Debates of April 3rd, 1995

St. John's West

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Prime Minister about the list of concerns that keeps growing and growing in what is surely to be a major headache in St. John's West, Newfoundland.

RCMP reports present cause for searching the member's company which may lead to as many as 10 charges of fraud involving federally granted dollars.

My question for the Prime Minister is this. Will the Prime Minister give the ethics commissioner the mandate by making him accountable to Parliament so that he can investigate this case that is giving headaches to the people in St. John's, Newfoundland?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, you know our system of law. No one is guilty until there is a conviction in court. A person has the right to defend his or her point of view. I do not think the House of Commons is the place to debate that.

At some time any member of Parliament can be subject to accusations but in our criminal law system justice means that nobody is guilty until found guilty.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am talking about ethics here, not criminal charges at this point. The people of St. John's West, Newfoundland deserve a better answer than that.

A recall petition has already been circulated in St. John's West. I would like to ask the Prime Minister if he would not agree that recall legislation would deal with this. As presented by my colleague for Beaver River-

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge, AB]

The question as it is posed is out of order, as it is hypothetical. I will permit the hon. member to try to rephrase his question.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Prime Minister if he supports the concept of recall when it comes to the matter of ethics within the House of Commons and members of Parliament.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I think this member of Parliament has never faced any accusation from any court and she is representing her constituents very well as a member of Parliament.

In terms of recall I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that if we had a system of recall in Canada we would have a lot of byelections from that corner from western Canada.

Canadian Coast Guard

[Guy Arseneault, Liberal, Restigouche—Chaleur, NB]

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

The 1995 federal budget announced that the government will merge the Canadian Coast Guard with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans effective April 1995.

Can the minister inform the House how much this amalgamation will save the Canadian taxpayer? What assurances can he give that combining the two services will not reduce services to the marine industry?

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

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

This proposal, which originated with the quick thinking of the Minister of Transport who is looking for ways to consolidate, to build efficiencies and to save the taxpayers money, has been today officially approved by the Prime Minister. The merger of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard will result in some 168 vessels, including 42 offshore vessels, working together, hand in hand.

We saw an example last week of how putting coast guard vessels, officers and personnel, and DFO personnel together working efficiently for Canada contributed greatly to sustaining, to building and to protecting our offshore resources. I thank the member for his question.

Canadian Human Rights Commission

[Jean Landry, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. The budget cuts made in previous years have already forced the Human Rights Commission to reduce the number of its information officers. As a result, the number of public inquiries fell by 25 per cent, while the number of complaints filed with the commission continues to increase.

Can the Minister of Justice confirm that the Canadian Human Rights Commission intends to reduce services to the public once again by closing its six regional offices across the country because of the Liberal budget cuts?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, my information is that the Canadian Human Rights Commission is reducing the number of regional offices and centralizing the services it offers to the Ottawa location.

The commission is a body that operates at arm's length from government. Its resources have been reduced in recent years because of fiscal realities. The way it chooses to respond to that reality is a matter of policy for the commission. If it has concluded that it can provide the services in the way that has been decided on, then that is the way it will proceed.

[Jean Landry, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given that Commissioner Max Yalden has expressed concern over the rise of intolerance in Canada, does the minister not agree that closing these regional offices will undermine the protection of rights in federal jurisdictions?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I would have thought, based on the speeches and comments made by the chief commissioner, that his primary concern about the lack of tolerance in Canada has not had so much to do with the number of regional offices the commission has, but rather the attitudes in some quarters about human rights themselves.

The commission, which does its work so ably in serving the Canadian public, has had to decide, as we all must, how to meet its needs with diminished resources. It is apparently confident that it can meet those needs with centralized services from Ottawa.

Western Grain Transportation Act

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Vegreville, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in an article in the Western Producer the minister of agriculture is quoted as saying that farmers who have sold to the Canadian Wheat Board may have to pay the full freight rate for crops delivered before July 31.

The minister is telling farmers that the WGTA benefit is actually ending before the end of the crop year and not next year as promised in the budget. This is unfair.

Can the minister at least tell western Canadian farmers by what date they must deliver their grain to receive the Crow benefit?

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

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the termination of subsidy programs, obviously it is necessary to pick a date on which the subsidy terminates and after which payments will no longer be made.

In the grains industry in Canada, the key date in terms of the crop year is August 1, 1995. It is on August 1, 1995 that the subsidy will come to an end.

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Vegreville, AB]

Mr. Speaker, farmers get hit with the loss of the Crow benefit. Then they suffer more losses because of the rail strike and the other strikes. Now they cannot even be certain about which grains shipped in this crop year will be covered by the Crow benefit.

I wonder if there is anything the minister can tell farmers for sure. Is the minister telling me that he cannot give them a certain, definite date by which they must deliver grain in order to receive the Crow benefit?

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

Mr. Speaker, obviously the hon. gentleman does not understand how the crop year works.

Many events flow through the normal production season. It has always been August 1 of any given year on which the crop year ends and the next crop year begins while deliveries go on both before and after that date. One date must be chosen to make a determination when certain events will occur. We have picked August 1, 1995 as the only logical date that makes sense.

In the hon. gentleman's reference with respect to the labour dispute that was settled a week ago by legislation, it might have been a little more helpful had the hon. gentleman been here to vote.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

That last statement was clearly out of order. I ask the hon. minister to please withdraw it.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to withdraw the remark if it offends the Reform Party.

The Environment

[Len Taylor, NDP, The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government has representatives in Berlin today to engage in more talk about the need to improve the way that we as nations respond to the world's growing environmental crisis. At the same time here in Canada the media is speculating about the possible dismantling of Environment Canada because the department has become ineffective in dealing with our own domestic environmental problems.

Can the government confirm today that it will stand with the same political will to strengthen the federal role on domestic environmental issues as it has shown in the defence of turbot conservation and in support of the country's well-meaning but nonetheless meaningless position at the Berlin conference?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister of the Environment, the Deputy Prime Minister, is attending the conference in Berlin. Members can rest assured that she will honourably represent this government as she is wont to do in her inimitable fashion. She is a very strong representative for us in Berlin.

Pearson International Airport

[Jean Charest, Progressive Conservative, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. It concerns an issue that he raised himself during question period about people being presumed innocent until they are found guilty.

My question concerns the Pearson airport affair and the fact that during the election campaign on this very matter the Prime Minister said: "The people have a right to know all the facts". Since then we have found that there is no finding of fact whatsoever to support any wrongdoing. We have since learned that he has had a personal involvement.

I would like to know from the Prime Minister and the government whether or not they will hold a public inquiry on this whole matter.

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I regret very much that the hon. leader of the fifth party has not seen fit to recognize the fact that the Prime Minister stood in this House and denied categorically that he was involved in any discussions relating to Pearson and that deal. That was substantiated by a lawyer who allegedly had been present when such a discussion was allegedly to have taken place.

With respect to Pearson and in response to the hon. gentleman's question, anybody who does not think there is something wrong with the Pearson deal would have had to be a member of the Mulroney cabinet.

Presence In The Gallery

[The Speaker]

I would like to draw members' attention to the presence in the gallery of the hon. Senator Michael Beahan, President of the Senate of Australia, and his fellow parliamentarians who are visiting us.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.