Debates of Nov. 3rd, 1994

Justice

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this House is great at reports and in studies and I think what the Canadian people are asking for is action.

The Liberal red book states that as a government it will introduce measures to protect women and children. Yet in the majority of the above noted cases the victims are females. Over half the cases of manslaughter, over half the convictions for manslaughter have resulted in sentences of less than five years.

Will the minister advise the House when this government will live up to its red book commitment to protect the women of this country?

[An hon. member]

No rush.

[Russell MacLellan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, a member of the Reform Party says no rush. I want to disagree with him. There is a rush.

The Minister of Justice has asked for the recodification to include the area to which the hon. member refers. She mentioned dialogue and studies. What Canadians do want are good laws. They want good laws that are going to serve the needs of Canadian society and that is what this government is going to bring forward.

Business Loans

[Tony Ianno, Liberal, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

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

When the Prime Minister appeared on CBC's Prime Time News town hall meeting he said that some banks are doing a good job of supplying small and medium sized enterprises with financing, while others were not doing as well.

He also said there should be a ratio between lending money to big business and lending money to small business.

What is the minister doing to encourage the banks to meet a lending target whereby one-third of all business loans by the banks are allocated to small and medium sized businesses?

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to first of all acknowledge the work of the member for Trinity-Spadina on the industry committee, the study on access to capital for small business.

The member has proposed a very important idea. I believe that most members would recognize the fact that thanks to large businesses, lending to small businesses is not satisfactory. The member has proposed an idea that this should be increased to close to a two-thirds, one-third basis.

It is an interesting idea because it would be an injection of close to $15 billion into the small and medium sized business community pool. It is an idea we are going to look at closely and we will be back to him in due course.

Royal Military College Of Kingston

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

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

The Minister of Defence has stated on many occasions that the Military College of Kingston would be a model of bilingualism. Last week, he set up a special committee, over which he chairs personally, to make the college bilingual.

How can the minister explain the college authorities' refusal to grant the request of Canadian Military College teachers who are asking that francophone teachers have equal access and access in their own language to cultural, professional, financial and material resources useful for their career progression?

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to take issue with the hon. member.

The Royal Military College in Kingston is a bilingual institution. It offers courses in both languages and there are professors and students there of both linguistic groups.

With the consolidation of the three colleges we want to ensure that this bilingualization is total and complete and satisfies people like the hon. member who were obviously upset with the Collège Militaire Royal in Saint-Jean.

I announced the committee last week which I will chair. The former commandant there, General Emond who is now the commandant at RMC, will be on the committee as will the former principal, Mr. Carrier, and other prominent members of the francophone community.

I think that this committee, once it gets going, will oversee the consolidation and bilingualization of all of these colleges into one to the satisfaction of the hon. member.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the Minister of Defence explain the fact that the dean of the college in Kingston, Mr. John Plant, is sitting on this bilingualization committee, when he is the very person who refused francophone teachers access to services in their primary language?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is an allegation and I have no evidence that the assertion made by the hon. member, the allegation, is actually true.

If he has facts that will substantiate his assertion perhaps he could let me know and I will look into them and try to resolve the matter.

Esprit De Corps

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry will know that a free and independent press is a cornerstone of democracy. The press must be free to criticize government without fear of retribution. Esprit de Corps has in its writings been critical of certain aspects of sourcing of military equipment. Following this criticism a high ranking bureaucrat from industry, seconded to the Department of National Defence, is alleged to have suggested to advertisers that they should boycott advertising in the magazine Esprit de Corps .

Will the minister launch an investigation to determine the scope of the involvement of personnel from the Department of Industry in attempting to destroy this Canadian publication?

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

Mr. Speaker, there have been allegations of this nature made not only toward employees of the Department of Industry but also of the Department of National Defence.

I have no evidence whatsoever that anyone in national defence or in the Department of Industry has made these kinds of threats. If the hon. member has names of individuals he could please give them to me or to the Minister of Industry because we cannot every day in the House of Commons have these innuendoes floating around and hurting institutions and government departments that carry on their job on a daily basis beyond reproach.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of Industry investigate in the

department to find out whether these allegations are true? That was my question.

General Motors recently pulled its advertising from the magazine Esprit de Corps . The reason given for this decision is that its representative was getting bad vibes from the Department of National Defence. Would the minister of defence in concert with the Minister of Industry issue a directive that all personnel are to cease and that this kind of action would not be tolerated in any department of the Government of Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can give the hon. member an assurance. If there are people doing this it will not be tolerated no matter what government department. Please come forward and give us the evidence before he makes the charges on the floor of the House of Commons.

International Trade

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville—Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade. Today the Prime Minister leads Team Canada to China as an important strategy in our government's jobs and growth agenda.

I would like to ask the minister how he expects this mission to improve our international trade position and to improve the prospects for unemployed Canadians?

[Roy MacLaren, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all members of the House would join the hon. member for Oakville-Milton in wishing the Prime Minister well as he departs with his nine provincial colleagues and some 375 business people on the largest trade mission Canada has ever mounted.

That mission in its scope and participation by all regions in Canada and by large and small corporations represents the culmination of the commitment this government has made, through the missions led by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Secretary of State for-

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Kamloops.

Royal Bank Of Canada

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister, who will appreciate that in an effort to manage the deficit and the debt, the government has been calling upon Canadians, UI recipients, students, farmers, fishers and many others to pay their fair share.

She will also be aware that last week we heard the Royal Bank of Canada is expecting to see its profit margin in excess of $1 billion this year. If she looks at the financial record she will find that in 1992 in spite of $63 million in profits the Royal Bank paid no income tax at all.

Last year in spite of $324 million in profits, the Royal Bank paid no income tax and also got a tax credit to apply for this year. Will the Deputy Prime Minister not admit that when a teller at the Royal Bank is actually paying more income tax than the entire Royal Bank of Canada there is something wrong with this picture?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, this government has made serious efforts to increase fairness. We will make continued efforts to increase fairness.

I would remind the hon. member that the large corporation tax in Canada applies to the banks. The corporate income tax applies to them. They pay a capital tax in addition to that, which is not part of the income tax but is separate from the income tax.

I might add that banks and all other financial institutions are expected, when they make profits the size they are this year, to pay their fair share of taxes which will go toward decreasing our fiscal deficit. That will be an important part of it.

Business Of The House

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, could the secretary of state responsible for parliamentary affairs tell us what is on the legislative agenda for tomorrow and the days to come, after next week's adjournment.

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Secretary of State (Parliamentary Affairs) and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the order of business for the remainder of today will be Bill C-53 respecting the Department of Canadian Heritage, followed by Bill C-55 concerning Yukon surface rights, and followed by Bill C-54, the technical amendments regarding the Old Age Security Act and the Canada pension plan.

Tomorrow we will begin third reading of Bill C-38 respecting marine safety. We will then return to the unfinished business of today at the place where we left off. I understand there may be a disposition to finish the day earlier than usual tomorrow. We will discuss it as the day proceeds through informal consultations.

Next week the House is adjourned for Remembrance Day observances. I wish to inform the House that Tuesday, November 15, shall be an opposition day. The government will advise members of the business for the remainder of that week before the end of next week's adjournment.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-53, an act to establish the Department of Canadian Heritage and to amend and repeal certain other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee; and of the amendment.

Department Of Canadian Heritage Act

[Rey D. Pagtakhan, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the heritage of our country traces its roots to our First Nations peoples and thereafter to the French and English people who came as the earliest settlers and, even later thereafter, to peoples from all over the world who chose to immigrate and make Canada their home.

I am therefore pleased to stand in the House today to speak about Bill C-53, the Department of Canadian Heritage Act. The objective of the bill is designed to give legal status to the amalgamation of five predecessor organizations, namely the Secretary of State, the Department of Multiculturalism and Citizenship, the Department of Fitness and Amateur Sport, the Parks Canada component of Environment Canada, and the cultural broadcasting and heritage components of the Department of Communications.

This extensive reorganization reflects the government's commitment to more efficient and effective government. Under the new structure, one department with one minister and one deputy minister is given responsibility for delivering an important mandate. The Department of Canadian Heritage is a blend of the various elements that define us as a diverse and vibrant nation with a rich and abundant cultural and natural heritage.

The department's activities are the product of its broad range of responsibilities in the fields of cultural development, arts, broadcasting, national parks, historic sites, amateur sport and multiculturalism. The department also administers official languages, Canadian studies, and state ceremonial and native programs, all of which contribute in a very significant way to our sense of Canadian identity and pride.

As international barriers disappear and evolving technology stretches the world's boundaries, the development of our identity as a nation becomes increasingly vital to our country's prosperity and élan vital. It is only natural that the federal government would have an instrument such as the Department of Canadian Heritage to enable it to continue promoting development and a sense of Canadian identity.

The department has three principal areas of responsibility. Through Parks Canada, the department is the chief custodian of the natural and physical heritage found in our national parks, national historic sites and historic canals. Parks Canada commemorates, protects and presents both directly and indirectly places of significance to Canada's cultural and natural heritage in ways that encourage public understanding, appreciation and enjoyment.

The economic activity and tourism generated by the department's operations are of significance to many local economies not only in Canada but throughout the world. The parks service has been at the forefront of efforts for innovative partnership arrangements with private and not for profit enterprises in carrying out its mandated responsibilities.

Another principal area of the department's activities involves the enhancement of cultural development through policies and programs to support our cultural industries and our national cultural and heritage institutions such as the Canada Council, the National Gallery, the National Arts Centre and the National Archives, to name but a few.

In the area of arts and broadcasting, the Department of Canadian Heritage recognizes the importance of new technologies and is working to ensure that the impact of the information highway on Canadian artists will be a positive one.

Through the citizenship and Canadian identity sector of the Department of Canadian Heritage the government devotes many of its efforts to promoting a greater understanding of our diversity, to increasing the involvement of all citizens in Canadian society and to promoting our two official languages.

Canada's linguistic duality is deeply rooted in our country's very nature. Official language policies introduced by the federal government in the early 1970s reflect a generous and creative vision. The Department of Canadian Heritage has the unique responsibility of ensuring that English speaking and French speaking Canadians, irrespective of ethnocultural origins, feel at home wherever they choose to live in Canada.

This department places a key role in the enhancement and development of English and French linguistic minority communities; respect for Canada's two official languages, together with respect for the traditions and contributions of our First Nations people; respect for our cultural diversity; and respect for basic human rights, making Canada a unique country and one of the most highly regarded and respected in the world.

The Department of Canadian Heritage greatly affects all Canadians economically, socially and culturally. The economic activity and tourism generated by the department's operations are of great importance to many local economies.

The policies and programs of the department are aimed at fostering greater awareness of our cultural and natural riches. These are heavy responsibilities but the department is up to the task. It is apparent to me that the mission of Canadian Heritage is closely linked to the major issues facing our nation today. The

department has a full agenda and its mission extends into many sectors of Canadian society.

Clearly the Department of Canadian Heritage has a key role to play and, with the legislation in place, will be able to forge ahead to meet the challenges of the 21st century and the future beyond.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is out of great concern for the promotion and preservation of Quebec culture that I participate today in this debate on Bill C-53 to establish the Department of Canadian Heritage.

It is unthinkable, in my view, that a department be established to promote, as indicated in clause 4, Canadian culture and heritage. Once again, the federal government is proving to the people of Quebec that it does not understand the first thing about Quebec culture. How indeed can one seriously claim that there is such a thing as a Canadian culture? Perhaps government members should be reminded that the French language is alive and commonly used in Quebec and in many regions of Canada in spite of sustained efforts on the part of the federal government to trivialize the spoilsports it views francophones as.

Not only is Quebec culture alive and well in Quebec but it also radiates worldwide. Just think of the success of Quebec talent abroad. French Canadians are also successful abroad. Such a vibrant cultural environment can legitimately claim and gain complete independence at the cultural level. On that subject, the former Liberal culture minister in Quebec rightly indicated that she intended to reaffirm the need for Quebec to assume control over cultural matters on its territory. Culture is of paramount importance to Quebec; therefore, it is important that the government of Quebec be recognized the exclusive powers required to discharge its responsibilities.

As you can see, there is nothing new or partisan about us, Quebecers, wanting to manage our cultural matters ourselves. History and the evolution of Quebec over the years show this deep-seated will of dealing with Quebec culture, and to do so from Quebec. Let us look for example at the demands made by Premiers Johnson and Bertrand in the 1960s, Bourassa and Lévesque in the 1970s and 1980s, who despite their many differences of opinion all demanded that Quebec's cultural affairs be administered by Quebec.

In addition to promoting Canadian culture, Bill C-53 shows an intention of managing this so-called culture. I think that this bill amounts to an outright refusal to recognize Quebec's distinctiveness.

Let us now look at constitutional responsibilities in cultural matters. Section 92(16) of the 1867 Constitution Act recognizes provincial jurisdiction over all matters of a merely local or private nature. Is Quebec culture not a local or private matter?

Furthermore, the 1867 act gives the provinces jurisdiction over the administration of justice in civil matters, which is, as my colleague from Rimouski-Témiscouata so eloquently said, a fundamental characteristic of our distinct society.

Since provincial jurisdiction over education is closely linked to culture, it would be ridiculous and even totally inconsistent to deal with them separately. This demonstration clearly shows that the provinces have exclusive jurisdiction over the whole area of culture.

Quebec is fed up with the federal government's meddling in provincial matters! Justifying cultural interference by invoking the existence of a single Canadian culture is taking comedy, which is turning into drama, a little too far. It also ignores the history of the two founding nations, need I remind you.

Let us look for a few moments at your definition of nation. Since when is Canada a single nation? We live in a country that was created from scratch. Are you denying the existence of one of the founding nations of this country you are supposedly so proud of? Have you forgotten that there is a large francophone community in your great country and that they are in the majority in Quebec?

True, your daily actions show how little interest you have in issues affecting francophones. We only have to think about Kingston, Long Lac, the military college in Saint-Jean. But is flatly denying the very existence of a francophone culture in Canada not going a little too far?

It would be extremely dangerous to leave the administration of Quebec culture in the hands of a federal minister like the one now in place, working with a law which does not even recognize the existence of Quebec's distinct culture. Especially since the federal government was never too keen on investing as much money in francophone culture as in anglophone culture.

Take the example of the French and English networks of the CBC. The difference in the funding of these two is growing all the time; in April, the difference in the programming budget was $76.4 million. At the same time, we learned that the two networks had about the same size of audience.

We cannot fail to mention the many instances of duplication and overlap in the cultural field. Almost every federal cultural institution has a counterpart in Quebec. For example, there are Radio-Canada and Radio-Québec, the Canada Council and the Conseil des arts et lettres du Québec, the National Archives of Canada and the Quebec archives, to name only these.

Many hundreds of thousands of dollars are wasted every year with such unnecessary duplication and overlap. Can we afford it? Everyone knows that we cannot. Is it really asking too much to want to administer one's own culture? For too long, the federal government has shown its intention to assimilate and wipe out Quebec culture. The people of Quebec have enough of being laughed at for wanting to have all they need to develop and preserve their cultural identity.

Fortunately, Quebecers have understood that negotiations with the federal government lead nowhere and they will show that by expressing their desire to become a sovereign people. That is the only way to ensure our survival in America. Until that day, as the representatives here in Ottawa of most Quebec voters, we will strive to have the existence of this francophone culture recognized, for it shall never cease to exist.

Francophones pay taxes like all other citizens and as such they are entitled to all the benefits that anglophones have in this country and to the historical recognition that is their due. Finally, as Malraux said, culture is not inherited-it is won.

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Ontario, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on the bill to establish the Department of Canadian Heritage. French-speaking communities outside Quebec have long relied on the federal government to protect their rights and promote their development.

And the federal government has always responded with concrete and helpful measures for minority groups. In the early seventies, it set up programs to support French-speaking communities outside Quebec. These programs reflect an open and creative vision which allows French-speaking minority groups to thrive and fully contribute to the economic, social, cultural and scientific life of our country.

Since then, these programs have evolved according to the needs of communities and they have played an important role in their development. One of these initiatives is the Official Languages Act, which was originally passed 25 years ago and improved in 1988. There is also section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees French linguistic minorities the right to receive school instruction in their first language as well as the right to manage their schools, where the numbers warrant it.

So, the government of Canada, which happened to be a Liberal government, first created a legal framework to promote the development of French and English linguistic minority groups, and to promote the official languages in our country. It also created a constitutional framework which guarantees to the two linguistic communities the right to delivery of services in the official language of their choice. Whether it is delivery of services in both official languages or the right to education in the minority language, these initiatives helped make tremendous progress.

As regards the management of schools by French-speaking communities, the federal government supported every cause related to clarifying that right. The Court Challenges Program set up by the federal government was an invaluable tool for French-speaking minorities in the fight for the recognition of their rights. By the way, that program will soon be reinstated.

After the 1990 Supreme Court decision on the Mahé case, the federal government lent its support to every province to ensure a quick implementation of that judgment everywhere in Canada. In May 1993, the federal government announced measures to fund part of the implementation costs of a school management system in every province where such a system had not yet been set up.

Today, thanks to federal government support, French-speaking minorities can manage their schools almost everywhere in the country. I am convinced it is only a matter of time before all francophones in this country will be able to manage their own schools. I may add that this is already the case in my own riding.

The federal government is also present in other areas that are of primary importance to these communities, including the economy, human resources development and culture, to name only a few. The Department of Canadian Heritage is not the only federal institution that can play a decisive role in priority areas but is responsible for co-ordinating the implementation by departments and federal agencies of the federal government's commitment to the growth and development of official language minority communities.

These provisions of the Official Languages Act were not acted upon by the previous government. Last summer, cabinet members agreed to consider the specific needs of official language communities when implementing the policies and programs of their respective departments.

A number of specific projects have now been finalized: The La Picasse Community Centre Project in Petit-de-Grat, Nova Scotia; the new school of electrical engineering at the University of Moncton; a human resources adjustment committee for Canadian francophones; an economic development plan for bilingual municipalities in Manitoba; and the construction of a francophone community centre in Edmonton.

That is how this government supports the growth and development of Canada's anglophone and francophone minority communities. The departments each have their own mandate but all work together towards a common goal: ensuring that official language communities can reach their full potential in all areas.

The communities themselves agree this is a remarkable achievement that will have a clear impact on the development of minority official language communities.

The Canadian government and the communities had established a good working relationship over the years, but since the seventies, the world has changed dramatically. Economic imperatives and new cultural, social and linguistic priorities that are developing today have made it necessary to restructure the federal government's approach, in order to make its support programs for these communities more effective.

Thanks to the current exercise in repositioning at the Department of Canadian Heritage, communities will be able to take an active part in setting priorities and thus target the main areas where action is needed.

Official language communities are a vital force in Canadian society, not only because of their numbers but also and above all because of their extraordinary vitality and energy.

The Government of Canada has always greatly contributed to their cultural development through cultural co-operation agreements with the provincial governments, direct assistance to cultural institutions, through the federal Cultural Initiatives Program and various other support measures and instruments which I mentioned in my speech.

Some people claim that the federal government does not do enough for francophone minorities outside Quebec. We should realize that despite the current financial squeeze, the federal government has maintained the special budgets that enable francophones to manage their own schools and have better access to post-secondary education.

Furthermore, pursuant to the inter-departmental initiative announced last summer, all federal institutions will from now on be involved in the development of francophone and anglophone minority communities, in the spirit of the Official Languages Act.

It is important to see where the real needs are and where real progress can be achieved in developing Canada's francophone communities. The federal government is committed to meeting the specific needs of these communities because it wants to develop this country's full potential. We are firmly committed to pursuing that goal.