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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 106(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the Ministry's response to the five petitions bearing the numbers 332-4722, 332-4785, 332-4812, 332-4830 and 332-4836.

[Editor's note: See today's Votes and Proceeding.]

Mr. Speaker:

Is it the pleasure of this House that the Hon. Member introduce this Bill?

Agreed.

Mrs. Mailly:

Mr. Speaker, when the electoral map was being re-drawn, the Commission suggested that the whole rural section of my riding be amputated, and it chose as the new name for the new riding that was thus created, the name of Chapleau.

Because of representations made by the residents of my riding, including the mayors of all the rural municipalities that did not want to be amputated from the riding of Gatineau, the judge decided not to change the structure of my riding.

But inadvertently the new name was kept, Chapleau.

Mr. Speaker, we have nothing but respect for Mr. Chapleau as a figure in our history, but he has no association, either geographical or historical or emotional, with the Gatineau region.

I therefore ask this House to permit me to return to the former name, adding to it "La Lievre", which is the other river valley in my riding, so that the name for the new riding would be "Gatineau-La Lievre", with the same structure we had before, that is, 80 per cent rural. It would be much fairer, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker:

Is it the pleasure of this House to adopt the Motion?

Agreed.

Motion agreed to and Bill read the first time.

Mr. Speaker:

When shall the Bill be read a second time? At the next sitting of the House?

Agreed.

[DOT] (mo)

Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East):

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour and duty to present a petition which has been certified as correct as to form, pursuant to Standing Order 106, from a number of residents of St. John's, Holyrood, Torbay, Bay Bulls, Goulds, Portugal Cove and other communities in Newfoundland, who state that the Conservative Government, through Bill C-33, seeks to deindex the pensions of federal public servants who now have complete protection through full linkage to the Consumer Price Index, and that the Government has insisted on dropping full indexing for public servants. The undersigned petitioners pray and call upon Parliament to reject Bill C-33 as regressive, unfair, untimely and against the best interests of public servants and all Canadians, and that Parliament affirm full indexing to the Consumer Price Index as the model for inflation protection for all Canadians.

July 18, 1988

Order Paper Questions QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER

(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

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

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 365 and 374.

Since November, 1981, according to the latest statistics available (a) have domestic workers been refused landing in Canada under the Foreign Domestic Program and, if so, in what numbers and, in each case, what was the applicant's (/) country of last permanent residence (//') age (iii) number of dependents (/v) gender (v) reason for rejection (b) have domestic workers applied for landing under the program and been accepted and, if so, in what numbers?

Hon. Barbara McDougall (Minister of Employment and Immigration):

Since its inception in November, 1981, the Foreign Domestic Program has accepted 14,199 workers as permanent residents. Very few do not qualify. For example, of the 28,869 foreign domestics who have entered Canada as temporary workers, from 1981 to the end of 1987, only 635 have been refused permanent residence. The approximative 14,000 remaining are in the immigration stream or they have left Canada having decided not to become permanent residents.

Foreign domestics refused for permanent residence

Total Nov. 1981 to Dec. 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987*635 27 119 149 188 46 106

Data on the composition of the refusal group will be available at the end of August, 1988, covering the period June 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988. Statistics on refusals for 1987 are available; however, it should be noted that the data breakdown requested only started as of June 1, 1987. Prior to June 1, 1987, there was no collection of specific data on refused applicants (i) country of last permanent residence (ii) age (iii) number of dependents (iv) gender (v) reason for rejection.

*Preliminary Statistics

Are contamination-monitoring procedures being carried out for the Great Lakes and, if so (a) with what frequency (b) by what groups or individuals (c) in what areas?

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

I am

informed by the Departments of the Environment and of the Fisheries and Oceans as follows:

Contamination monitoring procedures are being carried out for the Great Lakes by Environment Canada, the Ontario

Ministry of Environment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and eight Great Lakes states under the Canada/U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Environment Canada is responsible for the monitoring of conventional parameters and contaminants in the waters of the open lakes by carrying out the following: Lake Ontario-two cruises/year; Lake Huron-two cruises/year; Lake Superior-one cruise/year; Niagara River-weekly (Niagara-on-the-Lake, Fort Erie); St. Lawrence River-daily.

Environment Canada also operates a network of 30 air quality monitoring stations throughout the Great Lakes Basin and monitors contaminant trends in herring gull eggs in 13 colonies.

Since 1977, DFO has carried out a contaminants monitoring program on fish and other biota on the Great Lakes in response to federal commitments respecting the 1972 and 1978 Canada/U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

Annual surveys are carried by DFO throughout the Great Lakes at approximately 20 sites (10 sampled annually) to determine trends on selected contaminants in fish and other aquatic biota. The program receives the assistance of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and is part of a coordinated international study involving the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Environmental Protection Agency. Results of these annual surveys are presented through the surveillance Workgroup of the International Joint Commission to the Water Quality Board and reported biennially.