Debates of April 28th, 1994

Mil Davie Shipyards

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we wonder if there really is a Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec.

Are we to understand from the minister's silence that he agrees with the statements of the Minister of Transport? Is that why the Prime Minister refused to make any specific promises to the shipyard workers in Lévis during the last election campaign?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are extremely aware of how important MIL Davie shipyards are to the Quebec region.

As the hon. member knows full well, both the federal government and the Quebec government have received a business plan and we are prepared to consider it as part of a long-term plan for the commercial viability of MIL Davie.

However, I have no doubt that the hon. member agrees with the following statement: "I hope that this policy, which calls for the rationalization of shipyards, will adhere to the fundamental principle which the government has always defended, that is the principle of free enterprise. Any other approach would only lead to lame duck solutions, and this would be to the detriment of a shipyard that already enjoys a competitive position".

These words were spoken by his colleague, the hon. member for Richelieu.

Health Care

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

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

In my home province of Alberta there are some creative alternatives to the problems of the health care system. For example, the world renowned private Gimbel Eye Clinic provided cataract surgery to 3,500 people last year. That is one-quarter of the cataract surgery done in Alberta.

In her zeal to enforce the three-decade old Canada Health Act does the minister propose that 25 per cent of cataract patients line up in a longer line?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight here. When people go to the Gimbel Eye Clinic they pay a facility fee. It costs approximately $1,000 for a person to go there.

What this means is that a person who has money can get the cataract surgery ahead of others, but the person who really needs it and probably does not have the money has to wait a lot longer.

What does that $1,000 do? Does it add to hospitals? Does it help the system do a better job? Does it foster better utilization of what we have in place? No. It allows someone to get richer.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let me debunk the myth that these are wealthy people going to the Gimbel Eye Clinic. These are senior citizens, citizens who cannot see, cannot watch television and cannot read. They are not rich. They are poor.

The message the Minister of Health is giving us is that she cares more about the law of the land than the health of the land, and that is wrong.

Quebec's Chief Electoral Officer

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last night at a $250-a-head Liberal fund raising cocktail party in Quebec City, the Minister of Foreign Affairs publicly attacked the credibility of Quebec's Chief Electoral Officer. He described Mr. Côté's warning with respect to federal parties' involvement in the next campaign as a biased and partisan attack.

[The Speaker]

These questions do not deal with the administrative functions of the government. Perhaps the hon. member could rephrase his question so that it refers to these functions; his question would then be in order. The hon. member for Portneuf.

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, do you not think that the minister should realize that he is going against the commitment made by the Prime Minister on Tuesday that his government would respect Quebec's election law and that his attack is petty and contradicts what the Prime Minister promised, a petty attack against the Chief Electoral Officer who, as you will agree, oversees a fundamentally important institution in the democratic life of Quebec?

[The Speaker]

I am sorry but in my opinion this question does not deal with the purely administrative functions of the minister who is here. I think the question is out of order. If the hon. member has another question, would he please ask it?

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

I have already asked two questions. Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister had been here, I would have been happy to ask him a question, but he is not here.

Rwanda

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Rosedale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs and it concerns Rwanda.

Canada's reputation in Africa is very good. Therefore, why not use our good offices with international institutions, particularly the Organization of African Unity, to establish a humanitarian corridor and allow the 20,000 people currently stranded in Kigali to leave and seek refuge in Tanzania, until the situation stabilizes and the slaughter ends?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to answer a question which concerns my department and which is asked pursuant to the rules of this House.

I want to confirm to the hon. member that our official in Addis-Abeba made representations to the Organization of African Unity, asking it to get more involved in finding ways to help a population decimated by this totally unacceptable civil war.

I can assure the hon. member that Canada is prepared to participate in a humanitarian mission in that part of the world, which needs it badly.

Young Offenders

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

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

Four years ago a young offender by the name of Danny Perrault was convicted of manslaughter in youth court and received a three-year sentence. Last year he was transferred to minimum security in an adult provincial institute to serve a sentence for being unlawfully at large from the youth detention centre.

Mr. Perrault walked away from the minimum security facility and before being arrested he committed a brutal sexual assault. Earlier this year he received a 14-year sentence for that crime, which he is appealing on the grounds the judge gave undue consideration to the protection of society.

Will the minister send an unequivocal message to the Canadian legal profession, as well as to the Canadian public, that the protection of society is a primary concern of the criminal justice system?

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

Mr. Speaker, there are three points in response.

First, as the hon. member knows, because I have said as much in the House, we propose to bring forward specific changes to the Young Offenders Act within the coming weeks as we undertook to do during the election campaign in order to deal more effectively with crimes of serious violence. The steps we will propose will be intended in great part to meet the concerns addressed by the hon. member in her question.

Second, as to the facts of the specific case, I ask the hon. member to bear in mind that while that issue is raised in the appeal, the statute as it exists at present provides expressly that protection of society is one of the governing principles of the Young Offenders Act and is to be taken into account.

Third, we do not think for a moment that violent crime is going to be resolved in this society by tinkering with statutes or changing acts. The fact of the matter is that the criminal justice system itself is not going to end violent crime. It only deals with the consequence of underlying social problems. It is crime prevention that must have at least the equal focus of the House of Commons.

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

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Solicitor General.

It was recently reported that despite the fact Danny Perrault has twice terrorized the greater Vancouver area by being unlawfully at large, current parole legislation would permit him to go on unescorted day parole as early as December this year.

Is the minister prepared to change the parole legislation to ensure the Canadian public that protection of society is a primary concern of the criminal justice system?

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

Mr. Speaker, I have already indicated to the House and to the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs that I intend to bring forward legislation very soon to update the parole system and the correction system in light of a number of public concerns.

In that connection I want to confirm what I have already said: The priority will continue to be the protection of the public.

Regional Development

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will address my question to the Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec on the off-chance that he will have something to say today.

The government, which told us yesterday that it has already spent $6 million on studies regarding the high-speed train, is hiding behind some future study to avoid taking position on the HST project, or even approving it in principle. The government showed its lack of interest in VIA Rail's proposal.

How can the government, which claims to make job creation a priority, show so little interest in a major project that could create some 120,000 jobs in a high technology sector?

[Joe Fontana, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, in answer to the member's question with regard to VIA, yesterday the Prime Minister as well as the Minister of Transport indicated to the House that the $6 million report that is awaited and being done by three levels of government, the Quebec, Ontario and federal governments, is due some time this summer.

At that point the government will study the opportunities and the alternatives available to it to look at the very intriguing project of high speed rail.

We are not discarding anything, but it would be premature to say anything at this point until such time as the study was complete. Then we would be willing to work with all members of the House to see whether or not it is viable and feasible for the country.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is what you get for trying too hard.

Will the Prime Minister recognize that the HST project, considering the type of equipment required and the type of jobs created, fits perfectly in a strategy for the reconversion of the military industry, which is a commitment made by the Liberal Party in its red book and that is yet to be fulfilled?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois constantly talks about the need to co-operate with the provinces. The high speed train is a project we are looking at closely with the governments of Quebec and Ontario, and this is why these studies are necessary. Consequently, if we are to follow the advice of the Bloc, we should wait for the results of the studies and review these very carefully. As the member for Windsor, I can assure you that I have a real interest in this issue.

Unemployment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development.

It was reported in the Globe and Mail that the government paid out $440 million in unemployment insurance benefits due to fraud, abuse and mistakes in 1993. An internal investigation and control audit identified a study which pointed to a better focus on who abuses UI, but the use of this focus was prohibited because it contravened the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Will the parliamentary secretary confirm that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which was set up to protect law abiding Canadians from abuse by government, is once again being used to protect criminals at the expense of ordinary and law abiding Canadian citizens?

[Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Liberal, Secretary of State (Training and Youth)]

Mr. Speaker, as you well know the people on this side of the House are the architects of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we have a great deal of respect for the charter. Everything that the government undertakes does reflect that.

In reply to the question, that is a very specific question on which the minister has taken action. Of course everything we do upholds the charter. The full weight of the charter stands.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, I have notice of two questions of privilege which I am going to hear.

I would appeal to all members in putting forth their points of privilege to be reminded that privilege is very narrow in scope. I would ask hon. members to identify the point of privilege which has in some way been impeded so that I might get a better idea of just what is the point.

I go first to the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs on a point of privilege

Privilege

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I fully understand your desire to ensure that all members of this House enjoy the same privileges. I raise this question because I believe my privileges as a member of this House were breached during Question Period.

As House Leader for the Official Opposition, the member for Roberval should be familiar with the Standing Orders and should know that these prevail during Question Period. The fact that he would put questions to a minister concerning a field for which he is not responsible is not, in itself, an abuse of his right to ask questions since another minister, the responsible minister, may answer the question.

Where I feel my privileges were breached during Question Period, and I would think the same was true for the Minister of Finance, was not when opposition members rose and put questions to us, knowing full well that we could not answer them because they were not related to our ministerial responsibilities. Other ministers simply took it upon themselves to answer the questions.

I feel my privileges were breached when, in the preamble to their questions, both the member for Roberval and the member for Laurier-Sainte-Marie made some gratuitous statements to the effect that as a member and a minister from the province of Quebec, I was avoiding answering the question and leaving this task up to another minister from the province of Ontario.

It is totally unacceptable to allege dereliction of duty on the part of a member of this House. By making such an allegation, the members for Roberval and Laurier-Sainte-Marie were hoping to cast in a negative light my work as a minister and as a member of this House who defends the interests of his constituents.

In conclusion, I ask that you reflect upon this situation and review the questions put earlier by the opposition. I think it is important that you check the blues. As the saying goes, when you lie long enough, the lie becomes the truth.

[The Speaker]

I will certainly reread the blues and Hansard.