Debates of May 10th, 1995

Gun Control

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

Mr. Speaker, last September I had the privilege of visiting the Yukon territory, meeting with representatives of the Council for Yukon Indians, discussing with them their perspective on firearms, reviewing the options, going to communities like Kwanlun Dun outside Whitehorse, meeting with members of those communities, talking about the way

firearms are used as tools, talking about community needs and becoming sensitive to perspectives of the aboriginal communities on the issues.

That perspective is reflected in Bill C-68. I point out, as the hon. member will know as a member of the committee that is considering it, that section 110(t) of Bill C-68 provides expressly that provision can be made for the manner in which the bill is implemented in aboriginal communities, including those in Yukon.

That is the kind of approach we think is right to achieve community safety while respecting the aboriginal perspective.

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, he is talking about something once it becomes law. I guess the real problem is that big city lawyers do not understand the word consultation.

According to the agreements consultation must take place when any legislation may have an impact on hunting and trapping activities. It seems strange to me that consultation takes place after the legislation has received second reading.

Is the minister prepared to listen to the recommendations of Yukon natives who say to stop the proceedings until the proper procedures are followed?

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

Mr. Speaker, September of last year was some five months before the bill was tabled in the House. That was consultation before the tabling of legislation.

As far as the point of view of the people of Yukon is concerned, the committee of which the hon. member is a part is now listening in detail to the evidence of witnesses. I have no doubt they will have proposals to make to improve the legislation, but in the final analysis the government remains persuaded that the bill, its provisions and its approach, is exactly what is needed to enhance community safety throughout the country.

Agusta

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Public Works.

In the matter of the cancellation of the contract to purchase EH-101 helicopters worth nearly $6 billion, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works confirmed in April that the government was now negotiating with Agusta the amount of compensation it would have to pay the E.H. Industries consortium.

Would the minister of public works agree that the government should stop all negotiations with Agusta and conduct a judicial investigation into the circumstances around the awarding of the EH-101 contract, considering the many serious charges of corruption and misappropriation of funds pending against Agusta in Europe?

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

No, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, at least the minister is consistent.

How can the minister justify continuing talks with Agusta without first investigating the actions of this company as demanded by the Minister of Human Resources Development in April 1993? Does his answer mean that the government is prepared to turn a blind eye and negotiate compensation payments that may be as much as several hundred million dollars? What is at the bottom of this?

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

Mr. Speaker, very briefly, a contract was consummated. A contract has now been nullified. We are in the process of negotiating that contract. When it is complete the House will become aware of its details.

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.

The issue of investment is extremely important to small and medium size businesses. They may not be interested on that side, but the issue of investment is extremely important across Atlantic Canada.

Given recent media coverage of the meeting of the minister with the four Atlantic premiers and the chartered banks on a proposed Atlantic investment fund, will the minister now inform the House on the status of the proposal?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon.

member for the unexpected question and share with members of the House that the Atlantic region is the only region of the country that does not have a venture capital fund.

On behalf of the Government of Canada and the four Atlantic premiers I met with representatives of the chartered banks. We had a very comprehensive and detailed discussion on such a proposed fund as an Atlantic venture capital fund. We assured representatives of the banks, I on behalf of the Government of Canada and the premiers on behalf of the provincial jurisdictions, that in no way would governments want to operate such a fund as the Atlantic venture capital fund.

As a result a working committee has been struck. It is being led by the president of ACOA. We are working on a regular basis with the banks.

I hope in due course I will be able to come back to the House and provide more details relating to the Atlantic venture capital fund enhancing opportunities for businesses in Atlantic Canada.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the solicitor general stated that he could not confirm the assertion that Luke Desilets was recruited to CSIS to spy on the Aryan nations because he was respecting the law that was passed by this Parliament.

However, previous solicitors general have publicly identified Warren Hart, Claude Morin and Marc Boivin as RCMP security service or CSIS sources. These ministers stated that they were at liberty to do so because these individuals had identified themselves as human sources. Luke Desilets also identified himself as a human source for CSIS.

Will the minister now follow in the tradition of these previous ministers and confirm that Luke Desilets was a CSIS source?

[Patrick Gagnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, as we very well know, the matter is currently being investigated by CSIS. I am not at liberty to comment on the operations of CSIS.

I should add there is also SIRC which has the mandate to look into this and possibly make a recommendation to the government and to the service in relation to this matter as raised by the opposition member.

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the minister, through the parliamentary secretary, continues to hide behind section 18 of the CSIS Act. If he would read down to section 18, paragraph 2, he would see that Parliament also gave him the authority to reveal the identity of a source just like his predecessors did.

The solicitor general still appears reluctant to use the power at his disposal. I ask the parliamentary secretary: Is it the intention of this government to be even more secretive than the previous Conservative government?

[Patrick Gagnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, CSIS has a specific mandate to look into any problems that might arise in so far as it concerns the security of Canada. This is one allegation we are looking into. I can assure the hon. member that we have a process in place. It is working. It has worked in the past and I am sure it will work in the future.

High Speed Train

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transport. On November 1, 1991, the Transport ministers of Canada, Quebec and Ontario announced they would share the cost of a $6 million feasibility study on operating a high speed train similar to the TGV in the Quebec-Windsor corridor. This study was to be finished not later than November 1993, and the agreement between the three governments expired on March 31, 1994.

Since the study has yet to be submitted to the minister, could he explain why the report has been delayed for more than 16 months and tell us what he is doing or intends to do to put an end to this unacceptable situation?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his question. It is a rather tricky situation. Since three governments are involved-the Government of Quebec, the Government of Ontario and the federal government-a consensus among all three governments is essential before the study is submitted to the responsible minister and published.

Discussions are continuing to see if we can reach a consensus on the report. In fact, our deputy minister met his Quebec counterpart not long go, and the change of ministers in Ontario may have delayed things as well.

We are still waiting for all three governments to agree so there will be at least a consensus on the issue.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is also directed to the Minister of Transport.

Considering the studies he already has, including the joint study by Quebec and Ontario, why will the minister not at least take a preliminary position on this high speed train project which, first of all, would provide us with expertise that would be eminently exportable; second, would create thousands of jobs,

and third, would be financed to a considerable extent by the private sector?

[The Speaker]

Hon. members, I will give the minister the floor but I would like to point out that a question does not have three or four parts. It is one question. The Minister of Transport.

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize that we are all anxious to get to the end of this exercise. It has been a costly one. There have been a lot of studies. There has been a lot of expense on the parts of the Government of Ontario, the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada.

It would be highly irregular after all the time and effort put into this by three governments to have the Government of Canada set out its policy unilaterally. That is one of the things I hear my hon. friends in the opposition refer to constantly as being an improper way for the Government of Canada to act. When we consult and try to arrive at a consensus, it is not acceptable. When we try to dictate terms, it is not acceptable. We will just do the best we can to bring this to a conclusion as quickly as we can.

Ministerial Regional Offices

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been provided more evidence of how the Liberals go about giving the impression they are meeting their promises in the red book.

One of the promises was to cut $10 million from ministerial offices. We have a document to all ministers from Treasury Board dated April 27. It states that although current policy requires that 100 per cent of the costs of regional offices be charged to ministerial budgets "indications are that some departments have been absorbing these charges", not the ministerial budget.

Would the President of the Treasury Board tell the House which departments are engaged in the cooking of the books, which is illegal according to the Financial Administration Act?

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

Mr. Speaker, the premise to the question is all wrong. The government did cut $10 million from ministerial budgets, including the office of the Prime Minister. As led by that commitment, it has made those cuts.

The ministerial regional offices continue to be operated in a way that is most cost efficient and will be subject to further cost efficiencies in the future. The minister of public works indicated the other day that we have closed a number of them already. They are all being handled in a proper fashion.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that the President of the Treasury Board said that.

I want to quote again from this document we have. "The cost sharing will in effect allow ministers to respend the amount thus saved. This will result in an increase to the costs of running ministers' offices".

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Since the Prime Minister's office provided concurrence on this financial sleight of hand designed to fool the taxpayers, will the Prime Minister now come clean and table a full report showing which ministers' offices are practising these hocus-pocus politics?

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

Mr. Speaker, again the preamble is all wrong.

These ministerial regional offices are provided not only for ministers who are resident in the cities in which they are located but also for visiting ministers to conduct government business. The Treasury Board continues to examine the operation of these facilities. It will be making changes to ensure that they continue as in the past to be operated in the most cost efficient fashion.

Newfoundland Dockyard

[Bonnie Hickey, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

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

There is a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the future of the Newfoundland dockyard. Currently only a few tradespersons are working at the dry dock, down from 850 last year. Given the importance of the dockyard to the economy of St. John's will the minister inform the House about his plans for the dockyard?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the question of the dockyards in St. John's is one that has been discussed very thoroughly.

We have advised the president of Marine Atlantic to look into the commercialization of all the activities of Marine Atlantic, including the dockyard at St. John's.

The future of the dockyards at St. John's lies completely in the hands of the management of Marine Atlantic and especially the workers at that facility. We lost in excess of $3 million there last year. We do not intend to have that happen again.

Unless we can find a buyer for the dockyards at St. John's or a better solution than what we have been able to come up with so far, there will be no alternative but to close it. I hope that will not be the result of the work we have undertaken there. The board of directors and the president of Marine Atlantic have been given a

very clear directive that we have to commercialize the activities of that entire operation. That includes the dockyard at St. John's.

Bovine Somatotropin

[Michel Daviault, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture. Part III of the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture provides that, and I quote: "Dairy policy is expected to be a focus of analysis in 1995-96 and will cover the impact of the introduction of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) in Canada".

In view of the fact that available studies appear not to contain sufficient information to permit the marketing of the hormone and that the Department of Health has not announced any change in this regard, how does the minister explain the hormone's expected arrival on the scene this year?