August 16, 1988

?

M. Mike Cassidy (Ottawa Centre):

The Parliamentary Secretary says that change is inevitable. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary never travelled on one of these trains from Montreal's south shore. They go back to 1925, have no washrooms or heating and are among the oldest trains in this

August 16, 1988

Oral Questions

country. Will the Government make a commitment to maintain commuter railway services in the Montreal region? If so, will the federal Government participate in a joint program with the Government of Quebec and Montreal region municipalities to maintain these commuter services and thus prevent the closing of the Saint-Hilaire line which will otherwise disappear on August 31 ?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   RETENTION OF RAILWAY SERVICES FOR SUBURBAN AREAS- GOVERNMENT POSITION
Permalink
PC

Blaine Allen Thacker (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Blaine A. Thacker (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):

Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate moment there is no doubt that the Government will be prepared to consider any type of combination of possibilities. If an area is in trouble, it is because people are no longer using the service, whether it is VIA Rail service or traffic service, because they have often moved to other modes. That is the reality of the market-place.

CN finds itself in a position where some one-third of its lines carry over 90 per cent of its traffic. That means that two-thirds of its lines are carrying only one-third of its traffic. It simply cannot carry that on and be competitive with the trucking system that is becoming very sophisticated in Canada.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   RETENTION OF RAILWAY SERVICES FOR SUBURBAN AREAS- GOVERNMENT POSITION
Permalink

CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS

PC

Claude Girvin (Girve) Fretz

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Girve Fretz (Erie):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture. Recently the Minister announced an adjustment program for the grape growers of the Province of British Columbia. Why has the Government not made a similar adjustment for the grape growers of the Province of Ontario?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS
Permalink
PC

Walter Leland Rutherford (Lee) Clark (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Lee Clark (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture):

Mr. Speaker, this Government is fully committed to a policy and a process of consultation with provincial governments and with producers, wherever they may be. We are pleased by the results of those negotiations with the Government and the producers of British Columbia. As the Hon. Member for Erie has indicated, the results were announced some time ago when a package of some $28 million was announced.

I want to make it very clear that there is an offer on the table with respect to the difficulties the producers are encountering here in the Province of Ontario, difficulties which they are encountering for a variety of reasons that have already been discussed at some length during Question Period today. The federal Government has put an offer on the table. The provincial government is currently looking at that offer and I would hope that there could be a resolution to this problem in the not too distant future. In fact, I would hope it would come very soon.

I would also point out that we as a Government are fully committed to the process of keeping producers informed, wherever they may be, including the producers who I understand are here today. I also understand that Department of Agriculture officials have announced that they would be happy to meet with the producers to whom the Hon. Member for Hamilton East has referred, but I regret that apparently that offer has not been accepted.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS
Permalink
LIB

Sheila Maureen Copps

Liberal

Ms. Copps:

That is false, Mr. Speaker, that is false.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS
Permalink
?

An Hon. Member:

That is a lie. That is a lie.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS
Permalink
PC

John Allen Fraser (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

I do not know who said that, but it does not help the Chamber and it does not help the Speaker. I will not pursue it further, but please, it is not necessary.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT-ONTARIO GRAPE GROWERS
Permalink

NATIONAL DEFENCE

LIB

Leonard Donald Hopkins

Liberal

Mr. Len Hopkins (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke):

Mr. Speaker, the Government, and in particular the Minister of National Defence, used to grandstand all over in Canada and in NATO circles telling everyone they were going to bring on stream 10 to 12 nuclear powered submarines by the year 2012, 24 years after this Government will have been defeated. The rhetoric has really cooled of late and silence seems to be the order of the day. The Government has long passed the date it said it was going to make an announcement.

Is the Government now prepared to admit that it was wrong and that it will no longer proceed with this ill-conceived idea?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   NATIONAL DEFENCE
Sub-subtopic:   PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF NUCLEAR POWERED SUBMARINES
Permalink
PC

T.A. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):

Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member raises a very serious question, as he is well aware. I would be interested to know if the Hon. Member is now showing that he no longer supports such a move by the Government of Canada to modernize Canada's Armed Forces.

I think the Hon. Member will find that it is Canada's intent to modernize its navy and to provide its navy with the best technical equipment available. I think he will also be aware that the Minister of National Defence stated very recently that the announcement would be made soon.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   NATIONAL DEFENCE
Sub-subtopic:   PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF NUCLEAR POWERED SUBMARINES
Permalink

GOVERNMENT POSITION

LIB

Leonard Donald Hopkins

Liberal

Mr. Len Hopkins (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke):

Mr. Speaker, that answer is the square root of nothing. The Hon. Member knows that I support the Armed Forces and the refurbishing of them. However, this Party does not support nuclear submarines.

Will the Government proceed with this $8 billion ill-conceived purchase of 10 to 12 nuclear powered submarines or will it not? That is the question. Perhaps the Parliamentary

August 16, 1988

Secretary could come to the answer, stop the grandstanding and tell the people of Canada where he stands.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   GOVERNMENT POSITION
Permalink
PC

T.A. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Bud Bradley (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):

Mr. Speaker, I would be very pleased to tell the Hon. Member where I stand. I stand with this Government in supporting Canada's Armed Forces and in replacing their ill-equipped vessels which were given to them and not replaced by previous Governments. We will provide the navy with the required weapons systems.

I notice that the Hon. Member says that he supports but his Party does not. I wonder if he supports a submarine program or if he is talking through his hat.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   GOVERNMENT POSITION
Permalink
PC

John Allen Fraser (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

That concludes Question Period.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   GOVERNMENT POSITION
Permalink

PRIVILEGE

LIB

Jean-C. Lapierre

Liberal

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Shefford):

Mr. Speaker, I feel I must raise a question of privilege, because during Oral Question Period the Minister for International Trade (Mr. Crosbie) let his emotions get the best of him and finally impugned my motives. Mr. Speaker, I think we should realize that every statement made in the Simonds case is connected with the concept of free trade, and even the company itself has made statements to the effect that in future it would cover the North American market from its plant in Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, I did not want to mislead the House, far from it! I think that the arguments put forward by the company, by the Opposition and even by free trade supporters ... I would like to quote to the Minister what was said by, the PQ MNA for Shefford: "Manufacturing of knives and tools will be transferred to Fitchburg, Massachusetts in ...

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRIVILEGE
Sub-subtopic:   MR. LAPIERRE-ALLEGED INCORRECT INFERENCE IN CHAMBER
Permalink
PC

John Allen Fraser (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

I am sorry to interrupt the Hon. Member but if he wants to raise a question of privilege, the Chair must have a very clear position. I would appreciate the Hon. Member's co-operation.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRIVILEGE
Sub-subtopic:   MR. LAPIERRE-ALLEGED INCORRECT INFERENCE IN CHAMBER
Permalink
LIB

Jean-C. Lapierre

Liberal

Mr. Lapierre:

Mr. Speaker, I cannot make my position any clearer: It is that the Minister of International Trade (Mr. Crosbie) be asked to have the strength of character to withdraw the fact that he questioned my motives or that he said we voluntarily misled the House.

I can say one thing, Mr. Speaker. Not only was it not done voluntarily, but we did not mislead the House at all. The Minister refuses to face the facts, and instead of reacting like a hard-hearted nouveau riche, he should realize what it means to those 131 people to lose their jobs.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRIVILEGE
Sub-subtopic:   MR. LAPIERRE-ALLEGED INCORRECT INFERENCE IN CHAMBER
Permalink
PC

John Carnell Crosbie (Minister for International Trade)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. John C. Crosbie (Minister for International Trade):

Mr. Speaker, if the Hon. Member says that he did not have

Privilege

this information or he did not deliberately mislead the House, then I will accept that. However, he certainly did mislead the House, because I have just cited a person working in the company at Granby who was quite clear in his position. He is one of the persons being laid off, and he said that there is no connection between the plant closing and the trade deal. If the hon. gentleman said that he did not know about that at the time, fine. I will withdraw my suggestion, if there was one, that he deliberately misled the House.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRIVILEGE
Sub-subtopic:   MR. LAPIERRE-ALLEGED INCORRECT INFERENCE IN CHAMBER
Permalink

August 16, 1988