Debates of Jan. 25th, 1994

Foreign Affairs

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question is very relevant. Clearly, given the present situation where Haiti basically has four friends working within the United Nations to advance the cause of democracy in this country, we lack support.

One of our goals is to extend Haiti's circle of friends to include a certain number of countries, specifically neighbouring Caribbean nations which could, working together with Haiti's four traditional friends, help to enforce a comprehensive and truly effective blockade.

[Maud Debien, Bloc, Laval East, QC]

Does the Canadian government intend, as it has repeatedly said, to help train Haitian police forces whose mandate it would be to restore the country's democratic institutions? Did the minister make any formal commitments in this respect in the course of his talks with Mr. Aristide?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister discussed this matter when he met with the Secretary General of the United Nations in Paris. We feel it would be a good idea to organize under the auspices of the United Nations this kind of training program for police officers from countries under military dictatorship.

This proposal which was put forward by Canada could apply first to Haiti, and could later be extended to several other countries under military rule where a counterbalance such as a police force could be useful in terms of instituting and maintaining democracy. Consequently, during the course of our discussions with President Aristide yesterday, we obtained his support for such an initiative.

Obviously we cannot take this kind of initiative without the approval of the Haitian government. And we have obtained it. We will be appointing a representative who, along with President Aristide's representative, will review the terms and conditions of this kind of police officer training program.

Firearms

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

I noted in the House last week there is a torrent of inquiries regarding the new regulations for firearms acquisition certificates. There is mass confusion and frustration among firearms owners, RCMP and firearm safety instructors. As recently as last Thursday my assistant was getting two totally different answers to basic questions from the RCMP and safety instructors.

Is the minister aware of the problem and if so, what is his department doing about it?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member, I should first say that the introduction on January 1 of the safety courses for firearm owners is simply another important step that has been taken to ensure safety in the use of firearms in Canada, and we are happy that it is now in place in six provinces with the balance to follow on April 1.

So far as the circumstances surrounding the courses at present are concerned I am reluctant to agree with the description given by the hon. member. I do agree that in some provinces efforts are still under way to design and deliver the training courses. In most provinces master teachers have already been trained and are preparing to deliver the courses.

I expect that within a month or two the transition period, which will naturally involve some element of adjustment, will be over, these courses will be in place and the safety of Canadians that much more assured.

Finance

[Dianne Brushett, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Acting Minister of Finance in the absence of the minister.

The Bank of Canada rate is at a 30-year low of 3.94 per cent and expected to fall five bases points again today. Yet five year mortgage rates are still at 7.25 per cent. The spread is greater than 3 per cent.

In 1963 the Bank of Canada rate was 4.0 per cent and five year mortgages were 6.25 per cent, representing a spread of 2 per cent.

What measures will the Government of Canada take to ensure that Canadian banks reduce this spread and lower mortgage rates proportionately to the bank rate?

[David Walker, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Cumberland-Colchester for that very good question on the cost of a five-year mortgage.

As the member pointed out, the prime rate is at 5.5 per cent, which is the lowest rate since in 1956. Today the basic bank rate fell not five but six points. One year mortgage rates are at their lowest since their inception in 1980, but the five year rate still remains high. We in the government are watching this very closely and we are sure that Canadian financial institutions would like to see it drop more quickly also.

Job Creation

[Chris Axworthy, NDP, Saskatoon—Clark's Crossing, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

The minister will know that the red book promises on jobs have received four pretty major setbacks over the last couple of months: the signing of the NAFTA, the increases to the UI premiums, the replacement of John Crow by Gordon Thiessen and the chopping of $300 million from the training fund.

I wonder if the minister could explain why he has lost every one of these battles in cabinet and whether he could indicate what we could do in this House to assist him in making sure that job creation becomes the number one priority of his government.

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, not only has the hon. member not been able to read the red book accurately, but he clearly has not been able to read the record of the government accurately.

We have had a great string of successes. We have introduced the infrastructure program which has been universally applauded across the country as a major job stimulant. We have frozen the UI premium rate for a period of two years to provide a real incentive to small business to create jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I know time is of the essence so I do not want to hold the members of this House up for the whole afternoon as I recite the great record of the past three months. However, I will say to the hon. member for Saskatoon-Clark's Crossing that Parliament will have an opportunity to make its greatest contribution-and I know the hon. member has been a valued member in this area-by looking seriously at the structure of our social employment training programs across Canada to give a real incentive to millions of Canadians to find a job and give real dignity to their lives.

I look forward to the participation of that member so we can all enjoy, as parliamentarians, a record of accomplishment.

Infrastructure Program

[Jean Charest, Progressive Conservative, Sherbrooke, QC]

I am directing my question to the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker.

The minister responsible for the infrastructure program recognized before this House last week that the program was vulnerable to political influences, with regard to the Congress Center program in particular.

I have since come across a secret memo to the Prime Minister stating-and this is the clerk of the Privy Council writing to the Prime Minister-that his Minister of Human Resources Development and his Minister of Public Works have requested more direct control over the infrastructure program, and this, a mere ten days into this government's term of office.

The same secret memo written to the Prime Minister goes on to say-

[The Speaker]

Order. Could the member please put a very brief question.

[Jean Charest, Progressive Conservative, Sherbrooke, QC]

My question for the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker, in relation to this secret memo written to him, is whether or not he has clarified the mandates of the ministers of human resources and public works as they attempted a power grab in their own regions in relation to all federal undertakings as written in this secret memo?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, every member of the cabinet can take part in this program and, of course, regional interests are discussed in cabinet, especially considering that both ministers referred to are in charge of government agencies through which money is distributed because this the only way the government can implement this program quickly and effectively. So, it is ACOA and-

-the western diversification organization which are actually responsible for the delivery of the programs and both ministers are in charge, one on the Atlantic coast and the other one in western Canada.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Foreign Affairs

[The Speaker]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence and Veterans Affairs has the floor for six minutes.

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I had finished my presentation. In the interests of brevity I did finish so we have about five minutes for questions and comments.

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence indicated that he foresees the role of our peacekeeping forces continuing and perhaps increasing in the future, and that it is most important a mandate or a mission statement be developed. In this way we can determine what is the role we are to play.

Can the parliamentary secretary advise what the government is doing to develop the role and to ensure that the United Nations knows exactly what Canada thinks. What is his opinion concerning Canada's peacekeeping forces that are now around the world and does he think they will be in more demand over the next few years?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Bonavista—Trinity—Conception, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for that question.

I want to correct the hon. member. I am sure it is a misunderstanding. He is not trying to put words in my mouth. My thesis was that peacekeeping operations generally would likely increase because of the trend in the other 180 countries of the world with the smaller populations and the non-homogeneous ethnic, religious and racial groups.

My thesis was that the need for peacekeeping operations in general would likely intensify, would increase. I also pointed out in my thesis so would the intensity of peacekeeping operations, so would the nature of peacekeeping operations and so would the complexity of peacekeeping operations in the general sense of peacekeeping.

What is the government doing to help the situation along? I would remind the hon. member that, for example, in Bosnia alone, I cannot recall the number of UN resolutions. I know there are 743, 770, 776 and 800 and something. They are the ones with which I am familiar. I am sure there are others. We would like to, as much as possible try to get our mandate in a shorter period of time and in a less complex manner. Second, we would strive to have, perhaps through debate in the House of Commons, which we all agree is a novel but very useful exercise, to make our wishes and desires of what it is we want our peacekeeper forces to do, to make our wishes known to the United Nations, perhaps more in advance than we have had in the past.

With respect to the United Nations, the government is working on areas through our staff at the United Nations, our ambassador, and through those who are on the international staff to try to improve that part of the United Nations which oversees peacekeeping operations.

There are areas such as, for example, around the clock command and control capability; staffing with perhaps a more experienced and a larger number of military personnel. In this way the kind of command and control operation that takes place in NORAD or in NATO headquarters where instantaneous responses can be given and political input can be received, analyzed and weighed with respect to decisions, would take place in a much more clear-I hesitate to use the word efficient-and more effective manner than happens now.

I can assure the hon. member that those of us who are involved in these kinds of activities on this side of the House are imbued with their importance and wish to make our mandate more clear. It would make the selection of what we participate in more effective to have a better response to what it is we believe the Canadian people want and would support in the future.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank and to congratulate my hon. colleague for his speech. I would like to ask him a question. For one thing, he made a number of very positive remarks in his speech on the value of Canadian intervention abroad, but could he tell us what his position is exactly with regard to a Canadian presence in Bosnia-Hercegovina?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Bonavista—Trinity—Conception, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I was being specific in what I was hoping would be accepted by the House and by those who were listening as I am sure the hon. member was as to the litmus test to apply to the operation and to what our future direction would be.

I would remind the hon. member that those of us in the House who are going to be involved in looking at this in future operations, particularly those members of the cabinet who sit here along with the Prime Minister, will be listening to the response of all hon. members to get their input before any final decision is made in the House.

As a parliamentary secretary it is incumbent on me to pay attention to those presentations being made which allow the government to make a measured choice. Decisions are to be made on the facts and representations such as the one in which it was made clear by the hon. member from Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca that he was making a presentation representing the feelings of his constituents.

As this debate is expected to continue certainly well into the hours of the evening, I can assure the hon. member that I and other members of the government will be paying very close attention to what it is the members have to say so that when decisions are made this will be taken into consideration.

It is important for the hon. member to take into consideration what I as a member of the House of Commons and as a member of the governing party put forward with the experience, whatever it is, that I have had on a litmus test or an overlay that could be put on this operation and others to see what decisions would be made with respect to future operations.

If I could be permitted, there is one area that I did not cover. Very briefly, I refer the hon. member to a presentation that was made in December 1992. In addition to all the other measures to which I made reference and it has been mentioned in the House today, I think it is important for hon. members to consider that a timeframe is very important as well.

We look at all these considerations and I believe it is incumbent on any input to the United Nations to include a timeframe by which we will go back and review: (a) if the situation has changed; (b) if the measures that we have asked for have been met; and (c) if our mandate is as clear and indeed is as we believed it to be. I believe that is important in considering future directions that will be taken by Parliament, not necessarily just by the government but by Parliament, in responding to what I believe is going to be if not more Bosnias, certainly more Croatias and more of the kind of the 16 peacekeeping operations in which we are now involved and will likely be asked to be involved in, in the future.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Before I recognize the member for Bourassa I might indicate to members of the House that if they want to split their time they can get more speakers on instead of at three o'clock in the morning or whenever it is going to be. I believe one of the parties has already indicated it wants its speakers to speak for 10 minutes with a five minute question period. That is of course a matter for the parties to decide.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your appointment as Deputy Speaker of the House.

It is with a certain emotion, some apprehension and a lot of hope that I rise in this debate. I represent the riding of Bourassa, which includes the municipality of Montreal North with a population of about 85,000, with 70 per cent francophones and 30 per cent allophones from around the world, mainly Italians and Haitians, but also people from the former Yugoslavia.

It is a riding inhabited by people of modest means. My riding was badly hurt by the recession but contains very dynamic community organizations, popular groups and economic agents. These people are very interested in international problems, especially what is happening in the former Yugoslavia.

People are asking my staff and myself to take action. We must stop the massacre of innocent people, including women, seniors, young people and children, as we saw last weekend when six children were killed by mortar shells in Sarajevo.

Mr. Speaker, I come from Chile but I have been living in Montreal for 20 years. In Chile, Latin America and especially Central America we have experienced war and conflict. In Chile, we lived through a 17-year dictatorship that forced me to leave a country that I love dearly. There human rights violations were systematic and flagrant. I am also the first Quebecer of Chilean origin in the history of this country to be elected to the House of Commons.

I am therefore very concerned by the conflict and the barbarous acts committed in the former Yougoslavia that we see every day in dramatic detail on television.

Mr. Speaker, even before immigrating to Canada with my family, I had heard about Canada's role in peacekeeping and its commitment to promote peace and security throughout the world. At that time, we wanted Canada to become a member of the Organization of American States, a decision that was unfortunately too long in coming.

I listened with great interest this morning to the very relevant comments of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs about the role played by the Organization of American States and Canada's involvement in this regard. I encourage Canada to play a more active role within the OAS.

As far as Latin America is concerned, I am happy to see that Canada has been participating in the United Nations observer mission in Salvador since September 1991. Two members of the Canadian forces are currently monitoring the implementation of the agreements reached between the Government of Salvador and the Farabundo Marti Front for national liberation on human rights, the cessation of hostilities and disarmament.

The mandate of this mission expires on May 31, 1994. I personally hope that Canada will extend its participation. It is because of the problems that persist in Salvador that I asked the Canadian government not to execute the expulsion order against some 30 Salvadorans living in Quebec who were denied refugee status. Unfortunately, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has not yet replied. Canada should also send observers to the election that will be held in Salvador on March 20.

In Haiti, 11 Canadian military officers were part of the United Nations observer group for the verification of elections in Haiti, which was established in November 1990 for a four-month mandate.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we greeted in this House the democratically elected and legitimate president of Haiti, Father Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The UN and the OAS are currently trying to arrange for his return to Haiti. Resolution 875 of the United Nations Security Council calls for the application of appropriate sanctions against the military in power.

I hope that Canada will continue to contribute to the international naval force patrolling the waters around Haiti and to the immediate restoration of democracy in that country. It is also the hope of the large Haitian community living in my riding of Bourassa in Montreal North.

President Aristide was democratically elected on December 16, 1990, with 67 per cent of the popular vote. He thus represents the will of the Haitian people.

It is therefore time to step up and intensify the pressure on the military regime of General Raoul Cédras. The UN and the OAS must implement a full and complete economic boycott of Haiti, which must cover everything except humanitarian, medical and food aid, of course.

I hope that the government will be consistent with its statements and act on this issue. Personally, I intend to watch it very closely.

Canada's role in conflicts in the world brings us to basic issues involving the great values of solidarity and justice on which we have wanted to base our society. From these great values, our predecessors in this House developed a code of conduct written into laws defining our duties to assist people in danger and our moral obligations to those who are in extreme distress.

We have wanted to extend these duties and moral obligations not only to our fellow citizens who are affected but also to the people of the rest of the world who are in conflicts which endanger their lives, by giving them significant aid which very often means the difference between life and death for them.

These great values have guided our action abroad and earned Canada its international reputation and credibility as a defender of peace.

However, on his latest trip to Europe, the Prime Minister seemed to want to call into question this great tradition and the underlying values along with it by saying that Canada was a little tired of playing the international boy scout.

This is a strange position, claiming to be part of the great Liberal tradition which developed these policies of international aid and backing off when the going gets rough. However, you know your true friends in tough times and not when things are easy.

Despite what the Prime Minister seems to be saying, I believe that Canada must maintain its presence in areas of conflict where this presence is deemed essential to the safety of the civilian population involved. If today we deny this duty to assist, we would not only break with some of our social values, but even worse, we would limit our aid to people who are in danger in Canada.

Of course, there is no question here of putting our soldiers in dangerous situations. If their security must be strengthened by giving them the means to defend themselves and carry out their mission effectively, let us do it, but let us not withdraw them for all that.

For the sake of human rights, the lives of thousands of innocent people and the traditional commitment to UN peacekeeping missions, from which Canada derives much of its international credibility, Canada must continue to shoulder its responsibilities. Canada must do so by promoting a negotiated solution to conflicts, by working with its UN partners to ensure a more effective role for peacekeepers, by maintaining and even increasing its humanitarian aid to the civilians concerned, and by providing adequate assistance to the thousands of refugees who flee this terrible fratricide.

Mr. Speaker, the conflict in the former Yugoslavia and the ethnic clashes in Bosnia and in Croatia have led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. Civilian and ethnic minorities have been the victims of mistreatment, rapes and murders.

According to figures published in November 1993, more than 4.2 million people from Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina have been forced to leave their homes or are caught in the battles. More than 800,000 people have taken refuge in other countries.

The UNHCR was given the mandate of helping the people displaced within the former Yugoslavia, as well as those so-called "vulnerable" persons who are mostly in Bosnia-Hercegovina.

I want to pay tribute to the UNHCR, which does an excellent job in the distribution of humanitarian aid, in spite of the extremely difficult situation which prevails in that region.

Besides distributing food, medication and clothes, in some regions the High Commissioner's office looks after restoring water and hydro supplies, building houses and granting monetary aid to families who accept refugees.

It is sometimes very difficult if not impossible to provide humanitarian aid in some regions of Bosnia. Convoys are often delayed, stopped and even raided. The city of Sarajevo is supplied through land convoys and also through the most important airlift operation in history.

The personnel working for humanitarian organizations is sometimes harassed or assaulted and often requires the protection provided by peacekeepers.

The international community is making great efforts to absorb the more than 800,000 people affected by the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

Germany alone has accepted more than 340,000 refugees; Hungary, 128,000; Sweden, 92,000; Switzerland, 72,000; Austria, 90,000. As for Canada, it has only accepted some 10,000 refugees.

Nationals from the former Yugoslavia can enter Canada as refugees or through the family reunification program, following special measures implemented in 1992.

I believe that the Canadian government should continue to implement its host program for refugees and immigrants from the former Yugoslavia.

The quota for 1994 should be increased considerably. Moreover, families and groups should get organized to accept these refugees and provide support for them.

I have personally met several refugees from the former Yugoslavia. They are all very active and sometimes highly qualified people who make a great contribution to Quebec and to Canadian society.

In fact, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome them to Quebec and to Canada and to express my sympathy and my solidarity to them all.

Canada provides about $50 million in humanitarian assistance to the former Yugoslavia. Between April and December 1993, Canada gave out $1.5 million to UNICEF, which spent a quarter of that amount on rape victims. For which I want to say to them: Well done.

But we have to do more. We have to support UNICEF initiatives to treat the traumatized children and women who are the real victims of this war. This should always be a priority for Canada.

I listened very closely when the leader of the Official Opposition and member for Lac-Saint-Jean delivered an excellent speech this morning.

I wholeheartedly agree with him on this issue. I want to describe the main points on which we should focus.

First, I am strongly against the unilateral withdrawal of Canadian peacekeepers in Bosnia, as was recently suggested by the Prime Minister.

Second, I believe that the presence of Canadian soldiers in Bosnia is needed to stop this conflict from further deteriorating and from extending to other regions of the former Yugoslavia.

Third, the presence of our soldiers is also needed to maintain military support for the people and humanitarian assistance for civilians.

Fourth, we have to stop the fighting from escalating.

Finally, the presence of peacekeepers in Bosnia could and should facilitate the diplomatic negotiation process. I hope that the warring factions will reach a negotiated agreement as soon as possible.

Just like its Western allies, Canada made its first mistake in Bosnia when it did not intervene sooner and allowed the evil that has been gnawing at this poor country to develop just as it had before in Spain and in Germany. Let us not make a second mistake which could be fateful.

Withdrawing our peacekeepers from Bosnia would in fact result in a massive slaughter for a population which is looking to us and to the international community for protection.

Let us avoid irreparable damage. Let us renew the mandate of our Canadian peacekeepers in Bosnia.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I would like to thank the hon. member for Bourassa. We now have a question and comment period. Of course, with hundreds of members wishing to speak in this debate, you do not need to feel compelled to ask questions or

make comments. Is there anyone who wants to ask a question? As you can imagine, I try generally to recognize hon. members from other parties who want to ask questions, if there are any.

[Len Taylor, NDP, The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK]

I appreciate the opportunity to raise a question here. As this is the question and comment period I do have a couple of comments that are probably more relevant than my question. Given the fact that the minister is here I would very much like to direct a comment to him. I do not necessarily expect a reply at the moment from the hon. member who has spoken or the minister.

[The Deputy Speaker]

If I could just interrupt the member. I think he knows that is out of order so he has to put his question or his comment. Why does he not just make a comment?