House of Commons Hansard #237 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tax.

Topics

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gaston Leroux Bloc Richmond—Wolfe, QC

Not by using blackmail.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Liberal Saint-Maurice, QC

Mr. Speaker, since when is the truth blackmail? Since when is telling people that their economic and political future is at risk blackmail?

We are telling the truth. We are not looking for trick questions with "virages and mirages". We want to tell Quebecers the truth. We have proved in Canada that we can live together, even if we do not all speak the same language or have the same colour skin. I am delighted to see the best example of what we can do in Canada in our gallery today: hockey players who worked as a team.

They have proven they can become the best in the world, French and English, but all of them proud Canadians.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is distressing to note that the Prime Minister is prepared to use every means to ensure his truth wins, including standing behind documents that advocate blackmailing business.

The Prime Minister persists in claiming this is perfectly normal. Imagine, it is perfectly normal for Industry Canada to keep the political opinions of the heads of Quebec business on file. The Prime Minister thinks it is perfectly normal for a government document to describe ways to armtwist Quebec businesses into voting the way the Prime Minister wants them to.

When the Industry Canada document identifies the political affiliation of a number of heads of Quebec businesses, when it lists the subsidies granted them, when funding cuts to Spar, Pratt & Whitney or Canadian Marconi are threatened, how can this still be claimed to be a simple matter of economics and not a political matter for the special unit of the Prime Minister's office?

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, quite frankly, the people in the Bloc Quebecois are really desperate. Two days ago we were being accused of giving Quebec nothing for research and development.

Do you recall, hon. members, Mr. Speaker?

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yes.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Liberal Saint-Maurice, QC

We were not doing enough. Now we are doing too much, because we told the people of Quebec that these industries developed thanks to the presence of the federal government. The federal government has been giving subsidies to these businesses for 25 years. They are not being given because of an upcoming referendum. Twenty-five years ago we developed these programs of assistance to industry, which have resulted, in certain sectors, in Quebec workers being able today to sell their products worldwide.

This is why the heads of business who succeeded, with the help of the federal government, in developing these businesses want to keep them for the benefit of people working there.

Mr. Beaudouin probably has a pretty solid bank account, but if a disaster strikes, it will not be he who suffers, it will be the the families of people working in his plants. These are the people we want to protect, rather than leap into the void in the adventure that these folks here are proposing for Quebec. Quebecers know they are living in Canada, the best country in the world, and on October 30, they will vote for Canada.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister would like to talk research and development, he should take note and acknowledge before the cameras and before this House that the document prepared by his officials confirms the figures quoted by the official opposition last week to the effect that only 17 per cent of all research and development is done in Quebec, when the figure should be much higher than that. It should be at least 30 per cent.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, it is not desperation when we call for candour and a clear statement from the Prime Minister, an admission he should be making.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, Oh.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

The Speaker

The question please.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

In a democratic society such as ours, how can the Prime Minister find it normal and try to tell the House that a group of officials in the federal government's special operations unit, connected with his office, is systematically violating the charter of rights and freedoms by classifying the heads of Quebec businesses according to their political affiliation?

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, our request was not very complicated. We simply asked officials to tell us the truth about federal involvement in Quebec businesses.

It is very important for them to know, because we want people to know the truth. We did not do as the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois did and say: "We will come up with a winning question". Not a real question, a winning question. They did not want to tell Quebecers they are separatists. The leader of the Bloc Quebecois, the Leader of the Opposition, told the Americans, because they do not understand what the word "souverainiste" means, and besides, it is not in the French dictionary-

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Liberal Saint-Maurice, QC

It is in the new Quebec dictionary which has not been approved by the Académie Française.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Liberal Saint-Maurice, QC

For the first year, because we silenced them a few times recently.

The leader of the Bloc Quebecois said to the Americans: "I am a separatist". But he did not have the courage to go to Lac-Saint-Jean or Trois-Rivières or Rouyn-Noranda or Montreal and say: "I am a separatist". Everyone knows I am a Canadian and that I will still be one on October 31.

National DefenceOral Question Period

October 4th, 1995 / 2:30 p.m.

Reform

Jim Hart Reform Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC

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

Both the Canadian people and our armed forces deserve better than the culture of cover-up which has taken hold of the Department of National Defence. It seems that every day we discover new evidence of deception within the DND hierarchy. Access to information documents are forged. Police investigations are obstructed. Evidence is destroyed.

We have warned the Minister of National Defence repeatedly, yet he has adopted a hear no evil, see no evil attitude and continually expresses confidence in his senior officials. Canadians have lost confidence.

When will the Prime Minister recognize the chronic systematic failure of the leadership in the Department of National Defence?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I think Canada is very well served by a very good Minister of National Defence.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Reform

Jim Hart Reform Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is just like the defence minister. He is hiding behind camouflage. The failure is in leadership and it begins at the top.

The most basic principle of parliamentary democracy requires the minister to take responsibility for the decisions of his officials.

Why should we be surprised when officers in the Canadian forces chain of command begin passing the buck? This is an example set by the minister.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Who is calling the shots in the Department of National Defence? When will he appoint a minister who will take responsibility for the defence department?

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bonavista—Trinity—Conception Newfoundland & Labrador

Liberal

Fred Mifflin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member, the critic for the third party, he is suggesting there have been cover-ups.

Let me just tell him, his party and the House that it was this government that commissioned the inquiry into the Somalia events and the deployment of the Canadian forces. It was this government that made all the documents, every single document related to that inquiry, open to the public. It was this government that made available and encouraged members of the Canadian forces to appear in front of the commission and to do everything they could to bring light to the commission.

This government has not just been open; it has been terribly open.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Reform

Jim Hart Reform Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC

Mr. Speaker, terrible is the correct response for sure.

I remind the parliamentary secretary that external inquiries are not the question. It is the question of the internal inquiries where cover-ups, corruption and mismanagement are the daily practice at DND.

The Prime Minister knows the Canadian Armed Forces has served the country with honour. He knows that his minister has lost the respect of Canadians and has entirely lost control of his department.

Why does the Prime Minister refuse to demand the resignation of the Minister of National Defence who consistently demonstrates poor judgment and flees not only from his responsibilities but from questions in the House.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Saint-Maurice Québec

Liberal

Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I think the parliamentary secretary very eloquently explained the situation.

When we formed the government there was this problem which was created before we came into government that was causing a lot of problems. We decided to get to the bottom of it.

There were some very difficult decisions to be made. For example, when we had to decide to dismantle the airborne regiment it was not easy to do. I think it was the right decision. Now all the files are available to everybody and an inquiry has been named that will look at every document.

It is public. The press is there. How can we be more open than that? All the documents are there.

The incident in Somalia occurred before we formed the government but there was a desire by the public to get to the bottom of it and the commission will get to the bottom of it. It will make recommendations. If there is some need for changes in the way decisions are made in defence, we will change them. But so far so good.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Jean Chrétien Liberal Saint-Maurice, QC

Yes, yes. There is an inquiry and the minister has made available everything required by the commissioners. It is a public inquiry and we will wait for the results. After that if there is a need for changes we will make them, but first we will let the inquiry do its job.

National DefenceOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

The Speaker

I would ask colleagues to keep the questions and the answers short.

Industry CanadaOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, in the secret Industry Canada document it is stated that Oerlikon will likely adopt a federalist position in private, but that its public position will be determined by its head office instead. We also know that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs has recently been in touch with that company.

Can the minister assure us that neither he nor any member of his staff has used the fallout benefits from the armoured vehicle construction contracts to pressure Oerlikon to position itself on the No side, as recommended in the secret Industry Canada document?