Debates of Feb. 9th, 1995

National Defence

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, by all means, by all means. Considering the controversy around the regiment in Petawawa and the fact that this controversy has even led to the immediate disbanding of the regiment, how can the minister seriously say, two weeks after reading the report from the chief of defence staff, no less, how can he seriously say that yesterday he had no knowledge of the existence of a videotape and today, that he is not sure that the report from his chief of defence staff gives an accurate description of the content of the tape?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we have to understand the context of the question of the hon. member for Charlevoix yesterday.

He referred to the existence of a tape that was worse than the ones that were made public and which led to the dismantling of the regiment. I said yesterday and I say today that I have no evidence of that kind of tape being in existence.

However what I am saying is that in the report I got two weeks ago there was no reference to an initiation ceremony, nothing of that nature. There was reference to a welcoming party where the description I gave was applied.

What I am saying is that the description that I got two weeks ago did not add up to what I have just been told was actually in that video. It still does not go any way along the lines of the earlier video in terms of the abhorrent nature of the contents of that video to Canadians.

What I am saying is that since I have just been informed of this I would like to get to the bottom of it to clarify it.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister says he has no proof of the existence of this tape. It

seems to me that if the chief of defence staff mentions it in his report, that should be sufficient proof for the minister.

Are we to conclude that the minister was so prompt to disband the Airborne Regiment in Petawawa without, as he himself admitted, being aware of all the facts and all the available evidence, because he was probably trying to put a lid on it? Was he trying to cover up reprehensible acts engaged in by senior officers of the Canadian Forces, acts that would tarnish the army's reputation?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the decision to disband the regiment was made on good grounds. We made that public two weeks ago and it was made notwithstanding the recommendations of senior officials in the armed forces.

One of the reasons that I believe disbanding the regiment was right at that time is that I did not know as minister what else may be out there.

When the hon. member spoke to me yesterday it seemed to me he was referring-I have heard lots of rumours about other video tapes-to the existence of other evidence that may come to light.

What we did two weeks ago is that we took the sequence of events, the deployment last year to Rwanda where some of the airborne got in trouble, the two video tapes, and we said that there was something radically wrong with this regiment, that there was a systemic problem, and on those grounds we ordered the disbanding of the regiment.

[The Speaker]

I know the seriousness of this issue. I would ask that the questions and the answers be to the point.

[Jean-Marc Jacob, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to say to the minister that if this tape does not contain anything of serious concern, it should be made public and we will see for ourselves. It is being held by military police and no one can deny that.

Last December, the minister of defence announced that a commission of inquiry was being established to investigate the events in Somalia involving soldiers of the Airborne Regiment of Petawawa. In spite of additional events which further exacerbate the situation, the minister did not deem it necessary to take immediate measures.

How can the minister of defence justify not yet having established a commission of inquiry into the actions of the Airborne Regiment although section 45 of the National Defence Act gives him full authority to do so?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we are going over some ground that was covered a couple of weeks ago.

After the juxtaposition of events of the report based on infractions in Rwanda, the second video tape with racist behaviour involving some people now before courts martial, and the third involving the hazing, we felt that was enough. Enough was enough. We believe the problem was of such systemic origins that it had to be dealt with by disbanding the regiment, and I think there has been widespread public support for this.

In a perfect world I would have waited to take any action with respect to this regiment until after an inquiry had reported. I have to underscore the fact that the government inherited this particular dossier and what we will be judged on is how we handle the matter now, not how it got to one place right at the beginning months ago.

[Jean-Marc Jacob, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, may I remind the minister that we must distinguish between the events in Somalia and the events in Petawawa. Section 45 of the National Defence Act authorizes him to establish a commission of inquiry immediately, rather than disband the regiment and wash his hands of the affair and punish no one except enlisted men.

How can the minister claim to deserve the confidence of this House and of the public when, on the very day he set about disbanding the Airborne Regiment, he concealed from the public the existence of a third tape?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to make light of the hon. member's intention, but the fact is that when we are talking about the existence of other tapes I do not know how many tapes are out there. I do not know how many copies there are. I do not know how many camera people there are. What is obviously happening is that as modern technology is catching up with everyone, including the armed forces, people are taking tapes of certain activities and I do not know exactly what is out there.

With respect to the question of why, sure we have the authority to set up an inquiry right now. There is a court decision now before the Supreme Court, the Westray Mine decision, that calls into question the fact that we could have an inquiry, a coroner's inquest or judicial proceedings all at the same time.

Once judicial proceedings were initiated, and they were initiated before we were elected, there was no choice but to adjourn the original inquiry. What we are saying is once due

process is followed with the existing courts martial, and that would be the middle of March, there will be an inquiry. It will be public. It will be headed by a civilian. All these questions on how the regiment was fit for deployment to Somalia will be answered.

Pension Reform

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across the country are angry and we witnessed this last night at the huge anti-tax rally in Toronto. They cannot believe the government is considering tax increases.

[An hon. member]

They were all Reformers.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

I do not think it was just Reformers at the tax rally.

In the 1993 election we heard the present Prime Minister challenge then Prime Minister Kim Campbell to recall the House of Commons in the middle of August so that pension reform could be dealt with. He promised and told the press that the Liberals would change that plan in a day. Over 600 days have passed since then and Canadians are still waiting.

My question is for the Prime Minister. What changed since the 1993 election campaign? Why is the minister backtracking right now on his election promise? Will he introduce legislation now to reform MPs' pensions?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, first I thank the hon. member for Beaver River and other members of the Reform Party who attended the installation ceremony of the Governor General yesterday.

I would also like to thank the member for Laurier-Sainte-Marie and the other members of the Bloc Quebecois who attended this ceremony.

It was a sign of respect for the institution. They did what is expected of all members of Parliament; they displayed good manners.

As far as the bill is concerned, there will be legislation very soon in the House of Commons. It will be announced either before or at the same time as the budget.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we heard something to that effect this morning on "Canada AM". What surprises me is that we have heard cabinet ministers, especially the Prime Minister, say that they cannot reveal anything that is going to be in the budget. How things change. He has just revealed, quite likely, that it would be revealed in the budget.

The Prime Minister said: "MP pension reform is in the red book and I am committed to everything that is in the red book". This vacuous document unfortunately has become the Liberal's book of excuses. It is like the fine print on a legal contract, just like the Deputy Prime Minister's promise to resign if the GST were not scrapped in a year. We are waiting for that to come true.

Will the Prime Minister go beyond the bare minimum outlined in the red book which does not address the problem of only six years for people qualifying for pension and paying in, and a contribution ratio of employer to employee of eight to one?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in order to be courteous to the hon. member, I would would not like to see the bill passed before March 13. That will be the day she will qualify for the pension.

The bill will be dealt with. We made promises in the red book which will be kept. There are some people who want us to move further. We are discussing that at this time.

However, there is one thing I would like to say to all members of Parliament and to the public. The salaries of members have been frozen for years. Members of Parliament work very hard and are not very well paid. Many school directors and chiefs of police and so on are making much more money than members of Parliament.

I am not one to try and score political points at the expense of people who try to serve their citizens well as members of Parliament.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would agree that Canadians are not unreasonable. Nobody is suggesting that MPs do not work hard or that they do not deserve fair compensation for their years of public service. They simply want the MP pension plan brought into line with the realities faced by the private sector and do not violate the Income Tax Act.

If the Liberals are not willing to reform their gold pension plan, then start with mine which does kick in on March 13.

How can he justify a pension plan that is eight times as rich as the people who are paying for it, the taxpayers of Canada?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there was a commission that looked into this problem not long ago and reported. It said members are really underpaid for the work they have to do. I agree with the commission.

This pension plan was established a long time ago. I have been a member of Parliament for 32 years this April and I have seen members of Parliament who had a very difficult time adjusting

to life afterward. I am informed that there are a lot of former members of Parliament who were in this House two years ago who are having a difficult time, some of them 58, 59 or 60 years of age, finding another job because they were in Parliament 15 years and cannot make the transition to private life very easily.

I am not about to play politics with it. We will be fair to members of Parliament. I ran on a program and it was written there that it will be at least the minimum we will announce before the end of this month.

The Budget

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

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

According to the Liberal member for Gander-Grand Falls, senior finance officials have already presented the measures that the Minister of Finance plans to take in the next budget to influential business people and bankers.

Will the Minister of Finance confirm that he is considering the following measures, among others: a $4 billion reduction in transfer payments, a one per cent increase in the GST rate and a one per cent tax on the capital held in pension funds and RRSPs?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows very well that I have no intention of making any comment on specifics concerning the budget. Having said this, I can confirm that no meeting such as the one described in the hon. member's letter ever took place.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance could perhaps explain to us in what context the meeting occurred, if it did not occur in the way I described. Also, given the disastrous impact that a one per cent tax on capital accrued in RRSPs and pension funds would have, will the Minister of Finance commit to immediately and unequivocally ruling out this tax which would cost taxpayers, mostly from the middle class, some $5 billion?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, we have obviously just seen the drawback of writing the supplementary question before getting the reply to the first.

It is impossible to describe a meeting that never took place.

Indian Affairs

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of Indian affairs.

According to a story in today's Winnipeg Free Press , an aboriginal band in northern Manitoba is sending 53 band members to a conference in the Dominican Republic at taxpayers' expense.

Does the minister approve of this waste of taxpayers' money? Does he simply not know what is going on in his own department?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, this is a story that came today. This is not my department. This is an aboriginal decision.

This is something I will look into and I will get back to the hon. member with the information. Unlike members of the Reform Party, I want to hear both sides of the issue before I respond.

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said a few minutes ago that people find it difficult to find jobs when they leave this place and it is because they have made such a mess of the economy.

I can understand the minister having a difficult time understanding why things like this offend the taxpayers because members of his own caucus like to go on these kinds of junkets.

Can the minister tell this House what the goal of this trip is, how he justifies it? Is it just the case of the government looking for expensive new ways of appearing ridiculous, in which case it has succeeded admirably?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to the hon. member, I will discuss it with the First Nations of Manitoba.

If it is inappropriate in my opinion I will so state. I will at least talk to them unlike the hon. member who, when he talks about fairness and has a meeting in his own riding, sends out notices at our expense and advises everybody except the aboriginal people in his own riding.