Debates of Dec. 12th, 1995

Endangered Species Act

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislative proposal of the Minister of the Environment for an endangered species act.

In our diverse Confederation there is always a danger of government inaction simply because of the daunting prospect of complex, legal and political negotiations. To get things done someone has to have the nerve and energy to take a firm first step.

In the case of over 250 endangered species that do not know or care in which jurisdiction they live, it is most appropriate the federal government take the lead.

The minister has produced a detailed draft of an act that would protect endangered species. If necessary, I urge that she proceed alone with the legislation to the limit of her jurisdiction. However it is my hope that the provinces and territories will move quickly to join her.

Member For Churchill

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the honour and privilege of attending the sacred assembly presided by my colleague from Churchill. Although the themes of this assembly were reconciliation and spirituality, it reeked of politics.

We were quite surprised to read in the hon. member for Churchill's letter of invitation and to hear in his opening speech that the Great Creator was in favour of Canadian unity. The Bloc Quebecois denounced this unacceptable statement on Saturday and wishes to do so again in this House today.

The notion of spirituality transcends politics and the Great Creator has no use for national borders. The next step would have been to come straight out and say that the Creator is a Liberal.

Surveys

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

Mr. Speaker, registered voters in my riding were asked if a national referendum should be held on the reinstatement of the death penalty. The overwhelming response from 919 of over 1,000 voters was that a referendum should be held at the time of the next federal election.

In another initiative my constituents are being asked whether Quebec should be recognized in the Constitution as a distinct

society. In just two short days my constituents have rejected such recognition by a margin of 86 per cent. The survey will be ongoing until the end of December.

It would appear that the days of government imposing its will on the people are drawing to a long overdue close and direct democracy will allow them to be heard.

However members opposite need not take my word for it. All they have to do is ask their constituents, that is if Liberal members have the same belief in the values and principles of democracy as do Reform Party members.

Nuclear Disarmament

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, there is increasing concern among Canadians concerned about nuclear disarmament that the Canadian government, despite its official support of various treaties, is not as serious as Canadians want it to be about bringing an end to nuclear testing, about the proliferation of nuclear weapons and about the destruction of existing nuclear warheads.

The post cold war era was to be an opportunity for the world to put behind it the fear of nuclear war. The public has been lulled into thinking that significant progress is being made.

In reality, the nuclear club permits certain of its members like France and China to continue threatening the planet with nuclear testing. This same nuclear club, with which Canada is associated through NATO, also refuses to countenance the significant destruction or elimination of its nuclear capacity, thus encouraging other countries to seek such weapons.

The doomsday clock is being advanced once more. The Liberals need to wake up and show some courage on the issue instead of speaking out of both sides of their mouth, saying one thing at the UN and another thing through NATO.

The Late Harry Cavers

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on December 7, 1995, St. Catharines lost a great Canadian, the hon. Harry Cavers.

Mr. Cavers was born in St. Catharines in 1909. He practised law until joining the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve in the second world war, rising from ordinary seaman to lieutenant. After the war Mr. Cavers practised law as a partner in Cavers, Chown and Cairns.

He was elected as the member of Parliament for Lincoln in 1949 and again in 1953. He was the first Liberal elected in the area in 50 years. He was an effective representative of Lincoln for nine years and worked hard to make a difference for the area.

Following his time in the House of Commons, Harry Cavers returned to the legal community as a judge for Dufferin County. A former law partner, Mr. Roy Cairns, has spoken of Harry's fair-mindedness and ability to see both sides of an issue.

St. Catharines has lost an excellent ambassador and elder statesman who served his country well and was an inspiration to all those around him.

Our sympathy is extended to his daughter and her husband, Anne and John Carruthers, and their children, Megan and Meredith.

National Unity

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address what I believe to be the essence of Canadianism. We are ten provinces, two territories, numerous municipalities and many neighbourhoods, but above all we are Canada.

We are a nation that shares common values, a nation shaped by the challenges of nature, a nation forged by war but one that has fought for peace. We are people who have developed compassion and understanding for others in society. Most of all being Canadian means understanding that the issue is not whether we get a fair share of the pie but rather that the pie is shared fairly.

If we are to survive as a nation, those blessed by economic advantage must be willing to help those areas not so fortunate. That is the way it should be. I am proud to live in a society that cares for the least advantaged and whose people share their good fortune with their fellow Canadians.

In Canada, that is simply what we do.

Bank Act

[Rose-Marie Ur, Liberal, Lambton—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, under the 1992 legislation there will be a review of the Bank Act in five years or in 1997.

I have received many calls and briefs from insurance companies in my riding of Lambton-Middlesex that are very concerned, as I am, about the potential changes in the Bank Act that could give the very powerful banking sector the ability to retail insurance from its branches.

While it is important to have a strong banking system in Canada, I do not believe it is right or fair to other sectors of the financial services industry to allow the most powerful sector, the banks, to accumulate strength which would likely turn into a virtual monopoly.

As a government we have already acknowledged that many of the new jobs created in Canada over the last couple of years have come from small and medium size businesses.

Allowing banks into the retail insurance industry could decimate small insurance companies in Canada, many of which are policyholder owned and predominately serve rural communities, like those in Lambton-Middlesex.

Children As War Victims

[Maud Debien, Bloc, Laval East, QC]

Mr. Speaker, two million children have been killed, between four and five children crippled, and ten million psychologically scarred by the ravages of war over the past ten years.

That is what UNICEF says in its 1996 report released yesterday. Various conflicts around the world have left in their wake some horrifying and monstrous scenes in which children are all too often the victims.

Confronted with this sad finding, Western countries, including Canada, are forced to give serious thought to their moral obligations. For example, UNICEF does not hesitate to blame this sad situation in part on antipersonnel mines.

Yet Canada remains reluctant to dispose of its own mines as long as the other countries have not done so.

In the name of these children who are war victims, Canada should lead the way in eliminating these weapons of suffering.

Government Appointments

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, at a time when Canada is overburdened with old ideas and old institutions the government has come forward with far reaching, regressive veto legislation that will etch in stone for all time parliamentary anachronisms such as the current Senate.

The Prime Minister's outdated, outmoded, traditional political practice of stuffing that institution with patronage appointments has loaded this powerful unelected body with partisan failures, flatterers and pleaders of special interests.

Tomorrow I will be introducing my private member's bill that will give electors of a province a vote on who should be summoned to represent them in that chamber. It is absolutely vital that we remove porky patronage appointments from the Prime Minister's paws, if we are to have any true legitimacy in Canada's upper house.

Let us make no mistake. The Reform Party always has been and always will be driving toward true Senate reform, that of an effective, elected and equal Senate.

Waterton Glacier International Peace Park

[John Loney, Liberal, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Waterton Lakes National Park in the province of Alberta, together with the American Glacier National Park in Montana, was officially designated as a world heritage site by the United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization during a meeting held in Berlin last week. The name of this new world heritage site will be the Waterton Glacier International Peace Park.

Waterton Lakes National Park protects 528.8 square kilometres of land. The Canadian government established the park in 1895.

It is a great honour for the country that the outstanding universal value of the site has been recognized by the international community. It shares this designation with six other Canadian national sites and with other protected areas in the world such as Australia's Great Barrier Reef, the Equator's Galapagos Islands and Yellowstone.

Insurance Industry

[John Cannis, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I recently met with representatives of the Insurance Brokers Association of Ontario. This association represents over 8,000 licensed brokers plus support staff employed in over 1,100 offices contributing to local economies throughout Ontario.

These small business people have valid concerns about the possibility of chartered banks being permitted to aggressively enter the insurance business. On the surface it may appear to be just two industries in competition over a business segment, but it is much more than that. It is about the survival of many hundreds of small insurance brokerage firms. It is about the survival of thousands of Canadian jobs.

I implore the government not to alter the 1992 legislation which is working very effectively. The banks are raking in record profits. They have moved in on the brokerage industry. Now they want to move in on the insurance industry. What is next? It is time the little guy gets a break.

Quebec's Distinct Identity

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Vaudreuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative leader was quoted in the December 4 edition of Le Journal de Montréal as saying: ``The Progressive Conservative Party will support the government motion recognizing Quebec as a distinct society within Canada. This is a necessary first step in recognizing Quebec's identity within our federation''.

However, the day after our government passed this important motion in favour of Quebec, it is with sadness that the people of Quebec have realized that not all the federalist allies they were counting on were on board.

After so much energy was spent on having Quebec's distinct identity recognized when the Progressive Conservative Party was in office, it is a pity that not one Conservative member took part in the whole debate on this issue in this House.

They could have joined us in taking this major step toward recognizing Quebec within our federation, as the Conservative leader did enthusiastically throughout the referendum campaign.

Agriculture

[Jean-Guy Chrétien, Bloc, Frontenac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's rural regions voted yes in the October 30 referendum. Following that, the federal Minister of Agriculture showed up at the UPA congress and said that he got the message. This is quite the change, considering that the last federal budget dealt a direct blow to the agricultural sector.

Producers are asking that Quebec's programs not be tampered with, and that federal spending in the agricultural sector be spread fairly. The minister has his work all cut out, given that he only spends 10 per cent of his budget in Quebec, that he still managed to close three research centres in the province, including the one in La Pocatière, and that he also reduced dairy subsidies by 30 per cent.

I do not know what gimmick the minister will use to try to prove that Ottawa looks after Quebec's agricultural interests. But I do know that the facts speak for themselves and that agricultural producers are not dumb.

Penitentiaries

[Randy White, Reform, Fraser Valley West, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my statement is about this high powered committee consisting of the collections commissioner, parole board chairmen, deputy ministers of justice and the solicitor general's department. They feel there are problems, and these are some of the reasons.

They say that sentences are longer. Is that a problem? They also say that there are more challenging prisoners, the criminally challenged; increased periods of detention; a growing lifer group; an aging prison society; declining parole grant rates; and the toughening of laws.

Perhaps I can help the Liberal government. Why not look for new ways of doing things? Why not look at privatization of a couple of the prisons? What is wrong with double bunking? Why not restrict some of the ridiculous benefits like golf, project bleach, GST rebates for prisoners, prisoner's ability to sue and the ability to refuse work?

If the government does not like that, resign and let someone else with new ideas and courage take over.

Quebec's Distinctiveness

[Pierrette Ringuette-Maltais, Liberal, Madawaska—Victoria, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the member who, for a while now, has seemingly become a part time opposition leader paid us a rare visit yesterday. Unfortunately, the heir to the throne did not come to Ottawa to help build a better country. Nor did he come to protect Quebec's interests.

The Bloc leader came to Ottawa to lead his troops in the charge against Quebec and its distinct society status. Historians will remind future generations that Quebec separatists were always opposed to the recognition of a distinct status for their province, and that it is thanks to the federal government if such status was finally obtained.

Reform Party

[Brenda Chamberlain, Liberal, Guelph—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Reformers have told Canadians they would restore respect and decorum in the House of Commons.

Imagine the disappointment of Canadians, who believed their promise, following the shameful display of shouting, finger pointing and heckling during yesterday's vote on the Prime Minister's motion.

Canadians are still trying to get used to the idea that Reform's approach to national unity is voting with the separatists. Who could imagine the Reform Party's joining forces with the Bloc? Politics does make strange bed fellows.

We have finally found a promise Reformers have kept. They said they would do things differently in the House of Commons. What

they did not say is that it would be different from the promises they made to the people who trusted them. Their idea of different is unacceptable, unequalled and downright terrible behaviour.

Referendums

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, on the very day the government was boasting of having met its referendum promises by a simple inconsequential resolution on the distinct society, the Prime Minister was busy making unacceptable and antidemocratic statements, claiming that he reserved the right to use any means available to prevent another Quebec referendum.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Now that he realizes that his phoney offers do not satisfy Quebecers, and since he plans to use all means available to prevent another Quebec referendum, are we to take the Prime Minister's words to mean that the only hope remaining to him for winning the next referendum is to make up the rules himself?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the contradiction is immediately obvious. The hon. member says that I want to prevent a referendum, and then he refers to what I will do to win it. Either there will be a referendum or there will be none.

What I said yesterday is that we want a clear question. That is what democracy is all about. We do not need the Bloc to give us any lessons in democracy. As Michel Vastel said not too long ago, "The Bloc is a hereditary monarchy. When it comes down to it, eight people, six men and two women, decided how their leader would be chosen, eight people representing 0.007619 per cent of the total Bloc membership of 105,000".

We need no lessons in democracy from a party accused of all manner of funny business in the last Quebec referendum.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister wants to play it that way, I may remind him that he and his cabinet ministers were guilty of violating the Quebec Elections Act. To talk about democracy and refuse to recognize the results of a democratic vote is really pushing it.

The Prime Minister stated yesterday that 2.5 million citizens should not be allowed to determine the future of a country with a population of 30 million. Does this mean he denies the Quebec people the fundamental and inalienable right to determine their future?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, they have already done so twice. There have been two referendums in Canada in which Quebecers decided to vote in Canada.

All I said yesterday was that the rest of the country has a say in the future of that country. We have twice accepted the results of a referendum in Quebec, and democracy is being denied by those who refuse to take no for an answer.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that a politician of the Prime Minister's stature does not understand one cannot stop a people on their way to becoming economically independent.

How can the Prime Minister expect Quebecers to believe him when he says he kept the solemn commitments he made during the referendum campaign, when he changes his tune in English Canada and refers to his own commitments as three little promises of no consequence?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the promises I made go back a long way. Unlike the Bloc Quebecois, I voted for Charlottetown and for the distinct society. They voted against it. Since 1970, I have supported veto rights and the Victoria formula. That has always been the position of my party. In fact, I was merely confirming what our party has supported for a long time.

And talking about democracy, again their leader said on television a few days ago that they were going to take everyone by surprise. And when he was asked: "Do you intend to ask an honest question"? He said: "No, I will ask a winning question".

The only way to win honestly is to have an honest question, a question that everyone understands. In this way, there can be no confusion about the result.

Canadian National

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

Mr. Speaker, Paul Tellier has threatened to close the firm AMF in Montreal, if the union refuses to accept the conditions imposed by CN. The union and GEC Alsthom, the company trying to buy AMF, have almost reached an agreement, but CN is blocking any initiative that might lead to a settlement. At stake, let us not forget, are 1,300 direct jobs and 5,000 indirect jobs in southwest Montreal.

In view of the fact that CN's attitude in this matter could end up costing Montreal 6,300 jobs, does the Minister of Finance, responsible for regional development in Quebec, intend to intervene in this matter of importance to Montreal, the southwest part of Montreal, in his area, near his riding? Will he bring CN back to its senses?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague knows that the CN is now in the private sector. We have, however, been trying for months to find a solution for AMF. The CN had agreed to keep the plant open. Negotiations have been very long and hard, but I am confident, given the employees' attitude at the moment, that we will reach a solution.

We will follow this very closely. I know that my colleagues for the greater Montreal area are very interested in this. So are we. I hope that, at the last minute, all those involved in this matter will understand the importance, as the hon. member has mentioned, of keeping the plant in operation with all the jobs involved.

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

Mr. Speaker, since the federal policy on rail transport has always favoured western Canada, will the federal government, for once, make CN listen to reason or will it turn a blind eye?