Mr. Cyril Keeper (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, the second petition deals with the Patent Act.

The petitioners indicate that the changes proposed by the Government will increase drug prices for Canadian consumers and will severely restrict the ability of average Canadians to buy necessary prescription drugs. The petitioners call upon Parliament to reject these proposals which will increase prescription drug prices for Canadians.

Mr. Cyril Keeper (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, my final petition deals with child care.

Whereas the Conservative Government recognized at the time of the annual conference of First Ministers in November, 1986, that child care is a priority measure ensuring support and the strengthening of the Canadian family as well as promoting women's economic equality, and whereas the postponement to March 31, 1987 of the tabling of the Special Parliamentary Committee's Report on Child Care suggests it is possible that the Conservative Government will not set aside funds in its next Budget for the development of adequate child care services, the petitioners call upon Parliament to negotiate

mmmmm

April 7, 1987

and sign by the end of 1987 a federal-provincial agreement that provides a detailed framework for comprehensive child care systems.

Mr. Dave Dingwall (Cape Breton-East Richmond):

Mr. Speaker, I have seven petitions I wish to table this morning.

The first is signed by residents from Chilliwack, British Columbia, the home of the Speaker of this House. Whereas the monopoly granted to innovative pharmaceutical companies will prevent competition from generic companies, will result in an increase in drug costs and prices and will severely restrict the ability of average Canadians to buy necessary prescription drugs, the petitioners call upon the Government of Canada to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act.

My second petition is signed by Canadians who reside in Thunder Bay, Ontario. They call upon the Government of Canada to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act. They believe this Bill will negatively affect senior citizens, the poor and disabled, in the cost of prescription drugs.

My third petition is signed by individuals from the great Province of Saskatchewan, particularly the Lloydminster area, who call upon the Government and particularly the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Andre) to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act, which they believe will negatively affect Canadians regarding the cost of prescription drugs.

The fourth petition is from the Province of Newfoundland. Whereas the monopoly granted to innovative pharmaceutical companies will prevent competition from generic companies, will result in an increase in drug costs and prices and will severely restrict the ability of average Canadians to buy necessary prescription drugs, the petitioners call upon this Parliament and, indeed, the Government to withdraw Bill C-22 which they believe if not withdrawn will result in a substantial increase in the price of prescription drugs.

The fifth petition is signed by individuals from Peterborough, Ontario, Gander, Newfoundland and other parts of the Province of Newfoundland, whereby they call upon the Government of Canada to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act. They wish this Bill to be taken from the House because they believe if it is passed into law there will be substantial increases in the cost of prescription drugs thereby negatively affecting senior citizens, disabled and the poor.

The sixth petition is signed by a number of individuals in the Province of Ontario, St. Catharines, Willowdale, Dalton and other parts of Ontario. They call upon the Government of Canada to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act. They believe that if this particular piece of legislation is consummated into law that it will affect very negatively senior citizens, the poor and the disabled in this country as it relates to the escalation in the cost of prescription drugs. They hope that Conservative Members of Parliament will withdraw Bill C-22.

Introduction of Bills

My seventh petition, and in keeping with your wishes, Sir, in summary form, we have individuals who have signed this petition from the great Province of Saskatchewan, particularly the area of Saskatoon. Other individuals have signed from Ottawa and New Brunswick. They call upon the Government of Canada to withdraw Bill C-22, amendments to the Patent Act. They believe that if this Bill is passed into law it will negatively affect senior citizens, the aged and the disabled as it relates to the escalating cost of prescription drugs in Canada. They hope that government Members will see the wishes and the wants of Canadians and withdraw Bill C-22 which they believe will negatively affect the people of Canada.

Mr. Howard McCurdy (Windsor-Walkerville):

I have several petitions, pursuant to Standing Order 106.

These petitions come from a number of parts of Canada, Halifax, Dartmouth, Sackville, Moncton, British Columbia, St. John's, Regina and Montreal.

All of the petitioners are exercising their rights as Canadian citizens to avail themselves of their ancient and undoubted right to present a grievance common to them all in the certain assurance that the House will provide a remedy.

The petitioners note that the Government intends to change the Patent Act relating to prescription drugs and they note that this will increase prices for consumers, restrict the availability of such medication to average Canadians and increase the costs to provincial government drug plans.

They cite this as being another example of the Canadian Government making concessions in the interests of pleasing the United States in the bilateral trade agreement.

And they humbly pray and call upon Parliament to reject these proposals which will increase prescription drug prices for Canadians. And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Bob Pennock (Etobicoke North) moved

for leave to introduce Bill C-253, an Act respecting Heritage Day.

He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a distinct pleasure to introduce my private Member's Bill. The purpose of this Bill is to designate the third Monday of February as a legal holiday to be known as Heritage Day to reflect our country's deep and diverse history.

April 7, 1987

Order Paper Questions

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Shall the Hon. Member have leave to introduce the Bill?

Agreed.

Mr. Doug Lewis (Parliamentary Secretary to Deputy Prime Minister and President of the Privy Council):

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 80, 88 and 97.

1. Did the Royal Canadian Mounted Police conduct an investigation into the activities of Deltonic Trading Corporation of Toronto, Ontario and, if so (a) for what purpose (b) on what dates did it commence and conclude?

2. Were there any charges laid against any officers of the Corporation and, if so, against whom?

Hon. James Kelleher (Solicitor General of Canada):

1. Yes. (a) The investigation was conducted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to determine if Deltonic Trading Corporation, Toronto, Ontario committed any infractions of the Export and Import Permits Act. (b) The investigation commenced on October 23, 1985, and concluded on October 30, 1986.

2. No charges were laid against Deltonic Trading Corporation or any of its officers.

Since 1982, did the Government give assistance, grants or loans to Three Buoys Houseboat Charters Ltd., Ontario Wilderness or Canadian Wilderness Adventure and, if so, for each company, by year and department, in what amounts?

Hon. Michel Cote (Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion):

Since 1982 an amount of $36,175 was given to Canadian Wilderness Adventure Ltd. under the Industrial and Regional Development Program (IRDP). While an offer for further assistance under the Canada-Saskatchewan tourism Agreement was announced on August 12, 1986, no payments have yet been made.