Debates of Dec. 1st, 1994

Multiculturalism

[Sheila Finestone, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question and his incisive observations. Of course the answer is yes. Diversity and pluralism are the Canadian reality.

This government is committed to nation building, to ensuring that we live in an inclusive society and that we will have multicultural programs which will contain cross-cultural undertakings, intercultural exchange and will promote social harmony, social cohesion and peace.

We in this party believe that we should build a society in which racism, bigotry, intolerance and misunderstanding shall

find no home. That is the goal of this government. That is nation building and the Liberals support the multicultural program.

Saint John Shipyard

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources or whoever should choose to answer on behalf of the government.

Could the minister explain why the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board made a decision to review the process of awarding the contract to Saint John Shipyard last week as opposed to when the decision was initially made some months ago?

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

Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to get that information from the board. In the meantime I think we should take satisfaction that this independent review board is doing the job for which it was set up.

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my supplemental is for the same minister.

Could this minister please explain why the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board is reviewing the contract awarded to Saint John Shipyard when other contracts have been awarded without going to tender, such as the contract awarded to the Norwegian Contractors Newfoundland this past summer and no review took place?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, this is an independent board, an arm's length board and it does its job according to its mandate.

I will seek the information the hon. member is asking for but I do not know why the Reform Party, which wants probity in actions by government bodies, refuses to pay attention to the work of an independent, arm's length board reviewing the expenditure of taxpayers' funds.

Bosnia

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

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

Yesterday, the United Nations suffered a major diplomatic reversal when the Bosnian Serb authorities refused to meet with UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. Peace negotiations have reached an impasse. The NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs met today in Brussels to develop their position on the Bosnian situation, while major tensions between the Americans and Europeans continue to grow.

What position has the Canadian government taken today at the NATO Summit in Brussels in order to break the deadlock concerning Bosnia?

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, we regret that the Bosnian factions refused to meet with the UN Secretary-General. We are very sorry.

The Prime Minister has stated our position on the Bosnian conflict and this is the position which was stressed again this morning and this afternoon by my colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Right now, I do not have a report from these NATO meetings, since I am told they are still under way in Europe, but when I have an answer I will contact the hon. member.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, instead of simply criticizing the United States for their attitude, as the Prime Minister did in an interview he granted to the daily Le Monde , does the government not think it should take a much more constructive approach and consult its main partners in order to come up with solutions that would get the peace negotiations moving again in Bosnia?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister spoke to the French Senate today which is indeed an honour. I think he is the second foreigner ever to have addressed that body.

After the speech the Prime Minister was quite forceful in his desire for Canada to remain as part of the solution in the former Yugoslavia to help bring tensions to an easier point and to bring negotiations to fruition. Certainly he believes that Canada has a role, and I hope the Prime Minister has a role, to help in any new negotiating process.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the contact group on Bosnia was established in April, two of the five members being countries that had no troops there. Canada is one of the largest contributors but we are excluded.

Why did the government not do its job in April and demand our membership in the contact group? Why did this government wait silently for so long before it finally became involved as conditions worsened? The Canadian people want to know why.

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

Mr. Speaker, we made representations at the establishment of the contact group and for reasons I cannot explain Canada was not invited to be part of that group.

Certainly, even though we regret that state of affairs, that does not mean that we renege on our commitments to be an active full member of United Nations missions in Bosnia and Croatia.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if the contact group refuses to admit Canada when the Prime Minister asks this weekend in Budapest what exactly is the government going to do? Are we going to continue to be wimps in answering these sorts of things? Canadian lives are at stake and the people of this country want to know what the government is going to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been most articulate and most forceful in declaring Canada's interest in participating in all manner of fora to deal with the very terrible conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

We will certainly take note of the hon. member's support for our position that Canada should be much more involved in trying to get a diplomatic solution.

Violence Against Women

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. Next Tuesday, December 6, is a national day of remembrance and action to end violence against women.

Most of the violence women experience is in their homes and at the hands of men they know. What measures is the minister taking to protect women from violence?

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

Mr. Speaker, we are doing a great deal but it is not enough.

We must renew our commitment and focus our energies to do more, but what we have started to date is considerable. I can refer to the initiatives of yesterday with respect to firearms. I can remind the House that one woman every six days is shot to death in this country, that most of the time it occurs in her own home at the hands of someone she knows, and that person is using a rifle or a shotgun. The steps we took yesterday I believe will help in some way to deal with that issue.

I should refer as well to the creation of a national crime prevention council and the attention it will devote to violence against women. I can speak about Bill C-42 and the efforts to change the peace bound provisions to make them more effective to protect victims of domestic violence, and Bill C-41, the matters it deals with in terms of breaches of positions of trust, including relationships between physicians and female patients.

Telecommunications

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Industry.

The coalition for affordable telephone services has asked the government to reverse the CRTC's decision to allow telephone companies to raise rates for local calls by $72 annually over a three-year period. Furthermore, the association for competitive telecommunications is concerned that telephone companies would use the additional revenue from local calls to compete unfairly on the long-distance market.

Does the Minister of Industry intend to look into the association's allegations and examine the cost structure of telephone companies that offer local services, to ensure that the increase in local rates approved by the CRTC does not affect competition on the long-distance market?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we received the request to which the hon. member referred just now. I am examining this request, and I think I will submit a recommendation to cabinet before the end of the year to determine the outcome of this case.

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is directed to the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

To allow enough time to check the cost structure of the telephone companies, does the Minister of Canadian Heritage intend to delay the application of the CRTC's decision to allow an increase in local rates as of January 1?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, it is perhaps difficult for the opposition sometimes to understand but responsibility for the telecommunications sector does fall within my domain.

Therefore it will be a recommendation brought forward by me to cabinet which will be dealt with in the course of determining the government's position on the appeal and on the determination made by the CRTC decision 94-19.

National Defence

[Jack Frazer, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

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

The Reform Party is pleased to see that in general the white paper reflects much of what was recommended by the special joint committee on defence in its report. However, the white paper calls for a reduction in Canadian forces personnel to

60,000, 6,700 below the numbers projected in the February 1994 budget.

The defence review stated that cuts, either financial or numerical, beyond those projected would necessitate the surrender of Canadian forces capabilities. What capabilities has the government identified to be forgone?

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

Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the support of the hon. member and his party. He worked very hard on the joint committee and he should be commended. I thank him for his consideration.

With respect to the reduction in force personnel from a projected 66,700 as envisioned in the 1994 budget to an end state of around 60,000, we believe that much of the capability can be maintained simply by moving a lot of uniform people out of administrative positions of downsizing, of rationalizing, of privatizing certain services, of doing things efficiently to make better use of the personnel we actually have.

With respect to the specific point about those aspects of combat capability that we are losing, we are sort of trimming at the edges. Obviously the big one is that our fighter capability will be reduced somewhat from about 72 that are in service now to between 48 and 60. We have some flexibility depending on the financial requirements that I will be discussing with the Minister of Finance. It will be largely in that area.

My colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, has made it clear that from now on we just do not have the resources to take part in every peacekeeping mission. It is very expensive and we have to evaluate each request on its merits and look at what we can do and what we can afford to do.

[Jack Frazer, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, all of the reductions the minister mentions in his response were included and considered before the recommendations were made.

The defence review recommended that Canada be able to commit to the United Nations and sustain approximately 4,000 personnel. However, the white paper commits numbers that could "conceivably involve in the order of 10,000 military personnel".

As we know from Bosnia and other UN commitments, it is easier to become involved than to disengage. Canada cannot sustain such numbers. Why are we committing them?

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

Mr. Speaker, just because we have the capability to commit a certain number does not mean to say we actually do it.

What we say in the white paper is that at any one time we could deploy in missions, not necessarily in peacekeeping but in natural disasters or other measures, up to 10,000 people at once.

We also commit to increase by 3,000 the number of personnel actually involved in the army able to take part in the land forces missions.

Certainly the point that I raised earlier in terms of evaluating each particular mission on its merits answers the hon. member's question. We have to be very judicious in future in the way we deploy our forces. We believe that there is a consensus in Canada that this country really does want to continue to do its part for the UN and to help bring peace and stability to the world.

Canadian Pacific

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport and it concerns the offer by CP to buy CN east of Winnipeg.

I wonder if the Minister of Transport is aware of arguments to the effect that if CP were to be permitted by the government to buy CN east of Winnipeg, given the tax treatment of such a purchase CP might well get CN from the Canadian taxpayer for nothing.

I would like to ask the Minister of Transport if he could assure us that in the event the government does consider this proposal it would make absolutely sure, even if it has to change the tax system to do so, CP does not rip off the Canadian taxpayer by manipulating the tax system in such a way as to get CN for nothing.

Even better, could he assure us today that the government will have nothing to do with this offer whatsoever even though it has been extended?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the question of the unsolicited bid by CP for CN assets east of Winnipeg is under active consideration by both the management of CN and the Government of Canada.

It is a very serious question. In addition to the matters raised by my hon. colleague, there is the question that it would have the result of reducing competition and really changing the way rail operates east of Winnipeg.

It is a very serious not only business question, as the hon. member has raised, but policy question. For that reason we are going to weigh the pros and cons very carefully and the government will announce its decision in due course.