It has been clearly established that women with a family income of less than $15,000 are twice as likely to suffer physical abuse as women in the general population. In a document establishing the link between violence against women and poverty, the government said that unfortunately, the circumstances of women seemed to be getting worse. Governments are cutting budgets, reducing social programs and eliminating a number of programs and services that help low income women, men and children who are exposed to violence. These changes will probably lead to more poverty and more violence. And once again, women will be the worst off.
Will the Government of Canada admit that by slashing its social programs to the tune of nearly $5 billion by 1998, it is going too far and that instead of helping women, it is making matters worse?
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite is right to be concerned about violence against women, as we all are.
However, these accusations against the government are unfair. The hon. member must know that the new system of pensions for the elderly provide nine persons out of ten who live alone, and we know most of them are women, with benefits that are far more generous than under the old system. This is one example of the government's plans to ensure that women living below the poverty line will be better off under the system we intend to implement.
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I was referring to a government document and to figures that appeared in the government's budget. These are not accusations, these are facts.
I will continue. In the same document, the government said that as a society, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to help women get out of the vicious circle of poverty and violence. This means they must be given adequate resources in terms of child care, housing, training, social assistance benefits, and so forth.
Since the federal government recognizes the link between women's poverty and violence against women, why it is cutting social programs by $5 billion? Why does the government insist on reducing its deficit at the expense of the neediest in our society, the majority of whom are women?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is exactly the other way around. For instance, and I am following up on what my colleague said, the new old age benefit announced in the last budget is intended to deal with the concerns raised in the report.
Seventy-five per cent of elderly persons will benefit under the new system. Benefits will be the same or exceed those now received by the elderly. We announced an increase for those receiving the annual $120 supplement, because we too are concerned about the problem of violence against women, especially older women.
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, we were treated to another minister, but the same answer. I agree that the measure that was announced is a good one. We did not say all the measures were bad. But it is rather odd we could find only one this morning. Two ministers for the same measure. Two ministers for the same answer.
In the press release announcing the international day of remembrance and action on violence against women, the Secretary of State responsible for the Status of Women said that she hoped that Canadians would renew their commitment to prevent violence.
(1120)
Does the Secretary of State or anyone in this government realize this statement is contradicted by the decisions the government has been making?
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member is making accusations. He must be aware of all the measures initiated by our government to deal with violence against women.
The Minister of Finance has just described a number of social reforms that will be beneficial.
I would also like to remind the House of the amendments to Bill C-72 concerning self-induced intoxication used as a defence in cases of assault, especially against women. Amendments were also made to Bill C-68 concerning firearms and to the Criminal Code through Bill C-42. I could also mention sentencing reform and the review of the Criminal Code.
Mrs. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.
Last December, the Supreme Court of Canada allowed persons charged with sexual assault access to the medical and psychological files of their victims. As the result of this decision, a lot of women will now refuse to lodge a complaint for fear of finding themselves in the prisoner's dock.
Given the Minister of Justice's promise to act quickly in this matter to protect victims of sexual assault, could he explain the delay in having legislative measures passed to ensure fair and equitable trials?
[English]
Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my hon. friend on behalf the Minister of Justice that this continues to be a priority which engages the minister's attention. He is very conscious of the findings of the supreme court on this matter. Certainly action will be forthcoming before too long.
[Translation]
Mrs. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Mr. Speaker, as the government is favourably disposed, I will test its sincerity.
Over two years ago, the justice committee proposed that the provisions for the Criminal Code on obscenity be amended to prevent the exploitation and glorification of horror, cruelty and violence in all its forms.
How does the government justify the fact that no bill has yet been tabled to deal with this problem?
[English]
Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, this is something of importance to the government. I think it is clear to people serving in this House that the Minister of Justice on
behalf of this government has had a very heavy legislative program in the area of justice reform, particularly matters of concern to women.
Chief among them is the new Firearms Control Act. This was a major priority. With this act being adopted, we are well on our way to having the most effective gun control system in the world. This is important to prevent violence against Canadians generally but particularly against women.
I thought I heard some grumbling from members of the Reform Party. I wish they would listen to what has been said in the House this morning and change their narrow-minded position and give support to this measure if they are sincere in their wish to fight against family violence, particularly violence against women.
For the benefit of the Minister of Finance who seems to love creating lists, here is a list for him created by three years of Liberal government: 1.5 million Canadians unemployed; a youth jobless rate of over 17 per cent; two to three million Canadians underemployed; and 25 per cent of all Canadians worried about losing their jobs. So much for the Liberal promise of jobs, jobs, jobs.
Why will the finance minister not create real jobs by balancing the budget, lowering taxes in this country and making government smaller?
(1125 )
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, over the course of the last year, over 200,000 new jobs have been created in the private sector. Quite clearly one should look at the tendency over a longer period of time. There were 7,000 new jobs created as was announced by Statistics Canada this morning.
It is the overall job creation that is by far most important. When we look at the G-7 countries, outside of the United States, Canada this year and last year has created more jobs than any other G-7 country. This is as a result of the economic climate created by this government and the desire and the ambitions of Canadians for which we should all be proud.
Mr. Dick Harris (Prince George-Bulkley Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Finance is aware that if we compare Canada with what other countries are doing, perhaps we do look good. The fact is we should be considering where Canada could be if we had a responsible government running the country. Let us compare it to where we could be.
The association of Certified General Accountants has said that we could create 108,000 new jobs if the Liberal government would lower taxes by only $4 billion. Just think of the jobs we could create if the government took the Reform Party's lead and lowered taxes by $15 billion. It is obvious that the Liberals' approach is not working because jobs are scarce in this country.
I ask the minister again: Why will he not create real jobs by balancing the budget and lowering taxes?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is pretty clear that the hon. member opposite has not had the opportunity to read the full CGA report which he has just cited.
Reform members say that they want a faster deficit reduction. They are advocating slash and burn policies. In the CGA report the accountants have suggested slower deficit reduction than what we are engaging in. Furthermore, if I might quote from the CGA report: ``To give credit where credit is due, two years ago we could not have even considered entering into this debate on a tax reduction''. What the CGA is saying is that it is the policies not of the Reform Party but of the Liberal government that are giving us the success in cleaning up the balance sheet and allowing us to have the debate which we are now engaged in.
Mr. Dick Harris (Prince George-Bulkley Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the Canadian people are not going to be fooled and the Reform Party is not going to be fooled.
We know that the only reason the deficit figures are looking good is that the Liberal government has wrenched out of the pockets of Canadians an extra $25 billion in increased taxes which the Liberals have raised 35 times since they have been in office. As a matter of fact they have only lowered taxes, lowered the deficit, lowered spending by about $3 billion. If you have an endless money tree you can shake down any time, any deficit can look good.
The minister can bluster all he wants about what the Liberal government is doing but I ask the minister: Why has the Liberal government and the minister failed to deliver on what Canadians are asking for: lower taxes; real, long lasting, good paying jobs, not part time jobs to replace the full time jobs that they are losing; and a balanced budget? That is what is really needed. When is the finance minister going to listen to Canadians and do the right thing?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, unfortunately again the hon. member's facts are wrong. If we look at the 200,000 jobs that have been created this year, the vast majority are full time, permanent jobs.
Most economists, for instance Rosenberg from Nesbitt Burns has said that as a result of the low interest rate policies of this
government, over $5 billion of new purchasing power has been put into the pockets of Canadians. If the hon. member refuses to fully read reports of outside advisers, perhaps he might look at what his own party has said.
(1130 )
In its 1995 taxpayers budget, the Reform Party advocated a slash and burn course and then went on to say: ``Under the Reform's taxpayer budget the short term employment impact of spending and deficit reduction is negative but manageable''. What is manageable: the loss of 30,000 jobs, the loss of 50,000 jobs, the loss of 100,000 jobs? That is what Reform has advocated. We are creating jobs.
A few weeks ago, we learned about the smuggling of illegal immigrants from Hong Kong. This morning, we learned about the smuggling of illegal immigrants, this time from Iran through the Netherlands. This smuggling is said to have allowed the illegal entry into Canada of 4,000 Iranians, and to be operated by a very well organized network with connections in Canada.
What serious and effective steps does the Solicitor General intend to take in order to stop this smuggling of illegal immigrants and reduce the number of people illegally entering Canada?
[English]
Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the situation of immigrant smuggling is of serious concern to the government and certainly to the RCMP. It is a worldwide phenomenon and all countries are working to develop effective means of dealing with this problem.
The RCMP is giving priority to dealing with the situation. More money was appropriated in recent estimates to assist the RCMP in working on this problem. I can assure my hon. friend that the RCMP is working closely with other governments to deal with the situation. Dealing with it continues to be a priority.
[Translation]
Mr. Osvaldo Nunez (Bourassa, B.Q.): Mr. Speaker, only one RCMP officer handles this case. The Dutch authorities themselves said they were surprised that there was only one RCMP officer investigating such an important matter, when they themselves had assigned more than 30 police officers to work on it.
Does the Solicitor General appreciate that by downplaying such important matters, police authorities are in fact penalizing all legal immigrants, who will suffer the direct and indirect repercussions of these illegal entries?
[English]
Hon. Herb Gray (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my hon. friend that the RCMP is working closely with foreign governments, including the government of Holland to combat immigrant smuggling problems. This will continue because we agree it is a serious problem that deserves the high attention and priority of our police authorities. This is the case now and it will continue to be the case.
We all agree that families are suffering. Under this government unemployment is chronically at 10 per cent, personal bankruptcies have hit record levels, and the average family income has shrunk by an incredible $3,000.
The finance minister says he is committed to fighting family poverty. Why will he not adopt Reform's plan to take at least one million of Canada's working poor completely off the tax rolls?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is incumbent upon the Reform Party to put the full impact of its program before the Canadian people and before the House.
While Reform advocates a tax cut, that tax cut will only come well down the peace and substantially two to three years after the Reform Party has in fact cut the Canadian health and social transfer, cut equalization payments, after it has cut the basic social programs upon which those very Canadians rely. It is simply not reasonable or an accurate representation of the facts for the Reform to stand in the House and talk about a tax cut when what they would do would be to impose an unbearable financial burden upon low income Canadians.
Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, we are talking here about the difference between this government's policy of taxing people whether they are poor or not and leaving their earnings in their own hands.
(1135 )
Let me tell the truth about the Reform Party's plan. A single parent on social assistance with two children will have $1,300 more per year. A single parent earning $22,000 would get to keep an additional $200 each month and would keep that away from the tax man. Two parents making $35,000 would have their taxes reduced by $2,800 per year.
This country is in trouble when we have a finance minister who cannot understand how wrong it is to tax the poor. Why is the minister refusing to give poor parents tax relief so that they can provide for their children with pride and independence without having to rely on government handouts?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, that is not what the Reform Party is suggesting.
The Reform Party has said that its very first act will be to cut $3.5 billion in welfare payments. At the same time Reform has said that none of its positive programs will come in for years after it has in fact devastated the social fabric. That is the basis of the Reform program.
In last year's budget the government doubled the working income supplement. That helps poor Canadians. In last year's budget the Minister of Justice and myself announced a tremendously reformed set of social programs for families with a custodial parent who is having difficulty.
If we look at the caregivers credit and every single measure of our budget, they were all directed to helping low income Canadians. The only question that comes up is: Why did the Reform Party vote against every one of them?
Yesterday, the Canadian government chose to give up its leadership regarding a humanitarian mission to eastern Zaire. The Minister of Foreign Affairs said that the crisis had shifted to inside Rwanda where the problem now was the resettlement of refugees returning home. For his part, the defence minister announced yesterday the cancellation of the Canadian-led mission and questioned whether last week's highly publicized plan to air drop food would go ahead.
Are we to understand that the Canadian government has given up on eastern Zaire where, according to the UN envoy, some 300,000 refugees are still trapped, to concentrate its efforts solely on the resettlement of refugees who are returning to Rwanda?
Hon. Douglas Young (Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the member knows fully well that nobody said yesterday that we were going to cancel the humanitarian mission in Zaire and Central Africa.
What we said is that military developments in that area are being monitored by a steering group made up of representatives from countries belonging to the coalition. General Baril is assessing and will continue to assess the situation in the field.
There is no doubt that the situation has evolved dramatically. Canada did not go there on a unilateral basis, and will not leave on a unilateral basis. What is happening over there is based on assessments made by all parties involved in the mission, and who are party to the agreement reached a few weeks ago as a result of the Canadian Prime Minister's initiative.
The sad thing in all this is that the hon. member does not seem to realize that the huge success we encountered over there resulted in the unprecedented return home of over 700,000 refugees from Zaire to Rwanda, without any casualty or endangering troops in the field.
Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Mr. Speaker, instead of claiming, as the defence minister did yesterday and as he is doing again today, that Canada played a major role as a catalyst in the return of refugees and that the whole process was a phenomenal success, will the minister admit that if he really wants to show some leadership, he should convene an international conference to find some permanent solutions to the conflicts in the great lakes region?
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I announced yesterday, and I even personally handed over to my colleague across the way the press release in question, that next Friday there will be a conference in Kigali where we will offer help to all the countries in the great lakes region.
(1140)
We will offer food aid as well as other forms of assistance like justice reform and reconciliation measures for those people affected by the conflicts in that region.
I am happy that the member raised the question, but this is already being done. The conference has been convened for next Friday in Kigali, under the chairmanship of Canada.
This incompetence has been going on for 15 years. Can the minister explain why no action has been taken to rectify this waste and mismanagement at the Department of National Defence?
Hon. Douglas Young (Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I do not accept the statement by the hon. member that $200 million has
been wasted and that nobody knows where missiles and other types of military matériel might be.
What I do agree with, however, in the context of the question put by my hon. friend, is that there have been some questions raised about the way this fund has been managed over many years because of the requirement of the American government with respect to the acquisition of military matériel from the United States.
An internal audit is being conducted. Unless he and the House of Commons, to whom we are accountable, are thoroughly satisfied with the results of that audit, we will take whatever measures are appropriate.
Mr. Jim Hart (Okanagan-Similkameen-Merritt, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, that is no comfort to the Canadian taxpayer. The Department of National Defence has lost $200 million of taxpayers' money. Nothing has been done to rectify this problem which has been going on for 15 years.
The audit notes show that the problems have continued all the way through 1996, including today. The department knows full well about this mismanagement of taxpayers' money and has refused to take any action.
Will the minister immediately request that the Auditor General of Canada conduct a complete audit on the foreign military sales program and report back to the House before the Minister of Finance tables the next budget?
Hon. Douglas Young (Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member refers to documentation that he has in his possession. In the interests of trying to do the best thing, and in the interests of the Canadian taxpayers, I would appreciate receiving copies of that information. I am sure the hon. member will have no difficulty in providing us that.
With respect to the internal audit to which I referred, it is ongoing.
In response to the final part of his question, with respect to the Auditor General of Canada, I have already had a discussion with the auditor general with respect to this matter.
In his recent report to the House, the auditor general noted that of the four information technology projects audited this year, with a total budget of three billion dollars, three are experiencing major problems while the fourth one will probably be significantly late.
In the case of the Canadian automated air traffic system or CAATS, how can the minister explain that renegotiation of the contract by his department resulted in a $217 million increase, and for less service?
[English]
Hon. David Anderson (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is quite correct in pointing out that in the history of the CASS program, the computer program he is talking about, which I might add is a very sophisticated program dealing with aerial navigation, not only have there been changes to the program put forward by Hughes, but also cost overruns.
This is a matter of considerable regret and concern to the government. We have done everything that we possibly can to try to ensure that we get best value for that contract. I must point out to him, although the Reform Party does not appear to want to hear the facts on this situation, that when entering a contracting situation for the development of future technology from a corporation such as the Hughes Aircraft, it is not possible to take the same approach as buying a can of soup on the shelf of a store. A certain amount of discussion must take place back and forth as the development takes place and as the scientists and computer technicians develop the technology that you may wish to put in place.
(1145)
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport-Montmorency-Orléans, BQ): Mr. Speaker, there is quite a difference between what the minister is saying today in the House and what his department told the auditor general, as noted in the auditor general's report.
Does the minister not agree that by giving biased information to the auditor general, maintaining that renegotiation of the contract did not lead to any substantial increase in cost, despite a real increase of $217 million, his department was trying to hide from Canada and Quebec taxpayers its poor management of the project?
[English]
Hon. David Anderson (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the imagination of the hon. member is impressive but not realistic. When developing new technology for highly sophisticated navigational systems, the contract must be flexible to some degree. In some instances you may be paying substantially less than expected if progress is better than anticipated beforehand. Sometimes you may find yourself having to accept less or pay more. We were in that situation.
I assure him, as he has made reference to the auditor general, that the auditor general received all that information. But I should point
out that we simply cannot compare the purchasing of technology which has not yet been developed, not yet in existence, with the purchase of some other product off the shelf of a supermarket. It is simply not possible to have the same approach.
Inevitably, situations will arise where the development takes a lot more time or costs a lot more money than people-before they know what they are really into in that regard-anticipate.
[English]
The residents of Canada's national capital region and surrounding areas will soon be suffering through a third week of a municipal bus strike. It is snowing and it is cold out there. People are trying to get to work. Students are trying to pursue their educations. Seniors are imprisoned in their homes and cannot get to medical appointments. Merchants are suffering and the unemployed cannot get around to find jobs.
Does the Minister of Labour intend to intervene in this bus strike in order to break the impasse between OC Transpo and the union?
Hon. Alfonso Gagliano (Minister of Labour and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Canada Labour Code, which governs the talks between the transport commission of the Ottawa-Carleton area and its union provides for the free collective bargaining process.
Both parties asked me to appoint a mediator which I did immediately. I urged both parties, union and management, but I especially urged the transport commission to use the mediator's services in order to find a settlement to this dispute. Then the people of the region would have the transportation service they need and want.
I hope both parties acknowledge this is the only way to solve disputes. Go to the negotiation table and seriously negotiate. If in the next few days that goodwill appears at the negotiation table then I am sure there will be a settlement.
I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, what if anything is the government planning to do to stem the flow of illegal immigrants into Canada?
(1150 )
Ms. Maria Minna (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is very important to mention that Canada has a longstanding commitment to bilateral endeavours with several nations in the area of illegal migration. Canada has been working with such officials to uncover and investigate the smuggling ring. Our co-operation in this matter is continuing.
Canadian interdiction activities have resulted in a 50 per cent decrease in the number of improperly documented arrivals at Canadian airports since 1990. There is a great deal of activity in the department to deal with this issue and it is quite successful.
Ms. Val Meredith (Surrey-White Rock-South Langley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, talk is cheap. What Canadians want is action.
In April, immigration officers arrested a man for smuggling four Chinese refugee claimants into Vancouver airport. When the case went to court, the smuggler received a sentence of one day in jail. One day in jail is not going to be a deterrent for anybody in the multibillion dollar industry of trafficking of people.
I ask the parliamentary secretary if the government is prepared to introduce tough new penalties that would deter these criminals from trafficking in human beings?
Ms. Maria Minna (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the fact that the individual received jail it is obvious that we have very strong legislation-
Ms. Meredith: One day in jail?
Ms. Minna: Nonetheless the individual will be deported and not be allowed to stay in this country. Bill C-44 deals very clearly with that issue, something which the opposition did not support.
As I said before, the RCMP have very strong relations with police abroad. In this case, which the hon. member has cited, by working together with the Dutch officials we have uncovered this issue and it is being dealt with. The system is working. When people are caught they are deported. The system we have in place is very effective.
``When someone leaves the country, it is quite likely the tax is not due, since the item in question was never sold; so there is no capital gains tax''.
His motion tabled on October 2 indicated that, when assets are transferred out of the country, there is deemed disposition. The capital gain must be calculated and the tax is payable.
My question is quite simple, it is a Taxation 101 question. Yes or no, does a transfer of assets out of the country cause a disposition and thus the calculation of the capital gain on which a tax is to be paid?
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, a capital gain is realized when the item in question is sold. That having been said, since we have the right to tax residents, we want to ensure that someone who is a resident and who becomes a non-resident pays us the tax when it is due. The tax is determined when the emigrant leaves the country.
If the emigrant did not sell the item, this is treated the same way as if someone had something to sell in the country, that is, when it is sold, the tax is payable, except that it is determined when the emigrant leaves the country. That is where we ask for the security.
Mr. Yvan Loubier (Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I now realize that the minister tables ways and means motions and related documents without knowing what they contain. It is incredible to hear such things.
Thus, according to the minister, there is no disposition when a rich taxpayer transfers his assets out of the country. However, the motion he tabled on October 2 said, and I quote once again: ``When there is a transfer of trusts out of the country, we ask for a security that is sufficient to pay for any tax due through the deemed disposition''. This is exactly the opposite of what the minister just said. This is incredible.
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has the flu, so I also understand this is sometimes hard to follow.
The member just explained the exact situation. The tax is determined when the emigrant leaves the country. The capital gain taxable in Canada is the difference between the purchase price and the value when the emigrant leaves the country. The gain is realized when the item in question is sold, which is the same as when this happens in the country.
[English]
Recent media reports indicate that maybe officials are getting ready to prosecute those persons whose only crime appears to be that there is no Canadian provider of those satellite services.
Will the Minister of Industry give his assurance to the House and the people of Canada that until companies in Canada start providing DTH services that Canadians who receive U.S. signals will not be charged with an offence.
Hon. John Manley (Minister of Industry, Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Minister of Western Economic Diversification and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. I think he understands that it is very important that we distinguish between the black market in this trade and the grey market.
It is an offence to tamper with the equipment that enables people to acquire signals from satellites without paying for them. That is the black market. In the cases that have been reported in the newspapers it has been a case of the RCMP endeavouring to enforce the law in respect of the black market.
With respect to the grey market generally speaking, consumers will acquire a system through an intermediary that orders the direct to home service from an address in the United States and they pay indirectly for that service. It is not our intention to take any legal action against those subscribers.
I would like to make sure that they understand that they do not have the ability to ensure that the service will continue to be delivered to them. In fact, they may be at peril of losing a fairly substantial investment of $1,000 to $1,500 in the equipment because there is no way to ensure that the American service provider will continue to provide them with service.
Mr. Bob Ringma (Nanaimo-Cowichan, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the minister will be aware that the reason for the grey market is that there are no Canadian providers. The reason there is no Canadian service is because of CRTC regulations, an over abundance of regulations and hurdles that these companies have to go through.
What will the government do to clear away the obstacles and the red tape that prevent Canadian companies from fulfilling the market that is there, ready and waiting?
Hon. John Manley (Minister of Industry, Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Minister of Western Economic Diversification and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will be pleased to know that at least one
Canadian provider expects to be offering a service in the very near future.
In addition, the hon. member will know that we launched a request for submissions to the private sector in the hope that on a fast track we will have a proposal by December 15 to establish a Canadian direct to home satellite service in the Canadian satellite slot.
The hon. member will also know that if we are to have a Canadian service we need to be able to ensure that the service is up and running. To do that it is necessary for us to ensure that there is respect for the law and that the licensing laws in Canada are applied.
He will know that a Canadian service provider would not be licensed to provide direct to home service in the United States. I am sure for that reason he would not encourage us to permit U.S. service providers to provide service in Canada.
Today is the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. I would like to know how the government has responded to the calls to end violence against women and how the government is marking this important day.
(1200 )
Hon. Don Boudria (Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government I would like to recognize the significance of this very important day.
The attacks of seven years ago at l'École Polytechnique shook all Canadians.
Today the secretary of state is in Vancouver holding a round table against commercial sexual exploitation of children, the majority of whom, of course, are girls. It is a form of violence that strikes the most vulnerable.
Our government has introduced gun control legislation, legislation against criminal harassment and we have supported women's programs and shelters. We have accomplished a great deal.
I recognize that this is a societal problems and all men have to be interested in this issue of violence against women, in large measure perpetrated by men.