February 9, 1983

STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21

ENCOURAGEMENT OF BREAST-FEEDING IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES

LIB

Herb Breau

Liberal

Mr. Herb Breau (Gloucester):

Madam Speaker, I wish to urge the Government to develop and implement, in co-operation with the Provinces, Canadian programs consistent with the thrust of the international code of marketing of breast milk substitutes adopted in May, 1981, by the member countries of the World Health Organization.

Recently a UNICEF Report indicated that, in developing countries, the difference between breast milk and bottled milk can mean the difference between life and death. It warns that bottle-fed babies are between three and five times more likely to suffer from malnutrition than breast-fed babies. It indicates a decline in breast-feeding in Third World countries which it says is condemning thousands of babies to tragic deaths. In a lot of countries this is becoming more and more of a trend.

I urge the Government, in co-operation with the Provinces, to support those organizations, those international fora which want to encourage breast-milk feeding in Third World countries.

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   ENCOURAGEMENT OF BREAST-FEEDING IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES
Permalink

TOURISM

PC

Stan Darling

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Stan Darling (Parry Sound-Muskoka):

Madam Speaker, much of the cash flow of rural Ontario comes through a tourist industry based largely on fishing and hunting, especially in Parry Sound, Muskoka, the Kawarthas, Nipissing, and Timiskaming. As the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (Mr. De Bane) and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Mr. Munro) are well aware, an agreement has been signed by representatives of the Indian people and by the provincial Government of Ontario that would radically alter how our natural resources, particularly our fish stocks, are managed. I have received many telephone calls, letters, and personal visits from concerned private cottagers and resort owners.

Federal action on this matter, and the resultant uncertainty as to what the future ground rules are to be, have caused a great deal of uneasiness in rural Ontario. As this Government has failed to appreciate so many times before, uncertainty is the enemy of business, particularly small business, such as tourist operations in Parry Sound-Muskoka, because they are too small to have any clout or influence with the Government.

I am well aware that our Ontario provincial colleagues are concerned as to how far-reaching these changes may be. I am sure they will be voicing their concerns to the Ontario Minister of Natural Resources and to the Premier. I therefore call upon the Ministers responsible to tell this House just where the Government stands on this matter and whether or not this agreement will be acceded to. If so, when, and how far-reaching will it be?

Topic:   STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21
Subtopic:   TOURISM
Sub-subtopic:   EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ONTARIO FISH STOCK MANAGEMENT
Permalink

RAILWAYS

PAYMENT FORMULA FOR WESTERN TRANSPORTATION

LIB

Eva Lachance Côté

Liberal

Mrs. Eva Cote (Rimouski-Temiscouata):

Madam Speaker, I would like to say a few words about an event that took place in Rimouski last Monday evening, when we had the pleasure of a visit from the Minister of Transport (Mr. Pepin) and the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ouellet), who met with more than 500 farm producers from the Lower North Shore. I had invited this group personally to discuss the Government proposal relating to the changes in the formula for railway subsidies for the transportation of grain in Western Canada. It is true, Madam Speaker, that Quebec farm producers are worried about these changes, since they have been told that agriculture in Quebec is seriously threatened and may perhaps disappear altogether. That is just not true. The development of farming and the agricultural miracle, as they say, in Quebec was brought about thanks to the active and enlightened participation of the Federal Government and effective action by Quebec's representatives in the House. There is no reason why people should be telling farm producers in Quebec that the situation is going to change. On the contrary, we are all working to ensure the survival of farming in Quebec, and its continuing development through new initiatives. I can assure our farm producers that we shall have many more meetings with them, and I am also very pleased with the

February 9, 1983

overtures made by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs at this meeting-

Topic:   RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PAYMENT FORMULA FOR WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
Sub-subtopic:   DEFICITS-EFFECT ON QUEBEC AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS
Permalink
LIB

Jeanne Sauvé (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Madam Speaker:

Order.

* *

*

Topic:   RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PAYMENT FORMULA FOR WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
Sub-subtopic:   DEFICITS-EFFECT ON QUEBEC AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS
Permalink

DISASTERS

SINKING OF "OCEAN RANGER"-U.S. SAFETY BOARD FINDINGS

PC

John Carnell Crosbie

Progressive Conservative

Hon. John C. Crosbie (St. John's West):

Madam Speaker, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board has just made its findings with reference to the Ocean Ranger tragedy of a year ago. Its members concluded that it could have been avoided with proper training of the crew in operating the ballast control system. They concluded that the crew were not trained to operate the back-up system. They found that the crew were not properly trained in evacuation procedures, that the launching systems for the lifeboats could have been improved, and that there should have been better thermal protection.

This raises the question of what the Canadian Government was doing in the Department of Energy in its administration and supervision of the offshore before the Ocean Ranger tragedy. Why did it not require better thermal protection? Why did it not require better training of the crew? Why did the regulations and administrative practices not prevent this tragedy? Those are questions that I raise, which the Government must consider.

Why has the Government refused to refer this to a parliamentary committee, as 1 have requested? What regulations have been changed? What procedures have been changed in the last year? Why has the Minister of Energy (Mr. Chretien) refused to allow the House of Commons to consider what changes have now been made so that people can be assured that this cannot happen again?

It appears from the report of this U.S. Board that the Canadian Government has been negligent in its administration of safety procedures on the offshore. When is this House or one of its committees going to be put in a position to see what changes have been made since? There have been 84 lives lost, and the Government of Canada bears a heavy share of the responsibility.

Topic:   DISASTERS
Subtopic:   SINKING OF "OCEAN RANGER"-U.S. SAFETY BOARD FINDINGS
Permalink

BANKS AND BANKING

PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR RENEGOTIATION OF MORTGAGES

NDP

David Orlikow

New Democratic Party

Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg North):

Madam Speaker, prime interest rates have come down very substantially in the last year. Hundreds of thousands of Canadian families have mortgages on their homes which still reflect interest rates of

between 18 and 20 per cent. Until recently banks charged a three-month penalty for those wanting to renegotiate their mortgages. They have now increased the penalties.

One of my constituents obtained a mortgage in July of last year at 18% per cent. In November he was told he would have to pay a three-month penalty of $2,200 to get out of it. In January he was told the penalty would be increased to $5,000. The banks are not accepting the responsibility which I believe they have as a result of the charters they have been granted. What they are doing may be legally correct, but it is certainly ethically wrong. The banks are practising out and out robbery. They are taking advantage of people in a tough economic spot with fancy, fine print, double-dealing. Other people would call it usury.

I call on the Government to take up with banks what they are doing. Since the Government is asking mothers, pensioners and senior citizens and workers to share the load and take a bit less, is it not time the banks were asked to do the same?

Topic:   BANKS AND BANKING
Subtopic:   PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR RENEGOTIATION OF MORTGAGES
Permalink

REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION

REQUEST THAT GOVERNMENT CONDUCT STUDY OF EFFECTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF ALUMINUM MILL AT BECANCOUR, P.Q.

?

Mr. Pierre Gimai@

Madam Speaker, not long ago, the Government of Quebec announced its participation in a construction project for an aluminum mill in Becan-cour. The Quebec Government is about to invest $300 million with the Pechiney company in this part of the province. It is, of course, gratifying to see that the Canadian Government is showing an interest in the project and has proposed to pay for part of the infrastructures, but, coming from a region where aluminum is very important and where this year Alcan, for the first time in many years, has shown a deficit, I wish the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion (Mr. Lumley) would find out whether a market survey has been made to see whether Pechiney's move to Becancour will have a negative impact on Alcan. Before the Canadian Government starts spending $18 million on infrastructures for a mill in Becancour, I hope people will realize that the Government of the Province of Quebec never offered Alcan any grants to modernize its plant in my area, and other than by acquiring a controlling interest in Alcan through the Caisse de depot, it has never tried to convince its subsidiary, Alcan, to expand its plant, and I am referring here specifically to the plant in Alma.

I am bringing this up, Madam Speaker, because 500 jobs have already been lost in Alma at Alcan, and I think we should have more details before the Canadian Government starts funding infrastructures for Pechiney.

February 9, 1983

Topic:   REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION
Subtopic:   REQUEST THAT GOVERNMENT CONDUCT STUDY OF EFFECTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF ALUMINUM MILL AT BECANCOUR, P.Q.
Permalink

AGRICULTURE

FEED GRAIN TRANSPORT POLICY

February 9, 1983