap you get a fair amount—100,000 times $20; you do the
mathematics. This couple estimates that the syrup production in their
maple bush will be down by 40 to 60 per cent. They are finished if they
do not get any help.
Worse yet, our maple producers are very often in debt to the
federal government, through the Farm Credit Corporation, or to the
provincial government, through the Société de financement agricole.
Some will have to file for bankruptcy. Therefore the Farm Credit
Corporation will have to assume ownership of a maple syrup operation
which is no longer profitable. Or, if the money had been provided by
the Société, it is the government of Quebec which will have to deal with
the bankruptcy. You understand that.
Therefore, I think it would be wise to help the maple producers
financially. One of my constituents showed me a video.
He filmed the situation in the farm he was preparing for his retirement.
He would have cut some 25 or 30 cords of wood per quarter, just to add
some income to his pension, and would have lived happily, doing what he
enjoys.
2425
Unfortunately, all the deciduous trees, or at least 80 per cent of
them, because it is difficult to say 100 per cent, are doomed.
My second plea for help is directed to the minister of Human
Resources Development. Through his partnership program for job
creation, he proposed $25 million for Quebec, but the program applies
only to people presently receiving employment insurance or who received
it during the last 36 months. Within the “Granit et Amiante” regional
municipality there is clearly a lack of trained manpower to work in
maple bushes and pull the plastic tubing from under the ice and the
fallen branches.
There is a staff shortage and I am waiting for an answer, but time
is of the essence. The sap should start flowing within three weeks, or
a month at the most. If we miss that date, maple syrup producers will
obviously lose money.
I will conclude by simply saying that I deplore the attitude of
certain petty politicians in this country, who took advantage of the
situation to score political points. I am thinking, among others, of the
member for Bourassa, and the Ontario premier, Mr. Harris, who, during
the South American trip with the Prime Minister, took advantage of Mr.
Bouchard's absence, who had his hands full managing the crisis in
Quebec.
Again, congratulations to all those who did such a good job of
managing the crisis.
Polls conducted in Quebec clearly show that Lucien Bouchard, André
Caillé and the armed forces are the three big winners following this
crisis, the likes of which we hope never to experience again.
Thank you for your attention. The hon. member for
Hochelaga—Maisonneuve will use up the rest of the time allotted
to me.
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I want
to thank my colleague who described the situation in his riding with all
of his well-known sensitivity and eloquence.
The months of January and February will be forever remembered in
our history as times of almost exceptional solidarity.
To really understand the true nature of Quebeckers, the way they
ract as one and their natural generosity, one should thoroughly analyze
this crisis.
The public shelters set up by the emergency preparedness
organization, often with the help of municipalities, were not where most
people in trouble gathered.
It is interesting to see that, when Quebeckers realized they needed
help, their first reaction was to go to their neighbours, their friends
and relatives, to seek shelter in their basements or houses and some
sense of solidarity.
The solidarity shown at the height of this rather unique and
remarkable crisis that is the worst disaster our seniors can remember is
quite extraordinary. It is also interesting to note that Quebeckers
never lost heart. They rolled up their sleeves and showed an almost
unprecedented level of solidarity.
Of course, everyone was called in to help. I want to tell you what
happened in Hochelaga—Maisonneuve.
As we know, Montreal was not the worst hit area, but several of our
fellow citizens were without power for several days.
2430
This is what happened. Michel Allen mobilized his employees and
volunteers, who have been extremely helpful, at the Pierre-Charbonneau
Centre, a city facility. For a few days, people who could not be taken
in by neighbours, relatives or friends stayed at the Pierre-Charbonneau
Centre and the Olympic Stadium, in the riding of Hochelaga—Maisonneuve.
Another very moving initiative in Montreal is what Mr. Duchesneau,
the chief of police of the Urban Community of Montreal, asked of all his
police officers.
All the police officers in Montreal, together with volunteers,
systematically did what members of Parliament are used to, that is go
door-to-door.
It is very comforting to think that in an emergency situation such
as the one we experienced in January, all Montreal homes were visited.
Police officers and volunteers knocked on every door to make sure people
were not having problems, suffering from the cold or in need of food. If
they did, the relevant services would be called in. What a nice speedy
and generous collective response.
I would also like to talk about another very moving story that is
worth mentioning.
It is about a youth centre at the corner of Adam and Saint-Clément,
right in my neighbourhood. This institution called Escale Notre-Dame
welcomes people who have had drug problems in the past, and it is run by
the Christian Brothers. These young people gave their time. They took
turns, day and night, to provide entertainment and support in the
Pierre- Charbonneau Centre.
I want to thank them because they have their own problems and are
undergoing rehabilitation so they can reintegrate society. Through this
experience, they could realize how great and generous they can be
through involvement and dedication.
I would like to name these ten or so young people, and I hope my
colleagues will join me in expressing their thanks and appreciation to
them for their dedication and involvement.
I am thinking of André Larose, Florian Lebreton, Steve Gravelle, Rahid
Amlabid, Sylvain Décosse, Philippe Paradis, Robert Desrochers, Réjean
Hogue, Roger Boucher and Stéphane Lessard, who are all 20 to 25 years
old and who put on a show at the Centre Pierre-Charbonneau and did it of
course with all the generosity, serenity and courage required in the
circumstances.
It is because a series of factors that we all came out of this the
better for it. First, of course, we were able to fall back on the
community networks. Also, as my colleague, the member for
Frontenac—Mégantic, mentioned, we were able to rely on the
strength of the public
sector. In a city like Montreal, needless to say that the CLSC was
called into service.
I am thinking of the CLSC Hochelaga—Maisonneuve and its manager,
Mr. Leguerrier as well as the CLSC Olivier-Guimond, in the east of my
riding, that rapidly organized reliefs efforts and took especially good
care of our seniors.
It is well known that everyone cannot react with the same speed in
an emergency when we must mobilize. I must say that the authorities in
my community, particularly the health care system which must be the
closest to the people, and our frontline health services, the CLSC, took
specially good care of the elderly.
We know it was important to do it. Often times, the elderly tend to
be afraid of bothering other people, of asking for services, and to wish
to take care of themselves in their natural environment.
We were afraid seniors would put their safety in danger by not asking
for help even if they needed it.
2435
The worst was avoided because public authorities did the right
thing, because the CLSC and its staff got involved.
I would also like to mention the recreation organizations which are
very important resources in a community like mine. I particularly want
to underline the work done by Jeunes Sportifs d'Hochelaga. That social
club sent volunteers to help police go door to door in my neighbourhood
and to make sure that all the people likely to need help were reached.
Furthermore, a telephone network was set up in three days.
Three times in three days, the network was used to reach everybody. The
fact that it could be set up—and you can imagine the tremendous effort
involved—and that all our people were reached is due in large part to
the volunteer work done by Jeunes Sportifs d'Hochelaga-Maisonneuve,
along with Pierrette Demers with her husband Robert Demers, who have run
this association for over 15 years.
I close by thanking the Canadian Armed Forces as well. You know I
have always felt and have argued in my party that in a sovereign Quebec
we should have a civilian protection force.
If there is something which was eloquently demonstrated, it is that all
societies need organizations to protect people. I think we need a
civilian rescue organization made up of people who are absolutely
dedicated and whose role is not questioned so that they can reach out
and be of service to people.
We express our gratitude to the Canadian army because it was not an
issue of partisanship. When people do some good within a community, no
partisanship scenario can stand and I know I speak on behalf of my
fellow citizens when I rise in this House to pay tribute to the Quebec
military and reserve forces who did a truly extraordinary job.
To conclude, I want to thank all those who transformed an ordeal
into a great moment of solidarity. I believe we can truly say that we
have all come out of this crisis better persons, different in some ways.
I know we are equipped for the future, ready to face not only any danger
but any possible scenario of general mobilization.
To all the volunteers, to all my colleagues in the House, I say
thank you. I believe we have all been changed greatly by this crisis.
Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi, PC): Mr. Speaker, first, let me
thank you for recognizing me at this late hour. I also want to mention
that what you said last week about wanting to celebrate Quebec culture
as one of the great human foundations was well received by a lot of
people. I encourage you to try and share that new way of seeing things
with all your caucus and I wish you luck.
First, I want to commend my colleagues for Shefford and
Richmond—Arthabaska as well as our leader, the hon. member for
Sherbrooke, for insisting on having this debate on the serious
crises we have experienced over the last year and a half,
particularly the recent ice storm.
I am very happy to have been able to come back to this Parliament
if only to thank all our fellow Canadians who have helped us a lot
during this extremely difficult period. The people of Chicoutimi and of
the beautiful Saguenay—Lac Saint-Jean region know very well how
desperate and frustrated you can be when nature wreaks havoc.
2440
You saw the pictures at the time, a year and a half ago, of
the area in the heart of the city of Chicoutimi called “Le
bassin”,
and what they called the little white house, which survived the
wild and impetuous torrent. I am telling you tonight that this is
the old section of Chicoutimi, my neighbourhood, where I grew up
and where I was re-elected. I am very proud of it, and that period
was a very difficult one.
At the time, we were all struck by the courage and the
serenity of the victims and by the extraordinary spirit of
solidarity among the people, first in the region, then in Quebec
and then throughout the country.
It unfortunately takes a crisis of such magnitude to eliminate
political partisanship, ideologies and racial prejudice. It is
kind of crazy. Sometimes it looks like nature is taking revenge.
Sometimes nature appears to be setting new priorities, because when
everything is going well, both individuals and countries take the
lazy approach. Laziness is sometimes called the mother of all
vices. So nature sometimes decides to remind us of the real
priorities and the basic necessities. I hope that all we have
faced in the past few years will provide some inspiration for the
future.
The great floods have left an indelible mark on our collective
unconscious.
I am sure that the constituents represented by my colleague, the
member for Brandon—Souris, and others who have lived through
events as serious as ours, and neighbouring ridings in Manitoba,
share these same sentiments.
Yet, throughout these great and terrible tragedies, people's
noblest qualities come through. Solidarity, compassion, mutual
support, sharing and the desire to serve all flourish and make us
proud to belong to the great Canadian family.
In my riding, people took charge immediately, when the gravity
of the situation became apparent. People met and organized the
distribution of essential supplies. We saw municipal councillors,
to whom I wish to pay tribute this evening, Carl Savard and Jacques
Bouchard, who directed the delivery of firewood.
We know that firewood is a key element for survival in the dead of
winter when you have no fuel.
While on this particular topic, I would also like to take this
opportunity to congratulate my colleague from New Brunswick, the
member for Tobique—Mactaquac, who telephoned me at the height of
the crisis, having heard that we in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean had
organized the collection of firewood. He called me and told me he
would have a dozen truckloads of firewood. He asked me to help him
direct this contribution that he wanted to send. I found that
quite exceptional.
Naturally, we must take this opportunity to congratulate all
the volunteers in Quebec and throughout the country who played a
role, out of view of the cameras. We must also pay tribute to the
work done by all our mayors, elected officials and municipal
government employees.
I think that the last crisis we have been through will certainly
provide us with an opportunity to thank and congratulate the people
who helped us survive in our region.
I am thinking of our mayors, among others. The mayor of
Chicoutimi at the time; the mayor of La Baie, Claude Richard; the
mayor of Ferland-et-Boileau, the municipalities that were almost
destroyed, Léon Simard; the mayor of Saint-Félix, Jean-Marie
Claveau; the mayor of the very tiny and now famous municipality of
Anse-Saint-Jean, Laurent-Yves Simard; the mayor of Petit Saguenay,
Hervé Lavoie; they all worked very hard; and the mayor of Rivière
Éternité as well.
2445
Interestingly enough, there are no sovereignists and no federalists
when disaster strikes, only people who want to help one another. We
should learn something from this. We witness this kind of solidarity
only in times of crisis.
When there is no crisis, we go back to our collective passivity, to
the same old arguments that may not always be a priority for our fellow
citizens.
The lesson we should learn is this: Elected representatives should
be able to present a constructive agenda to the whole country. We have
been going on economic missions abroad. I have nothing against this.
I am trying to find out the concrete results of this, and I may be able
to come up with specifics in a few weeks. The first mandate for Canada,
if we are to promote solidarity among Canadians, is to set up a Canadian
economic mission.
I look forward to business people from Chicoutimi meeting with
their colleagues in Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver. I know for a fact
that good trade relations between business people in different regions
will have a major cultural impact.
Since we have to deal with new natural phenomena, piecemeal
emergency preparedness is not good enough. We need a Canadian plan to
support the provinces. We need all the elements, federal and provincial.
It is wrong that the Canadian Forces should not be officially part of
the emergency preparedness scenarios in Quebec or Alberta. We have to
wait for a request from the provincial government to deploy the young
men and women of the Canadian Forces. In the future, they must be
included in the emergency measure plans, because we are likely to be
faced with other unusual weather phenomenons.
We will need different strategic plans. Our forces should also be
provided with more modern equipment. I think that from now on we will
be less fearful of investing in more sophisticated, more modern
equipment for our forces, in order to make them more responsive and more
efficient.
I think that the cooperation between the federal and provincial
levels of government must also extend to unified emergency plans.
Because of all the crises we had to manage during the last year and a
half and the ones we can expect in the years to come, we have to opt for
a more continuous type of consultation. We can no longer manage these
crises at the last minute.
I think that all of the stakeholders would agree that everyone did
their best. Things did not go perfectly well, and lessons have to be
learned here.
For example, my area was hit a year and a half ago. Some of the
smaller municipalities still have huge credit lines. I am thinking in
particular of a small village. It has a credit line of $2.4 million
since the flood a year and a half ago. That cost them $90,000 in
interests last year and it still comes to $12,000 a month in interests
for a small village that has yet to receive any compensation. So, there
are still problems out there. There are problems because we are not well
prepared for these types of emergencies. We have to do better.
This will give the provincial and federal governments a great
opportunity to pool their resources together to further help our fellow
citizens in times of need.
We cannot have gone through three crises in the space of a year and
a half and still think that it will not happen again. These phenomenons
are something new in our lives. We have to be better prepared.
I am pleased to give my colleague from South Shore the opportunity
to talk about these new phenomenons and the extremely serious crises we
have gone through these last few weeks and especially this last year and
a half.
[English]
Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore, PC): Mr. Speaker, it was
not my intent to speak this evening. I would like to thank my
hon. colleague from Chicoutimi for allowing me the time to speak
this evening and the opportunity. I would also like to speak to
the patience of the rest of the members of this Chamber who are
waiting to speak at this late hour and congratulate them on the
fact that they are in this Chamber and prepared to speak on this
important issue.
There are a couple of important things that we should recognize.
Number one, we are here late at night discussing an issue of
national importance. I am not going to try to add to the
eloquent statements that have already been made by many of the
members who have been here this evening. I think most of it has
been said. However, I have sat through this debate and I would
like add a few things to the debate.
First, I was able to look at much of the damage up close and was
shocked and appalled at the extent of it. Frankly, I was amazed
at the extent of it. We drove from Montreal to Sherbrooke in
darkness. You could see the flashing lights on the electrical
trucks as far as you could see. There were not five or six,
there was not a dozen. There were literally hundreds of them.
You had to be there to understand just how bad it was.
The natural resources, the farms, the forestry resources of
eastern Ontario and southern Quebec are not only damaged, much of
them are devastated. The magnitude and the scope of this damage
I don't think parliamentarians, our provincial people or our
municipalities have fully understood yet.
Quebec produces 80 per cent of the maple syrup produced in
Canada. Ontario produces another 10 per cent. Where are we
going to make up that loss? How are those farmers going to put
those trees back into production? The tops are broken off the
sugar maples, the limbs are stripped from them. Unfortunately I
do not think they will ever come back. When the sap starts
running in March, we will have an industry that will be lost and
completely devastated.
One of the reasons I wanted to stand tonight to speak on this
issue is that there has been another area that has been
overlooked. The forest resources are going to have to be
harvested in much of eastern Ontario and much of southern Quebec.
The sugar maples will need to be harvested. The bush without
question will have millions and millions of cords of wood that if
we don't do something with will be a fire hazard and will be a
complete loss.
If we face a summer in 1998 like we faced last summer, we can
expect rampant forest fires in all those areas affected now. The
woods are dangerous to walk in, dangerous to work in and they are
almost impossible to work in. Somehow we have to look on a
national scale at some type of a salvage project for these two
areas.
The other point I would like to make which everyone else has
made this evening, and I will not take much time because there
are people waiting to speak, is that we understand the hazards.
We understand the dangers. We certainly understand that we have
the ability to rise above that.
I think that speaks to the resilience of communities, of
municipalities, of provinces and certainly to the resilience of
the nation of Canada. Most of all, and I would like to close on
this note, I think the events of the past months have spoken to
the resilience of the Canadian people.
2455
Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
I thank all the officers and employees of this Chamber for being
so patient with some of us who must seem terribly long winded. It
is an important gesture that so many members have been willing to
speak to the devastation that so many millions of our fellow
citizens have recently experienced.
While I as an Albertan did not have any direct experience with
the devastation of the recent ice storm, I want to add the voices
of my constituents in solidarity with those who were so deeply
devastated by the adversity of ice storm and its consequences to
the many eloquent speeches this evening. I represent some 75,000
people in Calgary who live in a part of the province that has
been fortunate enough not to experience natural disasters of this
nature. When they see a disaster occur in another part of their
country they feel affected by it. Many of my constituents
expressed to me their desire to assist in any way they possibly
could.
My home parish, St. Bonaventure parish, managed to establish a
charitable relationship with the St. Thomas More parish at
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu which is in the middle of what was
called the triangle of darkness in order to raise the necessary
funds to support the people in Saint-Jean who have lost so much
and are still just recovering.
My only experience with the storm was indirect in that I was
supposed to be in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu to attend the Centre
d'immersion de la Chambre des communes for French
instruction. But on the day I was planning to leave the news of
the storm came through and I was unable to travel to Saint-Jean.
The Collège militaire, where the immersion centre operates,
became an emergency centre for the people of that area. I would
like to put on the record our thoughts for the staff of the House
of Commons at the immersion centre in Saint-Jean, namely
Elizabeth Gervais and her colleagues who are very dedicated
servants of this place. I know they have no doubt been deeply
troubled by this disaster.
Members of my party often criticize government. We are often
characterized as being enemies of government, but one of the
things we saw in this storm was the need for government. We saw
government at its very best serving the people. We saw local,
provincial and federal levels of government working together,
marshalling all their resources, as other members have said,
putting partisanship, ideology and politics aside to serve their people
in their most urgent need.
We have learned many lessons about how we must be better
prepared for such emergencies in the future. This demonstrated
to those who are cynical about government that government can and
must be a force for good in particular when it is so urgently
needed at moments like this. That comment is no more clearly
applicable than to our military, an institution which for too
long in this country has been allowed to decline and dissipate in
its strength and resources. For various reasons we have chosen
not to invest in the resources needed by our military forces. Now
we see how necessary they really are to people when it counts.
More important, the response to the recent adversity really
demonstrates what Canada is all about, not government but civil
society, community in the most authentic sense. It is about
neighbour helping neighbour. It is a cliché but it is profoundly
true. We saw the same kind of response to the floods in the
Saguenay and the floods in the Red River Valley. We see it
whenever Canadians are confronted by adversity.
2500
The history of this country is one of carving out an existence
in an intolerably cold and difficult land against the
forces of the elements. Sometimes, such as in the last month or
so, we find that the elements are stronger than we are. But by
gathering together and through the power of synergy that we find
in community and civil society and voluntary institutions, it is
amazing what can be done to relieve suffering.
Finally, the last lesson I take from the recent adversity is one
I learned in the only natural disaster I lived through, which was
the terrible devastating earthquake in San Francisco in 1989.
Several hundred people died in that city as a result of a huge
earthquake in the bay area in California where I was going to
college at the time.
I was sitting in a class studying Thomas Aquinas, the doctor of
theology. The lecture was about Thomas Aquinas' writing on the
grandeur of God and his dominion over nature. Just as we were
discussing this rather prescient reflection by the great medieval
scholastic, the world began to shake underneath us. I even
wondered for a moment whether we were going to fall into the
Pacific Ocean and whether it was the big one.
What flashed through my mind at that time which has stuck with
me ever since is that no matter how pompous we are about our own
powers as human beings, we are brought to the realization from
time to time that we are really not in control of our own
circumstances, that we are at the mercy of much greater powers
than we can ever imagine. I think that was no doubt an emotion
and a sentiment experienced by so many of the hundreds of
thousands who struggled through this adversity.
I want to close simply by reiterating what some other members
have said in their remarks, that financial help is still needed.
For those who may be watching these debates, if they have not yet
found a way to assist those who have struggled through the ice
storm, they can still do so through the good offices of the Red
Cross which I understand is still distributing funds to those in
need. The Red Cross can be reached at 1-800-850-5090. I
understand the Red Cross is still taking financial contributions
and distributing them where those resources are most needed.
I want to commend all the other members of this place who have
spoken so eloquently and our fellow citizens who have shown us
what it really means to be a Canadian.
[Translation]
Mr. Yves Rocheleau (Trois-Rivières, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I am very
proud and very happy to rise in the House to take part in this debate on
the ice storm that hit a large part of the eastern part of North
America. Also, this is my first speech of the year in the House, and it
is a privilege to make it in these remarkable circumstances.
The ice storm that hit the south shore of the St. Lawrence River
had repercussions also in the riding of Trois-Rivières, on the north
shore. Indeed 150 disaster victims answered the invitation made by the
Sélect Hôtel Le Baron of Trois-Rivières which decided, on its own, to
offer 50 rooms free of charge to South Shore disaster victims.
One hundred and fifty people accepted the invitation. The hotel also put
at the people's disposal an assembly room, as well as a room that was
used as a volunteer centre. One hundred and fifty people coming from 19
municipalities located on the South Shore, including the most important
that were the subject of many news reports, such as Granby, Saint-Hyacinthe,
Drummondville, Saint-Jean d'Iberville, accepted the
invitation, and this complicated things somewhat at times
administration-wise. I will come back to that later.
2505
One hundred and fifty people: families, couples, elderly people,
teenagers full of the vim and vigour they are known to display at times,
children, seven infants—one of whom was only four days old when he
arrived at the Sélect Hôtel Le Baron, in Trois-Rivières.
These 150 people had to leave their home, afraid, at night
apparently, in a scene straight from hell, we were told; 150 people
isolated in trois-Rivières, but who eventually were able to rely on the
arrival of volunteers who, over several days, came on their own, in a
spontaneous gesture, and took it upon themselves to make their stay in
Trois-Rivières as pleasant as possible, the least inconvenient, and
tried to comfort them.
I am going to name these volunteers, knowing that I will probably
forget some of them because I am not aware of absolutely everything that
went on, and I was not able to meet all those who contributed to this
splendid event. I apologize beforehand for any oversight. Moreover,
there are some activities I did not witness from beginning to end.
First of all, I would like to congratulate and thank the
Sélectôtel Le Baron and its manager, Mr. Gilles Blais, who did a
remarkable job and displayed tact, calm and patience. I also want
to congratulate Gisèle Caron, who co-ordinated all volunteer work
and was there for 15 days, showing determination and persistence.
There is also Soula Pelletier, already mentioned, who is of Greek
descent and is very well integrated into Trois-Rivières
community. She was kind enough to invite me personally to meet
victims and volunteers.
Nicole Blanchette was there to give personal comfort to the
victims. Carol Chiasson and Réjean Normandeau, from Collège Laflèche,
put their experience and their professional expertise at the disposal of
the volunteer centre. They were assisted by a small group of students
from the Collège Laflèche, a private school.
The victims benefited from their skills and their energy.
The Trois-Rivières CLSC, managed by Laurent Paré, who came in
person to the volunteer centre, sent four employees to the centre. They
were Martin Foisy and Denise Brouillette, who are nurses, and France
Pouliot and André Plamondon, who are social workers.
I contacted the local emergency preparedness organization and it
officially recognized the Sélectôtel Le Baron as a shelter despite the
fact that this was a rather unusual situation. That allowed Trois-Rivières
to get involved right from the start. The city paid the meals
then sent the bill to the Quebec government, as is the normal procedure.
Second, it was able to proceed with the registration of people, to
communicate the information to emergency preparedness, to get the
cheques of $10 a day, $70 a week to people who had no money.
Then, there was the availability of buses, which allowed people to
travel to Trois-Rivières, to go to a ski resort in Mont-Carmel, which
offered a free day of skiing and outdoor activities, to go to the Island
of Saint-Quentin, to go to the pool at the university and the cegep, all
this with CITF buses. There was also the emergency preparedness
organization in Trois-Rivières that provided and ensured safety for
disaster victims during their stay.
There were also the Chevaliers de Colomb, who gave a considerable
amount of money, which was used as petty cash, to buy little things that
disaster victims needed.
There was Claude Bolduc, a professional radio host on CHLN, in our
area, who volunteered almost every evening, after work, to come and
emcee the shows.
In the evening, there were shows at the hotel to entertain the people.
He came as a volunteer. The same goes for Steve Normandin, an
accordionist who organized a dance party to entertain the victims.
I want to mention that Gervais Morissette, the chief executive
officer of the chronic hospital Le Trifluvien came to tell the
volunteers that if they ever had no other solution than to come to the
hospital for meals, he was going to offer free meals to the victims
until the end of their stay among us. That clinched all our efforts.
Claudine Alarie, the political assistant to our MNA and minister,
Guy Julien, had many contacts and took frequent action so that the
operation could go as smoothly as possible for everyone involved.
2510
In particular, I would like to mention the co-operation,
solidarity and friendship demonstrated by the Greek community in the
Mauricie region, especially in Trois-Rivières. I told you earlier that
it was Soula Pelletier, originally from Greece, who contacted me to
invite me to come and meet these people.
It was explained to me that people had run out of money and may
have had little to eat for several days. Sometimes we have good ideas in
this kind of situation. I decided to contact my friend, Kostas
Dimitropoulos, president of the Greek association of the Mauricie region
and owner of the Bravo Pizzeria restaurants.
I called my friend Kostas at his home around 8:30 on that Friday
night.
I explained the situation to him, told him about these 150 victims of
the storm who had run out of money and had had little to eat for several
days and I asked him and his friends in the Greek community to feed
these people—we know how powerful and competent they are in the
restaurant business—until the public authorities took charge of the
situation. Mr. Dimitropoulos immediately asked me how many meals and at
what time. The next night, a Saturday, 150 meals were delivered, and
they even had more than they needed. The day after that, Sunday, once
again there were meals for everybody.
On Monday, the vice-president of the association, Ilias Soilis,
owner of the restaurant Le Sieur de Laviolette, opened his doors to all
the nearly 100 storm victims who had accepted the invitation. He not
only served them his famous buffet, but also included little treats such
as beer, wine, drinks for kids, etc., all free of charge. This gesture
deserves to be mentioned and praised, because it reflects the
solidarity, friendship and affection between the Greek community and
Quebec society, as they themselves like to point out.
This reminded me of a comment made by René Lévesque on November 15,
1976, which made a big impression on Quebeckers like me.
I hope that all those who came to Trois-Rivières will have fond memories
of their visit and that they had a good trip back. But to use René
Lévesque's line, in such circumstances, we may be something of a great
nation.
[English]
Mr. Gurmant Grewal (Surrey Central, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I
rise on behalf of the people of Surrey Central, British Columbia
and all Canadians to participate in the ice storm debate.
On Monday all members of the House supported the Reform Party's
motion to set aside some time today to discuss the ice storm and
pay tribute to the Canadian men and women who survived it and
those heroes who helped make the survival quick and effective.
I join my colleagues in the House in extending my sympathy to
those 20 persons who lost their lives in the storm, to those who
lost those near and dear to them, to all those who suffered pain
and sorrow, to all those who suffered loss of livestock, farms
and businesses, and to all those who suffered from the cold and
lived without heat and water. All Canadians from the other parts
of Canada were with those who suffered during this natural
disaster. Let me say, we share their frustration, anger and
exhaustion.
I join my colleagues in this House from all political stripes in
saluting all those heroes, all those brave men and women from our
armed forces, the firefighters, police and paramilitary and those
in the technological services who protected life and property and
restored the services in the storm hit areas. My heart goes out
to them with my admiration, pride and thankfulness.
There are some people who still do not have power, heat, water
and other necessities in life. They cannot watch us on their
televisions. I thank them for their patience and courage. Folks,
help is arriving.
2515
I pay tribute to all the churches, hospitals and other
organizations, all Canadians and our neighbours from the south
who participated in helping the victims.
During the storm an old lady in my constituency of Surrey
Central called my office and said that she was desperate to send
help to all the victims who were suffering. That shows that
people from every corner of Canada care about the people who
suffered during the storm.
My younger son, Livjot, who is in grade 7 but very much a
politician, watched with dismay as hydro towers and wires fell
under the weight of tonnes of ice. He was so touched by the
disaster that he checked with me many times to see if my staff
and other people I knew in Quebec and the affected areas of
Ontario were all right.
As an employer my thoughts went to all the people I knew,
particularly my assistants in my House of Commons office. I
phoned each of them at home to find out how they were doing and
how their families were coping. I assured them that the people
of Surrey Central for whom they work in Ottawa were offering
their sympathy and prayers.
One of my assistants, Mrs. Dee Spiegel, reported to me that she
had opened up her home to a family of five people who had lost
their electricity, water and heat. She and her husband
generously housed the mother, father and the little children for
three days and three nights until they could return to their own
home. Everyone was warm and fed.
My other assistant, Mr. Dan Wallace, though his home was not
affected, reported to me that his parents who live near Perth,
Ontario, were in very bad shape. My assistant was terribly
concerned about his mother and father who were bravely fending
off the ice storm, remaining in their home with determination,
armed with only a cellular phone, a gigantic field stone
fireplace and their mastiff dog.
I felt it was appropriate and I did not hesitate to assure both
of my assistants that they should take whatever time they needed
to do whatever they could for their families, their neighbours
and their communities in dealing with the ice storm.
There are countless stories of suffering and hardship resulting
from the ice storm. Many people had to work hard to save their
lives, their families' lives, the lives of their livestock, their
businesses and other things.
This is the first time in this parliament when members from all
parties have looked through the lens of issues rather than the
usual lens of their political stripes. I shall expect this trend
to continue in the House.
All of us in the House should learn a lesson from the ice storm
tribute today. We should strive to work together in a spirit of
co-operation. It does not matter what part of the country we are
from. It does not matter what ethnic background we have, what
languages we speak, what religion or culture we have. We have
one similarity and that is that we are all proud Canadians.
Another lesson we can learn from the ice storm is that we must
be prepared for any disaster. Last year it was the floods in
Manitoba and then it was the ice storm. Who knows what it will
be next?
The ice storm shows us how vulnerable Canadians are to the
elements of our homeland. Some parts of Canada are located on
fault lines. My constituency of Surrey Central and neighbouring
areas in the lower mainland and the islands are among areas prone
to major earthquake. Our memories have not yet faded of the
earthquakes in San Francisco and Japan.
At present, my province of British Columbia is left without
emergency preparedness. It is a serious matter. Despite
warnings municipalities are not ready. The provincial government
is not ready. Above all, the federal Liberal government is not
only but has closed CFB Chilliwack.
2520
British Columbia is left without reasonable emergency
preparedness. My constituents tell me if B.C. is abandoned or
unattended by this government, scientists say a big earthquake
may hit at any time. If we have not learned to believe
politicians yet let us believe the scientists at least.
The nearest Canadian Armed Forces base which can provide
emergency help is based in Edmonton, Alberta. Assuming that the
roads and bridges will be operating, common sense can tell us how
long it will take before the first help may arrive to the people
who are suffering.
If the earthquake is strong, the CFB does not have the necessary
logistics to airlift the supplies to be made available to those
victims. What if the airstrip is not there for relief supplies
to land? What will happen to those injured, buried or trapped
children, women and men among fire and floods? Who will be there
to hear their cries?
The government should not play political football with CFB
Chilliwack or with the rescue helicopters. Closing CFB
Chilliwack is clearly a political decision, not a logical one.
We should learn lessons from one suffering or one disaster and
prepare for the next.
As I am about to close, I would like to bring two more quick
points to the attention of the House. Let me first appreciate
the kindness of all those who generously donated truckloads of
wood, food and clothes to the victims. During the ice storm most
Canadians were generous and helpful to each other. However,
there were a few complaints that some unscrupulous businessmen
were profiteering by selling gasoline, batteries, et cetera at
much higher prices than normal. The Minister of Industry
acknowledged this and has said that it was not illegal in Canada.
As parliamentarians we should work to prevent profiteering, at
least during any disaster. I am prepared to present a private
member's bill to this effect later on in the House.
I would also like to mention that another precious commodity we
lack in our country that may be the most needed during any
disaster is human blood. We often hear that the Red Cross is out
of stock. We should be generous in donating blood and
maintaining a reasonable stock of blood. Again, we have to
assure Canadians and win their trust in our blood supply being
safe.
I conclude my remarks by acknowledging on behalf of the people
of Surrey Central the courage of our eastern country men and
women in facing the ice storm. We pledge to learn from what has
happened to them. We pledge to ensure that these lessons are not
lost on the federal government.
Congratulations to all those who survived this disaster. I
would also like to thank all those volunteers who worked
tirelessly throughout this disaster.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): It being 1.24 a.m.,
the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been
adopted.
This House stands adjourned until later today at 10 a.m.,
pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 1.24 a.m.)