37th PARLIAMENT,
1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 098
CONTENTS
Friday, October 19, 2001
|
|
Government Orders
|
|
|
Customs Act |
|
|
Speaker's
Ruling |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Motions in Amendment
|
|
|
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ) |
|
|
Mr. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga--Maisonneuve,
BQ) |
|
|
Mr. Darrel Stinson (Okanagan—Shuswap,
Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
|
|
|
Bernard Mascarenhas |
|
|
Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan (York North,
Lib.) |
|
|
Marine Conservation
Areas |
|
|
Mr. Andy Burton (Skeena, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Organ Donations |
|
|
Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough,
Lib.) |
|
|
Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
Month |
|
|
Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre,
Lib.) |
|
|
Amnesty International |
|
|
Mrs. Karen Redman (Kitchener Centre,
Lib.) |
|
|
Canada Winter Games |
|
|
Mrs. Carol Skelton
(Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Order of Canada |
|
|
Mr. Serge Marcil (Beauharnois—Salaberry,
Lib.) |
|
|
Canadian Museum of
Civilization |
|
|
Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval
Centre, BQ) |
|
|
Diamond Industry |
|
|
Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton,
Lib.) |
|
|
Air Canada |
|
|
Mr. James Moore (Port
Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Peacekeeping |
|
|
Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mackenzie-Papineau
Battalion |
|
|
Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill,
NDP) |
|
|
Tax Havens |
|
|
Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides,
BQ) |
|
|
National Security |
|
|
Mr. Derek Lee (Scarborough—Rouge River,
Lib.) |
|
|
The Environment |
|
|
Mr. John Herron (Fundy—Royal,
PC/DR) |
|
|
National Security |
|
|
Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert,
Lib.) |
|
|
Airline Industry |
|
|
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
|
|
|
Immigration |
|
|
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Anti-terrorism
Legislation |
|
|
Ms. Caroline St-Hilaire (Longueuil,
BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Ms. Caroline St-Hilaire (Longueuil,
BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur
(Berthier--Montcalm, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur
(Berthier--Montcalm, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
National Defence |
|
|
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North
Centre, NDP) |
|
|
Hon. Art Eggleton (Minister of National
Defence, Lib.) |
|
|
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North
Centre, NDP) |
|
|
Hon. Art Eggleton (Minister of National
Defence, Lib.) |
|
|
Health |
|
|
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill,
Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill,
Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Anti-terrorism
legislation |
|
|
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Justice |
|
|
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Health |
|
|
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve,
BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve,
BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Immigration |
|
|
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant
(Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant
(Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
National Security |
|
|
Mr. Shawn Murphy (Hillsborough,
Lib.) |
|
|
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.) |
|
|
Employment Insurance |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.) |
|
|
Health |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Mr. André Bachand (Richmond--Arthabaska,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Mr. Jeannot Castonguay (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.) |
|
|
Anti-Terrorism
Legislation |
|
|
Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert,
Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert,
Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.) |
|
|
Canadian Security Intelligence
Service |
|
|
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Solicitor
General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ) |
|
|
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Solicitor
General of Canada, Lib.) |
|
|
National Security |
|
|
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.) |
|
|
Health |
|
|
Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Jeannot Castonguay (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Agriculture |
|
|
Mr. David Anderson (Cypress
Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. David Anderson (Cypress
Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.) |
|
|
Guaranteed Income
Supplement |
|
|
Mr. Marcel Gagnon (Champlain,
BQ) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.) |
|
|
Public Works |
|
|
Mr. Alan Tonks (York South—Weston,
Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Paul Szabo (Parliamentary Secretary
to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.) |
|
|
Canada Customs and Revenue
Agency |
|
|
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.) |
|
|
Highway Infrastructure |
|
|
Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold (Jonquière,
BQ) |
|
|
Mr. André Harvey (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Lib.) |
|
|
Health |
|
|
Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill,
NDP) |
|
|
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.) |
|
|
Infrastructure |
|
|
Mr. Loyola Hearn (St. John's West,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Mr. Alex Shepherd (Parliamentary
Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.) |
|
|
Heritage Canada |
|
|
Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier,
Lib.) |
|
|
Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian
Heritage, Lib.) |
|
|
Anti-terrorism
Legislation |
|
|
Mr. James Moore (Port
Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister of State and
Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Privilege |
|
|
Purchase of Medications by Health
Canada |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Official
languages |
|
|
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans, BQ) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Mr. Michel Guimond |
|
|
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister of State and
Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.) |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Hon. Don Boudria |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark |
|
|
Hon. Don Boudria |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Mr. Michel Guimond |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Right Hon. Joe Clark |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
|
|
|
Interparliamentary
Delegations |
|
|
The Deputy Speaker |
|
|
Canadian Tourism
Commission |
|
|
Mr. Claude Drouin (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Industry, Lib.) |
|
|
Foreign Affairs and International
Trade |
|
|
Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre,
Lib.) |
|
|
Petitions |
|
|
Assisted
Suicide |
|
|
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Kidney Disease |
|
|
Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough,
Lib.) |
|
|
Trafficking in Baby
Parts |
|
|
Mr. Carmen Provenzano (Sault Ste. Marie,
Lib.) |
|
|
Detroit River |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
Questions on the Order
Paper |
|
|
Ms. Aileen Carroll (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.) |
|
|
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos) |
|
|
Government Orders
|
|
|
Customs Act |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
Ms. Sophia Leung (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Gilles-A. Perron
(Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ) |
|
|
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos) |
|
|
Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa
West--Nepean, Lib.) |
|
|
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos) |
|
|
Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa
West—Nepean, Lib.) |
|
|
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos) |
|
|
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
|
|
|
Broadcasting Act |
|
|
Mr. John Harvard (Charleswood—St.
James—Assiniboia, Lib.) |
|
|
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance) |
|
|
Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval
Centre, BQ) |
|
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP) |
|
|
Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette,
PC/DR) |
|
|
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance) |
|
|
Mr. Serge Marcil
(Beauharnois--Salaberry, Lib.) |
|
|
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos) |
CANADA
OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)
Friday, October 19, 2001
Speaker: The Honourable Peter
Milliken
The House met at 10 a.m.
Prayers
Government Orders
[Government Orders]
* * *
Customs Act
(1005)
[English]
The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill S-23, an
act to amend the Customs Act and to make related amendments to other
acts.
* * *
Speaker's
Ruling
The Deputy Speaker:
There are two motions in amendment standing on the
notice paper for the report stage of Bill S-23, an act to amend the Customs Act
and to make related amendments to other acts.
[Translation]
Motions Nos. 1 and 2 will be grouped for debate, but
voted on as follows.
A vote on Motion No. 1 will apply to Motion No. 2.
[English]
I shall now propose Motions Nos. 1 and 2 to the
House.
* * *
[Translation]
Motions in Amendment
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ)
moved:
That Bill S-23 be amended by adding
after line 22 on page 91 the following new clause: |
“85.1 At the end of the first year
after the coming into force of this Act, the Minister shall prepare a report on
the application of its provisions and of any regulations made under those
provisions, and shall lay the report without delay before the Standing
Committee on Finance.” |
That Bill S-23 be amended by adding
after line 22 on page 91 the following new clause: |
“85.2 After concluding its
proceedings and hearing all the witnesses whose attendance it considers
necessary, the Standing Committee on Finance shall report to the House of
Commons on its findings, assessments and recommendations with respect to any
amendments to be made to this Act.” |
He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the two
amendments I introduced today.
I should point out, first of all, that the Bloc
Quebecois is in favour of Bill S-23 overall.
It should also be pointed out that examination of this
bill was undertaken long before the events of September 11.
I will return to this point later, but perhaps those
events cast this bill in a new light and perhaps they also cause us to have a
number of concerns in connection with it.
Generally speaking, we are in favour of this bill,
because it is worthy of note that the government wishes to facilitate or
enhance the flow of trade, particularly between Canada and the U.S., as well as
border crossings by individuals.
I am often told just how strict Canada's customs system
is compared to other countries, and how this causes delays at its borders. I do
believe that the desire to facilitate or enhance border crossings is a laudable
decision.
That said, we must not be lose sight, specifically
because of the lessons learned from the events of September 11, of the need to
maintain and ensure the security of Canada.
This focuses attention on the two basic functions of
the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, which are, on the one hand, to
facilitate the crossing of persons and goods between Canada and other
countries, the United States in particular and, on the other, to ensure the
security of persons and goods entering Canada, and perhaps those leaving it as
well.
We have a number of reservations about this bill, among
them its considerable vagueness as to the precise application of its
provisions.
Much latitude is left to the regulatory authority. We
have not been very satisfied with what we have been able to see so far, in
terms of projected regulations,
On the one hand, we do not have a good idea of what
this bill's regulations will actually be and, on the other, what idea we do
have leads us to believe that the minister will have very considerable
arbitrary powers, which creates certain misgivings about the long term
application of the bill.
It is for this reason that we would like the proposed
legislation, once adopted, to be reviewed and debated in one year's time, in
order to allow us to assess the effect that it, and the related regulations,
have had. This will also give us the opportunity to see if, given the very
particular context we now find ourselves in, we have succeeded in maintaining
the delicate but important balance that I mentioned, between smooth trade flow
between Canada and other countries, particularly the United States, and the
flow of persons on the one hand, and maintaining and ensuring the security of
Canada's borders, on the other.
This is essentially the purpose of my amendments, which
would allow us to review the legislation in one year and also to hear from
witnesses in committee.
It was pointed out to me earlier that there may be a
jurisdiction problem.
(1010)
I had an informal discussion with the government House
leader, who told me that this bill specifies the particular committee we would
like to review the legislation. We only mentioned the House standing
committee.
The reason for this may be the Bloc's natural tendency
to want to leave the job of assessing what is good for the population to duly
elected members. We have some reservations regarding the other place, which is
made up, as we know, of persons who are appointed, and not always for the right
reasons. We acknowledge that there are some individuals in the other place who
have exceptional professional and personal qualities. However, the fact remains
that regardless of the intrinsic qualities of the individuals who make up the
other place, the appointment process casts a shadow on the credibility of the
institution in a so-called modern democracy such as Canada.
Obviously our natural inclination would be to have the
House of Commons, which, as I said, comprises duly elected representatives,
study this sort of thing. But if the technical nature of the amendments
presents a major obstacle for the government or the other house and would lead
ultimately to the defeat of these amendments, we would rather, and I will
perhaps have the opportunity to discuss this informally with the minister, go
the route of a single amendment by unanimous consent to have the appropriate
joint committee of both houses look after the revision.
However, what is important, if only to lessen concerns
and shadows of doubt in the bill, is for us to be able to integrate this clause
in the body of the law. There is a lot of talk about it at the moment in what
is perhaps not the right terminology in French. The aim essentially would be to
use the terms used with respect to C-36, a sunset clause. In other words, the
bill would have to be reviewed after a year.
I invite all my colleagues to support these amendment
proposals. It goes without saying, as I said a few moments ago, that I would
not want my colleagues to oppose these two motions just for technical reasons,
even if they are important enough to them to cause their defeat. If our
colleagues share our concerns, we could work things out to find a formulation
that suited all the parties involved.
However, the objective of these two proposed amendments
is valid. It is to ensure that we can review the bill after a year. It will
mean that, in the present context and given that the bill was drafted long
before the events of September 11, we could maintain this fragile but vital
balance between the movement of goods and persons between Canada and abroad and
the protection of Canadian borders.
(1015)
[English]
Mr. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak on behalf of the
coalition and take part in the debate on Bill S-23, an act to amend the Customs
Act and to make related amendments to other acts.
Let me begin by reiterating how important trade is to
Canada. We are historically a trading nation, going back to the beaver pelt.
Without the free movement of goods and services between our borders, our
standard of living would certainly be threatened. September 11 has changed how
our economy is operating, including the movement of goods and services between
our two borders.
There is no doubt the goal of the legislation is
reasonable. However September 11 changed all the parameters on how we treat our
borders. Provincial leaders are currently calling for perimeter security.
Canadian ministers are travelling to Washington weekly to discuss trade and
border issues with our counterparts.
Bill S-23 was drafted long before the September 11
event. The bill needs major changes in light of the present day discussions.
The coalition believes the bill needs to go back to the drawing board or be
scrapped all together. There is no doubt some of the amendments do have
merit.
The coalition certainly understands how important trade
is with up to a billion dollars a day going back and forth across our borders.
In a time of crisis our governments must work together
to ensure that the flow of business services is not interrupted. Both countries
benefit from this free flow of goods and services.
At this time I would like to quote from a trade
quarterly report written by the Canada-U.S. Interparliamentary Group. On the
topic of border crossings it does an excellent job in summarizing the problems.
The report begins by saying:
One need look no further then the
border to see the problems we are facing with a continental economy. While
there are 116 border crossings between the United States and Canada that handle
commercial traffic, almost 76% of commercial traffic uses only 9 crossings.
Much of the infrastructure is obsolete, even at those crossings that were
recently upgraded. Physical infrastructure appears to be only part of the
problem, as some suggest that our borders are enforcing a 19th century attitude
in a 21st century global economy. |
I presume that is why the bill has been tabled. The
report goes on to say:
NAFTA and the Shared Border Accord
were supposed to facilitate border crossing between Canada and the U.S.,
although anecdotal evidence from those involved in cross-border activities
suggest that crossing the border has actually gotten more difficult over the
past five years, rather than easier. |
Many propose a completely open border
between Canada and the U.S., à la those European Community countries that
signed onto the Schengen Agreement. These individuals point out that if
Europeans, who were fighting each other as recently as 55 years ago, can open
their borders to each other, then surely Americans and Canadians, who have not
fired at each other in anger for almost 200 years, could do
likewise. |
There are others in both countries
who believe that our border is already too open and would like to see more
restraints put on border travel. In the U.S., Canadians are only temporarily
exempted from the provisions of Section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which requires all foreigners to be
documented in and out of the country. If Section 110 were ever enforced, the
consequences for those industries that rely on cross-border commerce, like the
auto industry, would be devastating. |
Proponents for stricter border
control in Canada argue that without the border, Canada would be inundated with
American fugitives, firearms and drugs. Those in the United States claim a
tight border is required to keep out illegal immigrants, terrorists and drugs.
While there is some validity to these claims, in reality over 99% of people
crossing the border do not pose any security threat. |
(1020)
An official with the United States
Immigration and Naturalization Service (USINS) pointed out that with the
approximate 30 million crossings at the various Niagara Falls-Buffalo border
points, only 10,000 Canadians were deemed ineligible for entry into the U.S.
However, 9,500 of these individuals qualified for a waiver to regain the
eligibility. |
The Canada-United States border does
provide an effective tool for law enforcement agencies on both sides of the
border. The border provides these agencies with greater latitude to question
and search individuals than is permitted elsewhere in either country. The
challenge is to utilize these powers only with that small percentage of traffic
that poses a threat. We need to balance legitimate security concerns with
traffic management. The current process is adding millions, if not billions, of
dollars to the cost of cross border business. |
The Canadian Trucking Alliance has
calculated that for every minute that all trucks are held at the border, an
additional $8 million is added to the direct cost of cross-border shipping.
With an average delay of twenty minutes for trucks at the border, that means an
additional $160 million has been added to shipping costs. |
Both the American and Canadian
governments have tried a number of experimental projects to reduce the time
spent at the border. There is general agreement that there should be a minimal
amount of paperwork done at the border, but there are concerns about the
accuracy of the information currently being forwarded electronically. This is
one area where the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is the
answer to many of the problems, but it must be shown to be beneficial to all
parties involved. |
With regards to the movement of
people, pilot programs where individuals are pre-screened have had some
success. These programs provide border authorities with more information about
the individuals than they would otherwise obtain through the usual primary
interview at the border. However, the success of these programs has been
generally limited to those locations where the pre-screened individual benefits
from a dedicated commuter lane that significantly reduces the crossing time.
|
In closing, we understand that trade is very important
to the health of both countries. We believe that there is merit to some of the
amendments, but we would like to see the bill go back to the drawing board in
light of the events that occurred on September 11.
(1025)
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill S-23 today.
The Canadian Alliance is supporting the bill because it will speed up the flow
of goods and people entering Canada.
Bill S-23 is actually the product of indepth
consultations with trade and tourism sectors. As far as the amendments which
have been introduced this morning, we will support these as well. We do not
have any problem with them and it only makes sense to do that.
What I would like to address more than anything else is
what is not in the bill that is so important at this time. While assisting with
trade issues, the bill does address some equally important issues that we
consider to be positive including new penalty structures, improved equipment,
more strict controls over export mail and customs-controlled areas at
international airports.
We all know that the world as we knew it before
September 11 has changed a great deal. I strongly feel that Canada customs must
change as well. Since September 11 our frontline officers have done an
excellent job in securing our borders. Security is of the utmost importance. To
date, Canada customs has been about collection and not about protection. It is
time to reverse those. It is now about protection.
The Canadian Alliance would like to see Canada customs
removed from the tax collection agency of revenue Canada and moved into a law
enforcement department of the solicitor general. Long before the terrible
events of September 11, the auditor general recognized the fact that with more
than one hundred million travellers a year entering the country at 147 border
points and 13 international airports, the risks to Canada's safety and security
were extreme.
Last April the auditor general wrote about customs
officers and said that their main role now was to protect Canadians against
illegal activities such as smuggling or contraband or the unlawful entry of
inadmissible people. He said that their audit raised some concerns about how
well these risks were being managed. Since the tragedy on September 11, he had
the opportunity to meet with the Canadian Police Association and customs and
excise union. He said that both of these organizations, among many others, were
in full support of moving customs out of revenue Canada and into the solicitor
general department.
The role of customs officers is already very similar to
other peace officers. Customs officers in the last year have been issued
bulletproof vests, batons, pepper spray and have been given self defence and
use of force training to better enforce our laws. Recruitment requirements are
now more difficult. Labour Canada has also just contracted a consultant to
study the inherent risks of the job and this consultant will undoubtedly look
at the question of whether customs officers should be equipped with
firearms.
Let me just read a paragraph out of the regulations
that customs officers are required to follow in regard to security. Paragraph
16 of the regulations states that Customs officers shall not use force against
members of the public where it is known or strongly suspected that the
individual is carrying a weapon and considered dangerous if, in the judgment of
the officer involved, the use of force would present an undue risk to their
personal safety or to the safety of another officer or the public. In these
circumstances officers shall note the pertinent details of the case, permit the
individual to proceed unobstructed and then the officer shall notify police
immediately.
One of the problems with this policy is that in our
vast country many of the border crossings are hours away from local police
response.
(1030)
In other words, some dangerous character who arrives at
the border can come into Canada because customs officers are not properly
equipped or trained to detain and arrest and keep the individual from coming
in.
I can understand why the revenue agency would not be
equipped in that sense. In one agency we issue both bullet proof vests and
calculators. That will not detain the most ardent of criminals. It is time to
start issuing the proper equipment so customs officers can do a good job at the
border of being able to arrest, detain and hold individuals for the
police.
It is possible to do that but we must equip them
properly. Under the circumstances customs officers are at risk because they do
not have the tools to look after their needs. In particular they do not have
the tools to do their work at border crossings where there is only one guard on
duty. What chance would they have?
Across the southern border they have increased
personnel by 5,400. The last figure I heard was that possibly somewhere around
100 to 130 individuals would be moved into these positions in Canada. It does
not make any sense, particularly following September 11.
Why would we want to allow a known criminal, smuggler,
big drug pusher or terrorist into Canada for any length of time to roam around
and then hope the police would be able to round him up before the individual
caused any real problem? That does not make sense. The people at the border
crossings are our first line of defence. Let us give them the proper equipment
and tools so they can do their job as the front line of defence. We must let
them detain and let them arrest. Let us give them the tools to do that.
Another thing I find amazing is that at some border
crossings where they only have one individual they are only open for eight
hours. They shut the port down for anywhere from 12 to 16 hours. They put up a
little orange cone indicating that the border is closed. That would really mean
a great deal to somebody who wanted to get into Canada. It would not stop them
whatsoever.
If anyone thinks the criminal element or terrorists
will only try to come through our major ports they need to give their heads a
shake. They know about these ports. They know about the ability to come into
Canada. These crossings exist and they know it. That is where they will
go.
Let us get serious about tightening them up. Let us get
them out from under a collection agency and get them under a protection agency
that knows what is required to enforce the law to better protect Canadians. It
only makes sense to do that. I do not understand why we are hesitating or
reluctant to do that at this time.
In 1998 the government passed Bill C-18 which for the
first time in the history of Canada customs extended criminal code powers of
detention and arrest to customs officers. Does it not make sense that if
officers are to be given the power to enforce the criminal code they should
come under a different agency than tax collectors or Revenue Canada? One would
think that would be the case.
We are supporting Bill S-23 because we want the flow of
goods and services to continue in an uninterrupted manner and we want to do the
best we can to keep them going. However we must not forget that the top
priority today as a result of September 11 is the protection and safety of
Canadians, so let us do that.
Having said all that I have said, let us make sure we
make it a lot easier and safer for our front line officers by equipping and
training them properly, getting the right individuals into position and getting
them out of collection and into protection.
(1035)
[Translation]
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga--Maisonneuve,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address Bill S-23. My
comments are based on the discussions that our caucus had following the
proposals made by the hon. member for
Rivière-des-Mille-Îles,
who followed this bill on behalf of our party.
For the benefit of those who may not know it, Bill S-23
will change Canada Customs' controls and rules of operation within the Canada
Customs and Revenue Agency.
First I want to mention two points. This is a bill that
came from the other place. We are always somewhat uncomfortable with this way
of doing things. We do not question the fact that the Parliament of Canada is
bicameral, which means that it has two chambers. The same legislative process
must be followed in each of the two chambers. We know these rules of operation
and we do not question them.
However, the legitimacy of each chamber is not the
same, since we feel that any legislation should first be dealt with by the true
holders of democratic legitimacy, who are of course the elected representatives
sitting in the House of Commons.
Let me do a bit of history. The reason our benches and
the floor here in the House of Commons are green is because the Commons
represent the grassroots, it is the people's chamber and it reflects the
diversity found in the public.
It is no coincidence that, in the other place, the
furniture and the floor are red. Why are they red? Because it is the chamber of
the monarchy. When the Queen, who is theoretically the head of Canada, comes to
our country, she never goes to the House of Commons. She goes to the Senate.
There is even a chair reserved for her in the Senate. That is the big
difference.
We examined this bill very seriously. The hon. member
for
Rivière-des-Mille-Îles
did so, but I also want to mention the rather exceptional work done by Sylvain
Boyer, who helped us make the appropriate distinctions. Sylvain Boyer is a kind
of behind the scenes thinker who very discreetly sets the tone for all our
interventions.
Since we are discussing the Canada Customs and Revenue
Agency, we should remember that this agency is special in that it is not, in
theory, part of the public service.
In the House, we debated a bill in which there were
problems regarding unionization and labour relations. I think we will have the
opportunity to come back to these issues.
We are generally in favour of Bill S-23. However
marginally, it is a reminder of the events of September 11. It is obvious that
Canada, a large continental country, which shares several thousands of
kilometres of border with the United States, must have border controls. But
these controls must not prevent freedom of circulation between Canada and the
United States.
Why is it important to ensure that the flow of goods
and people between Canada and the United States is as streamlined as possible?
Because economic imperatives demand it, of course. Every day, thousands of
people cross the Canada-U.S. border, as do thousands of dollars in goods.
We want there to be the necessary controls when
circumstances require, but we also want fluidity between the two
countries.
This brings me to another point. In our plan for a
sovereign Quebec, it is clear that there will be no customs post between Quebec
and English Canada. We will welcome any measure that encourages freedom of
circulation.
(1040)
This was in Mr. Lévesque's 1967 white paper. It was
part of the 1980 referendum plan and the 1995 agreement: there will be no
customs offices between a sovereign Quebec and the rest of Canada.
The bill before us contains a number of measures. The
first has to do with providing for the expedited movement of persons who are
precleared and authorized to travel freely between Canada and the
U.S.
There will also be streamlined clearance procedures for
low risk passengers by pre-arrival risk assessment of passenger information.
This is the crux of the bill.
There are people who travel on a regular basis, such as
MPs going from one place to another, business people, people in positions of
authority which require them to make representations at various times.
Obviously, because they travel frequently, are honest citizens and are known to
customs officials, these people do not represent a threat to the integrity and
security of either country. Provision must be made for very streamlined
procedures for these individuals.
This bill addresses such a measure as it relates to
requests for information provided by individuals and how it will be handled. We
welcome this measure, and have no problem with it.
Another provision of this bill addresses the
requirements for provision of information under the existing act. We have no
problem with that either.
Obviously, we understand that people do travel and that
information must always be available on who is on a plane, who is preparing to
go through customs. This is a matter of security, and there may be a need to
contact people quickly. We are, of course, in agreement with such a
provision.
There is also going to be a harmonization of the
provisions relating to the recovery of monies owing under this act, the Income
Tax Act and the Excise Tax Act. This is self-evident.
Where the problem lies, and the reason, I believe, for
the amendments presented by the hon member for Verchères--Les Patriotes, is the
coming into effect of this law and the extremely important role played by the
regulatory context.
The categories of individuals to be processed more
rapidly are determined by regulation. Implementation of the law is determined
by its regulations.
As for the various administrative penalties, the fact
that there is provision for 250 different ones to be set out in the regulations
concerning the various offences relating to the transit of goods and
individuals poses a problem for us.
Moreover, this government's predilection for such vague
provisions in a piece of legislation is most unacceptable.
Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold: Unclear
provisions.
Mr. Réal Ménard: The hon. member for Jonquière
calls them unclear. Why not make it a habit in this House to introduce bills
that are clear as to their intent, with provisions that can be evaluated, that
will not present ambiguity to parliamentarians?
This is unfortunate, because the bill is based on good
intentions. Of course, we disagree with the fact that it came from the other
place but, overall, the Bloc Quebecois supports the harmonization of customs
procedures.
Customs must be much more effective at clearing persons
and goods. However, a power that is much too broad will be granted through
future regulations, and the discretionary power given to the minister is also
very broad.
We proposed amendments and I will read one:
85.1 At the end of the first year
after the coming into force of this Act, the Minister shall prepare a report on
the application of its provisions and of any regulations— |
I will conclude by saying that, after the act has been
in force for one year, we hope that an evaluation will be made of the measures
triggered by this act.
(1045)
[English]
Mr. Darrel Stinson (Okanagan—Shuswap,
Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise here today to
speak to not only the amendments but also the bill.
We all know that since the attack on the United States
on September 11 the world has changed. Most important, North America has
changed. We have to look at many areas not only to tighten up Canada's security
but also to address the fact that through some of these measures our trade
routes might be impacted.
Canada is a nation of trade. It was built on trade. Our
biggest trading partner is the United States which we depend mostly upon. In
order to achieve the goals that are needed in Canada and the United States, it
is necessary for all government employees to address this concern. It impacts
on our daily lives, particularly on the lives of those who are trying to move
trade back and forth. We already have some information that companies are
looking at moving their operations south of the 49th parallel because of some
of these concerns.
Bill S-23 will address some of those concerns. That is
why I say here today that I give qualified support to it. I still have many
concerns with regard to what has not taken place, what has not been introduced
in this bill, and the speed with which this has taken place, which in my
opinion has not been fast enough on a number of issues.
There are concerns expressed by the public, not only
here in Canada but also in the United States. One of the big concerns we hear
is that here in Canada many people think that through co-operation with the
United States we will lose some of our sovereignty, that we will lose what we
take to be wholly Canadian. That is not true. That part of it is a
myth.
Americans have concerns that Canada will not implement
a lot of what it has been talking about with regard to our borders. That has
grown over the years. Even as the ministers have stated in the House, we have
been very lax. We have allowed a lot of our laws and policies to be abused.
That can be addressed. All of those concerns can be addressed.
What we have to understand first is that it is only a
border and we are dealing with a continent. In order to achieve that, we should
be harmonizing as close as possible with the allies we trade with. That becomes
the most important thing. We have to be able to move our goods back and forth.
We have to look at ways of speeding up the movement of the legitimate people
that come to Canada.
I will quote something by Gordon Giffin who was the
U.S. ambassador to Canada until last April. He talks about harmonizing, but
there is another issue he discusses. “We have talked about a perimeter of
defence to try and offset some of the concerns that are happening at the border
and I am strongly in favour of that”.
He goes on to mention: “Perimeter policy does not imply
unilateral action. Actually, it offers an opportunity for Canada to define the
agenda for this dialogue”. Here is the interesting part: “Since the 1950s we
have jointly defended North American airspace through NORAD, American and
Canadian military personnel working together with seamless binational command
authorities. Both procedures were not unilaterally imposed by the U.S. and
Canada is not less sovereign for its role in that initiative. Surely if we can
have a military perimeter policy, we can find better ways to collaborate on the
civilian side as well. Canada and the United States share much more than
geography as our shared goals that provide the foundation for this
task”.
(1050)
The good news is that there are people here in Canada
and the United States that are working toward achieving those goals. If Europe
can figure out how to simply enact legislation that allows goods to flow
freely, surely we can do no less here in Canada and the United States. It
becomes mandatory.
In order to achieve that, we have to look at our
customs agency. Most people in Canada have the mistaken impression that the
customs agents are our first line of defence. In some aspects it is true on the
inspection part. A real strange thing is that our customs agency is basically
underneath the revenue department and not the justice system. The citizens of
our country are depending upon those customs agents out there to stop the flow
across our borders of certain goods or people yet they have no power to detain
them nor the equipment to stop them.
I find that very strange as do the people in the United
States and other countries. If we are going to base customs strictly on revenue
and taxation, then at least give our customs officers calculators and let them
know that is their mandate.
If we are going to do what is necessary in order to
secure our borders, then let us properly equip our customs officers. Let us
train them to be officers and not tax collectors. Let us put our first line of
defence back where it should be, at our borders.
Today if a customs officer has a problem with people
coming into Canada, if somebody coming across the border threatens a customs
officer, if a customs officer feels that he is being threatened, if he or she
feels that the people coming in are armed or dangerous, they are supposed to
let them cross our border unimpeded and phone the RCMP. Coming from a province
where some of our customs officers may be an hour to an hour and a half away
from the closest RCMP detachment, I find that very strange. In a province like
British Columbia, within an hour to an hour and a half people can disappear
awfully fast. They can also swap any goods being brought across the border
illegally without being noticed. That is a major concern. We hear this across
the board regarding our custom agents and also the American agents.
Another area of concern is the sharing of information.
This must be mandatory. As we receive information about safety concerns
regarding the flow of people across our borders, we should be obligated to
share those concerns not just with one or two, but with all law enforcement
agencies in Canada and the United States. Until we are able to harmonize that
information and finally come to the realization that we are no longer innocent
people in the world and can no longer live underneath the old rules that we
were used to, that we must tighten our security, we will always have these
concerns.
To do that we have to implement some of the amendments
that are put forward in this bill and hope that the government will listen and
act upon them. That becomes of primary importance. If we are to have free
travel and trade routes and keep that trade flowing to eliminate hours of
backlog at the border, we must address not only the concerns of the American
people but also the concerns of Canadians who have come forward so strongly
since September 11.
(1055)
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak to the bill
today, not because of what is in it but for the opportunity to address issues
that should be raised concerning the travel of people and commercial goods
across the border between ourselves and the United States.
Before I address the specifics of the bill I will
express our party's displeasure with the fact that this very important issue
has been addressed once again at the Senate level. The issue, which before
September was crucial for my riding in terms of ongoing economic viability, has
become extremely important since September 11 yet is being addressed by a body
that is unelected and unaccountable. This is a policy that the government has
unfortunately followed all too often.
I will emphasize a point that a number of other members
have made, that the bill and the issues it addresses were all addressed prior
to September 11. We have said ad nauseam that our lives as individuals and as a
society as a whole in North America have changed dramatically since September
11. As a result the bill is inadequate to deal with the issues around moving
goods and people across the border between ourselves and the United States.
To digress for one moment, the Bloc has raised a couple
of amendments. I express our support for those amendments. Since both the
amendments deal with an early review of the legislation we would like to see
the bill withdrawn and sent back to the planning stages because it is
inadequate for the needs we faced before September 11 and even more so since
the tragedy and the outflow from those events.
I will begin to address the balance that the bill
attempted to reach, and that it clearly has not achieved, between the issues of
security, the free flow of goods and people across the border, and, because it
has raised its head, the issue of civil liberties for both travellers and
employees on the Canadian side of the border.
The Deputy Speaker:
I wish I did not have to interrupt the hon. member but
I must proceed to statements by members at this time. After question period he
will have approximately seven minutes remaining in his intervention.
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
[S. O. 31]
* * *
[English]
Bernard Mascarenhas
Mrs. Karen Kraft Sloan (York North,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, a constituent of mine from York North,
Bernard Mascarenhas, worked as the managing director at Marsh Canada. On
Tuesday, September 11, 2001, Bernard was working at the company's offices at
the World Trade Center in New York City. He did not survive the catastrophic
destruction of the terrorist attack.
Over 20 years ago Mr. Mascarenhas adopted Canada as his
new country. He was a hardworking man who did very well in his profession. He
was also a very humble man who gave much of himself to help those less
fortunate. He loved his family and was devoted to his wife Raynette, son Sven
and daughter Jaclyn.
In honouring the thousands of people who perished on
September 11, we must remember that they were individuals like Bernard
Mascarenhas who worked hard, gave to their community, loved and were
loved.
* * *
Marine Conservation
Areas
Mr. Andy Burton (Skeena, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a matter of great
importance to my constituents. I have been working to amend Bill C-10, the
badly flawed government bill on marine conservation areas.
Over 25 organizations, municipalities, chambers of
commerce and fishing groups have made their concerns known to me and through me
to the committee. Unfortunately less than half will have the opportunity to
present their concerns to the committee. The government has done a poor job of
consulting with British Columbians.
The Union of B.C. Municipalities passed a unanimous
resolution calling on the government to consult widely prior to passing the
bill. The bill has the potential to seriously hamper offshore oil and gas
exploration on the west coast, a resource an ailing British Columbia economy
badly needs to build its future.
I ask the government, on behalf of my constituents, to
please listen to our concerns and delete clause 13. I ask it not to stand in
the way of B.C.'s offshore oil and gas development.
* * *
(1100)
Organ Donations
Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, Canada lags behind other countries in
organ donations despite the efforts of various groups and
individuals.
The problem appears to lie with the relatives of people
who are unexpectedly taken. Often the driver's licence or other documents
declaring the deceased's wishes to donate organs are found too late or those
wishes are simply not acted upon.
Organ transplant technology has advanced very rapidly
in recent years. It is tragic that sick people cannot take advantage of this
for lack of available organs. A national organ registry would help. Those who
wished to donate organs would all be listed in the same place, making
verification of their wishes easier. This would ensure that their wishes were
carried out.
Let us all work to improve organ donations in
Canada.
* * *
Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
Month
Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, October is Child Abuse and Neglect
Prevention Month. The purple ribbon members of parliament have received
represents the campaign to make Canadians aware of the importance of early
intervention and prevention of child abuse and neglect.
Ever since the purple ribbon campaign was started by
the Durham Children's Aid Society in 1992, a growing number of organizations
dedicated to protecting children and children's rights have joined in. Last
year 39 agencies participated.
The Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies
reports that by working together these agencies are accomplishing their
objective to educate the public and take the message to wider
audiences.
During the month of October I encourage all my
colleagues in the House to support this campaign and to focus on the work of
children's aid societies so that one day, child abuse will become a thing of
the past.
* * *
Amnesty International
Mrs. Karen Redman (Kitchener Centre,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I ask hon. members of the House to join me
today in recognizing Amnesty International Week.
Amnesty International is among the most highly
respected human rights organizations in the world and was awarded the Nobel
peace prize in 1977.
Amnesty's work enables people to make a difference. All
around the world there are innocent people, poets, human rights activists,
journalists and others, who are imprisoned, tortured, executed or who simply
disappear. Amnesty International speaks out for the rights of these innocent
people, telling officials that these individuals are not anonymous. Often it
has led to their release.
Amnesty International's work is particularly relevant
in the new world that has emerged since September 11. Amnesty's work on behalf
of refugees and its commitment to human rights provides hope and courage in
today's world.
I ask Canadians to join me today in lighting a candle
to prove that, as the old Chinese proverb says, “It is better to light one
candle than to curse the darkness”.
* * *
Canada Winter Games
Mrs. Carol Skelton
(Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, I was delighted to travel to New Brunswick
this fall. The residents of the cities of Bathurst and Campbellton were warm
and inviting.
While there I learned that these cities will jointly
host the 2003 Canada Winter Games. The Minister of Labour awarded the games to
the Bathurst-Campbellton bid committee in 1999.
These games will see participants from Canada's ten
provinces and three territories. The games will provide an opportunity for
dedicated athletes to participate and compete against their peers. Races will
be won, awards will be presented and friendships will be formed.
I was also made aware during that visit that the
minister made a campaign promise to provide $2.5 million for these games. Has
the minister fulfilled her promise to the people of New Brunswick and the
Canadian athletes of the 2003 Canada Winter Games?
* * *
[Translation]
Order of Canada
Mr. Serge Marcil (Beauharnois—Salaberry,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, the Governor General of
Canada presided over a ceremony for new members of the Order of
Canada.
During this prestigious ceremony, 48 Canadians were
honoured for their contribution to our nation. The Order of Canada is the
highest honour for lifetime achievement.
I would like to pay tribute to these persons who,
through their commitment, deserve the recognition of all Canadians.
I would particularly like to congratulate the Quebecers
who received the honour. Their accomplishments have helped our society to
develop and move in the right direction.
* * *
(1105)
Canadian Museum of
Civilization
Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval
Centre, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Canadian Museum of
Civilization launched an exhibit entitled “The Lands within Me”, in reference
to the many places that have shaped the works of the 26 artists of Arab origin,
of whom more than half have chosen to live in Quebec.
The works presented, both in their choice of medium and
in the texts that accompany them, clearly illustrate that artistic expression
cannot be dissociated from the human experience. All we need to do now is take
the time to recognize how it affects us.
I would recommend this exhibition to everyone. There
are pieces that are both stunning and significant, such as Karim Rholem's
magnificent photograph, entitled “A Family Resemblance”. Rholem is a Quebecer
of Moroccan origin who introduces us to the Giroux family, a family of 11
living in Sainte-Rose de Laval.
The exhibition's curator, Aïda Kaouk is right in
stating that “The Lands within Me” invites us to broaden the view we have of
others, who may be different in their origins, but who are similar in their
human experiences.
* * *
[English]
Diamond Industry
Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I introduced Bill C-402, an act
to prohibit the importation of conflict diamonds into Canada.
We know the marketing lines that “diamonds are a girl's
best friend” or that “diamonds are forever”, but to many people on the African
continent, diamonds mean something completely different.
The illegal diamond trade has been used to finance the
activities of rebel groups in places like Sierra Leone, Angola and the
Democratic Republic of Congo. To many Africans, diamonds do not mean eternal
love, they mean death, destruction and suffering.
This illegal trade must be stopped. It not only
threatens human rights, political stability, economic development and peace and
security in a number of areas, it also threatens the legitimate diamond trade
in countries like Botswana, South Africa and indeed Canada.
We have been a leader in the Kimberley process which
involves an international system for the certification of rough diamonds. We
must work to ensure the Kimberley process is successful if we are to finally
eliminate the trade in conflict diamonds.
* * *
[Translation]
Air Canada
Mr. James Moore (Port
Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, it seems the reduced fares announced by
Air Canada may not be fair.
The discounts are significant, but Quebec City is not
on the list of originating cities. In fact, the fare between Toronto and Quebec
is $100 more than the fare between Toronto and Winnipeg. This is
absurd.
For far too long, the people of Quebec City have paid
exorbitant fares to fly. Air Canada is the only airline serving Quebec City. It
would be unfair for it to increase its fares and benefit accordingly from its
monopoly.
I want to assure this House and the people of Quebec
City that I will monitor Air Canada's fares closely on all flights between
Quebec City and other Canadian cities.
It is vital to ensure the rights of Quebec travellers
are protected, and we will fight to see they are.
* * *
[English]
Peacekeeping
Hon. Wayne Easter (Malpeque,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to acknowledge in parliament
two residents of Prince Edward Island who have been honoured as recipients of
Canada's prestigious peacekeeping award.
They are Mr. Blair Darrach of New Haven, who served
with the special forces units in the 1960s and 1970s, including two missions to
Cyprus, and Mr. Thomas Albrecht of Albany, who served with the Canadian forces
from 1963 to 1979, participating in missions to Cyprus, Egypt and the Golan
Heights.
Blair, Tom and their families exemplify the best of our
service men and women. They have shown a willingness to serve in some of the
world's most troubled places and enhanced our nation's efforts to make this a
more peaceful world.
I congratulate and thank them for a job well done and
for the inspiration they provided to others.
* * *
Mackenzie-Papineau
Battalion
Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill,
NDP):
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the unveiling of
the national Mackenzie-Papineau monument honouring the bravery and sacrifices
of the Canadians who fought against fascism in the Spanish Civil War from 1936
to 1939.
Recognition of the Mac-Paps is long overdue. Former New
Democrat MP Nelson Riis worked tirelessly to win Mac-Pap veterans and their
survivors the war pensions they deserve.
The Canadians who volunteered for the Mac-Pap Battalion
were true heroes, motivated by their convictions to risk everything in the name
of freedom and democracy. They went despite attempts by the Canadian government
of the day to stop them. Their valour in the field did our nation proud.
The Mac-Paps are an integral part of Canada's long
history of involvement in the worldwide struggle against tyranny. That struggle
continues today.
As Canadians and parliamentarians, it is our duty to
support the members of the Canadian armed forces who serve our country today,
the loved ones they leave behind, as well as to honour and provide for the
veterans who served in the conflicts of yesterday.
The Mac-Paps have a rightful place in that storied
heritage. May this new monument stand forever as a fitting reminder of their
valour.
* * *
(1110)
[Translation]
Tax Havens
Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, the superintendent of financial
institutions has asked Canadian banks to co-operate in the FBI's efforts to
trace and freeze funds belonging to terrorist groups.
We have often asked the Minister of Finance to report
on this and tell us whether such co-operation should extend to foreign branches
of Canadian banks. This question is basic, since the funds often comprise dirty
money, which is laundered in perfectly honest institutions, but in countries
considered tax havens, which are very permissive and which, according to the
OECD, do not look too closely at its source.
The major Canadian banks have a lot of branches in the
Caribbean, a total of 50 for fewer than 2 million people, in a region that is
the very best place for tax havens.
The Minister of Finance must answer these questions and
unequivocally fight the practices of the tax havens, an excellent breeding
ground for terrorists' financial power.
* * *
[English]
National Security
Mr. Derek Lee (Scarborough—Rouge River,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in the face of recent news of anthrax
scares and terrorist threats around the world, I would like to take a moment to
emphasize the importance of a calm and rational response.
It is understandable that at a time such as this
individuals might give in to fear and panic. It is crucial that we all remain
alert but it is equally important that we not succumb to the temptation to see
the world only through the lens of our fear, amplified by repeat media
broadcasts. This is exactly what the terrorists would want.
Common sense is our greatest ally as we struggle with
the new realities of the world around us. The government has sought a reasoned
and measured response to the threat which balances security needs with the
individual rights of our citizens. We have taken strong measures to ensure the
safety of all Canadians.
Once again I urge Canadians to remain strong, rational
and level-headed as we all work together to confront this new world
reality.
* * *
The Environment
Mr. John Herron (Fundy—Royal,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, on Monday I will be visiting the proposed
site of the American based Sumas 2 energy plant along with the coalition
leader, the member for Fraser Valley.
Emissions from the planned Washington border location
are expected to compound existing air quality problems for the Fraser Valley.
The site is located in a sensitive air pocket that traps emissions, making it
difficult for area residents to breathe.
The Fraser Valley has one of the most stressed air
spaces in Canada, due mostly to the cumulative effect of the pressure that air
pollutants have and the effect they have on human health.
Health officials, environmentalists and many other
individuals are saying that the site of power generating plants is absolutely
paramount. The municipality, the provincial Liberals and the MP for Fraser
Valley have all expressed concerns about the planned site. The only ones who
have not so far are the environment minister for British Columbia and the
environment minister for Canada.
When will the federal Minister of the Environment join
with other individuals in British Columbia and stand up for the people in the
Fraser Valley?
* * *
[Translation]
National Security
Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, after the events of September 11, I
noticed an escalation in the fears of Canadians. Security is certainly one of
our main concerns.
I am pleased to see that our government is committed to
making sure that we can live according to our values and beliefs. The measures
it has put in place are reassuring.
I would mention a number of examples: border post
security has been increased; a new citizenship card has been announced; a
cabinet committee on security has been formed; and a new bill to protect us
against terrorism is now before this House.
I believe that our government is responding
satisfactorily to the concerns of Canadians. It is responsible and it is
vigilant.
* * *
(1115)
[English]
Airline Industry
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, the transport minister has said that he
does not favour air marshals on planes because airports can be made totally
secure.
That would be fine except last Sunday in Toronto an
airport worker was observed going around the security measures, obviously a
friend of someone who was doing that screening. If pilots, passengers and
janitors must go through then so too should airport workers. That is not very
comforting. This was reported to Transport Canada and no action has been taken
yet.
Air marshals would make passengers more comfortable.
They would not carry weapons that would puncture the fuselage of a plane but a
specific weapon that would take out a terrorist. I believe the use of air
marshals would be sensible and I believe most Canadians share that
feeling.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
[Oral Questions]
* * *
[English]
Immigration
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, despite the sometimes overheated rhetoric
and reply of the minister of immigration, no one in the House is talking about
wanting to build penal colonies for refugees who show up here without
identification papers.
We are simply asking the minister to put in place a
system that would detain persons who arrive here without papers until it can be
proven they are not a security risk. It is simple. What problem does the
minister have with that?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what exists today. When
people arrive at a port of entry and make a claim, they are fingerprinted,
photographed and an extensive interview takes place. If there is any concern
that they may pose a security risk to Canada, whether they have documents or
not, but especially if they are undocumented, then they are
detained.
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, for how long?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for the leader of
the official opposition to know that we detain an individual for as long as
necessary. In fact, if we believe that individuals pose a danger to Canada
there is a security certificate procedure now in place which, by the way, the
new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act actually streamlines and makes it
easier for us to be able to remove those individuals.
Mr. Stockwell Day (Leader of the
Opposition, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, she did not answer the question. They are
not detained for any great length of time.
[Translation]
The question is a simple one. Identification papers are
required to board an airplane bound for Canada. Yet, every day, people arrive
here without them.
Could the minister assure us that people who arrive
here without papers will be automatically detained until it can be shown that
they are not a security threat?
[English]
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition
would have us believe that all undocumented refugees who come to Canada are
terrorists or criminals and should be detained under mandatory provisions. It
is false that they are all terrorists or criminals.
Further, as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration I
am not going to detain a woman who comes to our border with her children simply
because she does not have documents. If she poses a threat, that is a different
question, but for someone who does not pose a threat, no, sir, not in
Canada.
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, that was a smear and nothing but a
smear.
Let me switch over to the justice minister. Yesterday
in Vancouver a man who was wanted in the U.S. for being a purchasing agent for
Hezbollah was released on bail. The justice minister has the power and the
authority to extradite this individual so that he can face those accusations in
the States. Will she do it?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I want to inform the House that my lawyers
were in court opposing the bail application and we argued against the provision
of bail. I have to respect the decision of the court in that case. It did grant
bail to the individual in question.
Mr. Grant Hill (Macleod, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, obviously the answer is no.
Listen to the stuff this guy provided: mine detection
and blasting equipment, aircraft analysis software, stun guns, photographic
equipment, global positioning equipment. This is not the sort of fellow that I
think we should have on bail in Canada.
This minister has the power to extradite. I ask again,
is she going to do it?
(1120)
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member should be aware this
matter is before the court. In fact, I may well be called upon to make a final
decision as to whether or not this person is extradited. It would be
inappropriate for me to comment at this point when this matter is before the
court.
* * *
[Translation]
Anti-terrorism
Legislation
Ms. Caroline St-Hilaire (Longueuil,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, following the events of September 11, it
was agreed that, in order to avoid proving terrorists right, a balance had to
be maintained between the values of democracy, freedom and security.
If the government is serious when it says that we must
be prudent and wise in dealing with the September terrorist attacks, does it
realize that the signals it is sending to the public are very
disturbing?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in fact as we have said on a number of
occasions, we believe that we have struck the right balance in our legislation
to deal with the evils of terrorism. We recognize that this is an important
task. It is one that we take up very seriously.
It is also one that I look forward to working with our
Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to, because in fact
as I have said in the House on a number of occasions, I look forward to their
advice and their recommendations to ensure we get that balance.
[Translation]
Ms. Caroline St-Hilaire (Longueuil,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, whether it is the Access to Information
Act, the Protection of Privacy Act, the Patent Act, the criminal code, the
electronic surveillance legislation or any other act, we simply fear that
rights and freedoms which, until now, we thought were sheltered from arbitrary
decisions by the government, will now be vulnerable.
What message does the government want to send to the
public, which is concerned about the use the government could make of the
exceptional powers it is in the process of grabbing?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member
that what Canadians want is to be protected effectively and fairly from the
scourge of terrorism. That is what we believe our anti-terrorism legislation
provides.
However, I have already indicated that while we believe
we have struck the appropriate balance, some of these issues that are
implicated in the legislation are things on which reasonable people of good
faith can disagree. That is why we have a parliamentary committee process. That
is why we will hear from the committee. I look forward to its advice and
recommendations.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur
(Berthier--Montcalm, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, in special legislation such as this one,
definitions are of critical importance. The starting point for a fair use of
these powers is undoubtedly the definition of terrorist activity.
All week long, the minister has been telling us that
the terrorist activity that is targeted is the one that generates terror, but
this is not at all reflected in the bill.
Will the minister confirm that the concept of terror is
nowhere to be found in the bill's definition of terrorist activity?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, in fact let me point out to the hon.
member that what we are defining is terrorist activity. We are not defining
violent activity. We are defining terrorist activity. Therefore I would ask the
hon. member to keep in mind that is what we are concentrating on. That is what
we are focused on in this legislation: those who would use terror to achieve
their goals.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur
(Berthier--Montcalm, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, the term terror is not mentioned in the
definition. Through her answer, the minister herself has shown that there is
room for interpretation, even before the bill is passed.
How does the minister think that a police officer who
has to implement the act a year from now will do so in the heat of the moment?
If the minister, who drafted the bill, is interpreting its provisions, does she
not think that the police officer will do the same and that things could get
out of hand?
This is precisely what Canadians and Quebecers fear.
They fear that the act may not be applied properly. My question is very simple:
the word terror is not mentioned in the legislation.
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, what I find interesting is listening to
the hon. member who is always very quick to criticize that which we on this
side are trying to do, but not when called upon for constructive
recommendations to help us.
I indicated yesterday at committee that we believe the
definition of terrorist activity is sufficiently precise and clear. However, I
made it plain to the committee that if it can help us in terms of language that
will achieve what I hope are shared objectives I will be very interested in
hearing that advice. So far all the hon. member does is--
(1125)
The Deputy Speaker:
The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre.
* * *
National Defence
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North
Centre, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, the United States has confirmed that
American troops are now on the ground in southern Afghanistan and certainly
Canadians have reason to believe that our own soldiers who are part of the
joint task force two might also be deployed there in the near
future.
In every military operation there is a set of clear
goals and objectives to be attained. My question for the defence minister is
quite simple. What are the victory conditions?
Hon. Art Eggleton (Minister of National
Defence, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as has been said many times, obviously the
suppression of terrorism is our goal. Obviously we want Canadians, Americans
and all people in the free world to be able to live without fear of the kinds
of attacks that were experienced on September 11. To be able to flush out these
organizations, to break them up, to cut off their funding, to cut off their
recruitment, to cut off their communications with each other, these are all
part of the objectives. That has been made clear right from the
beginning.
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North
Centre, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, attacking the root causes of terrorism is
an action. It is not a victory condition. Canadians really want to know when
this war will be over. It is a legitimate question and I hope the minister
would agree.
What is there to be achieved? Is it arresting bin
Laden, overthrowing the Taliban, destroying Afghanistan's infrastructure? What
is it? What are the conditions before all Canadian troops can come back
home?
Hon. Art Eggleton (Minister of National
Defence, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, rather than repeat what I just said, which
really in effect answers the hon. member's question, let me also say that this
is a multi-dimensional campaign. It involves more than just military action. In
fact in the long run it will be won by means other than military power. There
is no doubt that root causes, what causes people to join these kinds of
organizations, all have to be examined.
Again I must say that in terms of the current action in
Afghanistan it is not against Afghanistan or the Afghanistan people, but to be
able to flush out the terrorists and their supporters.
* * *
Health
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, since Bayer has a patent for the drug
Cipro and it has adequate stock on hand, why would the government break the law
by getting a generic manufacturer to produce it?
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the
question, but I do want to report that Health Canada officials have been and
continue to be in discussions with Bayer to work out any difficulties or
issues.
I think that the hon. member and his party, all members
of the House, Bayer and others in Canada should be willing to work together to
serve what I trust we all agree is the main priority, protecting the health of
Canadians.
Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, there is also the tiny problem of breaking
the law that perhaps the minister should be careful with. The minister did not
seek authorization from the patent commissioner or Bayer prior to awarding the
contract to Apotex to produce a generic version of the drug.
Since the government has not declared a state of
emergency, since it has not sought permission from the patent commissioner
under section 19 of the Patent Act, and since it has not asked Bayer for
permission, it is breaking the law, plain and simple.
Is the real reason the minister chose Apotex to produce
the drug that Apotex gave tens of thousand of dollars to the Liberal Party of
Canada? Is that it?
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has misstated the Patent
Act. There is no requirement to declare a case of national emergency. The act
can apply to extreme urgency or where the use for which the authorization is
sought is a public or non-commercial use.
The hon. member is totally off base in his allegations.
I do not know why he and his party fail to be concerned with the main priority,
protecting the health of Canadians. Why is that not important to
them?
Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill,
Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, over and over since September 11 Canadians
have seen shocking evidence of an inept Liberal administration. In June 2000
the health minister was asked by provincial and local governments to take
national leadership to prepare for possible bioterrorism, yet it took until
yesterday for even the beginnings of a plan to emerge.
Why did the minister completely neglect even basics
like stockpiling necessary medicines?
(1130)
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the health department set up a special
office to deal with possible bioterror activities. What the minister announced
yesterday, and it was a good announcement and I am surprised she is not
praising it, is just the most recent of a series of steps to protect
Canadians.
Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill,
Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, that certainly is not what the emergency
response people are saying. They are saying there has been no leadership at
all.
Now the minister has moved from inaction to knee-jerk
reaction. Yesterday he, a former justice minister, swept aside the laws
protecting research and development patent to order illegally produced anthrax
medicine.
Is the minister telling us that he thinks there is an
emergency situation that justifies breaking the law of the land?
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we do not concede that any laws are being
broken. I repeat that discussions continue with Bayer to work out any issues.
I trust that the Alliance Party and the other parties
in the House agree with us that the priority is the health of Canadians. Why is
the Alliance Party now appearing to put the health of Canadians behind some
company's commercial interests?
* * *
[Translation]
Anti-terrorism
legislation
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, the anti-terrorism bill is making it
possible for the government to get around not only the Access to Information
Act, but the Privacy Act as well, as the commissioner, George Radwanski,
pointed out yesterday.
How can the Minister of Justice justify the
government's grabbing the power to do as it sees fit with the personal
information it has collected on Quebecers and Canadians?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House
before, the power to which the hon. member refers is an exceptional power in
which I, in my role as Attorney General of Canada, the chief law officer of the
country, can issue a certificate to ensure that in exceptional circumstances
highly confidential information is not released.
I should remind the member that the power that is seen
in the anti-terrorism legislation is very similar to powers found in
legislation of our allies with whom we share information and receive
information.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, the privacy commissioner is excluded from
Bill C-36. This means that no one, no organization, not the commissioner, not
parliament, not the justice system will be able to control the actions of the
government.
Does the minister consider this acceptable in a free
and democratic society?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I should point out to the hon. member that
the ultimate control over any action taken by me in my capacity as Attorney
General of Canada is the Parliament of Canada.
* * *
Justice
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, in the Burns and Rafay case the Minister
of Justice argued, and I quote:
It is necessary to refuse to ask for
assurances in order to prevent an influx to Canada of persons who commit crimes
sanctioned by the death penalty in other states. [Failure to do so] would make
Canada an attractive haven for persons committing murders in retentionist
states. |
Is this still the minister's view even though the
Supreme Court of Canada rejects this argument in this case?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be aware what the
supreme court said in Burns and Rafay. Among other things, it said that the
attorney general retains his or her discretion to seek assurances or not in
exceptional circumstances.
The court acknowledges there may very well be
exceptional circumstances to be determined initially by the attorney general as
to whether or not assurances need to be sought. I would intend to exercise that
discretion on a case by case basis.
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, the minister claims that she has the
discretion to extradite criminals facing the death penalty but the Burns and
Rafay decision said clearly that a court would have to determine whether an
extradition request would pass the Oakes test.
Who has the discretion, the minister or the
courts?
(1135)
Hon. Anne McLellan (Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, members should be aware that I have the
discretion to determine and I will exercise that discretion on a case by case
basis as to whether I think there are exceptional circumstances that justify
not seeking assurances.
Can that decision made by me, a public official, be
reviewed by the court at the request of the accused person? Yes, of course. It
would be a shocking proposition to suggest that it could not be
reviewed.
* * *
[Translation]
Health
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, claiming supply problems, the Minister of
Health violated the federal Patent Act by ordering drugs to fight Anthrax from
Apotex, a manufacturer of generic drugs, while Bayer, the company with the
patent, has enough for the government's needs.
How does the Minister of Health justify his
government's failing to comply with its own laws, thus jeopardizing the
pharmaceutical industry in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada? That is
unacceptable.
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we are complying with the Patent Act. I
hope the Bloc will agree with us that the priority is to protect the health of
all Canadians, including Quebecers.
Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, the priority is to comply with government
legislation.
The Bayer officials are positive they can supply the
government. In addition, the drug ordered from Apotex has yet to be approved by
Health Canada. So there was no justification for the minister's
decision.
Will the government acknowledge that it acted too
quickly, and illegally, and will it reverse its decision?
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the premise behind the hon. member's
question is incorrect.
No drug, patented or generic, is sold in Canada without
government approval.
I therefore again ask why the Bloc is not interested in
the health of Canadians. It should be our priority, for Quebecers and all other
Canadians.
* * *
[English]
Immigration
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant
(Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration claimed that whenever immigration officials are concerned that an
individual poses a security threat or will not show up for a hearing they can
and do detain. I suspect the minister has forgotten the case of Nabil
Al-Marabh. This man was finally captured in the U.S. by the FBI and is wanted
in connection with the attacks on North America.
If, as the minister claims, her officers have the tools
they need, why do they not use them to protect Canadians and our
neighbours?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about the impression
the member opposite is trying to create. I am particularly concerned when
members opposition call for the mandatory detention of all undocumented
refugees, suggesting that they are all terrorists and criminals.
When members opposite do not listen to the words of the
top cop in Canada, Mr. Zaccardelli, the commissioner of the RCMP, they do a
disservice to Canadians. Yesterday the commissioner said that he totally
disagrees with the notion that we are a safe haven. He said that we should
eliminate that word from our vocabulary in this country. That was his testimony
yesterday at the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.
Mrs. Cheryl Gallant
(Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, Nabil Al-Marabh was freed by the
minister's Immigration and Refugee Board even though he had a violent criminal
background, was apprehended with false documents trying to sneak into the U.S.
from Canada and had been rejected as a refugee claimant. This is a man who may
be connected with the horrific events of September 11.
How can the minister claim that she is doing her job
and protecting Canadians when individuals like Nabil Al-Marabh can slip through
her department's fingers?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, again the member opposite is taking an
individual case that is before the courts. As my colleagues have said, it is
irresponsible to do or say anything that may have an impact on a successful
prosecution.
Let me again repeat what the top cop, Commissioner
Zaccardelli, had to say. He stated that we are no different than any other
western country. He said that we face the same issues, the same problems, the
same challenges, and that being an open society is still trying to protect
citizens as much as we can.
* * *
(1140)
National Security
Mr. Shawn Murphy (Hillsborough,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of
National Revenue.
All Canadians are aware of the initiatives being taken
to improve and enhance security at our U.S.-Canadian borders. On a related and
equally important issue, what action is the minister and his department taking
with a view to engaging the United States to ensure at the same time the
efficient free flow of travellers and goods through the border?
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we all know that Canada customs started to
reform the system some time ago. We all know as well that my vision with regard
to the land border is a vision of co-operation. As well, we signed an agreement
back in 1995 with the United States talking about harmonization, co-operation
and joint engagement.
I would like to report to the House that last week the
commissioner of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency met with his counterpart.
Also this week my colleague, the Deputy Prime Minister, met with some elected
people in the United States. Next Monday night I will be delivering a speech in
Flint, Michigan in order to talk about our vision.
* * *
Employment Insurance
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Mr. Speaker, we have been attempting to get an answer
from the Minister of Human Resources Development that will help a good deal of
Canadians who are currently unemployed because of what happened on September
11. We continue to get platitudes from her.
Could the minister tell us when she will decide whether
the hours that are needed to qualify for EI are going to be reduced or not?
When will she make that decision?
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I think the better thing to do is to
assure the House and all Canadians that should they need the services of the
employment insurance program it is there now and it can serve them in these
times that are very difficult.
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, if I hear that one more
time I will be nauseous. If she will not answer that question and give us more
platitudes, could she tell us if she is doing anything about reducing the
number of weeks it takes for her officials to process applications?
Seven hundred people have been laid off at the casino
in Windsor and they are having to wait five, six and seven weeks for their
applications to be heard. Could she tell us what she is doing about
that?
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, there has been a backlog in the processing
of employment insurance claims but there is a process in place in the
department and the backlog is being reduced.
Where we have mass layoff circumstances we have
particular provisions with dedicated employees who are there to work with
particular employees, to go on premises to make sure that the applications are
processed quickly and efficiently.
* * *
Health
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, my question is about this very suspicious
practice of buying from Apotex when Bayer had all the product available to meet
the health needs of Canada.
Contrary to what the Deputy Prime Minister has just
told the House of Commons, before going to Apotex the government made no
application under section 19(1) and did not notify Bayer as required in the
law. There is no question, the government broke the law.
My question is for the Minister of Justice. Does the
Minister of Justice intend to prosecute the Minister of Health for breaking the
law of Canada or does she consider--
The Deputy Speaker:
Order, please. The Deputy Prime Minister.
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I did not say that the government had made
application under section 19(1). I simply pointed out that the use of it did
not require a national emergency to be declared. I would ask the leader of the
fifth party if he would get a better person to prepare his questions. That one
was totally ridiculous.
The Deputy Speaker:
The hon. member for Richmond--Arthabaska.
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, I will rise on a point of privilege after
question period.
[Translation]
Mr. André Bachand (Richmond--Arthabaska,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the scientific soothsayer or,
if you prefer, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health,
contradicted his colleague, the government House leader in the other place, and
said that the generic version of Cipro was safe, when the drug has not even
been tested.
The Minister of Health is ordering millions of dollars
worth of a drug which has not even been approved by his department.
In the absence of conclusive evidence, how does the
government justify its purchase of an untested drug?
Mr. Jeannot Castonguay (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, first, I wish to thank the member opposite
for the compliment he has bestowed on me. I have risen almost to the status of
a god in his eyes; I thank him.
I can assure the House that when we have drugs
available to respond to emergencies, they will be safe for ingestion and will
present no threat to the health of Canadians.
* * *
(1145)
[English]
Anti-Terrorism
Legislation
Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert,
Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, the anti-terrorism legislation has big
holes in it when it comes to extraditing and deporting people who pose a threat
to Canadian society.
Why is the government more concerned about the civil
rights of terrorists, criminals and dangerous people than the civil rights of
law-abiding Canadian citizens?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the premise of the member's question is
not only wrong, it is ridiculous. It is absolutely silly.
The government is absolutely committed to ensuring that
the protection of Canadians is the absolute number one priority. We brought
forward changes in the proposed immigration and refugee protection act that
will make it easier for us to streamline our procedures both for refugee
determination as well as for deportation and removal.
One of the important provisions is the new security
certificate procedure which will also allow us to identify and remove with
evidence those people who--
The Deputy Speaker:
The hon. member for Prince Albert.
Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert,
Canadian Alliance):
Talk about bluster, Mr. Speaker. The anti-terrorism
bill proposes many changes that would restrict the civil liberties of
law-abiding Canadian citizens.
Why is the government focusing more on policing
law-abiding citizens within Canada than stopping terrorists and dangerous
people from getting into the country in the first place?
Hon. Elinor Caplan (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true. Whenever we have
evidence that someone poses a risk to Canada, be that a security risk or a
criminality risk, we arrest them, we detain them and we keep them there as long
as we have to until we are able to remove them and deport them from this
country. To suggest otherwise is just wrong and it sends the wrong message to
Canadians.
I would ask the member to be sure that what he is
saying is accurate and factual because so far he is not.
* * *
[Translation]
Canadian Security Intelligence
Service
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, former minister Lloyd Axworthy and the
present Minister of Foreign Affairs have denied allegations that CSIS was
conducting secret operations outside Canada.
Yesterday, CSIS director, Ward Elcock, said the
opposite.
Will the solicitor general confirm whether or not CSIS
is involved in espionage activities outside Canada?
[English]
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Solicitor
General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times in this
House, CSIS has the authority to investigate any activity that threatens
security inside or outside of Canada. It has that authority and it fulfills
that mandate.
[Translation]
Mr. Stéphane Bergeron
(Verchères--Les-Patriotes, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, in light of what the Minister of Foreign
Affairs has said, is the solicitor general saying that CSIS is involved in
espionage activities outside Canada without the government's
approval?
[English]
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Solicitor
General of Canada, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, what I am telling my hon. colleague, and I
have said this many times in the House, is that CSIS has the authority to
investigate, inside of this country and outside of this country, any activity
that threatens Canada. That is the mandate of CSIS.
* * *
[Translation]
National Security
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier of Quebec joined
with his counterpart in British Columbia to call for the creation of a North
American security perimeter.
The two leaders pointed out that such a perimeter would
facilitate the movement of goods between Canada and the U.S.
Why is the government still stubbornly ignoring this
suggestion, which makes perfect sense and which will provide protection as well
as being good for trade and employment?
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the government has already demonstrated a
great deal of leadership and vision in this area.
As for the perimeter, what does the hon. member mean by
this? If reference to a perimeter refers essentially to the definition of
customs, which addresses the protection of ports and airports, then yes that is
a perimeter.
The only thing to which reference is then being made is
the basic principle of the customs system, which is a matter of proper risk
assessment and management. In that context, there is no doubt whatsoever that
there is a greater risk at international ports and airports. Customs is,
however, already doing a good job in this area.
The reform we have put in place, which is in the
process of being passed by the House of Commons, will also do an excellent job
of creating an ultra-modern customs system.
(1150)
[English]
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, the problem is the government is talking,
not doing. Premiers Landry, Campbell, Lord and Harris have all asked for this
security perimeter. They represent the concerns of millions of Canadians who
want to protect their jobs.
Why does this government not take the advice of these
four premiers, as well as the advice of Canadians, and work with our
counterparts in the United States to erect this security perimeter, which we
need to protect our jobs and our trade?
[Translation]
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as far as the customs system is concerned,
we cannot work in the abstract; concrete action must be taken. This means
co-operative action as well.
Once again, if by perimeter, international ports and
airports are being referred to, I would like to point out, in connection with
concrete actions, that last June we in customs announced a particular
initiative in Montreal, with more funds and more resources devoted to
technology.
If the hon. member kept abreast of policy developments,
he would know that last week we also announced the allocation of additional
resources and more technology for ports, airports and postal centres, as well
as more funding for technology. We are very much taking a lead role.
* * *
[English]
Health
Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, it has been said that sometimes our
greatest fear is fear itself. Recently we have heard members of the opposition
and some members of the media talking about bioterrorism.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Health give us a statement on behalf of Health Canada on what it is doing to
make sure Canadians are ready for any possible attack on
bioterrorists?
[Translation]
Mr. Jeannot Castonguay (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Health, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I must say that I agree with the hon.
member. We must look at the situation from a certain perspective. We must
realize that there are threats, but we must remain calm and face the situation
from a global perspective.
Yesterday, in order to improve the security and health
of Canadians, the minister announced initiatives totalling close to $12
million, including close to $6 million to buy pharmaceutical products, close to
$2.25 million to buy equipment for possible radio nuclear incidents, $2.12
million to improve a--
The Deputy Speaker:
The hon. member for
Cypress
Hills--Grasslands.
* * *
[English]
Agriculture
Mr. David Anderson (Cypress
Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, Canada's agriculture and food supply are
easy targets for bioterrorism. So far the government's response to protect our
food supply has been nothing. This is not good enough.
Last April, Dr. André Gravel, executive vice president
of the CFIA stated that the threat of bioterrorism to our food supply is “a
real threat and clearly a real possibility”.
Why has the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food taken
no action to protect our food supply?
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the track record of the Canadian food
safety in this country is second to none in the world. The Canadian Food
Inspection Agency, along with the Solicitor General of Canada, the Minister of
Health and other departments are being as diligent and vigilant as they
possibly can in the food safety system. There is an emergency preparedness
action plan in place if something takes place.
I can assure Canadian citizens that we will do all we
can to make sure that our food continues to be safe.
Mr. David Anderson (Cypress
Hills—Grasslands, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague from
Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca
pointed out, the government is talking and doing nothing. The lack of public
response from the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to the increased risk
to our food supply is both appalling and dangerous.
Since September 11, the United States has announced an
additional $350 million to keep its food supply safe. We have heard nothing on
this front from the Liberals.
Why has the minister of agriculture failed to implement
any new measures to protect Canada's agricultural industry and food
supply?
Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about it because the
measures are already there. We are not scaremongering Canadians as the
opposition is. We have the systems in place and we are prepared. We will
continue to do all we can to make sure that Canadian food continues to be the
safest in the world.
* * *
[Translation]
Guaranteed Income
Supplement
Mr. Marcel Gagnon (Champlain,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Standing Committee on Human
Resources Development studied the problem of senior citizens who are excluded
from the Canada pension plan.
According to the figures provided by one expert who
appeared before the committee, more than 380,000 Canadians would not receive
the guaranteed income supplement, even though they are eligible. We are talking
about millions of dollars that Human Resources Development Canada is literally
stealing from the neediest members of our society.
Does the Minister of Human Resources Development intend
to eliminate the 11 month period—
(1155)
The Deputy Speaker:
The hon. Minister of Human Resources
Development.
[English]
Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human
Resources Development, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the guaranteed income supplement is a very
important part of the Canadian pension structure. Indeed, ensuring that
Canadians who are eligible have access to that program is very
important.
I believe there are better ways of communicating with
Canadian seniors to ensure that those who have eligibility for the GIS have
access to it. I recently wrote to my colleague, the Minister of National
Revenue, to see if together we could come up with a more effective
strategy.
* * *
Public Works
Mr. Alan Tonks (York South—Weston,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the parliament buildings are one of our
most prized national treasures, are an essential part of the country's heritage
and are in dire need of restoration.
Could the Minister of Public Works and Government
Services inform the House on the government's plan for the parliamentary
precinct?
Mr. Paul Szabo (Parliamentary Secretary
to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the parliament buildings are the centre of
our history, our democracy and our identity. That is why the government has
developed and approved a long term vision plan for the parliamentary precinct.
We are now proceeding with its implementation.
Earlier this week, the Minister of Public Works and
Government Services announced the creation of an advisory committee to provide
oversight and advice on the renovations. I am also pleased to announce that the
hon. John Fraser, former speaker of the House of Commons, has accepted to chair
this committee.
* * *
Canada Customs and Revenue
Agency
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, what kind of message is the minister
trying to give to our customs officers? They are being told to call the police
if they are under physical threat. In many instances the nearest police are a
lot further than a heartbeat away.
Will the minister start protecting Canadians, our
borders and customs officers by giving them adequate tools to do their
job?
Hon. Martin Cauchon (Minister of
National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada
for the Regions of Quebec), Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the customs organization is a very good,
effective and efficient organization. Since September 11, it has been working
hard to protect our country and to fulfill its dual mandate. As I said, over
the last few months we have started to implement what we call officer
power.
One more time, customs officers are not a police force.
We have been working jointly over the past decade with police forces, such as
the RCMP, and we will keep working with them. As well, we have to take into
consideration the safety and security of our employees, which we are
doing.
* * *
[Translation]
Highway Infrastructure
Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold (Jonquière,
BQ):
Mr. Speaker, during the last election campaign, the
Minister of Finance opened the door to a possible specific agreement with
Quebec regarding the reconstruction of highway 175, for which Minister
Chevrette has asked.
Yet, the Minister of Transport told the government of
Quebec to include this work in the infrastructure program for highways.
What is the Minister of Transport waiting for to
negotiate a specific agreement with Quebec on highway 175, and follow up on the
comments made by his colleague, the Minister of Finance, during the election
campaign?
Mr. André Harvey (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, since May, the federal Minister of
Transport has been holding money under the infrastructure program, waiting for
Quebec's minister of transport to define his priorities.
Unfortunately, during the last election campaign, the
PQ and the BQ were nervous and Quebec's minister of transport came and bandied
around a bunch of figures. We have a program. The money is there. All we need
to know are the province's priorities.
* * *
[English]
Health
Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill,
NDP):
Mr. Speaker, brand name drug companies should not be
allowed to profit from terrorism. Nor should they be allowed to gouge
Canadians. The need for anthrax medicine has the government realizing what it
is like to be in the shoes of a senior citizen or the parent of a sick child as
they try to pay for medicines that have increased 87% since 1990, increases
directly related to drug patent changes.
Will the government finally admit that its support of
the Tory initiated drug patent changes is jeopardizing the health of Canadians
and our health care system?
Hon. Herb Gray (Deputy Prime Minister,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has raised an important
issue, but she should not try to mix this up with the basic issue that we have
been talking about in question period today, which is what should we be doing
and how should we be doing it to protect the health of Canadians against
anthrax. That is the priority issue here.
What she is talking about deserves attention, but she
should not mix up the two.
* * *
(1200)
Infrastructure
Mr. Loyola Hearn (St. John's West,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, a short while ago in the House, the Prime
Minister mentioned he was considering advancing infrastructure funding to give
a kick-start to our sagging economy.
The provinces, cities and towns will solidly support
this as they are crying out for infrastructure improvements. I mention
especially St. John's where we have severe water and sewer needs, and have been
devastated by flooding from the recent tropical storm.
When can we expect to see the suggestion by the Prime
Minister become a full commitment by the government?
Mr. Alex Shepherd (Parliamentary
Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we have a $6 billion infrastructure
program in place now. This is entirely within the provincial determination of
what projects the provinces want to set forward. I am sure the province of
Newfoundland will be taking advantage of that program in due course.
* * *
Heritage Canada
Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier,
Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, amidst the anxiety and the uncertainly
there is a group of Canadians looking with optimism to the future, trying to
secure a major international event in Canada.
Would the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell us if
there has been any progress in recent days with the Vancouver-Whistler bid for
the 2010 Winter Olympics?
Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian
Heritage, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, it is so great to have a question about
the future and about living and working together because one of the messages
that we have to send out to the terrorists is that life will go on and we will
work very hard.
We had a very constructive series of meetings this week
in Ottawa with the Vancouver-Whistler team, the premier and members of his
cabinet and members of the association. We will be out in Vancouver next week
to continue those discussions.
We believe Vancouver-Whistler is the best bid and we
hope that we will all be there in the most beautiful part of Canada in
2010.
* * *
Anti-terrorism
Legislation
Mr. James Moore (Port
Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, Canadian Alliance):
Mr. Speaker, on Monday when Bill C-36 was tabled in the
House it was not the first time that the country heard about the legislation.
Documents relating to Bill C-36 were leaked to the Toronto Star and
the National Post.
Canada is at war. The Prime Minister says so.
Parliament says so. President Bush says so. NATO says so. These are
confidential, delicate matters and delicate information.
What is the justice minister doing to ensure that
national security is preserved and these sorts of documents are never, ever
leaked again?
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister of State and
Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I responded to this issue on the floor of
the House of Commons earlier this week and the hon. member knows that. The
House unanimously passed a motion referring this issue to the parliamentary
committee. Everyone is doing their absolute best in that regard to ensure that
proper security is maintained, as well as proper respect for the rules of the
House of Commons.
We have endeavoured to make officials available to the
parliamentary committee, including the person in charge of security who also
happens to be my deputy minister. He is willing to appear before the committee.
The committee will do its work and we are looking forward to the
report.
The Deputy Speaker:
The Chair has received notice of a question of
privilege from the right hon. member for Calgary Centre.
* * *
Privilege
Purchase of Medications by Health
Canada
[Privilege]
Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre,
PC/DR):
Mr. Speaker, I raise a question of privilege relating
to a matter that arose in question period relating to the purchase of
medications that are covered by the Patent Act, a law that has been passed by
the House and which sets forth regulations. Some of my colleagues do not agree
with the content of the law, but they would agree that the law has been passed
by parliament and must be respected by all Canadians, cabinet ministers among
others.
During question period it was revealed that the
Department of Health did not make an application to the commission under
section 19(1) before purchasing from Apotex. That, Sir, is a breach of the law.
An application made after the fact does not cover the requirement of the law to
make an application before the fact. It is a breach of the law.
Also, the government did not have the commission inform
Bayer, the company whose rights are established and protected under the law
passed by this parliament. That was not done before the purchase from Apotex as
is required by the law of this parliament. That is a breach of the law of this
parliament.
The Deputy Speaker:
Order. With the greatest of respect to the right hon.
member, a parliamentarian of vast experience, he would know firsthand that the
Chair would not rule on a point of law. I sense that in the debate of question
period there might be a dispute of facts. I would ask the right hon. member to
get to the privilege.
(1205)
Right Hon. Joe Clark:
Mr. Speaker, I shall, having established the
facts.
There is a basic duty of ministers of the crown to act
within the confines of the law. That is fundamental to this parliament. The
failure to obey the law may be a matter for the courts, but it is also a matter
of grave concern to members of the House because a failure to obey the law is a
blatant and open contempt of the House. Why, Sir, are we here to pass laws if
the laws we pass can be ignored by ministers of the crown?
Earlier the minister of--
The Deputy Speaker:
Order. I want to once again reiterate that the Chair at
no time, under any circumstance, can make any ruling on a matter of law. If
there are further words to the question of privilege, I would ask the right
hon. member to get to the matter of privilege.
Right Hon. Joe Clark:
Mr. Speaker, the Chair can, as we both know and as the
House knows, come to judgments on matters of contempt of parliament. A contempt
of parliament is contained in an action by a minister of the crown of Canada to
deliberately breach the law of Canada. I am not asking the House to adjudicate
the law. The law is clear. I am asking the House to consider the question of
contempt. It is without--
The Deputy Speaker:
I again remind the right hon. member that first and
foremost there has to be, and is, a presumption of innocence. Otherwise there
is no contempt of parliament. I do not know what else I can do if there is
another matter dealing with the question of privilege.
I would like to make it clear that the matter of
contempt must be based on guilt. There is a presumption of innocence here so I
am at a loss to go much further. However I will recognize the right hon.
member.
Right Hon. Joe Clark:
Mr. Speaker, it is precisely because of the presumption
of innocence that I related to those matters which belong to the courts, which
is whether or not there has been a breach of the law. The government knowingly
departed from the law that this parliament wrote. That knowing departure by the
government of the country in itself constitutes a--
The Deputy Speaker:
I believe the Chair at this time has heard enough on
the matter. I have listened attentively to the matter raised by the right hon.
member. The Chair is satisfied at this time that there is no need for any
further debate on the matter with regard to privilege. I will now move on.
I remind members in the House that I have another
notice of a question of privilege. I will now go to the member for
Beauport-Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans.
* * *
[Translation]
Official
languages
Mr. Michel Guimond
(Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, this is not a question of privilege
relating to an event that occurred during oral question period but, rather, a
question of privilege that results from a briefing session on Bill C-36 given
this morning by the Department of Justice.
I want to put this question of privilege in its proper
context and to stress once again the indifference shown by this minister and
her department toward the members of this House and their right to information,
which is a priority. We saw the Minister of Justice's way of doing things with
Bill C-15, which resulted in a question of privilege on the part of the hon.
member for Provencher. That question was referred to the Standing Committee on
Procedure and House Affairs and the Leader of the Government in the House of
Commons amended the directives for members of the Privy Council
Office.
As regards Bill C-36, the Anti-terrorism Act, a lot of
information was released even before the bill was introduced in this House on
Monday. One simply has to read the October 13 edition of the National
Post, which included whole parts of the bill and which came out before the
briefing session organized by the Minister of Justice on Monday morning, the
day that Bill C-36 was introduced in the House.
Our right to information as duly elected members of
this House, which is a priority, was once again violated. This leak about Bill
C-36 in the National Post was the subject of a--
(1210)
The Deputy Speaker:
Order please. I simply wish to remind the House that
this question has already been referred to the committee. Therefore, I would
ask the hon. member for
Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans
to get on with his question of privilege.
Mr. Michel Guimond:
Mr. Speaker, I do not understand why the government
House leader does not want us to raise our point. Is he hiding something? Does
this bother him?
In short, the Minister of Justice and officials from
her department did it again in a meeting this morning. Notwithstanding the
complexity and the importance of this bill, it is, at the very least, peculiar
that nobody at the Department of Justice requested simultaneous interpretation
for their briefing session on Bill C-36 this morning. For more than one hour at
the beginning of this briefing, the minister's officials provided information
solely in English.
Assistants of members of the Bloc Quebecois were
present at that meeting and were unable to obtain the information in their
native language, despite the complexity of the bill.
The right to service in the language of one's choice is
guaranteed under section 133 of Canada's constitution as well as under the
Official Languages Act.
In view of the complexity of this bill and taking into
account the language barrier, it becomes very difficult for parliamentary
assistants and for the members themselves to form an informed opinion about
such a bill.
The reference book entitled House of Commons
Procedure and Practice says on pages 66 and 67, and I quote:
Any disregard of or attack on the
rights, powers and immunities of the House and its Members, either by an
outside person or body, or by a Member of the House, is referred to as a
“breach of privilege”-- |
I could also refer to Erskine May, who said the
following, and I quote:
The privileges of Parliament are
absolutely necessary for the due execution of its powers. They are enjoyed by
individual Members, because the House cannot perform its functions without
unimpeded use of the services of its Members; and by each House for the
protection of its members and the vindication of its own authority and
dignity. |
Let me now quote from Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary
Privilege in Canada, second edition, chapter 2, page 13:
If someone improperly interferes with
the parliamentary work of a member of parliament--i.e. any of the member's
activities that have a connection with a proceeding in parliament--in such a
case that is a matter involving parliamentary privilege. |
In conclusion, my right to receive information in my
native language, through my assistants, was violated this morning by the
Minister of Justice.
Considering these facts, I submit that my privileges as
a parliamentarian were also violated.
Should you rule that there is a prima facie case of
privilege, I would be prepared to move the appropriate motion.
(1215)
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister of State and
Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I agree, it is a very serious matter. It
is not, however, a question of privilege, as the member knows.
It is not a matter of a parliamentary committee or of
the House. It is a matter of a briefing session provided--
An hon. member: Oh, oh.
Hon. Don Boudria: If the member listened, she
might understand.
That said, I believe that the question raised by the
member is serious. However, it is not a matter of negligence by the
minister.
I have in hand and am prepared to table it, the
document that the minister, through her office, used to request interpretation
services in the House of Commons. I have received it and its reception has been
confirmed by the House.
It is possible the interpreters reported late for work.
Movement in parliament is restricted at the moment. It is possible.
In any case, I will not investigate the House staff or
put them on trial.
Mr. Michel Bellehumeur: Then the briefing should
not have begun at that time.
Hon. Don Boudria: I am getting to that. If the
member could listen--
The Deputy Speaker:
Order, please. I hope we will be courteous and
respectful enough to listen to each other even, and I understand, though we do
not always agree.
The hon. government House leader.
Hon. Don Boudria:
Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am prepared to table the
document I have in hand. However, I am prepared to go further, given that the
briefing session was clearly inadequate since it was not given in the language
of the member opposite, nor, for that matter, of other members.
Right Hon. Joe Clark:
The act was not complied with.
Hon. Don Boudria:
Mr. Speaker, this is a serious matter. It seems to me
that the right hon. member for Calgary Centre could for once in his life listen
to something serious.
I am prepared to offer the members opposite an
additional briefing session for their benefit. This session would be held at a
convenient time, in the language of their choice, with interpreters. I am
prepared to offer an additional information session.
That having been said, I apologize for what happened
and for the fact that interpretation services did not get there on time. If you
were to ask me if the briefing session should have been cancelled at that
point, I might agree. I do not know whether such a request was made.
To sum up, interpreters were requested. They arrived
late. These two facts are true. I am prepared to offer a new briefing session
at a convenient time, not just for the benefit of the member opposite, but for
the benefit of all members. I am also prepared to meet with the member opposite
to work out the details.
That having been said, I wish to table the document to
which I referred, showing that the minister had asked for interpretation
services to be present. It is entitled: Chambre des communes-House of
Commons. Since I have quoted part of it, I may now table it.
The Deputy Speaker:
I listened carefully to the comments of the hon. member
for
Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans
and to those of the government House Leader. During the latter's intervention,
he made an offer which I hope will make it possible to resolve the matter
amicably, without the intervention of the Chair. If not, we can always come
back to the issue, and the Chair will deal with it at that time.
I hope that this disposes of the matter for
now.
We will now revert to routine proceedings.
(1220)
Mr. Michel Guimond:
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Chair went
very quickly and did not give me the time to complete my thought on
this.
I wish to table a motion to the effect that the
question of privilege raised by the member—
The Deputy Speaker:
Order, please. The motion by the hon. member for
Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans
is premature. If the Chair is called upon to make a ruling, other measures will
be available at that time, depending on the ruling in question. However right
now, such a motion is premature.
[English]
Right Hon. Joe Clark:
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
I listened attentively to your remarks when I was
speaking earlier. You indicated that you had not found at this time reason to
find a question of privilege. I am rising to give notice to you and to the
House that I want to reserve the right to pursue this question at the next
sitting of the House.
The Deputy Speaker:
To the right hon. member for Calgary Centre, with the
proper motion in writing, certainly that privilege is his.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
[Routine Proceedings]
* * *
[English]
Interparliamentary
Delegations
The Deputy Speaker:
Pursuant to Standing Order 34, I have the honour to
present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the visit of
the parliamentary delegation led by the Hon. Peter Milliken, Speaker of the
House of Commons, to Northern Ireland and to the Republic of Ireland from June
23 to 30, 2001.
* * *
[Translation]
Canadian Tourism
Commission
Mr. Claude Drouin (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Industry, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have
the honour to table, in both official languages, the transition report of the
Canadian Tourism Commission, for the nine month period ending December 31,
2000.
* * *
[English]
Foreign Affairs and International
Trade
Mr. Mac Harb (Ottawa Centre,
Lib.):
Madam Speaker, in accordance with the order of
reference of Tuesday, October 2, your committee has considered Bill C-32, an
act to implement the free trade agreement between the Government of Canada and
that of the Republic of Costa Rica and agreed on Thursday, October 18 to report
it without amendment.
* * *
Petitions
Assisted
Suicide
Mr. Myron Thompson (Wild Rose, Canadian
Alliance):
Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure today to present a
petition on behalf of the residents of Olds, Alberta and district in regard to
the decision of the supreme court recently.
The euthanasia prevention coalition and the Canadian
citizens who signed the petition call upon the Government of Canada to respect
section 15(1) of the charter of rights and freedoms and uphold the Latimer
decision.
* * *
Kidney Disease
Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough,
Lib.):
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition from
citizens who are concerned about the huge and growing problem of kidney disease
in Canada. The petition, like many others, was initiated by Ken Sharp of my
riding.
These citizens are concerned that research into kidney
disease in Canada is being restricted by the fact that the national institute
concerned is called the Institute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes. They
believe that kidney research would be much better served if the words kidney
research were to appear in the title of that national institute.
Therefore they call upon parliament to encourage the
Canadian institutes of health research to explicitly include kidney research as
one of the institutes in its system, to be named the Institute of Kidney and
Urinary Tract Diseases.
* * *
(1225)
Trafficking in Baby
Parts
Mr. Carmen Provenzano (Sault Ste. Marie,
Lib.):
Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition
from members of my constituency of Sault Ste. Marie petitioning that parliament
take all measures necessary to ensure that trafficking in baby parts becomes a
criminal offence.
* * *
Detroit River
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Madam Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition from
my constituents and other members of the city of Windsor and the county of
Essex regarding the preservation of an ecologically important area along the
Detroit River. It is the last area along the Detroit River that has not been
affected by development and it is important in their opinion for this to be
preserved. I am happy to table that petition today.
* * *
Questions on the Order
Paper
Ms. Aileen Carroll (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to
stand.
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos):
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Government Orders
[Government Orders]
* * *
[English]
Customs Act
The House resumed consideration of Bill
S-23, an act to amend the Customs Act and to
make related amendments to other acts, as reported (without
amendment) from the committee, and of Motions Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Madam Speaker, as always when interrupted, my eloquence
may be less than it was in the first several minutes. I will resume where I
think I left off which was on the issue of the adequacy of the bill.
I have already made the points that we are concerned
that the bill came from the Senate and was processed through there rather than
through the House. It is well indicated that we are in support of the Bloc's
amendments.
Beyond that we have some very serious concerns about
the bill, particularly with regard to the tragedy of September 11. It is now
totally inadequate to respond to the concerns of both Canada and the United
States.
In that regard this was supposed to be about the free
flow of goods and people across the border. Because it was our border we were
looking at, it really was a question of the flow of people and goods from the
United States into Canada.
It is important to my constituency and generally to
constituencies in Canada that have large manufacturing centres. It is extremely
important to those industries because of the nature of that trade that goods
flow rapidly and equally so that the people involved in those manufacturing
industries, including truckers and business people, are able to move easily
across the border. Just on time manufacturing has been instituted in Canada and
the United States now for over a decade. In order for that process to work, we
must move across the border freely.
This bill was an attempt to deal with problems that
existed long before September 11. Unfortunately it is wanting even with regard
to the problems that we had at that time. What has happened since September 11
has dramatically increased the waiting periods on both sides of the border but
particularly on the Canadian side going into the United States. That reflects
the problems on the American side.
We do not do this a lot but I want to praise some of
the work that national revenue has done with regard to the advancement of the
use of technology and other systems to allow people and goods to move back and
forth across the border. However that only works on the Canadian side, that is,
it only works on allowing goods and people into Canada. The problem is it does
nothing to allow goods to move from Canada into the United States.
It is important to note that 40% of all the trade in
Canada moves across the five border crossings between Windsor and Sarnia. There
are three tunnels, one for rail, two for vehicles, and two bridges for 40% of
all the trade in this country. As a result of September 11 there have been
tremendous backups.
I grew up in Essex county. The small town of Belle
River is 20 miles, or 30 kilometres, from Windsor. On one day truck traffic was
backed up from the Ambassador Bridge all the way to the Belle River Road which
as I said is 30 kilometres from the border. Those are the kinds of problems we
had.The bill is grossly inadequate to deal with those types of
backups.
I want to come back to the praise I was trying to give
to the department. It has moved further along both in human resources in the
deployment of staff and in the use of technology on the Canadian side of the
border. There has not been the same kind of response on the American side. That
really is where the thrust has to be to get traffic moving again in an
efficient and effective manner.
(1230)
That is not to say there are no problems. We know that
one of the systems, the Canpass system, allows priority to be given to people
who hold the pass to move their goods across the border in a more rapid way
than others. However one of the things that came out at the committee was that
a full 15% of the addresses of people who hold Canpass passes are no longer
accurate. The department itself gave that information to us.
Given the situation we have now and the screening that
goes on around security, that is no longer acceptable. It should not be
acceptable to Canadians and it clearly will not be acceptable to the U.S.
government and its administration. We must improve these systems.
There is another system, Nexus, that assists
individuals in moving across the border. These are people who move back and
forth regularly. This system is similarly wanting in that it is not good
enough. No one expects perfection but we are not close enough yet. We need to
continue to work on that.
It is obvious that we need a system that both countries
will accept and utilize to allow people and goods which move regularly back and
forth across the border to have priority. It is the only effective and
efficient way to move those goods and people.
We need the government to enter into intense
negotiations with the U.S. government for these types of systems to be
developed. It could also use the ones we have now and increase their
effectiveness, or perhaps develop new systems that take into account the need
to balance security and the efficient movement of goods and people.
Bill S-23, quite frankly, does not address these issues
anywhere near adequately. It should go back for further review and be brought
up to date.
I see that I am getting a signal from you, Madam
Speaker, that my time has run out or is about to run out. I will finish with
one other comment.
We have serious concerns, quite frankly, with regard to
privacy and civil liberties in the bill.
(1235)
Ms. Sophia Leung (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, I have listened carefully to my hon.
colleague's comments on Bill S-23. I thank the member for his praise of the
bill. I am pleased that some members of the opposition recognize the importance
of the bill which would modernize and strengthen our customs system. They
support the bill and even praise it.
The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency has a solid,
professional and credible evaluation program. Evaluations are conducted by the
corporate review directorate which is independent of the customs branch.
According to CCRA policy all evaluation reports are made available to the
public.
The Minister of National Revenue has already committed
to having a review annually. We will have internal reviews by professional and
independent groups. We will have external reviews by conducting public
consultations to seek solutions and make the necessary adjustments.
Therefore the motions in amendment suggested by members
of the third party are clearly unnecessary since the Minister of National
Revenue has already made a commitment to do an evaluation annually.
I also stress the importance of Bill S-23 as part of
the special measures to combat terrorism. We all know that trade and safety at
our borders are vitally important to Canada. The new legislation would help us
handle the increased volumes. It would move low risk goods and passengers to
reduce delays at the border so we could focus on high risk travellers and
shipments.
Following the events of September 11 it is important
that we move forward quickly. Since fall 1998 the CCRA has consulted
extensively to see how we might improve our customs mandate to protect
Canadians and promote business and trade.
Our extensive consultations have shown that the
business sector wants these positive changes to take place as soon as possible.
The Canadian community would benefit from the bill's introduction of
pre-approval programs such as customs self-assessment and CANPASS to clear low
risk passengers and goods to expedite their movement at border
crossings.
CCRA will apply technology to support our new programs
to allow customs officers to focus their efforts on high risk people and goods.
Recently the Minister of National Revenue announced the government's commitment
to increase staff and technology applications for our proposed new programs.
The safety and protection of Canadians is vitally
important to the government and the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. In the
wake of September 11 the government has committed more resources to tools,
training and technology.
I heard my hon. colleagues all supporting our vision
and action plan for customs. Without unnecessary delay it is obvious that Bill
S-23 would provide the necessary action for Canada.
(1240)
We need to unite together in the House to fight
terrorism, for Canada and for the free world.
[Translation]
Mr. Gilles-A. Perron
(Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ):
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill S-23,
although I would have appreciated it if the revenue minister had been here to
listen to the concerns of the opposition about this legislation.
The Bloc Quebecois supports Bill S-23 and will be
voting for it.
Unfortunately, in light of the events of September 11,
the Bloc Quebecois is seeking extra protection by putting forward amendments to
ensure that the government will sit down again with the Standing Committee on
Finance at the end of the year to review the scope and the enforcement of the
legislation.
The Bloc Quebecois wants the services being set up
through this bill to be improved upon. It also wants businesses and travellers
to respect the regulations that could be made under this bill.
However, we do have some concerns, since we know that
all these new Customs measures to expedite the movements of persons and goods
and to streamline the security procedures will be taken by regulations. We feel
this leaves the minister with a lot of discretionary power.
I will not repeat the arguments raised by my hon.
colleagues from Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, Verchères—Les Patriotes and
Rosemont—Petite Patrie, who have so eloquently spoken to this bill. I simply
want to thank all opposition parties who said they would support the Bloc
amendments.
To conclude, I will say once again that the Bloc
Quebecois will support Bill S-23, but not without some major
reservations.
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos):
Is the House ready for the question?
Some hon. members: Question.
The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): The vote is
on the first motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the
motion?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Some hon. members: No.
The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): All those in
favour of the motion will please say yea.
Some hon. members: Yea.
The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): All those
opposed will please say nay.
Some hon. members: Nay.
The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): In my
opinion, the nays have it.
And more than five members having
risen:
The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): A recorded
division on Motion No. 1 stands deferred.
[English]
The recorded division will also apply to Motion No.
2.
(1245)
Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa
West--Nepean, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, the vote on the motion is automatically
deferred until Monday but I believe you would find unanimous consent in the
House to further defer the vote until the end of government orders on Tuesday
next week.
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos):
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa
West—Nepean, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, I believe you would also find consent in
the House to see the clock as 1.30 so that we may proceed to the consideration
of private members' business.
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos):
Is it agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
[Private Members' Business]
* * *
[English]
Broadcasting Act
Mr. John Harvard (Charleswood—St.
James—Assiniboia, Lib.)
moved that Bill S-7, an
act to amend the Broadcasting Act, be read the second time and
referred to a committee.
He said: Madam Speaker, it is an honour for me to
initiate debate on the bill.The purpose of Bill S-7 is to amend the
Broadcasting Act. The summary of the bill states:
This enactment amends the
Broadcasting Act in order to enable the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission to make regulations establishing criteria for the
awarding of costs, and to give the Commission the power to award and tax costs
between the parties that appear before it. |
Within the context of the bill, I bring the full
attention of hon. members to one significant area that requires further
elaboration and is the basis for the amendment that I am advancing.
Consider the following. We know that under sections 56
and 57 of the Telecommunications Act, the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, has the power to compensate the
organizations or individuals appearing before it during proceedings on
telecommunications. The act also authorizes the CRTC to establish the refund
criteria and to determine to whom costs will be paid and by whom.
Conversely, the Broadcasting Act does not envision such
provisions. Consequently, the CRTC has no power to either award costs or
establish the criteria of awards under this act. This is an imbalance that
causes concern and requires immediate rectification.
Why is it essential to amend the Broadcasting
Act?
First, the amendment brings the Broadcasting Act into
concordance with the Telecommunications Act, where the rights for cost recovery
have existed for years.
Second, convergence and the information highway have
created deep interplay between telecommunications and the broadcasting services
used by the public, such as news media and the Internet. Often the CRTC has
been faced with issues involving both the Telecommunications Act and the
Broadcasting Act. Regardless of the validity of the arguments presented, the
CRTC has been able to award only costs covered under the Telecommunications Act
but not under the Broadcasting Act, even though the information provided under
both acts has proven pertinent and value added.
Third, the vastness of the funding available to media
companies is an outright contrast to the financial limitations faced by
consumers and their representative groups. This condition therefore creates
imbalances and inequalities that are inconsistent with our democratic system.
Substantive and effective participation by consumer organizations representing
the interests of citizens is often hampered by financial limitations owing to
the fact that detailed research studies and expert assistance are very
costly.
Fourth, this much needed amendment brings into symmetry
and balances both acts. Thus, consumers will be fairly treated in all
proceedings before the commission whether conducted under the Broadcasting Act
or the Telecommunications Act.
Fifth, other regulatory agencies in Canada provide for
the payment of intervener costs. Many tribunals that regulate public utilities
or important public services award costs of public interest interveners to
reimburse them for their intervention.
Sixth, this amendment will be extremely beneficial to
the Canadian public. Cost awards would allow consumers and public interest
groups as well as individuals to develop thorough research and substantial
evidence to represent effectively the interest of citizens in broadcasting and
cable television policy and regulatory proceedings at the local or national
level. Locally, this amendment would permit our constituents to effectively
challenge cable TV issues such as rate increases, channel packaging or
licensing conditions of local broadcasters.
The issues examined by the commission could have wider
repercussions on the population in general. For example, national issues such
as television policy or cable television distribution regulations or more
specific issues, such as the rate consumers pay for cable television services,
could be potentially at stake.
Seventh, consumer groups across Canada strongly support
this initiative since they are aware of the importance of equal representation
under the Broadcasting Act.
(1250)
Among the organizations supporting the proposed
amendments are: the British Columbia Public Interest Centre, the Public
Interest Law Centre, the National Anti-Poverty Organization, the Canadian
Labour Congress, the Canadian Library Association, the Manitoba chapter of the
Consumers' Association of Canada, and the list goes on.
Again I must point out that the high level of citizen
participation in telecommunications matters cannot be compared to the level of
citizen participation in broadcasting proceedings, for one reason. Simply
stated, they have not been able to secure their participation because of
financial restraints.
The issue of effective citizen participation has become
even more relevant since the bill was first introduced. Over the past several
months the CRTC has instituted a number of proceedings relating to convergence,
pricing, service and industry consolidation, which are of great interest and
relevance to consumers.
For example, broadcasters and cable companies will be
changing the technology they use for broadcasting television signals from
analog to digital. This will cost at least several hundred million dollars and
change how channels are packaged and sold to consumers. Consumers will also be
required to purchase new televisions or rent digital decoders. Who will bear
the companies' costs? How will this technological change affect the pricing and
choice of programming and channels for consumers?
Another example is the community channel on cable
television. Four years ago many community groups lost access or control of
their channel through regulatory changes. This year the CRTC initiated a review
of this policy as well as new rules for the creation of community based over
the air television. Without good legal representation, research and other
resources, consumer groups were hard pressed to put forward good evidence and a
strong case to strengthen community television at the local level. How can we
expect the system to truly change to benefit our constituents without
sufficient resources?
Without the ability to recover costs related to the
gathering of substantial evidence, consumer participation is limited. While
consumers and consumer groups may be able to present short briefs expressing
general principles and expectations, they are not able to afford indepth
research and testimony. Their meagre efforts crumble under the weight of
evidence put forward by the industry.
In our changing communications sector, Canadians
deserve answers to these questions. We know how industry and consumer points of
view differ and how issues of this magnitude need to be treated in a fair and
balanced way for the benefit of all of us.
Who will be funded? Not everyone who appears before the
CRTC in a proceeding will automatically qualify for a cost award. With the
passage of this amendment, the CRTC will draw the rules of procedure that will
be used to determine the criteria for awarding costs under the Broadcasting
Act. As with the criteria that already exist in telecommunications rules of
procedure for costs, applicants must demonstrate to the commission that they
are representative of a group of citizens, that they have participated in the
proceedings in a responsible way and that they have contributed substantially
to a better understanding of the issues in question. These are rigorous
tests.
Who pays for these cost awards? The costs are met by
companies that come under the jurisdiction of the CRTC and that took part in
the proceedings and will be affected by the outcome. One of the principles of
reimbursement is to compensate deserving interveners for the costs incurred by
an intervention based on the fair market value of the work performed. Like the
costs for company representation, the funds come from the key industry
interveners services budget. This procedure will be the same as that already in
place under the Telecommunications Act.
In exercising its responsibility under the Broadcasting
Act, the CRTC is given decision making powers that are important for and have a
great impact on Canadians' association with the promotion of Canadian culture,
the setting of rates, the introduction of competition and the resolution of
stakeholder disputes.
Under paragraph 3(d)(i) of the Broadcasting Act,
the commission is instructed to safeguard, enrich and strengthen the cultural,
political, social and economic fabric of Canada. Therefore, for the process of
decision making to be congruent with our Canadian principles of fairness and
equity, it is vital that the process be conducted on the basis of openness,
impartiality and transparency.
(1255)
The amendment therefore affords us the opportunity to
translate these principles into functional ones so that the results of wise
governance may be delivered effectively in these important regulatory
hearings.
I would like to remind colleagues that the spirit and
intent of the bill rests with the concept that every democratic society should
foster active citizen participation in public issues. Modern democratic life
requires an active role from the population and needs participation from
members of the community. It should no longer be the case that those who are
governed act only to elect. They are then governed without any opportunity to
interact with the governing institutions.
By increasing the participation of public advocacy
groups in CRTC proceedings though Bill S-7 we would render a service to our own
institutions, allowing them to make use of valuable information. We would also
be making way for more reasoned decisions and a better understanding of the
concerns and aspirations of our society, as well as allowing all parties to
work in a co-operative fashion toward possible solutions.
In closing I would like to stress that Bill S-7 would
allow each and every one of us to empower our constituents to be fairly and
equally represented in all matters related to broadcasting and cable TV, both
locally and nationally.
Mr. Kevin Sorenson (Crowfoot, Canadian
Alliance):
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House
again to debate Bill S-7, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act.
The bill was introduced in the Senate and passed in
June. Essentially the intent of the bill is to permit the CRTC to establish
criteria that would allow the awarding of costs to interveners in broadcasting
proceedings. Currently it has the power to award costs in telecommunications
cases. The wording of the bill states:
The Commission may award interim or
final costs of and incidental to proceedings before it and may fix the amount
of the costs or direct that the amount be taxed. |
The Commission may order by whom and
to whom any costs are to be paid and by whom they are to be
taxed...establishing the criteria for the awarding of costs-- |
The intent of the bill seems reasonable and it is
something that can be studied further in committee. However, the concern on
this side of the House is that the timing of the legislation is perhaps a
little inappropriate.
The Canadian heritage committee is currently reviewing
the Broadcasting Act and will, without a doubt, focus on the CRTC's mandate.
Bill S-7 proposes that the awarding of costs would
allow individuals or groups to come together with the opportunity to develop
well researched evidence to present to the CRTC hearings. The opportunity to
provide the awarding of costs to interveners would, according to the sponsors
of the legislation, allow expert advice and testimony at hearings.
For those who sit on a committee and who are involved
in parliament, as it is for witnesses who go before a committee, such as
witnesses who go before the CRTC, it is imperative to come to conclusions on
legislation and on their ideals. We applaud the essence of what the legislation
is trying to do.
In May 2001, the government announced the long awaited
review of the 1991 Broadcasting Act. The Standing Committee on Canadian
Heritage requested submissions by Internet during the summer. We were hopeful
for an early fall commencement of hearings. The Canadian Alliance agrees with
the necessity of a review and it is anxious to participate in hearings that
will host a wide range of differing opinions. However, at its present rate of
speed, the review will not be completed by May 2002.
It must be recognized that technological changes are
rushing opportunities of choices for consumers at the speed of light. The
committee must be mindful that by the time the recommendations are put to
paper, everything may have changed.
This brings me back to the reasons that it is it is not
possible to support Bill S-7 at this time.
Legislation respecting the Broadcasting Act, whether it
is the CRTC or otherwise, must not be dealt with prior to the completion of the
Canadian heritage committee's study of the Broadcasting Act. To put forward
legislation on a matter that is still in the process of being reviewed by the
committee would be pre-emptive of the process.
I have a copy of a letter from the CRTC deputy
commissioner of competition. It was written to the clerk of the committee on
September 14, 2001. The letter states:
In general, the Commissioner is
interested in examining and reporting upon the extent to which competition and
market mechanisms have historically and may, going forward, be relied upon to
realize the core objectives of the Broadcasting Act. For this purpose, the
Commissioner will examine and make recommendations regarding the broadcasting
policy objectives, the current regulatory model and its environment, and
proposals for legislative and regulatory change. |
(1300)
The Canadian Alliance believes there cannot be any
legislation put forward at this time which would pre-empt the recommendations
of the study due to be released next year.
Furthermore, the committee has requested that the chair
of the CRTC, David Colville, attend the committee to discuss his understanding
of the proper constitutional relationship between parliament, its committees,
federal commissions and their respective roles.
There is concern at this time that decisions made by
the CRTC during the course of the heritage committee study may require the CRTC
to impose regulatory changes on broadcasters and consumers long before the
study is completed. Stated clearly, current CRTC decisions must not allow any
unfair advantage while the committee is conducting the study.
Throughout the course of the hearings we must ask
ourselves if the CRTC continues to be relevant or whether its purpose would be
better served in an alternative regulatory body rather than under the arm of
the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Department of Industry.
No one is questioning the relevancy of these regulatory
bodies. We know there needs to be a regulatory body but as we discuss and study
the CRTC and its mandate there are many things that will be brought out
regarding its responsibilities.
We know the CRTC has a mandate to license and regulate
broadcasters. We also know the CRTC is in charge of telecommunications. Part of
telecommunications, especially phone companies and the use of
telecommunications in rural Canada, will possibly be discussed at the
hearings.
One of the concerns of Canadians is what is happening
to rural Canada and agriculture. What the government, the CRTC and different
bodies can do is look at what may be viewed as insensitivity toward some of our
rural areas in regard to telecommunications.
When we look at some of our large metropolitan cities,
all the business of the residents of those communities is carried out in the
metropolitan area. One of my frustrations in rural Alberta is that every time
we call the neighbouring town down the road where we do much of our business we
are calling long distance. Towns in other parts have come together and the
local call is broadening out a bit.
One of the things we need to look at is where people
are doing business, where children are going to school and where people are
carrying out their normal activities. In rural Canada local telephone calls are
made not just to the closest small rural town but to many places. They are made
to many small locales and little communities.
Bill S-7 does not and is not intended to answer all the
questions of the CRTC. I fully understand that. However it sets the criteria
for awarding costs in broadcasting proceedings. It is therefore not possible
for the Canadian Alliance to support any legislative changes that would affect
either the CRTC or the Broadcasting Act until the committee hearings are
complete and recommendations are put forward.
As we have said, the content of the bill is good. The
timing of the bill is bad.
(1305)
[Translation]
Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval
Centre, BQ):
Madam Speaker, Bill S-7, which I am speaking to today,
aims to amend the Broadcasting Act to enable the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission to make regulations establishing criteria to
determine how the CRTC may authorize the reimbursement of the costs incurred by
a party appearing before it.
According to the CRTC, an official designated by the
commission would examine the costs and determine their eligibility. The parties
covered by Bill S-7 are primarily members of the public and consumer groups. At
the moment, the CRTC is empowered to compensate individuals appearing before it
regarding any matter under the Telecommunications Act, but it cannot intervene
in the same way for matters arising under the Broadcasting Act.
If passed, this bill, introduced by my colleague Sheila
Finestone, the former member for Mount Royal, and I recognize the member who
has replaced her, now a senator and for whom I have considerable esteem, would
harmonize these two laws and broaden the capacity of consumers or consumer
groups to better assert their rights in the matter of broadcasting.
As we know, the big broadcasters and telecommunications
companies have phenomenal sums available to them. According to the senator, the
radio-telecommunications industry has annual revenues of some $20
billion.
Clearly, the situation is very different for consumers,
given the cost of collecting data, and paying honoraria for experts to do
quality research and the time required for drafting briefs.
The gap between the public and the major industries is
measured in light years. Individuals whose rights have been infringed should be
able to demonstrate the injustice they have suffered. Obstacles of a technical
nature cannot be allowed to prevent them. The right to fair and equitable
treatment is a basic principle of our democracy.
Bill S-7 would give consumer groups the right to
properly defend their interests with the CRTC when there problems involve the
Broadcasting Act. This bill would enable the CRTC to make decisions based on
properly documented briefs, since the means for their production would be
assured. In addition, the means involved to permit costs should not be
excessive, because the regulations must provide criteria for awarding
costs.
In other words, the CRTC must ensure that the amount
spent on preparing a brief is reasonable, before reimbursing the individual or
consumer group appearing before it.
According to Action réseau consommateur, a group which
has met with the Bloc Quebecois, the situation is as follows:
The principle for appearance costs is
to reimburse qualified interveners for the work associated with an intervention
based on market value. The CRTC has always followed this practice, which was
confirmed and approved by the Supreme Court in 1986. This means that clearly
identified cases and detailed invoices must be prepared by the lawyer, expert
witness or analyst working for a group of interveners, for submission to the
charges assessor. This estimate is set in accordance with a fee scale which
generally reflects the maximum market charge for similar services. It is
important to note that the payment is for services rendered by recognized
professionals and does not go into the coffers of the organization. Frequently,
the intermediary organizations hire experts and consultants who are in private
practice. Under these circumstances, the reimbursement is for invoices from
these individuals for appearance fees, and the involvement of the intermediary
organization is merely administration of that reimbursement. These fees do not
constitute income for the public interest organizations; they are merely a
reimbursement of the costs incurred in making an intervention in the public
interest. |
(1310)
We have seen that this amendment to the Broadcasting
Act is supported by citizens and by organizations that represent
them.
In May Action réseau consommateur and the Fédération
des associations d'économie familiale du Québec appeared before the Senate
Standing Committee on Transport and Communications in their examination of Bill
S-7.
In their brief, these organizations brought up another
important point. Beyond re-establishing a balance between corporations and
citizens, these two organizations amply highlighted one of the reasons why
citizens, or the organizations that represent them, must be able to voice their
concerns to the CRTC at a time when the television industry is undergoing a
complete makeover.
For several years now, the cost of accessing television
has climbed steadily. Since the advent of digital television, cable operators
have been selling specialty channels separately.
Despite the fact that consumers do not appear eager to
pay more for these channels, the CRTC recently approved operating licenses for
283 new specialty digital channels.
Action réseau consommateur and the Fédération des
associations d'économie familiale du Québec asked themselves the following
question. Conventional television, which was free of charge, was mandated to
serve the public interest. How is the public interest better served
today?
With the complex issue of analog television channels
migrating towards digital, and the resulting rate increases that may ensue, the
constant increase in the number of American channels on the Canadian market and
all of the questions closely linked to these changes, it seems more than clear
to me that the bill currently before the House will allow us, to some extent,
to better cope with these challenges, thereby ensuring that consumers' rights
are respected.
The Bloc Quebecois will therefore support Bill S-7,
since it contributes to encouraging consumer groups in their efforts with the
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.
(1315)
[English]
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair,
NDP):
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in support of
Bill S-7, both on behalf of our party and more specifically with the full
support of the member for Dartmouth who is responsible for the bill and our
position on it, and who is wholeheartedly in support of it.
Other than the argument we have heard that perhaps it
is not the best time to be doing this, it seems to me that there is universal
support in the House for the need for this type of amendment to the
Broadcasting Act.
As a lawyer in private practice and a litigation
lawyer, one who has worked on various occasions for groups who needed this type
of support to provide themselves with the resources to act as interveners, it
is obvious to me that this bill should be approved by all members of the
House.
It is particularly important if one looks at what is
happening to our media, to our regulation of it and to the overhaul which I
think all parties agree is going on at this time and will continue for some
time in the future. From a democracy standpoint, we simply and absolutely
require the assistance that consumers and other interest groups will bring to
the debate around the overhaul of the industry.
There are some changes being suggested that are quite
frankly scary. There are some changes that have already occurred. One cannot
help but think that, if we had had greater intervention from these groups, we
would have had a better system for both public and private
broadcasting.
If one is serious about democracy, one must support the
bill.
I will raise a couple of issues that already have been
addressed. The whole debate continues around the convergence of the print media
with the electronic media, and the mergers of those systems, so that in many
respects we now are faced with public opinion being formulated through the
media by a smaller and smaller group of editors and producers. That cannot be
healthy for democracy. It limits debate and the issues raised. As democrats, we
must be concerned about that.
The other issue that caused a great deal of anger was
the issue of negative billing. One cannot help but think that if the issue had
been addressed at an earlier stage by interveners, it never would have got to
the point that it did and it would not have caused so many people grief,
including the providers of the service. This type of a bill and the resulting
support it would provide to the interveners would really help head off that
kind of a problem at a much earlier stage.
There are any number of other areas in the processing
and enforcing of legislation and regulations. One cannot help but think that
the government would be serving the Canadian public much better if it followed
the example in the bill.
Again, I reiterate the need for the bill. Senator
Finestone is to be commended for her work in the Senate with regard to it. I
also want to acknowledge the speech by the member for Charleswood St.
James--Assiniboia. His words were particularly forceful and eloquent at times
on the need to have this type of legislation in place and to provide that type
of support for the intervening groups who want to provide assistance to the
democratic process.
(1320)
Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette,
PC/DR):
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to join the debate this
afternoon on behalf of members of the opposition coalition. I will pick up
where my colleague left off in congratulating Senator Finestone, one of our
former colleagues in this House, for her good work on the bill. I would like to
also congratulate our colleague from Charleswood St. James--Assiniboia for his
hard work on this initiative as well.
I would also agree somewhat with my colleague from
Crowfoot on the point that perhaps, given the fact that there is an upcoming
review of the Broadcasting Act that will be undertaken by the heritage
committee, this may be the framework that this amendment is placed into, seeing
as there will be a review of the entire legislation. Nevertheless, members of
the coalition are generally supportive of the amendment.
I would like to focus my comments on some of the points
that were made earlier by some of my colleagues.
Sections 56 and 57 of the Telecommunications Act give
the CRTC the power to order intervener costs that compensate individuals and
organizations for their participation, research and testimony during
telecommunications procedures that appear in front of the commission. There are
rules that guide the CRTC on this.
This is not the same case for the Broadcasting Act. The
CRTC has no power to award intervener costs. I would agree with the points made
by my colleagues that we have a discrepancy between the two bills. The
amendment would seek to fix that point by harmonizing these two pieces of
legislation.
I would like to focus my comments at this point on the
purpose and the meaning of intervener funding.
The purpose of intervener costs is to ensure that
individuals or groups of individuals who are or may be directly affected by a
project under review by the CRTC have a reasonable opportunity to review
information submitted by the applicant and other parties, that they have a
reasonable opportunity to provide evidence relevant to the application and when
appropriate an opportunity to cross-examine persons submitting information
relevant to the application and that they have an opportunity to make arguments
before the CRTC regarding the project.
It is important that the CRTC hear different points of
view on an important decision it will make. Often the voice of individuals
without the access to funds or the ability to be involved in the hearing is not
heard. The amendment seeks to remedy that.
Why might we put this amendment in place? As I said
earlier, it would harmonize the language between the Telecommunications Act and
the Broadcasting Act, and that is an important thing to do. It would give the
CRTC the power to award costs and to establish the rules to award these costs
in the broadcasting field as they are presently in existence under the
Telecommunications Act.
The details of these rules already exists in the rules
of procedure for the Telecommunications Act and will remain the same should
they be applied to this act as well. The procedure for cost award is already in
existence in the Telecommunications Act and this would also be contained in
this act if we went ahead with this amendment.
It is important to note also that this would result in
asymmetry of legislation of both rules and procedures and would be fair to
consumers. It would allow the full participation of consumers or consumer
organizations in CRTC hearings. These people would be able to provide informed
opinions which could be beneficial to both the consumer and the
CRTC.
The amendment would be extremely beneficial to the
Canadian public. Cost awards would allow consumers and public interest groups,
as well as individuals, to develop thorough research and substantial evidence
to represent effectively the interests of citizens in broadcasting and cable
television policy and regulatory proceedings.
(1325)
There are many other reasons why we should be
supportive of this amendment. Many of those points have been brought up by my
colleagues throughout this debate. Perhaps the most important one, which has
been echoed in this place, is that it opens up a fairness opportunity for
Canadians. Canada is a big country in which it is often hard to get from one
place to another, but it is important that voices be heard in important
decisions and that people have the access to those opportunities to have their
voices heard so that good decisions can be made that are reflective of both
sides of an issue or of many sides of an issue.
The amendment would allow a greater opportunity for
that to happen. Of course individuals would still have to take the initiative
to be involved in the process and we would encourage individuals and groups to
do that. The amendment would encourage more individuals to get involved in that
process and would bring together the two bills, the Telecommunications Act and
the Broadcasting Act, in terms of harmonizing the procedures for both. It seems
a bit unfair that there is one procedure that allows for intervener costs in
the Telecommunications Act but not in the Broadcasting Act. We have heard in
debate today that most members would agree with that.
Again, we commend our former colleague from this place,
now Senator Finestone, and our colleague from Charleswood St. James--Assiniboia
for his good work on this issue and for bringing it forward for us to
consider.
[Translation]
Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, Canadian Alliance):
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to this
bill.
[English]
Indeed, we would like to compliment Senator Sheila
Finestone, who has done an excellent job on this matter, as well as the member
for Charleswood St. James--Assiniboia.
I also want to mention another colleague, Senator
Jean-Robert Gauthier, who has also done a lot of work on the bill.
Bill S-7, which would provide compensation for
witnesses to plead their cases in front of the CRTC, is a good bill and we
certainly support it given the current situation in the country. I emphasize
that phrase, given the current situation, for a particular reason. I think we
ought to ask ourselves why we even have a CRTC in its current form.
In this era of the Internet, of greater freedom of
speech and of greater freedom in movement of information, why do we have a CRTC
that is, in my view, overblown? It is an organization that has influenced and
put forth numerous rules and regulations that restrict the ability of the
broadcast media to be the best that they can be.
I remember a group of people in my riding that tried to
set up an ethnic broadcasting station and the incredible hoops those people had
to jump through in order to do that. Why did they have to go through all those
hoops and regulations in order to broadcast messages to ethnic communities in
western Canada?
If ours is a country that is supposedly a democracy,
that promotes freedom of speech and that believes in the ability to communicate
between peoples, a right that enables us to live in a secure, peaceful country,
then why do we have a CRTC that is putting out more and more rules and
regulations every year? Does this not impede the right of Canadians to access
information? Does it not impede the freedoms of writers, broadcasters,
reporters and editorial boards across the country, their freedom to pursue and
write stories and have them heard? Does it not impede artisans, actors and
actresses in their ability to use their craft and broadcast their voices across
the country? I think it does.
I think the CRTC has become overblown. Limited rules
and regulations are required, to be sure, but what is happening now is beyond
the pale. If we take a closer look at what the CRTC has become we see a small
group of individuals controlling the rules and regulations through which we
receive information. They decide what we can hear. They decide what we can
listen to. They decide what information we get and what programs we
watch.
What right do these individuals have to tell Canadians
what we should be watching? They do not. Certainly the original purpose of the
CRTC was and remains a good one, but over the years the CRTC has become
overblown, like many pseudo-government organizations. It has widened its grip
and influence and in so doing is actually violating one of the basic tenets and
principles upon which the country was built, the right of freedom of
speech.
In this examination of the CRTC that is taking place
today, I think we, the CRTC and the public need to take a very close look at
how much of a CRTC we need. Of the many rules and regulations the CRTC
currently supports or requires, how many should we keep and how many should we
remove? That is the larger question.
While Bill S-7 is a good bill given our current
context, and we will support it, we certainly believe that on the larger issue
we need to take a very close, cold, hard look at the CRTC and what powers it
currently has. I would submit that on close examination we would see that the
CRTC's powers, rules and regulations that it has manufactured for itself need
to be removed. Canadians, broadcasters, artisans and the public do not need a
small group of individuals telling us what we should be hearing.
(1330)
Clearly that violates the basic principles of democracy
in the country. Efforts have been made by good people to have broadcasting
rights in Canada that would educate and inform Canadians and make Canada a
better and safer place. It is bizarre that they have to go through all these
rules and regulations and jump through hoops, at great length and expense, to
accomplish this goal.
Let us also not forget that this organization uses the
taxpayer money. In effect, the CRTC uses this money toward having a small group
of individuals restrict the right that Canadians have to information. Does that
not seem passing strange? Does it not seem odd that we even established this
organization and allowed it to balloon to what it is today, with these
expansive powers?
We have been asleep at the wheel. I do not think we
have taken a very close look at this organization, which acts not as a
facilitator, but as a barrier to the dissemination of information which could
benefit Canadians.
Let us look at the CBC. It has a number of very superb
programs, be it Ideas on CBC radio or some of the documentaries which it
has produced. It also has some programs that are terrible. However, what it
clearly needs to have is the right and the power to sell and export those great
programs so it can make money and by doing so, it would rejuvenate its
editorial boards, its writers and broadcasters. It would also create jobs and
perhaps expand and put itself on a firm fiscal footing.
When I travel abroad, I find it heartwarming to see
Canadian programs being shown half a world away because of bilateral
arrangements.
I think everyone in this House has listened to
Ideas on CBC Radio and have been riveted by the extraordinary
programming on CBC Radio. Imagine if those programs could be sold to other
parts of the world, such as south of the border, Europe and other far away
places. Imagine how that could educate people about Canada.
When I travel to other parts of the world, I find the
quality of some of the programming quite sad. If some of our Canadian programs
were exported and sold, what a benefit it would be to these countries. That
would be extraordinary.
The CRTC acts as a bulwark to prevent that from
happening. That organization prevents the CBC from exporting this information.
It prevents broadcasters and people of extraordinary broadcasting abilities to
get their programs out there for us to see. The CRTC prevents that because
broadcasters have to go through it.
As I said in my earlier remarks, in this era of the
Internet, of open borders and of supposedly greater freedoms, which in fact we
have, we have an organization that does the opposite. It retards and
compromises our freedoms as Canadians.
I can only stress to the minister responsible, the
minister of heritage, that this could be an extraordinary legacy for her if she
informed the CRTC that her department would be doing an indepth examination of
the rules, regulations which govern the role of the CRTC. If she does that and
limits the powers of the CRTC, then Canadian broadcasters, editors, reporters,
writers and all Canadians would be better off and we would have a freer
country.
(1335)
[Translation]
Mr. Serge Marcil
(Beauharnois--Salaberry, Lib.):
Madam Speaker, as was explained earlier, the House is
considering Bill S-7, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act, which would enable
the CRTC to make regulations concerning the awarding of costs. It would in fact
allow the commission to award and tax costs between the parties that appear
before it.
It is important to remind the House that there is
support for the principles of fairness and balance behind Bill S-7. It is also
important to harmonize the rules governing the participation of witnesses to
the CRTC hearings dealing with either broadcasting or telecommunications. We
also need to harmonize the rules for stakeholders and broadcasters who appear
before the CRTC. For all these reasons, we think Bill S-7 should be passed at
second reading and referred to the appropriate committee for a more in-depth
review.
If passed, Bill S-7 will guarantee equal opportunity
for all Canadians who wish to take part in the decision-making process
concerning the future of our broadcasting system, as is currently done for our
telecommunications system.
The transition to a new and innovative economy, from an
industrial economy to a knowledge economy, does have an impact on what
Canadians expect from the government and on the role of the
government.
Therefore, in a democratic society, it is perfectly
logical to encourage citizens to act in accordance with the decisions by CRTC
advisers and businesses that appear before the CRTC to participate in the
process and react to it. After all, the broadcasting system uses a public
resource and, through its programming, it helps Canadians establish links with
one another and get to know their history and country better.
Convergence is an ever-present reality within the
communications industry. The convergence of technologies is a key element. The
regulatory issues and concerns that the CRTC must face are increasingly
connected to the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act, and they
affect a broader segment of Canadians.
In an increasingly more complex communications sector,
the rational approach would be to invite citizens to take part in the decisions
that affect them. While the commission is dealing with these issues, one way to
promote informed decisions regarding the protection of the public's interest
would be to help pay the costs incurred by stakeholders who appear before
broadcasting authorities.
If Bill S-7 were passed, the CRTC would have to take
into consideration the different nature and character of radio-broadcasting and
telecommunications hearings. The former are held frequently: they deal with a
wide variety of issues and attract a variety of stakeholders, who are
interested in making their points of view known.
Allow me to clarify.
Telecommunications hearings are generally official in
nature and take place less frequently. Stakeholders who appear before the
commission are usually specialists presenting technical details and economic
analyses regarding rates and their impact on consumers. There is normally a
cross-examination and no licence hearing takes place. Accordingly, the number
of interested stakeholders is relatively limited.
Radio-broadcasting hearings, on the other hand, are
frequent, almost regular. Numerous participants, who hold licences, reflect the
many facets of the radio-broadcasting system: radio, television, cable,
traditional and digital services, pay-per-view television, satellite and direct
distribution services, and multichannel/multipoint distribution
services.
(1340)
These hearings tend to be unofficial. More
particularly, the number of stakeholders interested in attending
radio-broadcasting hearings is not surprising, given that the cultural media
have a close impact on the daily lives of Canadians, shaping their identities
and how they see the world.
Accordingly, it is easier for an informed and
well-spoken citizen to present his observations without necessarily backing
them up with economic or technical analyses.
In addition, radio-broadcasting hearings do not include
cross-examination, and the hearings deal with matters of policy and whether or
not to grant, renew or amend licences.
As for radio-broadcasting hearings, the commission must
make its rulings after taking into account competing and varied issues having
to do with society, culture, language, ethnic origin and the economy. As a
result, the number of stakeholders and areas of interest is much
broader.
Convergence has resulted in differences between
telecommunications and radio-broadcasting, formerly separate industries. The
time has come to standardize the rules for awarding costs.
In the past, when the CRTC held proceedings under the
Telecommunications Act and the Broadcasting Act, including hearings on the new
media, it awarded costs only for representations dealing with one of the
telecommunications aspects. With increasing technological integration that will
blur the differences between the various communications industries, it will
become more and more difficult to assess the contribution of representations
made in relation to their impact on telecommunications or broadcasting.
As I said earlier, the objectives of Bill S-7 are
laudable in principle, but they will be difficult to achieve. In view of the
large number of broadcasting licence renewal proceedings, the CRTC should
probably tailor its criteria for awarding costs related to broadcasting to the
circumstances and even set a limit in that regard.
The CRTC said it was in favour of harmonizing the rules
with regard to the awarding of costs to the parties that appear before it and
that it was ready to set things in motion to bring about the necessary changes
through a public hearing. In fact, the CRTC wants the public and the industry
to be involved in determining what the criteria for the new system would be.
Bill S-7 provides for the harmonization of these rules.
The challenge facing the CRTC is to determine what will
entitle the parties making representations to an award of costs. According to
the rules of procedure in telecommunications, the parties must have an interest
in the outcome of the proceedings, take part in the proceedings in a reasonable
manner and help the CRTC to better understand the issues.
(1345)
The Acting Speaker (Ms.
Bakopanos):
I would like to inform the member that he will have two
minutes left out of the ten minutes normally allotted to him when debate on
this bill is resumed in the House.
The time provided for the consideration of private
members' business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the
order of precedence on the order paper.
[English]
It being 1.45 p.m., the House stands adjourned until
Monday next at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 1.45 p.m.)
APPENDIX
Alphabetical List of Members with their
Constituencies, Province of Constituency
and Political Affiliations;
Committees of the House,
the Ministry and Parliamentary Secretary
Chair Occupants
Speaker
Hon. Peter Milliken
The Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees of the
Whole
Mr. Bob Kilger
Deputy Chairman of Committees of the Whole
Mr. Réginald Bélair
Assistant Deputy Chairman of Committees of the Whole
House
Ms. Eleni Bakopanos
Board Of Internal Economy
Hon. Peter Milliken
Hon. Don Boudria
Hon. Andy Mitchell
Mr. Bill Blaikie
Ms. Marlene Catterall
Mr. Bob Kilger
Mr. Peter MacKay
Mr. Jacques Saada
Mr. John Reynolds
Mr. Pierre Brien
Mr. Richard Harris
Alphabetical list of Members of the House of Commons
First Session--Thirty Seventh Parliament
Name of Member |
Constituency |
Province of Constituency |
Political Affiliation |
Abbott, Jim |
Kootenay--Columbia |
British Columbia |
CA |
Ablonczy, Diane |
Calgary--Nose Hill |
Alberta |
CA |
Adams, Peter |
Peterborough |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Alcock, Reg |
Winnipeg South |
Manitoba |
Lib. |
Allard, Carole-Marie |
Laval East |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Anders, Rob |
Calgary West |
Alberta |
CA |
Anderson, David |
Cypress Hills--Grasslands |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Anderson, Hon. David, Minister of the Environment |
Victoria |
British Columbia |
Lib. |
Assad, Mark, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration |
Gatineau |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Assadourian, Sarkis |
Brampton Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Asselin, Gérard |
Charlevoix |
Quebec |
BQ |
Augustine, Jean |
Etobicoke--Lakeshore |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bachand, André |
Richmond--Arthabaska |
Quebec |
PC/DR |
Bachand, Claude |
Saint-Jean |
Quebec |
BQ |
Bagnell, Larry |
Yukon |
Yukon |
Lib. |
Bailey, Roy |
Souris--Moose Mountain |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Baker, Hon. George |
Gander--Grand Falls |
Newfoundland |
Lib. |
Bakopanos, Eleni |
Ahuntsic |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Barnes, Sue |
London West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Beaumier, Colleen |
Brampton West--Mississauga |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bélair, Réginald |
Timmins--James Bay |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bélanger, Mauril |
Ottawa--Vanier |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bellehumeur, Michel |
Berthier--Montcalm |
Quebec |
BQ |
Bellemare, Eugène |
Ottawa--Orléans |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bennett, Carolyn |
St. Paul's |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Benoit, Leon |
Lakeland |
Alberta |
CA |
Bergeron, Stéphane |
Verchères--Les-Patriotes |
Quebec |
BQ |
Bertrand, Robert |
Pontiac--Gatineau--Labelle |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Bevilacqua, Maurizio |
Vaughan--King--Aurora |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bigras, Bernard |
Rosemont--Petite-Patrie |
Quebec |
BQ |
Binet, Gérard |
Frontenac--Mégantic |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Blaikie, Bill |
Winnipeg--Transcona |
Manitoba |
NDP |
Blondin-Andrew, Hon. Ethel, Secretary of State (Children and
Youth) |
Western Arctic |
Northwest Territories |
Lib. |
Bonin, Raymond |
Nickel Belt |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bonwick, Paul |
Simcoe--Grey |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Borotsik, Rick |
Brandon--Souris |
Manitoba |
PC/DR |
Boudria, Hon. Don, Minister of State and Leader of the Government
in the House of Commons |
Glengarry--Prescott--Russell |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bourgeois, Diane |
Terrebonne--Blainville |
Quebec |
BQ |
Bradshaw, Hon. Claudette, Minister of Labour |
Moncton--Riverview--Dieppe |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Breitkreuz, Garry |
Yorkton--Melville |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Brien, Pierre |
Témiscamingue |
Quebec |
BQ |
Brison, Scott |
Kings--Hants |
Nova Scotia |
PC/DR |
Brown, Bonnie |
Oakville |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bryden, John |
Ancaster--Dundas--Flamborough--Aldershot |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Bulte, Sarmite, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Canadian Heritage |
Parkdale--High Park |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Burton, Andy |
Skeena |
British Columbia |
CA |
Byrne, Gerry |
Humber--St. Barbe--Baie Verte |
Newfoundland |
Lib. |
Caccia, Hon. Charles |
Davenport |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cadman, Chuck |
Surrey North |
British Columbia |
CA |
Calder, Murray |
Dufferin--Peel--Wellington--Grey |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cannis, John |
Scarborough Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Caplan, Hon. Elinor, Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration |
Thornhill |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cardin, Serge |
Sherbrooke |
Quebec |
BQ |
Carignan, Jean-Guy |
Québec East |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Carroll, Aileen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Foreign Affairs |
Barrie--Simcoe--Bradford |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Casey, Bill |
Cumberland--Colchester |
Nova Scotia |
PC/DR |
Casson, Rick |
Lethbridge |
Alberta |
CA |
Castonguay, Jeannot, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Health |
Madawaska--Restigouche |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Catterall, Marlene |
Ottawa West--Nepean |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cauchon, Hon. Martin, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary
of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of
Quebec) |
Outremont |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Chamberlain, Brenda |
Guelph--Wellington |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Charbonneau, Yvon |
Anjou--Rivière-des-Prairies |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Chatters, David |
Athabasca |
Alberta |
CA |
Chrétien, Right Hon. Jean, Prime Minister of Canada |
Saint-Maurice |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Clark, Right Hon. Joe |
Calgary Centre |
Alberta |
PC/DR |
Coderre, Hon. Denis, Secretary of State (Amateur Sport) |
Bourassa |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Collenette, Hon. David, Minister of Transport |
Don Valley East |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Comartin, Joe |
Windsor--St. Clair |
Ontario |
NDP |
Comuzzi, Joe |
Thunder Bay--Superior North |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Copps, Hon. Sheila, Minister of Canadian Heritage |
Hamilton East |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cotler, Irwin |
Mount Royal |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Crête, Paul |
Kamouraska--Rivière-du-Loup--Témiscouata--Les
Basques |
Quebec |
BQ |
Cullen, Roy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Finance |
Markham |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Cummins, John |
Delta--South Richmond |
British Columbia |
CA |
Cuzner, Rodger |
Bras d'Or--Cape Breton |
Nova Scotia |
Lib. |
Dalphond-Guiral, Madeleine |
Laval Centre |
Quebec |
BQ |
Davies, Libby |
Vancouver East |
British Columbia |
NDP |
Day, Stockwell, Leader of the Opposition |
Okanagan--Coquihalla |
British Columbia |
CA |
Desjarlais, Bev |
Churchill |
Manitoba |
NDP |
Desrochers, Odina |
Lotbinière--L'Érable |
Quebec |
BQ |
DeVillers, Paul |
Simcoe North |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Dhaliwal, Hon. Herb, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans |
Vancouver South--Burnaby |
British Columbia |
Lib. |
Dion, Hon. Stéphane, President of the Queen's Privy Council for
Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs |
Saint-Laurent--Cartierville |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Discepola, Nick |
Vaudreuil--Soulanges |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Doyle, Norman |
St. John's East |
Newfoundland |
PC/DR |
Dromisky, Stan |
Thunder Bay--Atikokan |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Drouin, Claude, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Industry |
Beauce |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Dubé, Antoine |
Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière |
Quebec |
BQ |
Duceppe, Gilles |
Laurier--Sainte-Marie |
Quebec |
BQ |
Duhamel, Hon. Ronald, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Secretary
of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Francophonie) |
Saint Boniface |
Manitoba |
Lib. |
Duncan, John |
Vancouver Island North |
British Columbia |
CA |
Duplain, Claude |
Portneuf |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Easter, Wayne |
Malpeque |
Prince Edward Island |
Lib. |
Eggleton, Hon. Art, Minister of National Defence |
York Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Elley, Reed |
Nanaimo--Cowichan |
British Columbia |
CA |
Epp, Ken |
Elk Island |
Alberta |
CA |
Eyking, Mark |
Sydney--Victoria |
Nova Scotia |
Lib. |
Farrah, Georges, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Fisheries and Oceans |
Bonaventure--Gaspé--Îles-de-la-Madeleine--Pabok |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Finlay, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian
Affairs and Nothern Development |
Oxford |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Fitzpatrick, Brian |
Prince Albert |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Folco, Raymonde, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human
Resources Development |
Laval West |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Fontana, Joe |
London North Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Forseth, Paul |
New Westminster--Coquitlam--Burnaby |
British Columbia |
CA |
Fournier, Ghislain |
Manicouagan |
Quebec |
BQ |
Fry, Hon. Hedy, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of
Women) |
Vancouver Centre |
British Columbia |
Lib. |
Gagliano, Hon. Alfonso, Minister of Public Works and Government
Services |
Saint-Léonard--Saint-Michel |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Gagnon, Christiane |
Québec |
Quebec |
BQ |
Gagnon, Marcel |
Champlain |
Quebec |
BQ |
Gallant, Cheryl |
Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke |
Ontario |
CA |
Gallaway, Roger |
Sarnia--Lambton |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Gauthier, Michel |
Roberval |
Quebec |
BQ |
Girard-Bujold, Jocelyne |
Jonquière |
Quebec |
BQ |
Godfrey, John |
Don Valley West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Godin, Yvon |
Acadie--Bathurst |
New Brunswick |
NDP |
Goldring, Peter |
Edmonton Centre-East |
Alberta |
CA |
Goodale, Hon. Ralph, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister
responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board |
Wascana |
Saskatchewan |
Lib. |
Gouk, Jim |
Kootenay--Boundary--Okanagan |
British Columbia |
CA |
Graham, Bill |
Toronto Centre--Rosedale |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Gray, Hon. Herb, Deputy Prime Minister |
Windsor West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Grewal, Gurmant |
Surrey Central |
British Columbia |
CA |
Grey, Deborah |
Edmonton North |
Alberta |
PC/DR |
Grose, Ivan |
Oshawa |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Guarnieri, Albina |
Mississauga East |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Guay, Monique |
Laurentides |
Quebec |
BQ |
Guimond, Michel |
Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans |
Quebec |
BQ |
Hanger, Art |
Calgary Northeast |
Alberta |
CA |
Harb, Mac |
Ottawa Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Harris, Richard |
Prince George--Bulkley Valley |
British Columbia |
CA |
Harvard, John |
Charleswood St. James--Assiniboia |
Manitoba |
Lib. |
Harvey, André, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Transport |
Chicoutimi--Le Fjord |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Hearn, Loyola |
St. John's West |
Newfoundland |
PC/DR |
Herron, John |
Fundy--Royal |
New Brunswick |
PC/DR |
Hill, Grant |
Macleod |
Alberta |
CA |
Hill, Jay |
Prince George--Peace River |
British Columbia |
PC/DR |
Hilstrom, Howard |
Selkirk--Interlake |
Manitoba |
CA |
Hinton, Betty |
Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys |
British Columbia |
CA |
Hubbard, Charles |
Miramichi |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Ianno, Tony |
Trinity--Spadina |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Jackson, Ovid |
Bruce--Grey--Owen Sound |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Jaffer, Rahim |
Edmonton--Strathcona |
Alberta |
CA |
Jennings, Marlene, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for
International Cooperation |
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce--Lachine |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Johnston, Dale |
Wetaskiwin |
Alberta |
CA |
Jordan, Joe, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister |
Leeds--Grenville |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Karetak-Lindell, Nancy |
Nunavut |
Nunavut |
Lib. |
Karygiannis, Jim |
Scarborough--Agincourt |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Keddy, Gerald |
South Shore |
Nova Scotia |
PC/DR |
Kenney, Jason |
Calgary Southeast |
Alberta |
CA |
Keyes, Stan |
Hamilton West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Kilger, Bob |
Stormont--Dundas--Charlottenburgh |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Kilgour, Hon. David, Secretary of State (Latin America and
Africa) |
Edmonton Southeast |
Alberta |
Lib. |
Knutson, Gar |
Elgin--Middlesex--London |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Kraft Sloan, Karen |
York North |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Laframboise, Mario |
Argenteuil--Papineau--Mirabel |
Quebec |
BQ |
Laliberte, Rick |
Churchill River |
Saskatchewan |
Lib. |
Lalonde, Francine |
Mercier |
Quebec |
BQ |
Lanctôt, Robert |
Châteauguay |
Quebec |
BQ |
Lastewka, Walt |
St. Catharines |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Lavigne, Raymond |
Verdun--Saint-Henri--Saint-Paul--Pointe
Saint-Charles |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Lebel, Ghislain |
Chambly |
Quebec |
BQ |
LeBlanc, Dominic |
Beauséjour--Petitcodiac |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Lee, Derek |
Scarborough--Rouge River |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Leung, Sophia, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
National Revenue |
Vancouver Kingsway |
British Columbia |
Lib. |
Lill, Wendy |
Dartmouth |
Nova Scotia |
NDP |
Lincoln, Clifford |
Lac-Saint-Louis |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Longfield, Judi |
Whitby--Ajax |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Loubier, Yvan |
Saint-Hyacinthe--Bagot |
Quebec |
BQ |
Lunn, Gary |
Saanich--Gulf Islands |
British Columbia |
PC/DR |
Lunney, James |
Nanaimo--Alberni |
British Columbia |
CA |
MacAulay, Hon. Lawrence, Solicitor General of Canada |
Cardigan |
Prince Edward Island |
Lib. |
MacKay, Peter |
Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough |
Nova Scotia |
PC/DR |
Macklin, Paul Harold |
Northumberland |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Mahoney, Steve |
Mississauga West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Malhi, Gurbax, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Labour |
Bramalea--Gore--Malton--Springdale |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Maloney, John |
Erie--Lincoln |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Manley, Hon. John, Minister of Foreign Affairs |
Ottawa South |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Manning, Preston |
Calgary Southwest |
Alberta |
CA |
Marceau, Richard |
Charlesbourg--Jacques-Cartier |
Quebec |
BQ |
Marcil, Serge |
Beauharnois--Salaberry |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Mark, Inky |
Dauphin--Swan River |
Manitoba |
PC/DR |
Marleau, Hon. Diane |
Sudbury |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Martin, Keith |
Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca |
British Columbia |
CA |
Martin, Pat |
Winnipeg Centre |
Manitoba |
NDP |
Martin, Hon. Paul, Minister of Finance |
LaSalle--Émard |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Matthews, Bill, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the
Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental
Affairs |
Burin--St. George's |
Newfoundland |
Lib. |
Mayfield, Philip |
Cariboo--Chilcotin |
British Columbia |
CA |
McCallum, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Finance |
Markham |
Ontario |
Lib. |
McCormick, Larry, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food |
Hastings--Frontenac--Lennox and Addington |
Ontario |
Lib. |
McDonough, Alexa |
Halifax |
Nova Scotia |
NDP |
McGuire, Joe |
Egmont |
Prince Edward Island |
Lib. |
McKay, John |
Scarborough East |
Ontario |
Lib. |
McLellan, Hon. Anne, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of
Canada |
Edmonton West |
Alberta |
Lib. |
McNally, Grant |
Dewdney--Alouette |
British Columbia |
PC/DR |
McTeague, Dan |
Pickering--Ajax--Uxbridge |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Ménard, Réal |
Hochelaga--Maisonneuve |
Quebec |
BQ |
Meredith, Val |
South Surrey--White Rock--Langley |
British Columbia |
PC/DR |
Merrifield, Rob |
Yellowhead |
Alberta |
CA |
Milliken, Hon. Peter |
Kingston and the Islands |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Mills, Bob |
Red Deer |
Alberta |
CA |
Mills, Dennis |
Toronto--Danforth |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Minna, Hon. Maria, Minister for International Cooperation |
Beaches--East York |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Mitchell, Hon. Andy, Secretary of State (Rural Development)
(Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario) |
Parry Sound--Muskoka |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Moore, James |
Port Moody--Coquitlam--Port Coquitlam |
British Columbia |
CA |
Murphy, Shawn |
Hillsborough |
Prince Edward Island |
Lib. |
Myers, Lynn, Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of
Canada |
Waterloo--Wellington |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Nault, Hon. Robert, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development |
Kenora--Rainy River |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Neville, Anita |
Winnipeg South Centre |
Manitoba |
Lib. |
Normand, Hon. Gilbert, Secretary of State (Science, Research and
Development) |
Bellechasse--Etchemins--Montmagny--L'Islet |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Nystrom, Hon. Lorne |
Regina--Qu'Appelle |
Saskatchewan |
NDP |
O'Brien, Lawrence |
Labrador |
Newfoundland |
Lib. |
O'Brien, Pat, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
International Trade |
London--Fanshawe |
Ontario |
Lib. |
O'Reilly, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
National Defence |
Haliburton--Victoria--Brock |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Obhrai, Deepak |
Calgary East |
Alberta |
CA |
Owen, Stephen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada |
Vancouver Quadra |
British Columbia |
Lib. |
Pagtakhan, Hon. Rey, Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific) |
Winnipeg North--St. Paul |
Manitoba |
Lib. |
Pallister, Brian |
Portage--Lisgar |
Manitoba |
CA |
Pankiw, Jim |
Saskatoon--Humboldt |
Saskatchewan |
PC/DR |
Paquette, Pierre |
Joliette |
Quebec |
BQ |
Paradis, Denis |
Brome--Missisquoi |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Parrish, Carolyn |
Mississauga Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Patry, Bernard |
Pierrefonds--Dollard |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Penson, Charlie |
Peace River |
Alberta |
CA |
Peric, Janko |
Cambridge |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Perron, Gilles-A. |
Rivière-des-Mille-Îles |
Quebec |
BQ |
Peschisolido, Joe |
Richmond |
British Columbia |
CA |
Peterson, Hon. Jim, Secretary of State (International Financial
Institutions) |
Willowdale |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Pettigrew, Hon. Pierre, Minister for International Trade |
Papineau--Saint-Denis |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Phinney, Beth |
Hamilton Mountain |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Picard, Pauline |
Drummond |
Quebec |
BQ |
Pickard, Jerry |
Chatham--Kent Essex |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Pillitteri, Gary |
Niagara Falls |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Plamondon, Louis |
Bas-Richelieu--Nicolet--Bécancour |
Quebec |
BQ |
Pratt, David |
Nepean--Carleton |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Price, David |
Compton--Stanstead |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Proctor, Dick |
Palliser |
Saskatchewan |
NDP |
Proulx, Marcel |
Hull--Aylmer |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Provenzano, Carmen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Veterans Affairs |
Sault Ste. Marie |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Rajotte, James |
Edmonton Southwest |
Alberta |
CA |
Redman, Karen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the
Environment |
Kitchener Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Reed, Julian |
Halton |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Regan, Geoff, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons |
Halifax West |
Nova Scotia |
Lib. |
Reid, Scott |
Lanark--Carleton |
Ontario |
CA |
Reynolds, John |
West Vancouver--Sunshine Coast |
British Columbia |
CA |
Richardson, John |
Perth--Middlesex |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Ritz, Gerry |
Battlefords--Lloydminster |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Robillard, Hon. Lucienne, President of the Treasury Board and
Minister responsible for Infrastructure |
Westmount--Ville-Marie |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Robinson, Svend |
Burnaby--Douglas |
British Columbia |
NDP |
Rocheleau, Yves |
Trois-Rivières |
Quebec |
BQ |
Rock, Hon. Allan, Minister of Health |
Etobicoke Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Roy, Jean-Yves |
Matapédia--Matane |
Quebec |
BQ |
Saada, Jacques |
Brossard--La Prairie |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Sauvageau, Benoît |
Repentigny |
Quebec |
BQ |
Savoy, Andy |
Tobique--Mactaquac |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Scherrer, Hélène |
Louis-Hébert |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Schmidt, Werner |
Kelowna |
British Columbia |
CA |
Scott, Hon. Andy |
Fredericton |
New Brunswick |
Lib. |
Serré, Benoît, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural
Resources |
Timiskaming--Cochrane |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Sgro, Judy |
York West |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Shepherd, Alex, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the
Treasury Board |
Durham |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Skelton, Carol |
Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Solberg, Monte |
Medicine Hat |
Alberta |
CA |
Sorenson, Kevin |
Crowfoot |
Alberta |
CA |
Speller, Bob |
Haldimand--Norfolk--Brant |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Spencer, Larry |
Regina--Lumsden--Lake Centre |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
St-Hilaire, Caroline |
Longueuil |
Quebec |
BQ |
St-Jacques, Diane |
Shefford |
Quebec |
Lib. |
St-Julien, Guy |
Abitibi--Baie-James--Nunavik |
Quebec |
Lib. |
St. Denis, Brent |
Algoma--Manitoulin |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Steckle, Paul |
Huron--Bruce |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Stewart, Hon. Jane, Minister of Human Resources
Development |
Brant |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Stinson, Darrel |
Okanagan--Shuswap |
British Columbia |
CA |
Stoffer, Peter |
Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern
Shore |
Nova Scotia |
NDP |
Strahl, Chuck |
Fraser Valley |
British Columbia |
PC/DR |
Szabo, Paul, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public
Works and Government Services |
Mississauga South |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Telegdi, Andrew |
Kitchener--Waterloo |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Thibault, Hon. Robert, Minister of State (Atlantic Canada
Opportunities Agency) |
West Nova |
Nova Scotia |
Lib. |
Thibeault, Yolande |
Saint-Lambert |
Quebec |
Lib. |
Thompson, Greg |
New Brunswick Southwest |
New Brunswick |
PC/DR |
Thompson, Myron |
Wild Rose |
Alberta |
CA |
Tirabassi, Tony |
Niagara Centre |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Tobin, Hon. Brian, Minister of Industry |
Bonavista--Trinity--Conception |
Newfoundland |
Lib. |
Toews, Vic |
Provencher |
Manitoba |
CA |
Tonks, Alan |
York South--Weston |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Torsney, Paddy |
Burlington |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Tremblay, Stéphan |
Lac-Saint-Jean--Saguenay |
Quebec |
BQ |
Tremblay, Suzanne |
Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis |
Quebec |
BQ |
Ur, Rose-Marie |
Lambton--Kent--Middlesex |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Valeri, Tony |
Stoney Creek |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Vanclief, Hon. Lyle, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food |
Prince Edward--Hastings |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Vellacott, Maurice |
Saskatoon--Wanuskewin |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Venne, Pierrette |
Saint-Bruno--Saint-Hubert |
Quebec |
BQ |
Volpe, Joseph |
Eglinton--Lawrence |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Wappel, Tom |
Scarborough Southwest |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Wasylycia-Leis, Judy |
Winnipeg North Centre |
Manitoba |
NDP |
Wayne, Elsie |
Saint John |
New Brunswick |
PC/DR |
Whelan, Susan |
Essex |
Ontario |
Lib. |
White, Randy |
Langley--Abbotsford |
British Columbia |
CA |
White, Ted |
North Vancouver |
British Columbia |
CA |
Wilfert, Bryon |
Oak Ridges |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Williams, John |
St. Albert |
Alberta |
CA |
Wood, Bob |
Nipissing |
Ontario |
Lib. |
Yelich, Lynne |
Blackstrap |
Saskatchewan |
CA |
Alphabetical list of Members of the House of Commons by
Province
First Session--Thirty Seventh Parliament
Name of Member |
Constituency |
Political Affiliation |
Alberta (26)
|
Ablonczy, Diane |
Calgary--Nose Hill |
CA |
Anders, Rob |
Calgary West |
CA |
Benoit, Leon |
Lakeland |
CA |
Casson, Rick |
Lethbridge |
CA |
Chatters, David |
Athabasca |
CA |
Clark, Right Hon. Joe |
Calgary Centre |
PC/DR |
Epp, Ken |
Elk Island |
CA |
Goldring, Peter |
Edmonton Centre-East |
CA |
Grey, Deborah |
Edmonton North |
PC/DR |
Hanger, Art |
Calgary Northeast |
CA |
Hill, Grant |
Macleod |
CA |
Jaffer, Rahim |
Edmonton--Strathcona |
CA |
Johnston, Dale |
Wetaskiwin |
CA |
Kenney, Jason |
Calgary Southeast |
CA |
Kilgour, Hon. David, Secretary of State (Latin America and
Africa) |
Edmonton Southeast |
Lib. |
Manning, Preston |
Calgary Southwest |
CA |
McLellan, Hon. Anne, Minister of Justice and Attorney General
of Canada |
Edmonton West |
Lib. |
Merrifield, Rob |
Yellowhead |
CA |
Mills, Bob |
Red Deer |
CA |
Obhrai, Deepak |
Calgary East |
CA |
Penson, Charlie |
Peace River |
CA |
Rajotte, James |
Edmonton Southwest |
CA |
Solberg, Monte |
Medicine Hat |
CA |
Sorenson, Kevin |
Crowfoot |
CA |
Thompson, Myron |
Wild Rose |
CA |
Williams, John |
St. Albert |
CA |
British Columbia (34)
|
Abbott, Jim |
Kootenay--Columbia |
CA |
Anderson, Hon. David, Minister of the Environment |
Victoria |
Lib. |
Burton, Andy |
Skeena |
CA |
Cadman, Chuck |
Surrey North |
CA |
Cummins, John |
Delta--South Richmond |
CA |
Davies, Libby |
Vancouver East |
NDP |
Day, Stockwell, Leader of the Opposition |
Okanagan--Coquihalla |
CA |
Dhaliwal, Hon. Herb, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans |
Vancouver South--Burnaby |
Lib. |
Duncan, John |
Vancouver Island North |
CA |
Elley, Reed |
Nanaimo--Cowichan |
CA |
Forseth, Paul |
New Westminster--Coquitlam--Burnaby |
CA |
Fry, Hon. Hedy, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status
of Women) |
Vancouver Centre |
Lib. |
Gouk, Jim |
Kootenay--Boundary--Okanagan |
CA |
Grewal, Gurmant |
Surrey Central |
CA |
Harris, Richard |
Prince George--Bulkley Valley |
CA |
Hill, Jay |
Prince George--Peace River |
PC/DR |
Hinton, Betty |
Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys |
CA |
Leung, Sophia, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
National Revenue |
Vancouver Kingsway |
Lib. |
Lunn, Gary |
Saanich--Gulf Islands |
PC/DR |
Lunney, James |
Nanaimo--Alberni |
CA |
Martin, Keith |
Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca |
CA |
Mayfield, Philip |
Cariboo--Chilcotin |
CA |
McNally, Grant |
Dewdney--Alouette |
PC/DR |
Meredith, Val |
South Surrey--White Rock--Langley |
PC/DR |
Moore, James |
Port Moody--Coquitlam--Port Coquitlam |
CA |
Owen, Stephen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Justice and Attorney General of Canada |
Vancouver Quadra |
Lib. |
Peschisolido, Joe |
Richmond |
CA |
Reynolds, John |
West Vancouver--Sunshine Coast |
CA |
Robinson, Svend |
Burnaby--Douglas |
NDP |
Schmidt, Werner |
Kelowna |
CA |
Stinson, Darrel |
Okanagan--Shuswap |
CA |
Strahl, Chuck |
Fraser Valley |
PC/DR |
White, Randy |
Langley--Abbotsford |
CA |
White, Ted |
North Vancouver |
CA |
Manitoba (14)
|
Alcock, Reg |
Winnipeg South |
Lib. |
Blaikie, Bill |
Winnipeg--Transcona |
NDP |
Borotsik, Rick |
Brandon--Souris |
PC/DR |
Desjarlais, Bev |
Churchill |
NDP |
Duhamel, Hon. Ronald, Minister of Veterans Affairs and
Secretary of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Francophonie) |
Saint Boniface |
Lib. |
Harvard, John |
Charleswood St. James--Assiniboia |
Lib. |
Hilstrom, Howard |
Selkirk--Interlake |
CA |
Mark, Inky |
Dauphin--Swan River |
PC/DR |
Martin, Pat |
Winnipeg Centre |
NDP |
Neville, Anita |
Winnipeg South Centre |
Lib. |
Pagtakhan, Hon. Rey, Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific) |
Winnipeg North--St. Paul |
Lib. |
Pallister, Brian |
Portage--Lisgar |
CA |
Toews, Vic |
Provencher |
CA |
Wasylycia-Leis, Judy |
Winnipeg North Centre |
NDP |
New Brunswick (10)
|
Bradshaw, Hon. Claudette, Minister of Labour |
Moncton--Riverview--Dieppe |
Lib. |
Castonguay, Jeannot, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Health |
Madawaska--Restigouche |
Lib. |
Godin, Yvon |
Acadie--Bathurst |
NDP |
Herron, John |
Fundy--Royal |
PC/DR |
Hubbard, Charles |
Miramichi |
Lib. |
LeBlanc, Dominic |
Beauséjour--Petitcodiac |
Lib. |
Savoy, Andy |
Tobique--Mactaquac |
Lib. |
Scott, Hon. Andy |
Fredericton |
Lib. |
Thompson, Greg |
New Brunswick Southwest |
PC/DR |
Wayne, Elsie |
Saint John |
PC/DR |
Newfoundland (7)
|
Baker, Hon. George |
Gander--Grand Falls |
Lib. |
Byrne, Gerry |
Humber--St. Barbe--Baie Verte |
Lib. |
Doyle, Norman |
St. John's East |
PC/DR |
Hearn, Loyola |
St. John's West |
PC/DR |
Matthews, Bill, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the
Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental
Affairs |
Burin--St. George's |
Lib. |
O'Brien, Lawrence |
Labrador |
Lib. |
Tobin, Hon. Brian, Minister of Industry |
Bonavista--Trinity--Conception |
Lib. |
Northwest Territories (1)
|
Blondin-Andrew, Hon. Ethel, Secretary of State (Children and
Youth) |
Western Arctic |
Lib. |
Nova Scotia (11)
|
Brison, Scott |
Kings--Hants |
PC/DR |
Casey, Bill |
Cumberland--Colchester |
PC/DR |
Cuzner, Rodger |
Bras d'Or--Cape Breton |
Lib. |
Eyking, Mark |
Sydney--Victoria |
Lib. |
Keddy, Gerald |
South Shore |
PC/DR |
Lill, Wendy |
Dartmouth |
NDP |
MacKay, Peter |
Pictou--Antigonish--Guysborough |
PC/DR |
McDonough, Alexa |
Halifax |
NDP |
Regan, Geoff, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons |
Halifax West |
Lib. |
Stoffer, Peter |
Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern
Shore |
NDP |
Thibault, Hon. Robert, Minister of State (Atlantic Canada
Opportunities Agency) |
West Nova |
Lib. |
Nunavut (1)
|
Karetak-Lindell, Nancy |
Nunavut |
Lib. |
Ontario (103)
|
Adams, Peter |
Peterborough |
Lib. |
Assadourian, Sarkis |
Brampton Centre |
Lib. |
Augustine, Jean |
Etobicoke--Lakeshore |
Lib. |
Barnes, Sue |
London West |
Lib. |
Beaumier, Colleen |
Brampton West--Mississauga |
Lib. |
Bélair, Réginald |
Timmins--James Bay |
Lib. |
Bélanger, Mauril |
Ottawa--Vanier |
Lib. |
Bellemare, Eugène |
Ottawa--Orléans |
Lib. |
Bennett, Carolyn |
St. Paul's |
Lib. |
Bevilacqua, Maurizio |
Vaughan--King--Aurora |
Lib. |
Bonin, Raymond |
Nickel Belt |
Lib. |
Bonwick, Paul |
Simcoe--Grey |
Lib. |
Boudria, Hon. Don, Minister of State and Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons |
Glengarry--Prescott--Russell |
Lib. |
Brown, Bonnie |
Oakville |
Lib. |
Bryden, John |
Ancaster--Dundas--Flamborough--Aldershot |
Lib. |
Bulte, Sarmite, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Canadian Heritage |
Parkdale--High Park |
Lib. |
Caccia, Hon. Charles |
Davenport |
Lib. |
Calder, Murray |
Dufferin--Peel--Wellington--Grey |
Lib. |
Cannis, John |
Scarborough Centre |
Lib. |
Caplan, Hon. Elinor, Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration |
Thornhill |
Lib. |
Carroll, Aileen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Foreign Affairs |
Barrie--Simcoe--Bradford |
Lib. |
Catterall, Marlene |
Ottawa West--Nepean |
Lib. |
Chamberlain, Brenda |
Guelph--Wellington |
Lib. |
Collenette, Hon. David, Minister of Transport |
Don Valley East |
Lib. |
Comartin, Joe |
Windsor--St. Clair |
NDP |
Comuzzi, Joe |
Thunder Bay--Superior North |
Lib. |
Copps, Hon. Sheila, Minister of Canadian Heritage |
Hamilton East |
Lib. |
Cullen, Roy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Finance |
Markham |
Lib. |
DeVillers, Paul |
Simcoe North |
Lib. |
Dromisky, Stan |
Thunder Bay--Atikokan |
Lib. |
Eggleton, Hon. Art, Minister of National Defence |
York Centre |
Lib. |
Finlay, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian
Affairs and Nothern Development |
Oxford |
Lib. |
Fontana, Joe |
London North Centre |
Lib. |
Gallant, Cheryl |
Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke |
CA |
Gallaway, Roger |
Sarnia--Lambton |
Lib. |
Godfrey, John |
Don Valley West |
Lib. |
Graham, Bill |
Toronto Centre--Rosedale |
Lib. |
Gray, Hon. Herb, Deputy Prime Minister |
Windsor West |
Lib. |
Grose, Ivan |
Oshawa |
Lib. |
Guarnieri, Albina |
Mississauga East |
Lib. |
Harb, Mac |
Ottawa Centre |
Lib. |
Ianno, Tony |
Trinity--Spadina |
Lib. |
Jackson, Ovid |
Bruce--Grey--Owen Sound |
Lib. |
Jordan, Joe, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime
Minister |
Leeds--Grenville |
Lib. |
Karygiannis, Jim |
Scarborough--Agincourt |
Lib. |
Keyes, Stan |
Hamilton West |
Lib. |
Kilger, Bob |
Stormont--Dundas--Charlottenburgh |
Lib. |
Knutson, Gar |
Elgin--Middlesex--London |
Lib. |
Kraft Sloan, Karen |
York North |
Lib. |
Lastewka, Walt |
St. Catharines |
Lib. |
Lee, Derek |
Scarborough--Rouge River |
Lib. |
Longfield, Judi |
Whitby--Ajax |
Lib. |
Macklin, Paul Harold |
Northumberland |
Lib. |
Mahoney, Steve |
Mississauga West |
Lib. |
Malhi, Gurbax, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Labour |
Bramalea--Gore--Malton--Springdale |
Lib. |
Maloney, John |
Erie--Lincoln |
Lib. |
Manley, Hon. John, Minister of Foreign Affairs |
Ottawa South |
Lib. |
Marleau, Hon. Diane |
Sudbury |
Lib. |
McCallum, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Finance |
Markham |
Lib. |
McCormick, Larry, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Agriculture and Agri-Food |
Hastings--Frontenac--Lennox and
Addington |
Lib. |
McKay, John |
Scarborough East |
Lib. |
McTeague, Dan |
Pickering--Ajax--Uxbridge |
Lib. |
Milliken, Hon. Peter |
Kingston and the Islands |
Lib. |
Mills, Dennis |
Toronto--Danforth |
Lib. |
Minna, Hon. Maria, Minister for International
Cooperation |
Beaches--East York |
Lib. |
Mitchell, Hon. Andy, Secretary of State (Rural Development)
(Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario) |
Parry Sound--Muskoka |
Lib. |
Myers, Lynn, Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General
of Canada |
Waterloo--Wellington |
Lib. |
Nault, Hon. Robert, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development |
Kenora--Rainy River |
Lib. |
O'Brien, Pat, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
International Trade |
London--Fanshawe |
Lib. |
O'Reilly, John, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
National Defence |
Haliburton--Victoria--Brock |
Lib. |
Parrish, Carolyn |
Mississauga Centre |
Lib. |
Peric, Janko |
Cambridge |
Lib. |
Peterson, Hon. Jim, Secretary of State (International Financial
Institutions) |
Willowdale |
Lib. |
Phinney, Beth |
Hamilton Mountain |
Lib. |
Pickard, Jerry |
Chatham--Kent Essex |
Lib. |
Pillitteri, Gary |
Niagara Falls |
Lib. |
Pratt, David |
Nepean--Carleton |
Lib. |
Provenzano, Carmen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Veterans Affairs |
Sault Ste. Marie |
Lib. |
Redman, Karen, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the
Environment |
Kitchener Centre |
Lib. |
Reed, Julian |
Halton |
Lib. |
Reid, Scott |
Lanark--Carleton |
CA |
Richardson, John |
Perth--Middlesex |
Lib. |
Rock, Hon. Allan, Minister of Health |
Etobicoke Centre |
Lib. |
Serré, Benoît, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Natural Resources |
Timiskaming--Cochrane |
Lib. |
Sgro, Judy |
York West |
Lib. |
Shepherd, Alex, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the
Treasury Board |
Durham |
Lib. |
Speller, Bob |
Haldimand--Norfolk--Brant |
Lib. |
St. Denis, Brent |
Algoma--Manitoulin |
Lib. |
Steckle, Paul |
Huron--Bruce |
Lib. |
Stewart, Hon. Jane, Minister of Human Resources
Development |
Brant |
Lib. |
Szabo, Paul, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public
Works and Government Services |
Mississauga South |
Lib. |
Telegdi, Andrew |
Kitchener--Waterloo |
Lib. |
Tirabassi, Tony |
Niagara Centre |
Lib. |
Tonks, Alan |
York South--Weston |
Lib. |
Torsney, Paddy |
Burlington |
Lib. |
Ur, Rose-Marie |
Lambton--Kent--Middlesex |
Lib. |
Valeri, Tony |
Stoney Creek |
Lib. |
Vanclief, Hon. Lyle, Minister of Agriculture and
Agri-Food |
Prince Edward--Hastings |
Lib. |
Volpe, Joseph |
Eglinton--Lawrence |
Lib. |
Wappel, Tom |
Scarborough Southwest |
Lib. |
Whelan, Susan |
Essex |
Lib. |
Wilfert, Bryon |
Oak Ridges |
Lib. |
Wood, Bob |
Nipissing |
Lib. |
Prince Edward Island (4)
|
Easter, Wayne |
Malpeque |
Lib. |
MacAulay, Hon. Lawrence, Solicitor General of Canada |
Cardigan |
Lib. |
McGuire, Joe |
Egmont |
Lib. |
Murphy, Shawn |
Hillsborough |
Lib. |
Quebec (75)
|
Allard, Carole-Marie |
Laval East |
Lib. |
Assad, Mark, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration |
Gatineau |
Lib. |
Asselin, Gérard |
Charlevoix |
BQ |
Bachand, André |
Richmond--Arthabaska |
PC/DR |
Bachand, Claude |
Saint-Jean |
BQ |
Bakopanos, Eleni |
Ahuntsic |
Lib. |
Bellehumeur, Michel |
Berthier--Montcalm |
BQ |
Bergeron, Stéphane |
Verchères--Les-Patriotes |
BQ |
Bertrand, Robert |
Pontiac--Gatineau--Labelle |
Lib. |
Bigras, Bernard |
Rosemont--Petite-Patrie |
BQ |
Binet, Gérard |
Frontenac--Mégantic |
Lib. |
Bourgeois, Diane |
Terrebonne--Blainville |
BQ |
Brien, Pierre |
Témiscamingue |
BQ |
Cardin, Serge |
Sherbrooke |
BQ |
Carignan, Jean-Guy |
Québec East |
Lib. |
Cauchon, Hon. Martin, Minister of National Revenue and
Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of
Quebec) |
Outremont |
Lib. |
Charbonneau, Yvon |
Anjou--Rivière-des-Prairies |
Lib. |
Chrétien, Right Hon. Jean, Prime Minister of Canada |
Saint-Maurice |
Lib. |
Coderre, Hon. Denis, Secretary of State (Amateur Sport) |
Bourassa |
Lib. |
Cotler, Irwin |
Mount Royal |
Lib. |
Crête, Paul |
Kamouraska--Rivière-du-Loup--Témiscouata--Les
Basques |
BQ |
Dalphond-Guiral, Madeleine |
Laval Centre |
BQ |
Desrochers, Odina |
Lotbinière--L'Érable |
BQ |
Dion, Hon. Stéphane, President of the Queen's Privy Council for
Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs |
Saint-Laurent--Cartierville |
Lib. |
Discepola, Nick |
Vaudreuil--Soulanges |
Lib. |
Drouin, Claude, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Industry |
Beauce |
Lib. |
Dubé, Antoine |
Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière |
BQ |
Duceppe, Gilles |
Laurier--Sainte-Marie |
BQ |
Duplain, Claude |
Portneuf |
Lib. |
Farrah, Georges, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Fisheries and Oceans |
Bonaventure--Gaspé--Îles-de-la-Madeleine--Pabok |
Lib. |
Folco, Raymonde, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Human Resources Development |
Laval West |
Lib. |
Fournier, Ghislain |
Manicouagan |
BQ |
Gagliano, Hon. Alfonso, Minister of Public Works and Government
Services |
Saint-Léonard--Saint-Michel |
Lib. |
Gagnon, Christiane |
Québec |
BQ |
Gagnon, Marcel |
Champlain |
BQ |
Gauthier, Michel |
Roberval |
BQ |
Girard-Bujold, Jocelyne |
Jonquière |
BQ |
Guay, Monique |
Laurentides |
BQ |
Guimond, Michel |
Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans |
BQ |
Harvey, André, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of
Transport |
Chicoutimi--Le Fjord |
Lib. |
Jennings, Marlene, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for
International Cooperation |
Notre-Dame-de-Grâce--Lachine |
Lib. |
Laframboise, Mario |
Argenteuil--Papineau--Mirabel |
BQ |
Lalonde, Francine |
Mercier |
BQ |
Lanctôt, Robert |
Châteauguay |
BQ |
Lavigne, Raymond |
Verdun--Saint-Henri--Saint-Paul--Pointe
Saint-Charles |
Lib. |
Lebel, Ghislain |
Chambly |
BQ |
Lincoln, Clifford |
Lac-Saint-Louis |
Lib. |
Loubier, Yvan |
Saint-Hyacinthe--Bagot |
BQ |
Marceau, Richard |
Charlesbourg--Jacques-Cartier |
BQ |
Marcil, Serge |
Beauharnois--Salaberry |
Lib. |
Martin, Hon. Paul, Minister of Finance |
LaSalle--Émard |
Lib. |
Ménard, Réal |
Hochelaga--Maisonneuve |
BQ |
Normand, Hon. Gilbert, Secretary of State (Science, Research
and Development) |
Bellechasse--Etchemins--Montmagny--L'Islet |
Lib. |
Paquette, Pierre |
Joliette |
BQ |
Paradis, Denis |
Brome--Missisquoi |
Lib. |
Patry, Bernard |
Pierrefonds--Dollard |
Lib. |
Perron, Gilles-A. |
Rivière-des-Mille-Îles |
BQ |
Pettigrew, Hon. Pierre, Minister for International Trade |
Papineau--Saint-Denis |
Lib. |
Picard, Pauline |
Drummond |
BQ |
Plamondon, Louis |
Bas-Richelieu--Nicolet--Bécancour |
BQ |
Price, David |
Compton--Stanstead |
Lib. |
Proulx, Marcel |
Hull--Aylmer |
Lib. |
Robillard, Hon. Lucienne, President of the Treasury Board and
Minister responsible for Infrastructure |
Westmount--Ville-Marie |
Lib. |
Rocheleau, Yves |
Trois-Rivières |
BQ |
Roy, Jean-Yves |
Matapédia--Matane |
BQ |
Saada, Jacques |
Brossard--La Prairie |
Lib. |
Sauvageau, Benoît |
Repentigny |
BQ |
Scherrer, Hélène |
Louis-Hébert |
Lib. |
St-Hilaire, Caroline |
Longueuil |
BQ |
St-Jacques, Diane |
Shefford |
Lib. |
St-Julien, Guy |
Abitibi--Baie-James--Nunavik |
Lib. |
Thibeault, Yolande |
Saint-Lambert |
Lib. |
Tremblay, Stéphan |
Lac-Saint-Jean--Saguenay |
BQ |
Tremblay, Suzanne |
Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis |
BQ |
Venne, Pierrette |
Saint-Bruno--Saint-Hubert |
BQ |
Saskatchewan (14)
|
Anderson, David |
Cypress Hills--Grasslands |
CA |
Bailey, Roy |
Souris--Moose Mountain |
CA |
Breitkreuz, Garry |
Yorkton--Melville |
CA |
Fitzpatrick, Brian |
Prince Albert |
CA |
Goodale, Hon. Ralph, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister
responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board |
Wascana |
Lib. |
Laliberte, Rick |
Churchill River |
Lib. |
Nystrom, Hon. Lorne |
Regina--Qu'Appelle |
NDP |
Pankiw, Jim |
Saskatoon--Humboldt |
PC/DR |
Proctor, Dick |
Palliser |
NDP |
Ritz, Gerry |
Battlefords--Lloydminster |
CA |
Skelton, Carol |
Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar |
CA |
Spencer, Larry |
Regina--Lumsden--Lake Centre |
CA |
Vellacott, Maurice |
Saskatoon--Wanuskewin |
CA |
Yelich, Lynne |
Blackstrap |
CA |
Yukon (1)
|
Bagnell, Larry |
Yukon |
Lib. |
LIST OF STANDING AND SUB-COMMITTEES
(As of October 19, 2001 — 1st Session, 37th
Parliament)
Aboriginal Affairs, Northern Development and Natural
Resources
|
Chair: Raymond Bonin
|
Vice-Chairs: Nancy Karetak-Lindell
Maurice Vellacott
|
Larry Bagnell
Gérard Binet
Serge Cardin
Jean-Guy Carignan
David Chatters
Reed Elley
John Finlay
John Godfrey
Gerald Keddy
Richard Marceau
Pat Martin
Benoît Serré
Guy St-Julien
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
Gérard Asselin
André Bachand
Claude Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Stéphane Bergeron
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
Joe Clark
Joe Comartin
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Bev Desjarlais
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Ghislain Fournier
Cheryl Gallant
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Jason Kenney
Robert Lanctôt
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Joe McGuire
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Anita Neville
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Charlie Penson
Gilles-A. Perron
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Jean-Yves Roy
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Agriculture and Agri-Food
|
Chair: Charles Hubbard
|
Vice-Chairs: Murray Calder
Howard Hilstrom
|
David Anderson
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Claude Duplain
Mark Eyking
Marcel Gagnon
Rick Laliberte
Larry McCormick
Dick Proctor
Bob Speller
Paul Steckle
Suzanne Tremblay
Rose-Marie Ur
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Peter Adams
Rob Anders
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Joe Comartin
Paul Crête
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Odina Desrochers
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Mario Laframboise
Robert Lanctôt
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Charlie Penson
Gilles-A. Perron
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Jean-Yves Roy
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Canadian Heritage
|
Chair: Clifford Lincoln
|
Vice-Chairs: Jim Abbott
Dennis Mills
|
Paul Bonwick
Sarmite Bulte
Rodger Cuzner
Claude Duplain
Christiane Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Roger Gallaway
John Harvard
Betty Hinton
Wendy Lill
Grant McNally
Caroline St-Hilaire
Tony Tirabassi
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Bill Blaikie
Rick Borotsik
Diane Bourgeois
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Joe Comartin
John Cummins
Libby Davies
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
Antoine Dubé
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Robert Lanctôt
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Dick Proctor
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Benoît Sauvageau
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Suzanne Tremblay
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Citizenship and Immigration
|
Chair: Joe Fontana
|
Vice-Chairs: Paul Forseth
Steve Mahoney
|
Mark Assad
Yvon Charbonneau
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral
John Godfrey
Art Hanger
Inky Mark
Anita Neville
Jerry Pickard
David Price
Stéphan Tremblay
Tony Valeri
Judy Wasylycia-Leis
Lynne Yelich
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Francine Lalonde
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
|
Environment and Sustainable Development
|
Chair: Charles Caccia
|
Vice-Chairs: Karen Kraft Sloan
Bob Mills
|
Roy Bailey
Bernard Bigras
Joe Comartin
Paul Forseth
Marcel Gagnon
John Herron
Gar Knutson
Rick Laliberte
Karen Redman
Julian Reed
Andy Savoy
Hélène Scherrer
Alan Tonks
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Peter Adams
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Leon Benoit
Stéphane Bergeron
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Bev Desjarlais
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Robert Lanctôt
Clifford Lincoln
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Svend Robinson
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Peter Stoffer
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Finance
|
Chair: Maurizio Bevilacqua
|
Vice-Chairs: Nick Discepola
Ken Epp
|
Sue Barnes
Carolyn Bennett
Scott Brison
Roy Cullen
Albina Guarnieri
Rahim Jaffer
Jason Kenney
Sophia Leung
Yvan Loubier
John McCallum
Shawn Murphy
Lorne Nystrom
Pauline Picard
Gary Pillitteri
Monte Solberg
Total: (18)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Odina Desrochers
Norman Doyle
Antoine Dubé
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Christiane Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Monique Guay
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Alexa McDonough
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Charlie Penson
Gilles-A. Perron
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Stéphan Tremblay
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Fisheries and Oceans
|
Chair: Wayne Easter
|
Vice-Chairs: John Cummins
Paul Steckle
|
Sarkis Assadourian
Andy Burton
Rodger Cuzner
Georges Farrah
Loyola Hearn
Dominic LeBlanc
James Lunney
Bill Matthews
Lawrence O'Brien
Jean-Yves Roy
Peter Stoffer
Suzanne Tremblay
Tom Wappel
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
Gérard Asselin
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Ghislain Fournier
Marcel Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Svend Robinson
Yves Rocheleau
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Foreign Affairs and International Trade
|
Chair: Bill Graham
|
Vice-Chairs: Jean Augustine
Brian Pallister
|
George Baker
Aileen Carroll
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
John Duncan
John Harvard
Marlene Jennings
Stan Keyes
Francine Lalonde
Diane Marleau
Keith Martin
Pat O'Brien
Pierre Paquette
Bernard Patry
Svend Robinson
Total: (18)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
Sarkis Assadourian
André Bachand
Claude Bachand
Roy Bailey
Colleen Beaumier
Leon Benoit
Stéphane Bergeron
Bernard Bigras
Bill Blaikie
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Irwin Cotler
Paul Crête
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
Stan Dromisky
Antoine Dubé
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Mark Eyking
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Mac Harb
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
John Maloney
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Anita Neville
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Beth Phinney
David Price
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Yves Rocheleau
Benoît Sauvageau
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Bob Speller
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Stéphan Tremblay
Tony Valeri
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Sub-Committee on International Trade, Trade Disputes and
Investment
|
Chair: Mac Harb
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Rick Casson
Mark Eyking
Gary Lunn
Pat O'Brien
Pierre Paquette
Svend Robinson
Bob Speller
Tony Valeri
Total: (9)
|
Sub-Committee on Human Rights and International
Development
|
Chair: Beth Phinney
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Sarkis Assadourian
Colleen Beaumier
Bill Casey
Irwin Cotler
Antoine Dubé
Marlene Jennings
Deepak Obhrai
Svend Robinson
Total: (9)
|
Health
|
Chair: Bonnie Brown
|
Vice-Chairs: Reg Alcock
Rob Merrifield
|
Diane Ablonczy
André Bachand
Colleen Beaumier
Diane Bourgeois
Jeannot Castonguay
Brenda Chamberlain
Stan Dromisky
James Lunney
Réal Ménard
Hélène Scherrer
Judy Sgro
Yolande Thibeault
Judy Wasylycia-Leis
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Rob Anders
David Anderson
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral
Libby Davies
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Pauline Picard
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with
Disabilities
|
Chair: Judi Longfield
|
Vice-Chairs: Joe Peschisolido
Diane St-Jacques
|
Eugène Bellemare
Paul Crête
Libby Davies
Raymonde Folco
Monique Guay
Tony Ianno
Dale Johnston
Gurbax Malhi
Serge Marcil
Joe McGuire
Anita Neville
Carol Skelton
Larry Spencer
Greg Thompson
Alan Tonks
Total: (18)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Peter Adams
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Carolyn Bennett
Leon Benoit
Rick Borotsik
Diane Bourgeois
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
Antoine Dubé
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Christiane Gagnon
Marcel Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold
John Godfrey
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Nancy Karetak-Lindell
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Robert Lanctôt
Wendy Lill
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Larry McCormick
Grant McNally
Réal Ménard
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Jean-Yves Roy
Werner Schmidt
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Myron Thompson
Tony Tirabassi
Vic Toews
Stéphan Tremblay
Maurice Vellacott
Judy Wasylycia-Leis
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Industry, Science and Technology
|
Chair: Susan Whelan
|
Vice-Chairs: Walt Lastewka
Charlie Penson
|
Larry Bagnell
Stéphane Bergeron
Bev Desjarlais
Claude Drouin
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold
Preston Manning
Dan McTeague
James Rajotte
Andy Savoy
Brent St. Denis
Chuck Strahl
Paddy Torsney
Joseph Volpe
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Peter Adams
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Mauril Bélanger
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Pierre Brien
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Odina Desrochers
Norman Doyle
Antoine Dubé
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Christiane Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Mario Laframboise
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Réal Ménard
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Joe Peschisolido
Dick Proctor
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Peter Stoffer
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Justice and Human Rights
|
Chair: Andy Scott
|
Vice-Chairs: Chuck Cadman
Denis Paradis
|
Carole-Marie Allard
Michel Bellehumeur
Bill Blaikie
Irwin Cotler
Paul DeVillers
Ivan Grose
Peter MacKay
John Maloney
John McKay
Lynn Myers
Stephen Owen
Kevin Sorenson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Pierrette Venne
Total: (18)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Diane Bourgeois
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Joe Comartin
John Cummins
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral
Stockwell Day
Bev Desjarlais
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Marlene Jennings
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Dominic LeBlanc
Derek Lee
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Réal Ménard
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Anita Neville
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Pierre Paquette
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
David Pratt
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Svend Robinson
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Suzanne Tremblay
Maurice Vellacott
Tom Wappel
Judy Wasylycia-Leis
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
Bryon Wilfert
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Liaison
|
Chair:
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Peter Adams
Mauril Bélanger
Maurizio Bevilacqua
Raymond Bonin
Bonnie Brown
Charles Caccia
Wayne Easter
Joe Fontana
Bill Graham
Charles Hubbard
Ovid Jackson
Clifford Lincoln
Judi Longfield
David Pratt
Andy Scott
Susan Whelan
John Williams
Total: (17)
|
Budget Sub-Committee
|
Chair: Bill Graham
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Bonnie Brown
Wayne Easter
Clifford Lincoln
Judi Longfield
Susan Whelan
John Williams
Total: (7)
|
National Defence and Veterans Affairs
|
Chair: David Pratt
|
Vice-Chairs: Leon Benoit
David Price
|
Rob Anders
Claude Bachand
Roy Bailey
Colleen Beaumier
Stan Dromisky
John O'Reilly
Janko Peric
Louis Plamondon
Carmen Provenzano
Peter Stoffer
Elsie Wayne
Bryon Wilfert
Bob Wood
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
David Anderson
André Bachand
Stéphane Bergeron
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Monique Guay
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Francine Lalonde
Wendy Lill
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Svend Robinson
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Procedure and House Affairs
|
Chair: Peter Adams
|
Vice-Chairs: Richard Harris
Jacques Saada
|
Pierre Brien
Marlene Catterall
Cheryl Gallant
Yvon Godin
Michel Guimond
Jay Hill
Joe Jordan
Paul Harold Macklin
Carolyn Parrish
Geoff Regan
John Reynolds
John Richardson
Tony Tirabassi
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Sue Barnes
Michel Bellehumeur
Leon Benoit
Stéphane Bergeron
Bill Blaikie
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
John Harvard
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
John Maloney
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Réal Ménard
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
Dennis Mills
James Moore
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Marcel Proulx
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Caroline St-Hilaire
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Paul Szabo
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
Bryon Wilfert
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Sub-Committee on Private Members' Business
|
Chair: Carolyn Parrish
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Bill Blaikie
Garry Breitkreuz
Michel Guimond
Jay Hill
Marcel Proulx
Total: (6)
|
Sub-Committee on Parliamentary Calendar
|
Chair: Marlene Catterall
|
Vice-Chair:
|
Pierre Brien
Yvon Godin
Richard Harris
Jay Hill
Total: (5)
|
Public Accounts
|
Chair: John Williams
|
Vice-Chairs: Mac Harb
Beth Phinney
|
Robert Bertrand
John Bryden
Gerry Byrne
Odina Desrochers
John Finlay
Rahim Jaffer
Sophia Leung
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Shawn Murphy
Gilles-A. Perron
Alex Shepherd
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Total: (17)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Bev Desjarlais
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Denis Paradis
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Benoît Sauvageau
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Peter Stoffer
Chuck Strahl
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
Lynne Yelich
|
Sub-Committee on Combating Corruption
|
Chair: John Williams
|
Vice-Chair:
|
John Bryden
Odina Desrochers
Mac Harb
Pat Martin
Philip Mayfield
Shawn Murphy
Beth Phinney
Alex Shepherd
Greg Thompson
Total: (10)
|
Transport and Government Operations
|
Chair: Ovid Jackson
|
Vice-Chairs: James Moore
Marcel Proulx
|
Reg Alcock
Gerry Byrne
John Cannis
Joe Comuzzi
Bev Desjarlais
Brian Fitzpatrick
Peter Goldring
André Harvey
Mario Laframboise
Ghislain Lebel
Val Meredith
Alex Shepherd
Paul Szabo
Total: (16)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
Gérard Asselin
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Bernard Bigras
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Serge Cardin
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Paul Crête
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Odina Desrochers
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Paul Forseth
Ghislain Fournier
Christiane Gagnon
Cheryl Gallant
Jocelyne Girard-Bujold
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Monique Guay
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Charles Hubbard
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Dominic LeBlanc
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Serge Marcil
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Réal Ménard
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Dick Proctor
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Peter Stoffer
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Special Committee on non-medical use of drugs
|
Chair: Paddy Torsney
|
Vice-Chairs: Carole-Marie Allard
Randy White
|
André Bachand
Bernard Bigras
Libby Davies
Mac Harb
Dominic LeBlanc
Derek Lee
Réal Ménard
Stephen Owen
Jacques Saada
Carol Skelton
Total: (13)
|
STANDING JOINT COMMITTEES
Library of Parliament
|
Joint Chair:
|
Joint Vice-Chair:
|
Representing the Senate:The Honourable SenatorsGérald Beaudoin
John Bryden
Jane Marie Cordy
Donald Oliver
Vivienne Poy
|
Representing the House of Commons:Mauril Bélanger
Carolyn Bennett
Robert Bertrand
Marlene Catterall
Marcel Gagnon
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Betty Hinton
Jim Karygiannis
Raymond Lavigne
Wendy Lill
Jerry Pickard
Louis Plamondon
Jacques Saada
Darrel Stinson
Andrew Telegdi
Total: (21)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
John Cummins
Libby Davies
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Howard Hilstrom
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Benoît Sauvageau
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Official Languages
|
Joint Chairs: Mauril Bélanger
Shirley Maheu
|
Joint Vice-Chairs: Scott Reid
Yolande Thibeault
|
Representing the Senate:The Honourable SenatorsGérald Beaudoin
Joan Fraser
Jean-Robert Gauthier
Laurier LaPierre
Jean-Claude Rivest
Raymond Setlakwe
|
Representing the House of Commons:Mauril Bélanger
Eugène Bellemare
Gérard Binet
Sarmite Bulte
Claude Drouin
Christiane Gagnon
John Godfrey
Yvon Godin
Peter Goldring
Richard Harris
John Herron
Raymond Lavigne
Dan McTeague
Scott Reid
Benoît Sauvageau
Total: (25)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Leon Benoit
Stéphane Bergeron
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Joe Comartin
John Cummins
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Loyola Hearn
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Richard Marceau
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Lorne Nystrom
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Jim Pankiw
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
Louis Plamondon
James Rajotte
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Suzanne Tremblay
Maurice Vellacott
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
Ted White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Scrutiny of Regulations
|
Joint Chair: Céline Hervieux-Payette
|
Joint Vice-Chair:
|
Representing the Senate:The Honourable SenatorsJohn Bryden
Sheila Finestone
Noël Kinsella
Wilfred Moore
Pierre Claude Nolin
|
Representing the House of Commons:Sue Barnes
Paul Bonwick
Jean-Guy Carignan
Joe Comuzzi
John Cummins
Jim Gouk
Gurmant Grewal
Michel Guimond
Gar Knutson
Robert Lanctôt
Derek Lee
Paul Harold Macklin
Lynn Myers
Lorne Nystrom
Jim Pankiw
Tom Wappel
Ted White
Total: (23)
|
Associate Members
Jim Abbott
Diane Ablonczy
Rob Anders
David Anderson
André Bachand
Roy Bailey
Michel Bellehumeur
Leon Benoit
Rick Borotsik
Garry Breitkreuz
Scott Brison
Andy Burton
Chuck Cadman
Bill Casey
Rick Casson
David Chatters
Joe Clark
Stockwell Day
Norman Doyle
John Duncan
Reed Elley
Ken Epp
Brian Fitzpatrick
Paul Forseth
Cheryl Gallant
Peter Goldring
Deborah Grey
Art Hanger
Richard Harris
Loyola Hearn
John Herron
Grant Hill
Jay Hill
Howard Hilstrom
Betty Hinton
Rahim Jaffer
Dale Johnston
Gerald Keddy
Jason Kenney
Ghislain Lebel
Gary Lunn
James Lunney
Peter MacKay
Preston Manning
Inky Mark
Keith Martin
Philip Mayfield
Grant McNally
Val Meredith
Rob Merrifield
Bob Mills
James Moore
Deepak Obhrai
Brian Pallister
Charlie Penson
Joe Peschisolido
James Rajotte
Scott Reid
John Reynolds
Gerry Ritz
Werner Schmidt
Carol Skelton
Monte Solberg
Kevin Sorenson
Larry Spencer
Darrel Stinson
Chuck Strahl
Greg Thompson
Myron Thompson
Vic Toews
Maurice Vellacott
Pierrette Venne
Elsie Wayne
Randy White
John Williams
Lynne Yelich
|
Panels of Chairman of Legislative Committees
The Speaker
Hon. Peter Milliken
The The Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees of
the Whole
Mr. Bob Kilger
The Deputy Chairman of Committees of the Whole
Mr. Réginald Bélair
The Assistant Deputy Chairman of Committees of the
Whole House
Ms. Eleni Bakopanos
THE MINISTRY
According to precedence
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien |
|
Prime Minister of
Canada |
Hon. Herb Gray |
|
Deputy Prime Minister |
Hon. David Collenette |
|
Minister of Transport |
Hon. David Anderson |
|
Minister of the
Environment |
Hon. Ralph Goodale |
|
Minister of Natural Resources and
Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board |
Hon. Brian Tobin |
|
Minister of Industry |
Hon. Sheila Copps |
|
Minister of Canadian
Heritage |
Hon. John Manley |
|
Minister of Foreign Affairs |
Hon. Paul Martin |
|
Minister of Finance |
Hon. Art Eggleton |
|
Minister of National
Defence |
Hon. Anne McLellan |
|
Minister of Justice and Attorney
General of Canada |
Hon. Allan Rock |
|
Minister of Health |
Hon. Lawrence MacAulay |
|
Solicitor General of
Canada |
Hon. Alfonso Gagliano |
|
Minister of Public Works and
Government Services |
Hon. Lucienne Robillard |
|
President of the Treasury
Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure |
Hon. Martin Cauchon |
|
Minister of National Revenue and
Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of
Quebec) |
Hon. Jane Stewart |
|
Minister of Human Resources
Development |
Hon. Stéphane Dion |
|
President of the Queen's Privy
Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs |
Hon. Pierre Pettigrew |
|
Minister for International
Trade |
Hon. Don Boudria |
|
Minister of State and Leader of the
Government in the House of Commons |
Hon. Lyle Vanclief |
|
Minister of Agriculture and
Agri-Food |
Hon. Herb Dhaliwal |
|
Minister of Fisheries and
Oceans |
Hon. Ronald Duhamel |
|
Minister of Veterans Affairs and
Secretary of State (Western Economic Diversification) (Francophonie) |
Hon. Claudette Bradshaw |
|
Minister of Labour |
Hon. Robert Nault |
|
Minister of Indian Affairs and
Northern Development |
Hon. Maria Minna |
|
Minister for International
Cooperation |
Hon. Elinor Caplan |
|
Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration |
Hon. Sharon Carstairs |
|
Leader of the Government in
the Senate |
Hon. Robert Thibault |
|
Minister of State (Atlantic
Canada Opportunities Agency) |
Hon. Ethel Blondin-Andrew |
|
Secretary of State
(Children and Youth) |
Hon. Hedy Fry |
|
Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)
(Status of Women) |
Hon. David Kilgour |
|
Secretary of State (Latin America
and Africa) |
Hon. Jim Peterson |
|
Secretary of State (International
Financial Institutions) |
Hon. Andy Mitchell |
|
Secretary of State (Rural
Development) (Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern
Ontario) |
Hon. Gilbert Normand |
|
Secretary of State (Science,
Research and Development) |
Hon. Denis Coderre |
|
Secretary of State (Amateur
Sport) |
Hon. Rey Pagtakhan |
|
Secretary of State
(Asia-Pacific) |
PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES
Mr. Joe Jordan |
|
to the Prime Minister |
Mr. André Harvey |
|
to the Minister of Transport |
Mrs. Karen Redman |
|
to the Minister of the
Environment |
Mr. Benoît Serré |
|
to the Minister of Natural
Resources |
Mr. Claude Drouin |
|
to the Minister of Industry |
Ms. Sarmite Bulte |
|
to the Minister of Canadian
Heritage |
Ms. Aileen Carroll |
|
to the Minister of Foreign
Affairs |
Mr. John McCallum |
|
to the Minister of Finance |
Mr. John O'Reilly |
|
to the Minister of National
Defence |
Mr. Stephen Owen |
|
to the Minister of Justice and
Attorney General of Canada |
Mr. Jeannot Castonguay |
|
to the Minister of
Health |
Mr. Lynn Myers |
|
to the Solicitor General of
Canada |
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
to the Minister of Public Works and
Government Services |
Mr. Alex Shepherd |
|
to the President of the Treasury
Board |
Ms. Sophia Leung |
|
to the Minister of National
Revenue |
Ms. Raymonde Folco |
|
to the Minister of Human Resources
Development |
Mr. Pat O'Brien |
|
to the Minister of International
Trade |
Mr. Geoff Regan |
|
to the Leader of the Government in
the House of Commons |
Mr. Larry McCormick |
|
to the Minister of Agriculture
and Agri-Food |
Mr. Georges Farrah |
|
to the Minister of Fisheries and
Oceans |
Mr. Carmen Provenzano |
|
to the Minister of Veterans
Affairs |
Mr. Gurbax Malhi |
|
to the Minister of Labour |
Mr. John Finlay |
|
to the Minister of Indian Affairs and
Nothern Development |
Ms. Marlene Jennings |
|
to the Minister for
International Cooperation |
Mr. Mark Assad |
|
to the Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration |