Debates of Nov. 22nd, 2001
House of Commons Hansard #117 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was security.
Topics
- Government Response to Petitions
- Public Safety Act
- An act to amend certain acts and instruments and to repeal the Fisheries Prices Support Act
- Public Safety
- Committees of the House
- Criminal Code
- Points of Order
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Question No. 67
- Starred Questions
- *Question No. 73
- Foreign Missions and International Organizations Act
- Housing
- Ukraine
- Peace
- Afghanistan
- Western Canada
- Violence
- Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de Drummond
- SaarGummi Company
- National War Memorial
- Yukon
- The Media
- Heritage Minutes
- The Canadian Francophonie
- Bill C-42
- Airline Security
- Afghanistan
- Minister of Canadian Heritage
- Anti-terrorism Legislation
- Airline Security
- Justice
- Terrorism
- Afghanistan
- Housing
- Revenue Canada
- Justice
- National Defence
- Afghanistan
- Foreign Affairs
- National Defence
- Agriculture
- Terrorism
- Fisheries
- Anti-Terrorism Legislation
- Housing
- Trois-Pistoles Wharf
- Agriculture
- Presence in Gallery
- Points of Order
- Business of the House
- Points of Order
- Privilege
- Business of the House
- The Acadians
- Business of the House
- The Acadians
Airline Security
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Michel Gauthier Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister can say whatever he wants but if he is not familiar with his bill, and that is his problem not ours.
Clause 11.1.4 of the bill—which he wrote, not me—, says that an order is exempt from the application of certain sections, including the one requiring it to be consistent with the charter.
When it is written down in black and white, I would prefer to believe the bill and what it says than a minister who says whatever comes into his head.
Airline Security
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
Don Valley East
Ontario
Liberal
David Collenette Minister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of regulatory power, not just for Transport Canada but for other departments, is so that the government can act in an urgent circumstance. I think Canadians would support that.
What Canadians also want is that their basic rights are protected under the charter and under other laws and that basic parliamentary procedures are followed.
If the hon. member reads the act carefully, he will see that all of that is there.
Afghanistan
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, aid groups are desperately calling for help from the United Nations and specifically Canada to help get assistance to remote parts of Afghanistan. Over six million Afghan people are now in need. Aid groups say the situation is getting worse. Lloyd Axworthy has said that Canada should be taking a lead role in taking over an airport in the country so flights may distribute aid.
What action is the government taking today to ensure that the aid gets to those who need it before the winter turns the situation into a disaster?
Afghanistan
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
Beaches—East York
Ontario
Liberal
Maria Minna Minister for International Cooperation
Mr. Speaker, as we speak, we are working with people on the ground at all times. The world food program in fact is getting food into Afghanistan, about 100,000 tonnes just in the last couple of weeks. There is some difficulty in some areas in the northern part. There is food getting in from some of the various countries as well.
There is some difficulty with respect to security but food is getting in to different parts. We need to improve that.
Minister of Canadian Heritage
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, on November 15 during a visit to New Brunswick, the Minister of Canadian Heritage made a public statement that the strength of spirit of Acadians had allowed them to survive, despite the English and the church.
The minister has a very poor grasp of Acadian history. Acadians know very well that the church was of great assistance to their survival, with schools, hospitals and so on.
My question for the Minister of Canadian Heritage is simple: will she apologize to the church and take back her statement?
Minister of Canadian Heritage
Oral Question Period
2:25 p.m.
Hamilton East
Ontario
Liberal
Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, I come from an Acadian family from Nova Scotia, and what I said was that in the Guthro family, when it came time to receive an education in the French language, it was neither the church nor the government that helped. French was taught within the family, which is how the Acadian language and culture survived.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
November 22nd, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.
Progressive Conservative
Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, under the government's new limitation on citizen rights, any judge reviewing any application can keep secret from the accused the reasons that person is called a terrorist. Sometimes that information may be provided by foreign governments whose democratic values are very different from ours, provided by China, by Russia, by Saudi Arabia.
Will the government table in parliament the specific criteria by which information from foreign states will be evaluated and the specific procedure by which the court will decide whether a Canadian citizen should be told why he or she is accused?
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Vancouver Quadra
B.C.
Liberal
Stephen Owen Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the judges in superior courts and provincial courts in Canada have the responsibility to ensure that all accused before them have a fair trial. Where evidence is brought before a court that is deemed by the government under certificate of the solicitor general or otherwise to be highly sensitive, the judge will consider that evidence in private and decide whether it is necessary to go in summary form or not. If it is not and a fair trial cannot be maintained, then the accused will be dismissed.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Progressive Conservative
Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, parliament has a right to defend the freedom of citizens. That right is denied by the government.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
The Speaker
I know that hon. members are trying to be helpful but it is impossible to hear the right hon. member if we have this kind of help.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Progressive Conservative
Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the government's latest attacks on the rights of citizens lets a solicitor general decide who is called a terrorist. The only way a citizen can get off the list is to go to federal court.
Lawyers cost over $200 an hour. These cases could drag on for months. The government has deep pockets. The PMO is already spending, so far, $152,000 to hide the Prime Minister's record from an officer of this parliament.
At the very least, will the government table in parliament the criteria--
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
The Speaker
The hon. solicitor general.
Anti-terrorism Legislation
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Cardigan
P.E.I.
Liberal
Lawrence MacAulay Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we have a process in place in order to put an individual or a group on a list. That information is provided by security intelligence, the RCMP or other departments. It is taken to cabinet. If an individual or a group is listed, it is a decision of the cabinet.
Airline Security
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Canadian Alliance
Rahim Jaffer Edmonton—Strathcona, AB
Mr. Speaker, why would the Minister of Transport introduce a public safety bill that has no new provisions to screen baggage or cargo, that does nothing to prevent foreign nationals from leasing planes here, unlike in the U.S., and has no new penalties for interfering with airport security?
Could the minister explain how he can view his bill as a public safety bill when it does not meet the tenets of public safety?