House of Commons Hansard #69 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was federal.

Topics

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. Minister of National Defence.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

York Centre Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, again cold war mentality. That is not what we require today. The specifications are what the military say we require today.

The comment about the civilian in the water shows that the hon. member has no understanding of what this helicopter is about. It has to do with maritime patrol in blue water on high seas from the back of frigates. It is not the search and rescue helicopter. We have bought another helicopter for the search and rescue function.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB

Mr. Speaker, let us listen to what the military has to say about this requirement:

—the required endurance of a helicopter mission to aid an naval vessel in distress 100 miles from Shearwater, Sydney or St. John's...could be greater than three hours.

That is from an internal DND document. It continues:

A less capable aircraft would lack the time...to achieve...probability of success.

Why is the minister saying the military is lowering the requirements when this document clearly indicates that politics are lowering the mission standard by a full 25% below the Sea King?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

York Centre Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, there was quite clearly some discussion within the military and a desire to clarify different requirements, but this was all done within the military context by people who are expert in this matter.

Ultimately they recommended to me, and I recommended it to cabinet, the statement of requirements that stands today. There was no political interference in the statement of requirements.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's success in rehabilitating young offenders has nothing prefabricated about it, to borrow the expression used by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

Its good results are very real. With the exception of P.E.I, Quebec has the lowest youth crime rate in Canada.

Does the Minister of Justice realize that the government is shrugging off the opinion of the experts responsible for Quebec's success with rehabilitation, the same experts who are unanimous in denouncing her bill, the bill that passed in this House. There is still time for her to react.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Edmonton West Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I have reacted to this opinion. As I have said throughout, our new youth justice legislation provides all provinces with sufficient flexibility to pursue policies and programs that make sense for them. That is very true for the province of Quebec.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, all those who are involved in this, all those working in the field, do not share the minister's opinion, even those who might be more likely to be in favour of repression. By this I mean the victims of crime.

The director of the Bureau d'aide aux victimes d'actes criminels is also of the opinion that the new young offender legislation is not good for either youth or victims.

Will the minister admit that all reasoning people in Quebec want to see the focus on rehabilitation and are unanimously opposed to the legislation she wants to impose?

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Edmonton West Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, this new legislation puts increased emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegration of young people into society. Therefore I would call upon the Bloc to support our efforts in that regard.

I return to the basic point that there is sufficient flexibility in this legislation for the province of Quebec to pursue policies and programs as it sees fit.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, when so many experts and credible individuals such as judges, police officers and social workers reject her bill and tell the minister she is making a mistake, the minister should listen.

Does the minister not hear alarm bells from the experts who tell her that her bill is threatening the Quebec approach, which promotes rehabilitation rather than repression?

Those who apply the law and are the source of Quebec's success are telling you that you are wrong, Madam Minister. Is that not setting off a bell—

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

The Speaker

Order, please. The hon. member knows that he must address his remarks to the Chair.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Edmonton West Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, our new youth criminal justice legislation increases the focus upon rehabilitation and reintegration.

As I have also said before in the House, we will be providing additional resources to all provinces including Quebec to build upon their successful programs and policies.

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, instead of going after the separatists, is the government prepared to acknowledge that the experts opposing this bill do so because the statistics indicate, year after year, that Quebec's approach is the best?

These people, in contact with the victims and with the relatives of these victims, have the figures and recognize that Quebec's model works, that we are on the right track and that we are properly applying the law.

Why does the minister not listen to reason in this and acknowledge that Quebec is right?

Young OffendersOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Edmonton West Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Because in fact, Mr. Speaker, we have listened. We have listened to those who are experts in the youth justice system across the province of Quebec.

That is why we have enhanced our focus on rehabilitation and reintegration. That is why we are providing additional resources to all provinces to carry on their policies and programs.

Freshwater ExportsOral Question Period

May 31st, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.

NDP

Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, the government pretends that it is opposed to the export of bulk water. Yet Environment Canada has issued a tender call to estimate the economic value of our water “to help government make decisions on water exports”.

If the federal policy is really no to the export of bulk water, why is the government advancing the very opposite behind the backs of Canadians?

Freshwater ExportsOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Victoria B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken both in her preamble and in her question.

There is no policy change by the Government of Canada. The government remains committed to the prohibition of movement of bulk water out of watersheds. We will continue to protect water at the source rather than at the border.

Freshwater ExportsOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, I think it is crystal clear what the government is up to. It is putting a price tag on our water so that when it decides to export it, it will be ready, which is exactly what we feared in 1999 when Environment Canada's website stated that bulk water exports await the development of foreign markets.

To clear up any confusion about where the government stands, will the minister immediately remove the tender call for water commodification?

Freshwater ExportsOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Victoria B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, I really do not know where the hon. member has been since Walkerton. Witness after witness has pointed out that the way Canadians value water has led to its misuse. The way Canadians assume water is a free good is one of the reasons they appear unwilling to pay the amounts of money needed to protect water sources.

The member should look at the testimony given in Walkerton and she will find the importance of making sure that we collect the data needed so we can make intelligent decisions when it comes to water and its protection.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question for the minister of public works. Did his former deputy minister, Ranald Quail, ask the minister for written direction on how to proceed with the Sea King replacement project and did the minister provide that written direction?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel Québec

Liberal

Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, as ministers we receive a lot of communications between deputy ministers and ministers. I do not think I should reveal what discussions have taken place between me and my deputy minister.

I can tell the hon. member that the procurement strategy the government decides is very clear. The procurement strategy is open and transparent. It is open to everybody. As I said before, with one contract we had three possible bidders. With two contracts we have thirteen possible bidders. I think that is a very open and transparent procurement strategy.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, let me try this simple question again. Did the minister refuse to give his most senior official the written direction his most senior official requested on this politically contentious file?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel Québec

Liberal

Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, I always give directions to my deputy. I have been doing it since I have been a minister and I will continue to do so.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB

Mr. Speaker, according to an internal briefing note from the chief of the maritime staff, senior navy and air force officers were stunned to learn of changes to the statement of operating requirements for the new marine helicopter project. They note that there was no explanation of why the changes to the statement of operating requirements were necessary.

Since these changes probably came from the Prime Minister's Office, could the Prime Minister please explain why they were necessary?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

York Centre Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, it was part of a dialogue between people in the navy and people in the air force as to what our requirements would be, given our needs now and in future. There was discussion and dialogue about the old cold war types of requirements, which was a different kind of mission altogether.

They went through all of this and at the end of the day the Canadian forces made a recommendation to me. I in turn made it to cabinet. There was no political interference in the matter.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB

Mr. Speaker, we will see. The memo we obtained indicates that the Sea King helicopter is one of only three aircraft armed with significant weapons systems in the Canadian forces and that a change to the statement of requirements is in effect directing the staff to acquire a non-combat capable aircraft to replace the one meant for combat. They are to replace that one with a non-combat aircraft.

Why did the minister's office rewrite the requirements?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

York Centre Ontario

Liberal

Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, my office did not rewrite the requirements. It was quite clear the navy decided that the kind of helicopter we needed today was quite different from the helicopter needed at that time and that we were not into an anti-submarine warfare kind of scenario as we were during the cold war.

Patrol and surveillance, extending the surveillance capabilities of our frigate ships, was the purpose. That is what they ended up writing the specification for. There was no political interference in their doing that.