Debates of March 20th, 1996

Points Of Order

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, regarding question period as well, in my question for the Prime Minister I said that his Liberal government was imitating the political sleaze of Brian Mulroney. You got up and said that I should not be using derogatory adjectives and I certainly would not think of doing that. The word "sleaze" is a noun.

Further to that I also said that I would like to-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

We can consider that one for the Beave, right?

Mr. Speaker, I offered to table at least one copy of the document by the former minister that was not shredded. It is called "Creating Opportunity: Fulfilling the Promise of Immigration and Citizenship".

I would like to seek unanimous consent to table it so that one of the unshredded copies will be kept forever more.

[The Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Speaker]

There is not unanimous consent.

[Jim Silye, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one or two weeks ago, did you not rule that we could table anything in this House without unanimous consent?

[The Speaker]

I hope I did not because I would have to eat crow right now.

A private member may have something tabled in the House with unanimous consent. With a minister it is a little bit different. I know that is the clarification the hon. member wanted.

Government Response To Petition

[Paul Zed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in

both official languages, the government's response to one petition presented during the first session.

Journée Internationale De La Francophonie

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

On March 20, all French speaking countries around the world celebrate the Journée internationale de la Francophonie.

On behalf of the minister responsible for the francophonie, who will be with us in this House next week, I am pleased to mark this event.

Canada's involvement in the francophonie is a an essential element of its foreign policy.

The francophonie is a forum in which all Canadians, and especially our 8.5 million francophones, can affirm their sense of belonging and develop their culture. It is also a forum that highlights the solidarity between the 49 member states and governments.

At the francophonie summit in Benin last December, the Prime Minister outlined Canada's priorities within this forum for the next few years. First, consolidate francophone institutions. Second, define the francophonie's policy on conflict prevention.

In this context, I want to acknowledge two actions recently taken by Canada. At the Bordeaux conference, Mr. Pettigrew's proposal to create consultation committees on Burundi-a country ravaged by civil war-was approved in order to bring back peace.

Also, as a result of the work done by the Association des parlementaires de langue française in Haiti, my government made a commitment to maintain a peacekeeping force in that impoverished country. It was a difficult situation, but Canada has remained steadfast in its solidarity.

The Prime Minister, the Minister for International Co-operation and myself will have the honour of welcoming President Préval to Canada later this week.

Finally, as a third priority, Canada wants to put the francophonie on the electronic highway. Its access to and presence on the Internet are an essential part of keeping French alive and well in growth industries.

Canada is in the vanguard of new communication technologies. That is why we will host a conference on this subject very soon.

Finally, I would like to say a few words on the francophonie's huge impact within our borders.

Like their counterparts in many French speaking countries, French-Canadians speak the same language but with different accents.

I am thinking, of course, about Quebecers, who set the tone for our French culture. I am also thinking about the Acadian and other francophone communities across Canada who, by deciding every day to speak French, give the Canadian francophonie its full significance.

I am proud to say that the legislature in my province of Manitoba will soon inaugurate a monument in honour of Louis Riel, which recognizes the legacy of those men and women who were leaders of the Canadian francophonie. They are still inspiring us today.

I wish all French speaking nations and all francophiles in our country a great Journée internationale de la Francophonie.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is with great honour and pride that I rise today on behalf of the Bloc Quebecois to draw attention to the Journée internationale de la Francophonie.

This day is especially important for all Quebecers and all francophones in the rest of Canada, whose collective future is necessarily tied to that of la Francophonie as a whole.

Listening to the Minister of Foreign Affairs tell us proudly that 8.5 million Canadians are French-speaking, I could not help but reflect on the sad situation in which francophones outside Quebec find themselves.

If today we are celebrating this memorable day, this does not necessarily mean that we must ignore the bad position the French language is in everywhere else in Canada. Contrary to what the Prime Minister said, there are no longer one million Canadians outside Quebec for whom French is the language spoken at home, but only 640,000.

In actual fact, there are not 8.5 million people in Canada who still speak French at home, but only 6.3 million. That is 2.2 million fewer than suggested by the minister, if you exclude those who barely know the language.

In relation to the total population, this also represents a decrease in the francophone population in Canada as compared to 1981.

Instead of getting better, the situation of the French language outside Quebec is deteriorating. No wonder that the minister is trying to embellish reality, when in fact francophones outside Quebec are being assimilated at an increasing rate. The rate of assimilation is even as high as 75 per cent in British Columbia. We are pleased-

[An hon. member]

It can't be soon enough.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I must tell you that I just heard one of our friends from the Reform Party make a rather uncalled-for remark to the effect that it cannot be soon enough, that 75 per cent is not enough.

We are pleased to learn that a monument in honour of Louis Riel will soon be unveiled in the minister's home province. One can wonder however if the importance attached to la Francophonie by the government in that province is not limited to just that, monuments.

In Manitoba, the rate of assimilation of francophones is 50 per cent. The minister should not be proud, he should be ashamed.

More than 25 years of official bilingualism did not stop the assimilation of French speaking people outside Quebec. As well, there is no indication that, in Quebec, the relative percentage of French speaking people will be maintained. The irresistible attractive force of English in North America weighs more heavily than the progress made by the French language among allophone communities.

Moreover, the use of French in the scientific field is very problematic. Scientific research at the international level is done in English. No one can deny that. Indeed, English is by far the dominant language within the scientific community.

Nevertheless, this does not keep us from hoping that French will eventually be used more in the field of science. This is why we must increase our efforts to ensure that our scientists can spread the achievements of the Quebec and French speaking scientific community throughout the world.

Our researchers obviously have a responsibility to teach and to work in French.

As for the information highway, we are pleased that both the Quebec and the Canadian governments intend to be very active regarding French content. Let us hope that the Cotonou summit, in Benin, will have definitely put the French speaking world on the information highway.

Finally, French speaking states must also try to stop the erosion of the French language within international organizations. The challenge is, of course, to avoid letting English truly become the only language of communication at international forums.

In concluding, I would like to emphasize the urgent need for solidarity between Quebec, francophones in Canada and other French speaking nations around the world.

Our commitment in Haiti is a step in this direction and is to be commended.

Finally, I wish to point out that Quebec's sovereignty is now more obvious than ever to other countries in the Francophonie. There is no doubt that francophone countries have understood that the situation has evolved and that sovereignty is now only a question of time.

The close results in the last referendum have given additional moral weight to Quebec, the weight of a state that will soon become sovereign. Quebec will therefore play an increasingly important role in the international Francophonie. It has, furthermore, been named rapporteur for the Francophonie until the summit to be held in Hanoi, Vietnam, in 1997.

On behalf of the Bloc Quebecois, I wish a memorable day to all those who cherish this beautiful language.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Madam Speaker, before I start my response, it is our position that we examine our membership in all organizations and certainly the francophonie is one of those.

I have listened to the minister say many wonderful things about the francophonie. I hope the minister's optimism is justified but I certainly have some doubts. My doubts really started last year during the francophonie conference in Benin when the member countries failed to condemn dictators as the Commonwealth had done during the meeting in New Zealand. Nigeria had been expelled from the Commonwealth because of its abusive government. This was action, not like what we saw in Benin.

At the Benin conference there was no action. There were not even strong words for the dictators of the world, some of whom are members of the francophonie. This made me wonder what this organization really does. Is there ever productive action or just an endless series of conferences that provides good photo opportunities for politicians? Is the francophonie about unveiling statutes and making warm, fuzzy speeches when it should really be getting things done? Is that not what international organizations are supposed to do?

Canada spends millions of dollars every year on the francophonie, but where was the francophonie when it came time to bail out Haiti, one of its members? Again there was no action. Instead Canadian taxpayers had to open their wallets to save the day. Why?

When the minister talks about the upcoming visit of the Haitian president to Montreal, I am surprised he can talk about it with a straight face. On the final weekend before the byelection in the riding with the highest concentration of people of Haitian origin, can the minister really pretend this has something to do with francophonie solidarity? It is about getting Pierre Pettigrew elected, plain and simple.

In the future the francophonie must shed its current image of an expensive forum where dictators mix with democrats to have

banquets and stage photo opportunities. This does nothing for the citizens of the member countries.

There are many poor people who live under repressive regimes and they deserve to have the francophonie working for their interests. These people need action, not meetings, discussions and political rhetoric. If the francophonie can provide this action, good, but the time for change is now, not five or ten years from now.

Being a forum for solidarity is no longer enough. The francophonie must become a functional tool to strongly press for democracy, peace and human rights.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wonder if I could have the unanimous consent of the House to respond on behalf of the NDP to the minister's statement.

[Translation]

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais)]

Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond on behalf of the New Democratic Party to the statement by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I would like to add my own best wishes to the francophones in Canada and around the world on the occasion of this Journée internationale de la Francophonie.

In the new world order, or more accurately the new world disorder, feelings of solidarity, of shared roots, of world citizenship have given way to relationships that are purely commercial. In that context it is most timely to celebrate international ties between cultural and linguistic communities such as those developed by the French speaking countries and communities. In our market driven world, we should cultivate communities, and the francophone world community helps us in that vital task.

Like the Commonwealth, the francophonie can and does play an important role not only in the cultural development of member states but also in their political development. Canadians look to the francophonie, like they do to the Commonwealth, as an agency that can play a creative and positive role in the challenging task of building an international community in which basic human and democratic rights are respected everywhere.

However, the francophonie has a way to go before it fulfils that kind of role in the way the Commonwealth has in the past, for instance with respect to South Africa. I share the urgings of a previous speaker that the francophonie needs to take a stronger stand with respect to human rights in its member states.

The minister mentioned Louis Riel. As a Manitoban I second his sentiments that a francophone was the founder of our province. The francophone parish, the parish of Notre-Dame-de-l'Assomption, was a founding element of the community I come from, Transcona.

In 1911 it was francophones from St. Boniface and from Quebec who came to Transcona and helped found the community. They are a vital part of it today. Their school formed the nucleus around which a very successful French immersion program was built in Transcona. It created an opportunity to learn French and also the French culture because it was an institution that grew out of the French speaking community in Transcona.

Allow me to again express my best wishes to all of the francophones of Canada, the francophones of Quebec, the Acadians, the Franco-Manitobans in my own riding of Winnipeg, and all other French speaking Canadians.

Committees Of The House

[Paul Zed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the associate membership of various committees.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the ninth report later this day.

Income Tax Act

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-240, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (child care expense).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to table this bill in the House today, which proposes to amend the Income Tax Act to convert the child care expense deduction to a tax credit and to extend the same value of tax benefit to those who provide care in the home to their preschool children.

The bill will also recognize the honourable profession of managing the family home and caring for preschool children and eliminate in part the tax discrimination against families that make the choice to stay together and to provide direct parental care.

The bill represents not only a starting point but I believe a turning point whereby family values return to be a significant priority in this place.

If the family were strong, the deficit would be gone.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

Criminal Code

[Paul Forseth, Reform, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-241, an act to amend the Criminal Code (punishment for subsequent and serious personal injury offence).

Madam Speaker, it is snowing today in Ottawa but the daffodils are up in my riding of New Westminster-Burnaby and we have some here today supplied by the radio station CKMW from my riding.

It is a pleasure to introduce the bill to the House. Too often following a serious crime we learn the offender has a long criminal record. We need some common sense crime prevention. This bill would imprison an offender for an indeterminate period of time should they be convicted of a second serious personal injury offence.

At first glance opponents of the bill say it resembles the three strikes and you are out laws currently be used in several U.S. states. However, this bill avoids the shortcomings of the American model. Stealing a pizza or painting one's name on a bridge or even writing a bad cheque, although hurtful and socially disruptive, are not examples of a serious personal injury offence as defined in the Criminal Code.

This amendment would operationalize the existing Criminal Code sections and protect the community from the few offenders who are causing the majority of serious crimes and who are unwilling to reform.

The way the law currently stands there is little deterrence for repeat offenders who commit serious personal injury offences. This bill goes to the source of the problem for the safety of the public. Most important, it places the victim's concerns before those of the offender.

I encourage all members to support this bill.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

Divorce Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-242, an act to amend the Divorce Act (joint custody).

Madam Speaker, first I would like to thank my hon. colleague from Athabasca for seconding this bill.

The Divorce Act is discriminatory. It leaves non-custodial parents, usually fathers, out in the cold. I know some very good fathers who always pay child support but can no longer afford to see their children because their mothers have taken them to live a considerable distance away.

Statistics show a direct correlation between access and non-compliance. Non-custodial parents who get to see their children are more likely to make their payments. However, custody now goes to one parent unless an application for joint custody is made. It should be the reverse.

Joint custody of and access to one's children should be automatic unless it is not in the children's bests interests. Today I am tabling a bill to amend the act to make joint custody automatic.

The recent controversy over child support payment taxation should not detract from the most important issue to children. In most cases that issue is not dollars and cents but guaranteed access to both parents.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

Committees Of The House

[Paul Zed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move that the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented to the House earlier this day, be concurred in.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais)]

Is there unanimous consent to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Motion agreed to.)