Debates of May 24th, 1994

Federalism

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

The best way to answer the question is to do what we are trying to do. That is to give good government to the people of Canada which is what they want, to reopen that type of debate, to talk about the values of Canada. I do it all the time. In fact I will have the pleasure of saying that to 1,000 people in Calgary this week. I said that in front of 12,000 people in Winnipeg last week. I will have another great occasion to say the same thing to a great crowd in Edmonton.

I say to everybody who listens to me that we have problems. Every country in the world has problems. It is not easy, but I would not change the problems of Canada with the problems of any other nation of the world. We live in the best nation in the world, the most generous country that exists with a tolerant society. It is a country that has such an open democracy we can tolerate the separatists in front of us who want to break up the country. You do not find a better country than Canada.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Defence Industry Conversion

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a study commissioned by the federal government concluded that over 10,000 defence industry jobs had been lost in Quebec since 1987. It also indicated that unless action is taken, 10,000 more jobs are in danger of disappearing within five years.

Given this alarming context, how can the Minister of Industry refuse to implement an emergency plan to put defence industries to alternate, civilian uses, thereby preserving thousands of jobs in Quebec?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate my hon. colleague on his article published in La Presse last week. At least he paid attention to the debates we had in this place the week before the recess.

It must be made very clear here that the Bloquists' understanding is that defence conversion requires massive subsidies to be paid to companies which also have shareholders and managers responsible for finding ways of succeeding. That is essential to helping us understand where they are coming from.

We will support defence conversion and DIPP is doing that. We also recognize the important role shareholders and company managers have in ensuring the success of their own enterprises. That is part of the system and it is part of defence conversion.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased, delighted really, to see that the hon. minister reads other material besides Shakespeare.

Considering that Bell Helicopter admitted to delaying a $40 million investment because the existing DIPP did not meet its needs, how can the minister continue to maintain that the program is adequate for companies seeking to move away from defence production? This is a concrete example of conversion. How can the minister help this company?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, in all honesty I believe $160 million a year which DIPP currently has is adequate to support a program of defence conversion.

I would like to point out as well to the hon. member that since this government was elected we have approved 41 DIPP applications. Of those, 39 were for civilian or dual use purposes. This in effect demonstrates that a defence conversion program is operating.

It is time the hon. member recognized the important contribution DIPP is making to firms across Canada, particularly in Quebec. Pratt & Whitney, Canadair and others have benefited in great measure by this government's program.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Bob Ringma, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Last Tuesday the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development suggested that the aboriginal people of Quebec would have the right to remain in Canada if Quebec separates. On Thursday the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development had misspoken and would soon clarify his remarks.

Can the Prime Minister tell this House which of his ministers speaks for the government on the subject of aboriginal people in Quebec?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, under the Canadian Constitution the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is the one responsible for natives in Canada.

Because there was a lot of debate about hypothetical questions, he gave a hypothetical answer. At that time I said we were all wasting our time. That was my answer.

We are talking about a hypothetical situation that will not exist. I do not want to spend my time on that because I want members of my cabinet and members of this Parliament to be preoccupied with the jobs that are needed for the Canadian people.

To speculate on what would happen, as Mr. Trudeau said one day: "If my grandmother had wheels, I would have been a bus". I do not want to speculate; I do not like if, if, if. I like to do things. What is important at this time is job creation and giving a good society and a lot of confidence to the Canadian people and Canadian investors so that everybody will be there.

I do not want to reply to hypothetical questions. It is not permitted by your rulings, Mr. Speaker. One cannot ask hypothetical questions in the House.

[The Speaker]

I want to thank the right hon. Prime Minister for pointing that out to me.

[Bob Ringma, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, following that hypothetical answer, I would like to try one more time with another one of the Prime Minister's ministers. The government House leader recently stated at a convention that the government had no policy regarding native self-determination in Quebec should separation occur.

Can the Prime Minister tell this House whether he has any strategy to deal with aboriginal people in Quebec so that all Canadians, including members of his own cabinet, will know how he intends to address this crucial issue?

[The Speaker]

I agree that the questions are getting into the more hypothetical stage. I will permit the Prime Minister to answer that question if he so desires.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, after 32 years in the House of Commons and in Parliament what happened to the Solicitor General? Rightly so. At that convention, he refused to reply to a hypothetical question.

Foreign Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Barely 48 hours after the global embargo imposed by the UN against the military regime in Haiti, it is reported that the junta is executing members of organizations supporting President Aristide. The terror campaign against them is intensifying.

Can the minister indicate what measures Canada has taken to enforce the global embargo and whether it intends to get actively involved to achieve the desired results without ruling out any option?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, in the last few days, I met with Mr. Caputo, the official representative of the UN Secretary General for the Haitian question, to discuss initiatives that could be taken to reinforce the complete blockade of Haiti and prepare for the return of President Aristide as soon as possible.

Of course, this must be done in co-operation with other countries and Mr. Caputo will meet with representatives of Haiti's four friends to establish a common position.

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

Mr. Speaker, I again ask almost the same question. Besides consulting with the three other countries that are friends of Haiti, can the minister tell us

whether Canada will intervene directly in the conflict in order to enforce the embargo?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, from a distance, it is very difficult for Canada to enforce this embargo.

One of the best-known ways to get around the embargo is through the border with the Dominican Republic. We cannot enforce this embargo at the border with the Dominican Republic. However, we have told the authorities that, if they want, we will help establish a United Nations force that could enforce this embargo along the border with the Dominican Republic.

Penitentiaries

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

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

Recently in my riding of Mission-Coquitlam two high risk prisoners, wrongly labelled low risk, walked away from Ferndale minimum security prison. They walked away either by walking out the front gate or by crossing the prisoner golf course and going over the four-foot fence.

Mission's mayor and council have requested an immediate public inquiry as to those prisoners' classification in being there. Because of the federal government's inaction to this point, the municipality is going to hold its own public inquiry.

Will the Solicitor General launch an immediate public inquiry into the whole classification system?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has raised a good point, but she is a bit late on it.

The Correctional Service of Canada's commissioner has already announced a national inquiry, not just into the circumstances of the escapes from Ferndale but into the situation involving minimum security institutions, including the approach to classification. This is already under way. I am sure it will do a good job in dealing with the concerns she has raised and which I fully understand.

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Solicitor General for his answer. He may be aware that I did contact his office and was waiting for a confirmation on just that question. I have not yet received it.

However, I am concerned that classification seems to be one of the areas where there is inconsistency. In making the term low risk, would the Solicitor General please check in his public inquiry as to how the classification comes about. That seems to be the problem why we have so many high risk prisoners with low risk classifications.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will draw the hon. member's point to the attention of the commissioner of corrections so that it can be taken into account in the national inquiry which is going on. I understand this is already intended, but I will make sure it is not overlooked in the inquiry. I think the inquiry is much needed and I look forward to its results.

Ethics

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

He said on several occasions that he intended to prepare a code of ethics for his government, to table before the end of June a bill on lobbyists and to name an ethics adviser.

Would the Prime Minister not agree that the proposed appointments to the Immigration and Refugee Board, without interviews, solely on the basis of their resumés, remind us of the urgency of the proposed legislation I just mentioned?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I said that we would proceed in these areas. We hope to be able to give a name to the Leader of the Official Opposition and the Leader of the Reform Party in the next few days. The bill on lobbyists will be tabled shortly after the person is appointed. We would like to consult with that person before introducing the bill, because we think it would be useful to have his or her opinion.

I hope we can agree shortly on an appointee, and that the promise will be fulfilled before the summer recess.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the meantime, does the Prime Minister not think that his Minister of Citizenship and Immigration would be well advised to postpone the appointment of 25 commissioners, at a salary of $85,000 each, without interviews, solely on the basis of their resumés?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the hon. member that the minister has proceeded with appointments since he has been a minister and has been praised across the land for the quality of people he has chosen to occupy these jobs.

Peacekeeping

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the United States is asking us to take part in the new United Nations peacekeeping mission in Haiti.

Canada, as usual, will probably participate and share the peacekeeping expenses. The United States profits from these ventures through the additional sale of arms. However, it refuses to pay its share of peacekeeping costs which now amount to over $1 billion.

What is the Canadian government doing to get the United States to honour its United Nations peacekeeping commitments?