Debates of Oct. 4th, 1996

Official Languages

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the President of Treasury Board alleged that 54 per cent of federal public service positions in Quebec needed to be bilingual in order to serve anglophones and allophones. By thus linking the allophones with the anglophone minority, the President of the Treasury Board, a francophone minister who is an elected member for Quebec, is openly admitting that he is working to anglicize Quebec's allophones.

My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Why is the President of the Treasury Board, a francophone, working to anglicize Quebec's allophones, in contradiction of every language policy adopted by the governments of Quebec since 1960 for the purpose of integrating them into Quebec society through their use of the French language?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the allegations the opposition member is making are totally unfounded and, what is more, he is attacking my credentials as a francophone. Allow me to say that his French name does not entitle him to defend all francophone traditions.

My family has been here since 1648. My entire family has defended the francophone literature, culture, language, institutions, and no member of the Bloc Quebecois or of the Parti Quebecois can tell me what my family has done from the francophone point of view.

In my opinion, the Bloc Quebecois are the ones working against the interests of Quebec at this time, and the ones whose efforts will gradually weaken the influence of the French language and culture in Quebec. It is they who are doing a disservice to francophones.

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, clearly, the truth is hard to take. It is up to the President of the Treasury Board to stand up for himself, for it is he who clearly spoke yesterday of "serving the allophones". So he is incapable of standing up for himself.

I wish to ask him this: if it is good for Quebec anglophones to have five times as many bilingual public servants as their demographic weight justifies, would it be logical for the same rule to apply to the francophones of New Brunswick, who represent 34 per cent of the population, or those in Ontario, who form the largest francophone minority in Canada? Why do the federal government, and the President of the Treasury Board, a francophone member of Parliament from Quebec, continue to systematically disadvantage the francophones in English-speaking Canada?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, it is clearly not true that the government, or myself, are disadvantaging the francophone minorities in Canada. The opposition does nothing but spread rumours which, they know to untrue.

What the report by the President of the Treasury Board demonstrates, and clearly demonstrates with figures, not with untrue allegations, is that the linguistic minorities in Canada have received far better service in recent years than in the past.

In fact, from the point of view of service to the public, from the point of view of language of work, from the point of view of their numerical representation in the public service, francophone minorities are better off now than they have ever been in the past, than they were 20 years ago. I myself bear witness to that, and the allegations being made by the opposition will not change those facts.

Canadian Heritage

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the heritage minister's defence of her free flag program giveaway is total garbage.

We are proud that Reform staff are trained to help constituents, which does not change the fact that her program sucks wind. This program has been flim-flam from the word go. Her officials originally said that it was going to be $6 million. Now it is $23 million and climbing.

The minister told Canadians that her flags were free, yet on the document that comes with the flags she says that you will receive a tax receipt for donations of $10 or more.

Why does she refuse to give any spending details to this House? It is $23 million and climbing. Precisely how many dollars have been collected?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for bringing to the attention of Parliament the most popular program of government.

As of this morning 613,420 families across Canada have participated in the flag program.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Hamilton East, ON]

That represents one in every sixteen Canadian households that have actually received a flag. In certain ridings the participation is even stronger.

In the riding of Beaver River, one in eleven households has received a flag. In the riding of Calgary Southwest one in sixteen households has received a flag. In the riding of Fraser Valley East one in thirteen households has received a flag. In the riding of Calgary North-

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Kootenay East.

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to understand that the Liberals have no monopoly on patriotism, it is just that they do it with taxpayers' money.

Realizing that these flags cost money, can the minister tell the House how many hospitals will close, how many books will be taxed, how many seniors will be cut off from benefits to pay for this program?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, none.

Military Justice

[Jean H. Leroux, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, things being what they are, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister.

A shocking case of fraud at the Valcartier military base is one more reason to question the effectiveness and relevance of the court-martial system. Although the same kind of fraud was allegedly practised in several other military bases in Canada in the past 15 years, very few charges have been laid. Light sentences and limited investigations cast some doubt on the credibility of this justice system.

Since the entire military justice system has been sorely strained since the appointment of the Minister of National Defence and the current Chief of Staff, General Boyle, will the government appoint a parliamentary committee to carry out a full and detailed examination in this respect, and do so as soon as possible?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, considering the seriousness of the allegations and the fact that an investigation is now taking place, we cannot comment on the case here in the House.

[Jean H. Leroux, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is entirely relevant and does not concern the current investigation.

The attempt to silence Corporal Purnelle and deprive him of his most fundamental rights, when the army wanted to bring him before a career review board instead of a court-martial, is a very good example of what is wrong with the military justice system.

And now for my supplementary. Instead of minimizing the problems, will the minister or will she not admit that the military justice system is ailing in more ways than one and that a remedy is needed, not six months from now but right away?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member says he is not talking about problems but that is exactly what he is doing. We take these charges very seriously. That is why the investigation is continuing, and that is why we do not want to discuss the justice system here in Parliament.

Canadian Heritage

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage has summed herself up quite well over the last two days. She blows $160 million on flags, propaganda and TV advertising while her government taxes books and cuts medicare. Her only response to Canadians is to wave her little list. Canadians deserve a whole lot better from their Deputy Prime Minister.

Let me try again. The minister has been building a list of voters' names from flag order forms. Is that list to be used for Liberal election mail-outs?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the flag is not Liberal. The flag is Canadian.

When the member talks about the television programming fund, he should be aware that the television programming fund, with a budgeted investment of $100 million which was provided for in the last budget, is expected to lever a total of $600 million in investment in new Canadian programming.

That same program is expected to create thousands of jobs across the country. At the same time, it will help Canadians share their stories with each other, something that we desperately need in this difficult time for our country.

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder how many byelections it is going to take for this minister to learn the importance of honesty in politics.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, I would ask you please not to use reflections on the honesty of any member of Parliament. We take it for granted that you are all honourable members. I would ask the hon. member to please be very judicious in his choice of words.

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the flag giveaway is nothing more than blatant electioneering by this government.

Is it not true that the Deputy Prime Minister thought her reputation was so badly damaged by her broken GST promise that she had to rob $23 million from Canadians to prop it up?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Once again, if the hon. Deputy Prime Minister wishes to answer that question, I will permit it.

Air Transport

[André Caron, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

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

We learned, last July, that the Minister of Transport was taking the Prague route away from Air Canada and giving it to Canadian, the very day that Air Canada announced its new service to Prague, in partnership with Lufthansa.

How can the Minister of Transport justify this decision as anything other than a shameless bias in favour of Canadian to the detriment of Air Canada, which has its head office in Montreal and employs 5,500 people in the west and over 14,000 in Ontario and in Quebec?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is simple. There is an almost automatic policy in place for cities such as Prague. If the first airline does not use the route, and Air Canada did not, it goes to the other airline. It is almost automatic. I made no decision. That is how it works.

Air Canada knew this, as my colleague, the former transport minister, sent them a letter last year, when they indicated that the Hong Kong routes would also be available for Canadian International.