Debates of Nov. 16th, 1994

National Defence

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member and members of the House that an inquiry was established by the previous government. However it was suspended once charges were laid against certain individuals.

The judicial process is currently ongoing, the court martials. There is one to go I believe in January or February. After the judicial process is complete I have said publicly that there will be a resumption of the inquiry. The terms of reference for that inquiry will be broad enough to answer any concern raised by members of the opposition about the individual in question who was a military officer and was involved.

With respect to the actual events surrounding the circumstances in Somalia, as I have said they are subject to judicial proceedings at the moment and, as I have said in the House before, it would be inappropriate for me to comment.

[Stephen Harper, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question.

There is an additional allegation on March 4, 1993. Major Armstrong performed an autopsy on Mr. Ahmed Affrah Aresh, another unarmed Somali civilian who was shot in the back and killed execution style. No charges were ever laid and I am told there is no investigation proceeding on the matter.

Will the minister agree that this should be investigated? Will he also agree that the whole process of military justice in this case should be submitted to an investigation? We have a corporal alone, sitting in jail, the man who provided the initial evidence for the investigation.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, on the last point first, the military justice system has been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada.

On the second point with respect to the allegations made in print this morning, there are two police investigations ongoing. If the individual in question has evidence which he has a duty to report as a member of the armed forces, he should make that evidence available to the police authorities undertaking the investigation.

Unemployment Insurance

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. Wanting to look like Robin Hood, the Minister of Human Resources Development pretends that his reform will attack the wealthy unemployed so that more can be given to the poor, by taking from households earning over $60,000 the right to collect unemployment insurance benefits while requiring them to continue to pay premiums.

Does the minister recognize that his proposed reform of unemployment insurance will force 2.6 million households earning over $60,000 to pay UI premiums without being able to collect benefits?

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

Mr. Speaker, again I remind the hon. member that the green paper is simply a series of proposals. There is no program; there is no policy. It is out for discussion. It is out for an important dialogue among Canadians.

When the hon. member speaks about the need to help those who are chronically unemployed, I point out that the whole purpose of the paper is to find ways in which we can get the resources to help those who have been unemployed for long periods of time, to get good literacy programs, to retrain, to help self-employment programs, and to develop a variety of ways to give them a chance to get back to a job. It is a way of trying to turn the safety net into a springboard. It gives an awful lot more opportunity and an awful lot more hope to those who have been unemployed.

That is the purpose of the green paper. It is a purpose that I think the hon. member should endorse.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

I wish to ask a supplementary question. Does the minister realize that his reform making family income a condition of eligibility for unemployment insurance will penalize mainly women, reducing them to unacceptable financial dependence on their husbands?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the hon. member to look more carefully at the technical paper that was presented. I think it does explain.

First, it points out that under the proposal for a two tier system, 70 per cent of those who receive unemployment insurance would not be affected in any kind of way, but those who receive basic insurance would have the same formula attached. It is only those who are basically using unemployment insurance every year.

This is an important difference. What is really happening and has happened is that 40 per cent of UI users are frequent users. That means it is no longer an insurance program. It has become an income benefit program. Perhaps it is very much needed, perhaps it is very much necessary, but it is no longer based on the fundamental insurance principle. It has become an income benefit program. As the hon. member would know, every income benefit program has some test applied to ensure that those who are very wealthy, those who have a lot of money, do not use the system as it is not supposed to be used.

That is simply the proposal to which we are asking Canadians to respond. I will welcome the hon. member's response to that question.

Post-Secondary Education

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. All kinds of false rumours are circulating about social program reform and about the green book which, by the way, is a discussion paper. Some say that the federal government wants to cut up to $2.3 billion in contributions to post-secondary education. Some even claim that the federal government wants to centralize student loan programs.

Can the Minister of Human Resources Development set the record straight on this?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly true that false rumours are circulating, particularly in publications by the members opposite, about the changes we will make to the post-secondary education system.

First of all, we do not want to cut federal assistance; we want to invest it. As I said earlier, if the status quo was maintained, $61 billion would be spent on education. But, if the federal proposals are adopted, the combination of transfers, taxes and loans would produce $70 billion for this period, or an additional $10 billion for the education fund in Canada.

Private Medical Clinics

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister has challenged Alberta private medical clinics to a showdown at high noon. Alberta's health minister has given me the authority to refute these allegations. Where would the minister suggest we have this debate?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue. I have expressed my concern on numerous occasions. There is no quick solution as the Reform Party would have us believe.

I have been systematically working over this past year to address some of the very serious issues to ensure that Canadians get the kind of care they need when they need it and that we do not create a system that benefits the healthy and wealthy at the expense of the sick and the average Canadian.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I suggest we have this discussion outside in the lobby today. Too busy? Let's do it on "Newsworld". Not ready? Let us debate this in the minister's office with all her bureaucrats-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

It is a good thing we left our guns at the door today. The hon. member for Macleod, his question please.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

The straightforward question is this: Is this health minister afraid to debate me on the issue of private medical clinics?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I have been talking about health in this House for a year. I am certainly not afraid to talk about health to anyone in our country.

I know exactly where the members of the Reform Party are coming from. It is not the policy of this government, nor is it the policy of this minister.

Fisheries

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at the federal-provincial conference of fisheries ministers held in Victoria on November 1, the government of Quebec formally requested jurisdiction over fisheries management. You will recall that, in 1983, the Liberal government had unilaterally decided to centralize fisheries management in Ottawa.

Can the Minister of Fisheries tell us whether or not he intends to make changes to administrative jurisdictions with regard to Canadian fisheries? And, if so, does he intend to do so along the lines of what Quebec is asking for?

[English]

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. Indeed, several governments in Canada in recent weeks and months have expressed an interest in greater responsibility in the area of the administration of the health of the fisheries.

Among those is the Government of Quebec, which made its position clear at a meeting of federal and provincial ministers in Victoria a few weeks ago. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador expressed an interest in fisheries management in a proposal it calls joint management. The Government of British Columbia expressed an interest in seeing licensing and allocation boards established in the province of British Columbia.

It is good to see that the new Government of Quebec, and on this I congratulate it sincerely, and I have congratulated the minister who is in tune with his fellow colleagues, understands the need to build efficiencies in this country given our fiscal restraint, to find ways to avoid duplication and overlap and to have better administration of fisheries policies by working together, all 10 provinces and the national government.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thought I had put my question clearly, but I am not sure that the answer I got was clear.

Here is my question: Does the minister intend to reorganize fisheries management in Canada? Information was leaked to the Globe and Mail three weeks ago to the effect that cuts would be made. Quebec has come up with a proposal.

I would like to know if the minister is planning to make changes to fisheries management. If so, will these changes be in keeping with Quebec demands?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly intend working with my colleague, with others in the House interested in fisheries matters and with all of the provinces to respond very directly to reorganizing the fishery. The bottom line is that we look after the resource for conservation and for enforcement. That means sharing greater roles and responsibilities with all of the provinces, including the province of Quebec. I am quite open and willing to take a look at it.

The member is asking me whether or not the proposal of any one province is going to be accepted in its total form without amendment or without discussion. That is not the nature of federalism. Federalism is based on mutual respect, mutual interest, dialogue and discussion.

I look forward to continued good dialogue and discussion with all of the provinces, including Quebec.

Alan Eagleson

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in March of this year the House was informed that the RCMP was involved in an ongoing investigation into the activities of Hockey Canada and Mr. Alan Eagleson.

Since then a U.S. grand jury has brought down a 34 point indictment and the Law Society of Upper Canada a 41 point complaint against Mr. Eagleson.

The RCMP in this time has not even contacted the primary source of information to the FBI and the Law Society of Upper Canada, Mr. Russ Conway of Lawrence, Massachusetts.

My question is for the Solicitor General. Why has the RCMP not even interviewed Mr. Conway and why is the RCMP not pursuing this investigation with vigour and commitment?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, it is not customary for a Solicitor General to comment on ongoing investigations. However, I can confirm that the investigation continues. I am sure it will be carried out with the professionalism that we associate with the RCMP.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the House has been hearing the same answer to that exact question from this Solicitor General and previous Solicitors General since 1992.

There is a concern that the minute U.S. authorities request extradition the RCMP will lay a charge of jaywalking or some

other charge to prevent or preclude the extradition of Mr. Eagleson to face United States authorities.

When American authorities request the extradition of Mr. Eagleson to face charges in the United States for racketeering and embezzlement, will the minister allow those proceedings to have priority over any charges laid by the RCMP subsequent to an extradition request?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member makes an interesting point and it is that the U.S. authorities have not yet sought the extradition of Mr. Eagleson. If and when they do this matter will be for the Minister of Justice to deal with, not the Solicitor General.

Inglis Limited

[Janko Peric, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

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

Yesterday I was advised by a representative of Inglis Limited that its parent company, Whirlpool Corporation, will be closing its manufacturing facility in my riding of Cambridge.

Given that my riding has had both very good and very bad news in the course of one week, does the minister have any words of advice for those workers at Inglis who will be losing their jobs and of course for my people in Cambridge?