House of Commons Hansard #3 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was destruction.

Topics

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Okanagan--Coquihalla.

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Stockwell Day Canadian Alliance Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC

Mr. Speaker, that is not what was said. It is disappointing that the minister did not distance himself from those Liberal remarks because it gets worse.

There was another comparison that any allied action that might be taken against Saddam Hussein would be comparable to the Japanese invasion and attack on Pearl Harbour. Is that the government's position?

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

The Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs.

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

Order, please. We have questions and we have answers. We have to listen to both. The Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs has the floor.

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Toronto Centre—Rosedale Ontario

Liberal

Bill Graham LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, that is no more the position of this party than it is an accurate description of what the member said in the House. The member said in the House that we may not associate ourselves with attacks that are perceived as aggressive attacks.

We have spent our time and the member and the Leader of the Opposition took this position as well. We have created a world order which resists aggression. This party and this country believe that we must work through the United Nations, as the Prime Minister has said, to have a world order which restricts aggression.

IraqOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, today, President Bush reached a bipartisan agreement to table a resolution before the U.S. Congress allowing him to unilaterally take action in Iraq, outside the framework of the United Nations.

Given that he indicated yesterday his support for the American position, could the Prime Minister tell us today whether he will inform President Bush that Canada will never support unilateral action by the United States, whether the U.S. Congress authorizes it or not?

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, a debate is indeed taking place in the U.S. Congress, and a resolution to support or not to support the president will be passed. This is a U.S. domestic matter.

Canada's position remains unchanged. Any military action in Iraq will require a UN resolution. If there is a UN resolution which clearly indicates that all members that took part in previous coalitions want to participate, Canada will participate, but only with the support of the security council.

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister realize that, by supporting the American position, under the UN resolutions, as he did yesterday, he is delaying the work of UN inspectors in Iraq and creating a split among security council members, when agreement and unanimity were not easy to obtain, and that he is condoning the unspeakable comments made yesterday by the White House spokesperson who alluded to the possibility of selective assassinations?

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we hope that the inspectors will return to Iraq as soon as possible to do their job, but we also agree that a new resolution a required to clearly indicate what must be done and within what timeframes reports ought to be made to the United Nations.

There are already resolutions in effect. If they want to comply with the old resolutions, that is fine with me, but they will also have to comply with the one that will eventually and hopefully be adopted by the security council.

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that the implementation of the Kyoto protocol was so important that there would be a vote on it in the House. So what about war and deploying troops? These are also matters important enough that the government should obtain a prior go-ahead from the House before taking any sort of military action against Iraq.

Will the Prime Minister assure us that members of this House will be given an opportunity to vote before Canada takes any military action against Iraq?

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, a debate is now taking place on this topic, right here in the House of Commons. It was held yesterday and will continue today.

Should new actions be necessary, we will come back to the House, as we did last night.

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC

Mr. Speaker, if declaring war and sending troops abroad comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the government, the same logic also applies to Kyoto. And the Prime Minister thinks that Kyoto is so important that he is calling for a vote in the House.

So why are the people's representatives, members of this House, not being asked to vote on something like war and the deployment of troops?

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we have followed the rules of procedure and, on several occasions since I became Prime Minister, have held debates here in the House of Commons. This was the case when we sent troops to Afghanistan, it was the case for Kosovo, and I believe that the procedure which was followed was satisfactory at the time, as it should normally be in the future.

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

The U.S. has introduced a new resolution in the Security Council permitting an invasion of Iraq if U.S. demands are not met. Even though the resolution is not yet public, the Prime Minister says he supports it.

Would the Prime Minister tell us precisely what that resolution says? If not, why is he giving a blank cheque to the United States?

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, there is no resolution. People are debating at this time what the next resolution should be. We say that we need a new resolution that has to be approved by the Security Council. Members of the Security Council are debating what the wording should be. We are not a member of that committee. The resolution does not yet exist.

The Security Council is trying to build one. We are in agreement with other governments that there is a need for a new resolution. The Americans are in agreement with that statement as well as the British and the French. The question now is what the words will be. When the words are known we will take action on the resolution. We need a new resolution and that is being worked on at this moment.

IraqOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, in the 1993 red book the Liberals promised to carve out a more independent role for Canada and “to reject a camp follower approach to the U.S.”.

What do we have instead? We have the government giving comfort to assassination threats and silver bullet strategies. Is that really the legacy that the Prime Minister wants to leave behind?

IraqOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, it is always like that when people do not look at all the facts. I was attacked by the Leader of the Opposition for statements I made about the situation. It so happened that many of the words I used in my interview with the CBC were used last week by President Bush himself.

This is another loose interpretation by the leader of the NDP rather than looking at the facts. The Canadian position is an extremely strong position that has gained support from a lot of people who did not support that type of position before.

Kyoto ProtocolOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Former Premier Lougheed has noted that while the federal government has the power to ratify the Kyoto protocol it may not have the power to implement it.

Has the Government of Canada received a formal legal opinion that the federal government, acting alone, has the constitutional authority to implement Canada's Kyoto obligations? After he has answered that question, would the Prime Minister agree to table that legal opinion in Parliament today?

Kyoto ProtocolOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, it is an international obligation that can be taken by the national government. This has been the position that we have had over the years. The implementation is always done in Canada.

We have two levels of government, and we always manage to implement our international obligations in collaboration with the provinces and the private sector in Canada. It will be the same thing with Kyoto.

Kyoto ProtocolOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

John Herron Progressive Conservative Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the environment minister told the House that Canada would meet the targets set out by Kyoto. Yet in La Presse yesterday the minister said Canada will likely ratify yet at the end of the day not meet the target. Enron had Andersen Accounting and look where that got it.

Is the Prime Minister prepared to ask the House to vote on a target that his own minister admits the government does not intend to honour?

Kyoto ProtocolOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the targets are well known and we have 10 years to meet the targets. In the past we moved on things like acid rain. It was supposed to be an awful problem and we dealt with it at a lower cost than predicted, and everybody was happy.

It was the same thing some years ago concerning the lead in gasoline. Everybody said if we were to force the industry to take out the lead the industry would collapse. Now there is no more lead in gasoline and the oil companies are not on welfare yet.

FinanceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister made a lot of spending promises in Monday's throne speech. However he made no similar promises about holding the line on taxes. Yesterday he even hinted he may raise taxes to pay for health care. Instead of considering increasing taxes like the GST or some other dedicated tax for health care, the government needs to get control of its spending addiction.

Will the Minister of Finance assure Canadians that he will not be raising taxes to pay for all these promises, and will he bring down a fall budget to lay out his plans?

FinanceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Ottawa South Ontario

Liberal

John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, it has been the record of the government to lower taxes.

In fact, the announcement we made in October 2000 on tax reduction was a $100 billion package over five years, the largest tax reduction package in this country's history; of that, $20 billion of tax reductions in this year alone. I do not know what the hon. member is worrying about.

FinanceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Charlie Penson Canadian Alliance Peace River, AB

Mr. Speaker, Canadian travellers and air traffic would certainly know what I am referring to. There is a tax that has been put on that.

Canadian taxpayers deserve to know how the government intends to carry out financing all these programs. The government does not have a revenue problem. It has not had a revenue problem for a long time, but it has a spending problem, a spending addiction. That is the Prime Minister's real legacy, a spending problem.

Why does the finance minister think it is appropriate to keep Canadians in the dark for four or five months before he brings down a budget to tell us how he will pay for these programs?