Debates of Oct. 8th, 1996

The Solicitor General

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what specific guarantees can the minister give the House that there will never be another case like the Marcel Blanchette incident ever again in the Canadian prison system?

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, one such incident is one too many, I agree. However, our system is working very well. I cannot believe that the hon. member is suggesting that we get rid of the review process and the National Parole Board.

The system is working very well and has been fully tried and tested. In this case, we will check with our sources and, as I said earlier, wait for the upcoming report before taking all appropriate measures.

Agriculture

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday could have been a glorious day for the minister of agriculture. His news conference could have been his opportunity to be king for a day but sadly he remains the king of delay based on his press conference on the Canadian Wheat Board.

The minister promised Reformers in the House: "I will give a detailed response to the panel's recommendations". In fact, his message was so unclear it took his officials four more days to write up a press release.

After three years of preparing for this big day, why was the minister's statement so vague and underwhelming? When will the minister specifically tell prairie farmers what he plans to do?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can understand the hon. gentleman's frustration. Of course he is perfectly at liberty to call his own news conferences, but he prefers to come to mine in order to guarantee some attention.

On Friday I had the opportunity to outline to the news media in Regina and across western Canada the general directions being pursued by the government with respect to grain marketing and changes in the Canadian grain marketing system. Yesterday a very detailed statement was issued outlining the focus of those changes.

Legislation is presently being prepared. It will be presented to the House of Commons at the earliest possible moment.

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly had a lesson on how not to hold a press conference. It is a good thing the minister is not the chief electoral officer because our democratic process would be in shambles.

How can the minister call a plebiscite of producers when he does not know what the question will be, he does not know who can vote, he does not know what constitutes a majority and he does not know if the vote will be binding?

Will the minister commit today in the House to giving all western Canadian barley producers a clear, honest question on whether they want the choice of how they market their barley?

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

Mr. Speaker, I indicated very clearly on Friday and very clearly again yesterday what the nature of the question would be.

Let me quote: "They", that is farmers, "will be asked a clear cut question about whether they wish to put all barley, both feed and malting, on to the completely open market for all sales or would they prefer to retain the current marketing system through which the Canadian Wheat Board, as modernized by the other changes announced by the government, remains the single desk seller for all barley sales for export and domestic barley sales for human consumption". It is very clear and very specific.

The Canada Post Corporation

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for Canada Post Corporation.

Today, the minister finally tabled the report on the review of Canada Post Corporation's mandate. She has stated the she will not privatize Canada Post Corporation so long as it has a public policy role to fulfil.

Can the minister tell us how she defines the public policy role that Canada Post Corporation has to fulfil?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, we live in a vast country that includes a number of remote areas, and I imagine Quebec also has remote areas. It is obvious that all Canadians across the country want to receive their mail; it is a necessity for them.

As long as this necessity exists, Canada Post Corporation will have to keep on serving Canadians.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has announced today her choice to stop the delivery of unaddressed advertising mailings, while rejecting the recommendation contained in the report regarding an increase in postal rates.

Will the minister wait after the next election to authorize a five cent increase in postal rates as recommended in the report?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if that is the Bloc's position. Does it want us to increase postal rates? We think that small and medium size business and people living in remote areas would have to bear the cost of such an increase, and we are not willing to do that at this time.

Employment Insurance

[Dianne Brushett, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the new Minister of Human Resources Development.

On July 1 the first phase of Bill C-12 came into effect. Could the minister tell the House exactly how the new employment insurance legislation provides income protection for low income earners everywhere in Canada?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, Canada needed a new and modern system of employment insurance. We have actually ef-

fected a very dramatic shift from a passive role to an active role in assisting people to go back to work, which was absolutely necessary. The changes are about getting people back to work, allowing people to help themselves and responding to the way people work today in the new economy. It was important for us to address the issue with the new economy.

The goal is to help people to go back to work when there is work available and for employers to accept a larger responsibility to create more employment for these people.

Canada Pension Plan

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government is proposing to partially de-index Canada pension plan payments to Canadian seniors. This will mean less income for seniors and breaks a promise that the Prime Minister made during the last Quebec referendum.

Why is the government reducing Canada pension plan benefits when it promised it would not?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the government has not made a proposal along those lines. When the federal and provincial governments came together, both examined a series of options. This happens to be one of the options. It was set out in the consultation book that was signed on by all of the provinces unanimously.

That option was discussed. A number of individuals throughout the consultation process, in fact some in the hon. member's own province, subscribed to this as a thesis. However, no decision has been taken. What was agreed to by the finance ministers was that we would examine the situation, look at the total package and eventually come to a consensus.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his response because there are a good number of seniors who are very nervous about what is likely going to happen to their pensions and other income. The last budget cost seniors up to $1,200 each through the elimination of the age limitation tax credits.

We know that the provinces are very upset about allowing the federal government to use unemployment insurance premiums to offset the cost of the CPP premiums. They think the two should be linked in that the unemployment insurance premium should be reduced while the others go up.

Why would the government break faith with Canadian seniors, especially the most needy seniors, when we look at all of these threats to them, particularly the 50 per cent tax on income? Why are the Liberals breaking their promise?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I think I can answer the question, but first I have to figure out what the question is.

The government made it possible for Canadian seniors and for a whole generation of young Canadians to know that the Canada pension plan, the OAS and the guaranteed income supplement would be there for them. We did not want to make the same mistake the previous generations of politicians did, which was simply to defer this problem until such time as the Canada pension plan got into such difficulty that there would be no other solution except the terrible one that is advocated by the members of the Reform Party.

In our budget we brought down a seniors benefit that will be as good if not better for 75 per cent of Canadians, better for nine out of ten women in the country, that will allow Canadians to hold their heads high as they recognize the-

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Immigration

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Since 1986, the Canadian government has required Portuguese citizens visiting Canada to have a visa. However, Portugal does not require Canadians to have a visa to visit that country. In fact, it is the only country in the European Union on which Canada imposes this requirement. When it was in the opposition, the Liberal Party was against this requirement.

When will the minister decide to remove the visa requirement for Portuguese visitors as it has in the case of other countries?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we regularly review our visa policy in this country.

A number of factors are taken into consideration. As you know, many visitors come to Canada, and at the same time we must also control our borders. As for the situation concerning Portugal, this week I will have the pleasure of discussing the matter with the Secretary of State of Portugal who will be visiting us.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I may remind the minister that this measure is utterly discriminatory against a friendly and allied country.

Could the minister explain why she has maintained this visa requirement, although Portugal is the only country in the European Union to which it applies?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, situations vary from country to country. We decided some time ago to remove the visa requirement for Chile. As you know, we have to reinstate this visa due to a very particular problem we have with illegal immigrants to this country coming from Chile.

When we make a decision of this kind, we have to look at several factors, which means finding out whether the country where these people come from properly controls the passports and visas it issues and whether or not a large percentage of visa applications are turned down.

That is the context we are looking at. And that is why I am quite prepared to the reopen discussions with the Portuguese authorities on this question.

Justice

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is national family week and it is a good time to focus on the safety and security of Canadian families.

This morning I presented a petition from more than 25,000 people from across Canada asking the minister to toughen up the justice system for criminals who have committed sexual acts and crimes against children.

Does the solicitor general agree with these petitioners? Does he agree with their specific demand that local RCMP officers be given permission to notify Canadians whenever sexual offenders are about to be released back into their communities?

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

Mr. Speaker, it was just those concerns that lead the government to consult and then produce Bill C-55 which was tabled in the House some two weeks ago.

Through Bill C-55 changes were proposed to the criminal justice system that will enable us to take that burden from the shoulders of police. This will be done by enabling sentencing judges, in the cases of repeat sexual offenders, to impose not only a prison term but to ensure that at the end of that prison term there is an appropriate period of supervision in the community to safeguard the interests of Canadians and their families.

After the sex offender is out of prison at the end of the sentence, there will be a period during which the offender will have to report, if appropriate, to police, let authorities know of the whereabouts of the offender, continue treatment if that is required and even in the appropriate cases wear an electronic monitor. That is the most effective way to deal with this threat to our security.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister should know that in Bill C-55 the only communities that must be notified of a release of a sexual predator are aboriginal communities. There is no such provision in his bill for the rest of the communities. It is a weakness in that bill.

Since April of this year there has been a delegation order sitting on the solicitor general's desk. The solicitor general merely has to sign that order and local police officers will be given the authority and the permission, the delegation, to release that information to communities when those sexual predators are released back into the community.

Will the solicitor general sign that delegation order and will he do it today?

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of that order but I will bring it to the attention of the solicitor general at the earliest convenience.