Debates of Dec. 2nd, 1994

National Defence

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

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member has answered his own question, if I may say. The fact is this government has had debates on our peacekeeping engagements and I am sure the Prime Minister will continue to do that in future.

In terms of the flexibility of having those debates, that is really up to the Prime Minister and the government generally. Again it is a representation that I am sure we will consider.

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

Mr. Speaker, we would very much like to see a commitment by the government to bring this to pass.

The military training assistance program is one in which foreign military personnel are trained in concepts and procedures by our military. Unlike Canada, foreign military officers are often directly involved or very influential in their governments.

In the white paper the government has committed to expand this program. While the training is done by the military the results support foreign relations, international trade or it could even be called foreign aid. The committee recommended that that defence dollars be spent only on defence.

Will the minister confirm that the costs of the MTAP will not come out of the defence budget.

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

Mr. Speaker, they do come out of the defence budget now and they obviously will in the future.

I beg to differ with my friend. We believe that the bilateral assistance that we give to members of other armed forces is consistent not only with our foreign policy, but is an aspect of defence policy. That is something we will continue. In fact, in the white paper we do announce a decision which was communicated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs yesterday in Brussels to his colleagues to reduce our commitment to the NATO infrastructure budget so that some of those funds which now do not come back to Canada, because Canada has given one of the largest shares and has probably the lowest payback, will be used for bilateral training at our Lester B. Pearson Peacekeeping Institute in Cornwallis, Nova Scotia, involving specifically those countries in the Partnership for Peace Program from eastern Europe.

Bosnia

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. The war is more intense than ever in Bosnia. After the visit of the UN Secretary-General to Sarajevo ended in failure, Bosnian Serbs took more peacekeepers hostage in a raid in Croatia. They are pursuing their assault on Bihac and continue to block humanitarian relief convoys. It is even reported that, today, they fired missiles on Sarajevo.

Does the minister confirm these reports? And can he give us an update on the situation in the former Yugoslavia, especially as the conflict may well spread to Croatia now?

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

Mr. Speaker, we did not get any dramatically different news from the former Yugoslavia today than we got yesterday except that there are some hopeful signs. Some convoys, I believe involving British and Dutch, have been allowed to proceed. So they are not being detained.

Discussions are under way concerning our Canadian peacekeepers that have been detained. As I have said publicly, those people who are detaining them from the Bosnian-Serb side are not unknown to our forces. There is a good rapport between them. While it is obviously becoming much more worrying and frustrating for everyone concerned, especially the families, we have no reason to believe that the situation involving our own peacekeepers has deteriorated substantially.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the contact group is scheduled to meet today in Brussels to develop a new diplomatic approach. Can the minister tell us what Canada's preference would be in terms of such an approach and whether or not he supports the idea that was put forward, to let the Bosnian Serbs form a confederation with Serbia?

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

Mr. Speaker, this gets a little out of my realm. Perhaps my colleague, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who is here, would like to address it subsequently.

As far as we are concerned it is time to take a fresh look at negotiations for a settlement in the former Yugoslavia. Obviously the settlement the contact group came up with earlier this summer is unacceptable, at least to the Bosnian Serb side.

We need some fresh thinking. Whether or not Canada is part of the contact group we are kept informed. We have indirect input. I hope that Canada can play a more prominent role in bringing the various points of view together in the coming weeks.

Budgetary Policy

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge]

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party has been saying that the deficit should be eliminated during this term of Parliament but the Minister of Finance has said it is unrealistic.

In the finance hearing, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Business Council on National Issues, the C. D. Howe Institute and others have said that we should balance the budget within the term of this Parliament.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. Does he believe this is realistic at this point in time?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to be committed to its deficit reduction target. Its interim target is 3 per cent of GDP in the third year of its mandate. It is definite. It is clearly the Minister of Finance's response to this. It is clearly on the agenda and we will certainly make that target.

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge]

Mr. Speaker, the pillar of the Liberal Party is the red book. On page 20 of that book it says that there will be a balanced budget, but it also says that it is unrealistic to do it five years. It is time the government puts on the table what is a proper time line. Could the minister indicate to the House when the budget will be balanced?

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

Mr. Speaker, the interim target is within two years now. It is important for the government to meet its targets on a year by year basis.

It is important to restore the confidence of the financial markets in the ability of the government to meet its targets. There is no point in putting forward a target that is unreachable such as the Reform Party has done in the past. It is important to put forward targets that are reachable and attainable to ensure we have the financial market's support.

That is what we are going to do. We are going to reach our target of 3 per cent of GDP in the third year. Then we are going to go on to a balanced budget.

Defence Policy

[Philippe Paré, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

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

The minister tabled yesterday, and rather hastily, his white paper on defence, which is in fact a botched job, a spur of the moment job, a paper characterized throughout by a backward-looking vision and lacking any real, meaningful direction.

Does the minister not realize that the hurried tabling of his white paper has deprived the government of practical proposals with respect to NATO, NORAD and the UN and thus provides no real vision of the future?

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

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe the hon. member made this assertion. I can only assume he has not read the white paper. As has been pointed out by the critic for the Reform Party, the white paper has been very well received.

As to the timing, we always said we would try to table the document before Christmas. We are cognizant of the fact that going into the holiday season people are preoccupied with other matters and we wanted to give Parliament and Canadians a good time to reflect on it.

Again the hon. member is indirectly reflecting on the work of the special joint committee on defence. I know his party had a dissenting report, but there were three other parties including a party not represented in the House officially, but represented in the Senate-which shall remain nameless-that all agreed with the report. We have taken the core of that report, almost all the recommendations, and we have embellished them. I believe that if the hon. member reads the document he will see it does set out a clear vision for defence policy in the 21st century.

[Philippe Paré, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, knowing that the development of any defence policy is really only possible when it is keyed to a clear foreign policy, how can the minister suggest and maintain that he has a clear vision of the future, when his white paper was tabled before the government even had the chance to announce the new thrust of its foreign policy?

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

It is true, Mr. Speaker, that defence policy is to some degree an instrument of foreign policy but not exclusively so. There are constitutional requirements made of the armed forces which do not fall into the foreign affairs category. The whole question of protecting Canada offshore, around its coasts, aid to the civil power, are domestic considerations to protect Canada's interest.

With respect to the substance of the question on why we have done this now as opposed to doing it jointly with a foreign policy report, the government felt that with all of the rapid changes, especially reductions, being faced by the armed forces we owed it to all those in the forces, both civilian and uniform personnel, to give some clear indication of where we are going as quickly as possible, but also to set in motion some of the equipment purchases for which we have a dramatic need.

The defence white paper and its security review coincide with the recommendations of the joint committee on foreign policy, the joint committee on defence policy and was developed in conjunction with my colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who is quite comfortable with it.

From the point of view of Canada's security policy we feel it is quite appropriate to table the document at this particular time.

Health Care

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Acting Minister of Health.

The Reform Party is committed to ensuring that every Canadian citizen receive essential health care services in a timely fashion regardless of income. The presence of private medical clinics would allow this by decreasing waiting lists and decreasing pressure on the public system.

Why is the government exercising the archaic Canada Health Act and threatening to penalize Alberta for trying to provide better health care for all of its citizens?

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

Mr. Speaker, at the meeting of November 28 the Minister of Health advised that she would be providing a clarification of our interpretation of the Canada Health Act to all provinces in the very near future.

The minister has repeatedly maintained that the Canada health system is the best system in the world. The rest of the world envies our system. We invite the province of Alberta, like the other provinces are doing, to continue to protect and develop this wonderful system.

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we used to have the best health care system but tragically we do not any more. I hope no one in the House has to find that out.

Private clinics exist in Alberta, Ontario and the rest of the country. Why is the government threatening only Alberta for this by cutting transfer payments and not Ontario?

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister has repeatedly stated in the House that a broad consensus exists on the need to regulate private clinics to ensure there are no financial barriers to access any necessary medical services, and the minister invites the Alberta government to do that.

National Defence

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. In spite of the disastrous state of public finances, the Minister of National Defence has drawn up an extensive shopping list. Indeed, he wants to buy new armoured personnel carriers, new land helicopters, new remote controlled weapons, and even new submarines. Yet, the white paper tabled yesterday does not include any concrete measure to eliminate the waste of some $100 million disclosed by the Auditor General in his recent report.

How can the minister explain that his white paper totally ignores the Auditor General's recommendations and that his department still does not implement better management practices to cut spending and save money?

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. member has read the report.

The white paper talks about improvement of administrative practices, of saving money, of privatizing certain functions such as maintenance and things of that nature, all of which have been advocated by the Auditor General over the years. In addition, administrative measures have been announced recently that are ongoing and meet the Auditor General's requirements.

On the question the hon. member raises about a so-called shopping list, the fact is, and let us be frank about it, we are either in the defence business or we are not. If we are in the defence business we cannot have our armed forces personnel ill equipped. There is agreement both in the parliamentary committees and across the country that we have to equip our armed forces better.

In the case of the armoured personnel carriers I do not think there is any argument that these are justified. In the case of helicopters we always knew that the search and rescue helicopters would have to be replaced. It is a civilian role, not purely military.

As to the question of the helicopters on the ships that is something that was recommended by the special joint committee and something we can fully justify.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister, who was described last week as the minister of waste by the Auditor General, justify that his white paper contains none of the Auditor General's recommendations, whether on the reserve army-which, incidentally, is the most costly in the world-, on the deplorable management of capital assets, or on the procurement programs of the defence department?

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

Mr. Speaker, the only person who has ever called me the minister of waste is my wife and that has to do with the fact that I need to lose a few pounds. The running around we are doing in budget preparations and with the white paper will achieve that objective.

From cover to cover we talk about doing business differently in the armed forces. We talk about ending project management. We did in the last budget. We talk about buying equipment off the shelf. We talk about contracting out to the private sector a number of functions that are already being performed internally. We think we can do them much more cheaply. We have even mused about privatizing the operation and maintenance of the search and rescue function with Department of National Defence crews.

If the hon. member reads the report over the weekend I do not think he would ask this type of question on Monday.

Conference On Security And Co-Operation

[John O'Reilly, Liberal, Victoria—Haliburton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs will be in Budapest next week to attend the Conference on Security and Co-Operation in Europe. What does Canada hope to accomplish at this summit, in particular concerning the crisis in the former Yugoslavia?

[Jesse Flis, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the upcoming CSC summit in Budapest is to enhance security and respect for human rights in Europe.

Canada would also like the summit to broaden the CSC's capacity to prevent and resolve conflicts, notably by giving it the ability to establish or monitor peacekeeping operations. The conflict in former Yugoslavia, including recent events in the Bihac area of Bosnia will be of primary concern to the heads of state and government.

In support of an eventual comprehensive political settlement to the conflict, the summit could and should offer CSC expertise in areas such as human rights, elections monitoring, the protection of minorities, arms control, and confidence building measures.

Canada's voice at previous summits, conferences, and general meetings has always been listened to and highly respected.