Debates of May 25th, 1994

Immigration

[The Speaker]

One day we have Shakespeare and now we have poetry. Did the hon. minister withdraw? He did. The hon. minister of immigration.

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, York West, ON]

Very clearly, yes. I forgot the question.

[The Speaker]

Perhaps the member could ask his second question.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted to ask the question again for the minister.

My question to the minister was how can he justify talking tough and at the same time create an all new level of bureaucracy to pave the way for failed asylum seekers to stay in Canada?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, upon becoming Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, one of the first things I asked NGO representatives to do on a non-remunerative basis, on a very quick basis, was try to put together a report of recommendations on how we can better deal with the automatic review and the humanitarian and compassionate review under the immigration refugee board. There was concern because it lacked clarification and it lacked definition. I have accepted the premise of the report.

Upon accepting the premise of the report I believe it is logical in the interim to allow those individuals since 1993 when the automatic review started to have a review of their cases to ensure that through that lack of clarity those individuals did receive a fair determination.

That has absolutely nothing to do with those cases of criminality that do not deserve the compassion or the tolerance of our system.

We will have a bill in this House before we leave for the summer to deal with precisely that issue.

[The Speaker]

A very short supplementary question.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we are concerned about the millions of legitimate refugees who are languishing all over the world, many close to death.

This minister is making it easy for the migrants who have the economic wherewithal to travel to Canada and claim asylum. We are concerned about queue jumpers.

Will this minister admit that under his supervision the inland acceptance rate has shot up 12 per cent and that inland asylum seekers are jumping the queue and straining our ability to accept desperately needy refugees from abroad?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, this government's red book was very clear. It places a great deal of evidence on overseas selection. As the hon. member alludes to, it is cost efficient but more important goes precisely to the matter of those who are in the refugee camps who are true refugees.

The reality of the 1980s and 1990s is that all over the world, not only Canada, these migrants are on the move. Refugees are no longer waiting in the camps for our visa officers and so they are coming to our country. That has necessitated the international community and all its member states to try and have an inland determination system. You cannot move the clock back and

pretend that in this day and age of technology and transportation people will not move.

We are trying to make that system the best we can so that we can give sanctuary to the true refugee, and the false has no business applying as a refugee.

Fisheries

[Jean Payne, Liberal, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

On May 12 amendments to the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act received royal assent. This legislation will allow Canada to take action against foreign fishing vessels fishing contrary to conservation measures on the Grand Banks outside Canada's 200-mile limit.

Can the minister advise this House when and how we can expect to see this measure enforced?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, the regulations to bring the new act into force were approved by cabinet this week and will come into effect the week of May 30.

All stateless and all flag of convenience vessels are being notified of the new legislation. We are already receiving indications as a result of boardings that have taken place over the last few days that many of these vessels will leave voluntarily. We hope that all vessels will leave voluntarily because those that do not will be seized and charged under a new Canadian law.

Contracting Out

[Bernard St-Laurent, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we learned from a press release issued by the Public Service Alliance of Canada that the federal government has considerably increased its spending in several departments by using the services of outside contractors. Between 1984 and 1992, contracting out increased by 207 per cent for National Health, 247 per cent for Supply and Services and a full 628 per cent for Customs and Excise Canada.

My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. How can the minister justify freezes and cuts in the public service, when contracting out has increased so phenomenally in recent years?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, of course those are actions which were taken by the past government. This government is reviewing the contracting procedures.

Not all of the contracting out is for work that could be done by the public service. Where it could be done by the public service, we would want to examine that. We want to make sure the taxpayers' dollars are spent in the most efficient and effective way. If it can be done better in house, fine. In some cases however, it would be justified to contract out.

We are reviewing that matter. We will also ask the government operations committee to review that matter together with the Treasury Board.

Agriculture

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Vegreville, AB]

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

About three weeks ago a joint agriculture and transportation subcommittee met to deal with the issue of grain movement problems in Canada. The result of these meetings was a letter of recommendation presented to the ministers of transportation and agriculture.

Why has there been no government action resulting from these recommendations?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport and I have received the letter from the subcommittee on agriculture and transport.

In addition to considering that letter ourselves at a departmental level, we referred the contents of that letter to a group of grains industry senior representatives at a meeting which I called in Winnipeg on May 16. All of the subject matter contained in the letter is now the subject of a variety of working groups being undertaken by the grains industry representatives together with government.

I have asked those representatives to have a report to me no later than next Monday in terms of the type of actions which can be implemented quickly in this crop year. This is to make sure that our grain transportation difficulties are resolved as much as that is humanly possible and further to make sure that this country does not get into that kind of problem again in a future crop year.

Employment

[Audrey McLaughlin, NDP, Yukon, YT]

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

Today a report was released that indicated young families in this country are living in conditions of poverty not seen since the Depression.

According to a departmental document leaked yesterday, the government is prepared to spend over $1 million on what can only be called self-promotion of the social policy review-not doing it, but promotion of the social policy review.

I would like to ask the minister if he would take those funds, over $1 million, and put them into job creation for these young families that are quickly sinking into poverty.

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the question.

There have been no million dollars assigned. That was partly a figment of imagination put forward by one of her colleagues. We have not made any decisions about any communications strategy or what it would cost.

I think the hon. member would be the first one to acknowledge that in putting forward a number of proposals for reform of social programs we have to make every effort possible to have a wide range of Canadians involved. This includes young families who are very much affected by the economic conditions of today. That means we have to find ways of reaching out to them.

I can assure the hon. member that one of our primary objectives and concerns is how we can improve the position of young families, especially the children of young families, which must be the concern of every Canadian. To do that we will reach out on a very broad based consultation using the committee of this Parliament to do that. We will provide the most resources possible to meet that very problem which was highlighted in the report.

South African Elections

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Secretary of State (Latin America and Africa)]

Mr. Speaker, in April I had the privilege of leading the Canadian delegation to the elections in South Africa, that historic moment in time. It is my pleasure today to table, in both official languages, the report of that delegation's experience in South Africa.

Canada Communication Group

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, under the auspices of tabling of documents I would like to table for the benefit of the House the audit report of the Canada Communication Group, in both official languages, as well as the Canada Communication Group audit action plan prepared in both official languages.

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions.

Rwanda

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Secretary of State (Latin America and Africa)]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a few words today on the subject of Rwanda.

The massacres that have engulfed Rwanda since April 6 have already cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of children, women and men, while millions of others are streaming out of the area or country in terror.

The needs of displaced families and those stranded in their urban homes are increasing as time goes on. Fresh food is not readily available. Stocks of medical supplies are rapidly being depleted. And the lack of clean water is complicating an already explosive situation.

Sanitation and lack of access to clean water have been the most serious problems facing displaced people in urban areas in Rwanda and has also been a threat to the refugees in camps in Burundi and Tanzania.

Health problems are also escalating, mainly respiratory infections, diarrhea and malaria, which have been traditional ailments in refugee camps.

Shortly after the Rwandan conflict broke out Canada assumed a leadership role. First of all, Canada's Department of National Defence operates the only relief flights going into Kigali. Second, CIDA has promptly responded to appeals by the Red Cross and international non-government organizations for emergency aid to assist those in desperate need.

Canadian aid amounting to $4 million has already flowed into Rwanda through emergency organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders.

In addition to this the UN peacekeeping forces in Rwanda are currently under the direction of a Canadian, Major-General Romeo Dallaire, who has requested and obtained an increase in UN troops and an enlarged mandate in order to protect humanitarian operations.

Canada pressed the Security Council of the United Nations in order to have the UN more actively engaged in a search for a resolution of this disastrous conflict.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs has taken the initiative of asking for a special session of the UN Human Rights Commission. At this very moment this special session is addressing the situation in Rwanda on an urgent basis.

After consultation with Canadian NGOs last week I am pleased to announce today on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs that Canada will contribute $7.606 million in supplementary humanitarian assistance to the victims of this terrible conflict in Rwanda. This new contribution will be allocated as follows: $4.856 million, representing 64 per cent of the envelope, will go to nine Canadian non-governmental organizations operating in Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda and Zaire; the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies will receive $750,000 in Uganda and Tanzania; and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees will receive $2 million for its activities in Tanzania.

These CIDA funds will help fulfill basic needs like drinking water, sanitation, shelter and health care. Our aid workers and military personnel are doing their very best to maintain a lifeline to the victims of this tragedy. Canada is determined to continue to support their efforts through the UN system, the Red Cross movement and Canadian non governmental organizations operating in the region.

I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to those many Canadians who are part of the aid agencies, non-governmental organizations and peacekeeping forces in this region of Africa. Let us not forget that these women and men risk their lives every day in order to relieve the suffering of a truly tortured people.

I would also like to give recognition on behalf of the Government of Canada to those countries that have most generously welcomed the growing numbers of refugees that stream across their borders every day.

In conclusion, I want to join all Canadians in praying that the many efforts currently undertaken by the international community will lead to resolution of the conflict in Rwanda and that a peaceful dialogue will assume its place.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois welcomed the news today that the Canadian government has decided to provide additional humanitarian aid for the victims of the conflict that is now raging in Rwanda.

Only yesterday we urged the federal government to act as soon as possible on the resolution by the Security Council to reinforce the UN mission in Rwanda, and we welcome the additional contribution from CIDA announced this afternoon by the Secretary of State.

The additional emergency aid comes at the right time. We are confident that the amounts committed by Canada will help Canadian non-governmental organizations in Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda and Zaire, as well as the International Federation of Red Cross Societies and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, which are also active in Tanzania and Uganda.

There is an escalating need for so many things. There is a shortage of food, drinking water and medical equipment. Public hygiene is a problem, as is the disease spreading through the refugee camps.

The Bloc Quebecois wishes to take this opportunity to commend the courage and invaluable contribution of civilians and military personnel from Canada and Quebec who are working over there with relief organizations to alleviate the suffering and help meet these needs.

Uganda has also requested the help of the international community to remove the thousands of corpses of Rwandans civilians which are rotting in Lake Victoria. A member of the government put it in the following terms, and I quote: "The situation is horrible. Thousands of bodies are caught in the marshes surrounding the many islands in the lake, and we do not have the equipment to remove them".

Meanwhile, mortar attacks prevent relief organizations from getting food from the warehouses to feed the thousands of civilians living under UN protection.

Today, according to a news release, two scheduled humanitarian flights were cancelled because a Canadian C-130 was hit by a bullet. According to the same news release, UNICEF expects malnutrition to become a problem within the next two weeks.

That is why last week, the UN Security Council authorized the deployment of an additional 5,500 peacekeepers. The UN mission in Rwanda will also be responsible for the safety and protection of displaced persons, refugees and civilians who are at risk, which will include the creation and maintenance, where possible, of secure humanitarian zones.

Ghana, Ethiopia and Senegal have each committed 800 soldiers. It is reported that they may not have the necessary equipment, including armoured vehicles, take their position

between the opposing Rwandan forces which have been fighting since early April.

As yet, there has been no response from the international community, so that the actual deployment of the peacekeepers may well take several weeks.

Meanwhile, the killing continues, and according to the latest UN estimates, more than 500,000 people have died and hundreds of thousands are refugees.

Will the Department of Foreign Affairs take part in reinforcing the UN mission in Rwanda? The Secretary of State did not answer that question today.

Canada has a very important role to play in Rwanda. CIDA's response to requests for emergency assistance by the UN and non-governmental organizations is part of that role, and we welcome that decision.

Today, at an emergency meeting of the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva, several countries are calling for punitive action against the perpetrators of the slaughter in Rwanda and for international action to put an end to the killing. We can only hope that peace will be restored as soon as possible in that country.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Rwanda situation has opened the eyes of many across the world to the incredible obstacles that the international community must face in the days to come.

The civil war in Rwanda is certainly of incredible concern to Canada. Our leadership role in international relief demonstrates our deep concern for the peoples of the world.

Unfortunately we have witnessed the civil war become ten times worse in only the last few weeks. The estimated casualties have ranged from 500,000 dead, 500,000 wounded and two million refugees. The largest refugee camp in the world now exists in Tanzania where over 300,000 refugees are taking shelter from the massacres in Rwanda.

The inability of the factions in Rwandan society to settle their differences and establish effective government is no longer an issue facing Rwanda alone, nor is it an issue solely for Africa. Rather, it is an issue for the international community and we must step up and face it.

To some degree we have done this. Nearly every major world relief organization is operating either in Rwanda or in the neighbouring countries in order to assist the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from this area.

We have great respect for the individuals from all over the world who are there doing what they can to make a difference in this war torn place.

We also hold in high esteem Canadians who operate the only flights going into Kigali. I can accurately say that we are all proud of the role Canada plays in relieving international tensions and handling international traumas.

The position of CIDA on the forefront of this situation is highly respected and appreciated by many in the international community. A comprehensive understanding of the role Canada is playing requires the study of our goals and methods in this region.

It is clear that we all desire to see a country that could be united with political and economic stability.

We must play a role in foreign countries. However, we must make the decision making process much more transparent. We cannot operate in an ad hoc arrangement and Canadians are demanding accountability when it comes to our decisions on programs like this, particularly with regard to aid.

It is hard for me to really understand what is happening in Rwanda, as I was fortunate enough to visit this country; a rich country in terms of its natural scenery, its wild animals and, yes, its people. I will always remember those market scenes of people smiling and happy, trading their goods, everybody with a baby on their back. It is difficult to understand how that could change. I guess it really demonstrates how fragile all democracies or all types of situations are.

In summary, I would applaud the statements that the secretary of state made. However, I would ask that we always remember the accountability. We must provide the criteria so that the people of Canada understand what we are doing in such aid projects as this.

Canada Communication Group

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this day I released the audit report of the Canada Communication Group.

As some hon. members may recall, I requested that an independent audit be conducted as a result of allegations made by suppliers, members of Parliament and concerned citizens on possible conflicts of interest in the contracting practices of the Canada Communication Group.

After listening to suppliers, I decided to act quickly to get the facts out in the open. That is why Deloitte and Touche were asked in March to come in and examine the Canada Communication Group's contracting practices. This impressive audit was conducted in just six weeks.

It is clear from the audit report that the Canada Communication Group's role as both a supplier and a contracting agent results in an inherent structural conflict of interest.

The auditors have recommended, and I have accepted as I have accepted all of the recommendations which have been put forward, that the Canada Communication Group procurement activities be transferred to the supply operations group within Public Works and Government Services Canada. This transfer is to be completed by August 1 of this year.

The decision to sever Canada Communication Group contracting arm from its service delivery component directly in my view addresses this finding of an inherent conflict of interest. The Canada Communication Group will continue to provide, however, a full range of services. However, the removal of the contracting activity eliminates both the potential for conflict of interest and a major irritant to suppliers across this country.

As well there are well over 150 employees at the Canada Communication Group whose lives will be affected by this decision. All affected will become employees directly of Public Works and Government Services Canada.

It must be noted that the auditors found the Canada Communication Group business practices to be consistent with its charter. Further, the auditors concluded that there was no evidence of illegal or fraudulent activities. The auditors also recommended that an advisory committee be established to look at the Canada Communication Group organizational status and its future evolution. This committee to be comprised of government and industry representatives will consult widely and extensively with all stakeholders in mapping out the future directions for the Canada Communication Group.

Officials are now finalizing the mandate of the committee and I expect to be able to name the members in the next few weeks and to have the final report from the committee some time in the very near future.

At the same time the Canada Communication Group in consultations with client departments, suppliers and central agencies is to develop and publish a policy and guidelines on conflict of interest. The advisory committee will review and approve the policy and determine how the policy is to be monitored for compliance.

I do not think that one can talk candidly about the Canada Communication Group without acknowledging its status as a special operating agency. I already noted at the Standing Committee on Government Operations that the concept of a special operating agency is an important one but should be reviewed. I am looking at the issue of special operating agencies with my colleague from the Treasury Board. We need to re-examine the purpose of special operating agencies and the type of government services which benefit most from being structured along those lines.

I fully expect that the special operating model as structured by the former government will come under further scrutiny and reviews which are now presently under way.

In closing, I want to assure all hon. members that their input on the review of future options for the Canada Communication Group will be welcomed. It is my hope and expectation that a full and frank discussion will evolve and that the Canada Communication Group and the Government of Canada will emerge even stronger as a result of this particular process.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I read the statement made by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services concerning the Canada Communication Group. Some elements sound vague and raise some very serious concerns.

As all stakeholders and certainly the minister himself knew, the outside firm Deloitte and Touche confirmed there was a conflict of interest in this special operating agency or SOA.

The minister either did not keep his eyes open or did not have the ability to review this matter himself, since it was an outside firm that made him see the light. In any case, it may be better this way since this firm only took six weeks to write its report whereas the minister would surely have taken six or twelve months if not more to do the same.

The first concern relates to the transfer of the Canada Communication Group's purchasing operations with all 150 employees affected to the supply operations arm of the department. Should this transfer exercise not be subject to an extensive review to rationalize departmental staff and resources?

The Bloc Quebecois periodically asks for a comprehensive review of public expenditures. Would it not be appropriate to take advantage of this adjustment to streamline spending and cut the waste of public funds?

Can the minister also assure us that the supply operations group within his department will be completely transparent and that the new status of the 150 employees will effectively stop any conflict of interest with the Canada Communication Group?

The announcement by the minister that an advisory committee will be set up to examine the status of the Canada Communication Group does not come as a big surprise to us. The Liberals have become the undisputed champions of advisory committees. We wonder whether ministers need their own staff since they always rely on advisory committees. Do ministers of this government have the authority to analyze, consult and make decisions on their own? Can they do the job themselves?

What guarantee do we have that this other advisory committee will not be made up of friends of the Liberals? On what basis and under what conditions will members of that committee be appointed? There are numerous concerns, Mr. Speaker.

I suggest to the minister that all members of the Standing Committee on Government Operations should sit on that committee. The minister should use a committee which already exists and whose members are MPs elected by the public. Instead of doing your usual show, I ask you, when the committee does its work, to open the books, to provide all necessary information, to invite your civil servants and let them express their views, and to consult all those interested in this issue. In this way, we will be able to shed some light on the issue and propose new options through a transparent and open process, as is the public's wish.

We are concerned by two other aspects in the minister's statement. While setting up an advisory committee, the minister is asking Communications Canada to develop and release a policy on conflicts of interest. Why is that not the committee's responsibility? Given its mandate, it is incumbent upon the committee to recommend such a policy. Again, more duplication of studies and consultation processes!

Finally, the minister says that he is reviewing the whole issue of Special Operating Agencies, including Communications Canada. What a mess, Mr. Speaker. The minister is looking at SOAs, the advisory committee is looking at a SOA, and the SOA is looking at itself. As far as we are concerned, this is pure improvisation.

Logic, intelligence, simplicity and common sense do not seem to be the forte of the minister responsible for SOAs.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to respond on behalf of the Reform Party to the minister's statement.

Before I do, however, I would like to mention that we did not get a copy of this report from his office until 90 minutes prior to this announcement. Since he knows that we are expected to respond directly after his statement in the House, and since his own party was scathing in its criticisms of such lack of information and lack of co-operation from the old government when it was in opposition, I would think that the minister would be particularly sensitive to the actions of his own people and would like to look into that in his own office.

One can imagine the righteous indignation from the minister if he were on this side of the House while the government delayed the release of a potentially embarrassing report.

In dealing with the audit report of the Canada Communication Group I will start by commending the minister for the quick turnaround in this audit. While we are happy that the government has moved on this issue, I cannot help but wonder why the government needed an audit in the first place to determine that as both supplier and contractor, CCG was in a conflict position. That appears to me, and I would hazard to say to most of the country, to be self-evident.

This audit was moved up due to a series of complaints against CCG across the country from private sector companies that felt they were unable to compete fairly for government business. These are the types of rumours that have circulated about CCG in recent press clippings.

First, there was a director general attempting to contract work to the private sector. CCG co-ordinates the bidding process. The winning bid selected by CCG is CCG. The agency comes in just below the lowest private sector bid. Understandably all sorts of questions about insider knowledge emerged.

Second, CCG is one of the bidders for a substantial contract with the federal government and it wins with the lowest bid. Only afterward is it known that CCG had a small advantage over the other firms in that it did not feel the need to include its employees as labour because CCG did not have to pay them for the work on the specific project since they already had a federal salary.

One area the minister did not address with any substance deals with the whole issue of special operating agencies or SOAs of which CCG is one. There has been much criticism that these SOAs create unfair competition for those wanting government contracts.

More and more, companies are finding themselves facing off against SOAs for contracts within government and even outside government. Several national industry associations have said that they have been deluged with complaints from their members. Companies have complained that these SOAs receive insider information because of their privileged position within government that can assist them in winning contracts.

Others complain it is not fair that SOAs, which are essentially subsidized by taxpayers' money, are allowed to bid against them in the first place. Still others complain that it is not fair that SOAs are winning contracts with universities and municipalities. Finally, some wonder if allowing government departments to compete for contracts internationally is such a good idea.

A number of questions need to be answered with regard to SOAs, none of which the minister has addressed today. Are there any rules governing SOAs when they find themselves competing with the private sector? Each SOA runs according to a private agreement worked out between it and the department.

Technically, when government departments offer to do work for another government department, the transaction does not fall in the category of contracting. It is called the provision of professional services according to one analyst. When SOAs aggressively seek out work that might have gone to public

tender, it is not competing for contracts because all SOAs are still 100 per cent owned by their departments.

Also the reason why SOAs such as CCG are bidding on contracts with municipalities and universities is they have literally interpreted the standard rule that work can be sought within government to include any level or institution of government. As for international contracts with foreign governments, government departments compete for these because they feel they as government often have the best chance of securing work.

The whole issue of SOAs has not been adequately addressed today by the minister other than his tepid reference to another government study on conflict of interest and some new nebulous review by his department and the Treasury Board on the role of SOAs. This needs much more serious attention in our opinion.

In reference to the auditor's report itself, the auditor has made five major recommendations respecting these conflicts of interest. However of greatest interest to our party is a recommendation that either CCG be privatized, given crown corporation status or retain its special operating agency status but with revised goals and targets.

Our party has a bias toward privatization and in the case of CCG this option does bear exploring. In the interim, the minister has moved to put CCG's procurement arm under-