Debates of March 26th, 1996

Canadian Security Intelligence Service

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, as far as I can recall all these matters were gone into by SIRC when it reviewed the matter and, as I say, I have no reason to question the conclusions of SIRC in this matter or the advice I have received from the director.

Statistics Canada

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, from the way the Minister of Industry has been answering our questions for the last while, he obviously seems to think that there is nothing unusual in the census being prepared by Statistics Canada. I would therefore like to hear what he has to say about other information we have obtained.

In an information note from Statistics Canada, Census 96 , we read the following:

The priority given priority lists remains unchanged. Please note that a sticker will identify these lists as priority.

However, representatives of the Liberal Party have until March 29 to provide us with additional names and to follow up on your request. It is also possible that the Liberals will provide us with other priority lists of candidates in federal ridings not held by Liberals.

Are the minister's firm assurances based on his complete ignorance of what is going on in his department or do they simply indicate that he is trying to cover up the rather unorthodox treatment reserved for us by these people?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many times I can explain this.

With respect, the hon. Leader of the Opposition has given us a list and it has been forwarded to Statistics Canada. I do not know from what he is reading. I would be happy to look at it if he wants to pass it over to me. It certainly did not originate with me.

I can assure him that members of Parliament from all parties who submitted names through their contact person for census commissioner were disappointed with the results of the testing process.

In order to at least give some opportunity to those many people whose names were submitted-and there are many others that have to be hired because those lists would not be adequate-we have asked Statistics Canada to give priority to the qualified people, after testing, that have been submitted through members' offices.

That includes the names the Leader of the Opposition submitted from Roberval.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that this is a minister with problems. How can the minister make the sort of statements he has just made, when a note on Statistics Canada letterhead says, and I quote: "The big news is that you may go to other sources to recruit enumerators-" and the memo mentions the Bloc Quebecois, students-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Go on, go on.

[An hon. member]

No, no, read the whole thing.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

I will read the whole thing, at the general request of the Liberal Party. Understandably, it will take a little longer, if you insist that I read it all.

The big news is that you may go to other sources to recruit enumerators, CECs, the Bloc Quebecois, students, Statistics Canada lists. However,

You asked and now you shall have the answer.

please inform these candidates that, even if they pass the test, there is no guarantee that they will be called to an interview. It all depends on the number of positions remaining that have not been filled from the priority list.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[An hon. member]

They take their orders from the Liberals.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

How can the minister give us such firm assurances, when we know full well that the priority lists were provided by the Liberals, identified by Cabinet, and that they take priority over ability, as the note says?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Leader of the Opposition would be kind enough to table the documents so that I will have a chance to look at them. They are not something that originated with me or my office.

If the hon. member wishes to provide names, as members of Parliament from all parties have done, those names will be passed on. The people will be subject to some rigid testing. After all, this is the census of Canada. We want qualified people to do the job. We do not want some of those people who counted the ballots in the referendum.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

Disability Tax Credit

[Beth Phinney, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.

People with vision impairment have been affected by the definition of blindness used in the disability tax credit form. Recently in the Hamilton area, Zena Duguay received a letter revoking the credit which she has received for 20 years.

What is the minister doing to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the benefits to which they are entitled?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking the hon. member for Hamilton Mountain for her diligence on this file.

As a result of her representations and representations from other members in the House and the Canadian National Institute for the Blind a problem has been identified with the eligibility certificate used with the disability tax credit, particularly as it relates to Canadians who are blind or visually impaired.

Some of these people were rejected under the credit when, in fact, they are eligible. This will be fixed. The department will work with the CNIB to review the files that were rejected as a result of the problem with the form and that the form will be fixed.

Finally, the department will administer the disability tax credit with fairness and compassion, and where there are administrative improvements that need to be made, we will make them.

Criminal Code

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the justice minister came under fire from the Canadian Police Association for his non-committal stand on the repeal of section 745. What did he do? He referred to a case where a victim's family actually supported an application for a judicial review.

Can the justice minister explain why he did not tell them that the victim's family was also the offender's family? Why did he purposely deceive the members of the-

[Sarkis Assadourian, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

You will never learn.

[An hon. member]

You blew it.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Once again I ask you to be very careful. The words "purposely deceive" are not acceptable. I would ask the hon. member to withdraw those words.

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

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw them. I would like to continue with the question for the justice minister. Why on earth were the members of the CPA not well informed of the situation?

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

Mr. Speaker, the case to which I referred made the point I wanted to express, namely, that not all those persons serving time for murder are career criminals, are dangerous offenders and there are exceptional circumstances. The case to which I referred was just that, an exceptional circumstance.

In the course of my address yesterday before the police association I told its members that I am working with the solicitor general on proposals which we are going to bring to caucus and then to cabinet to change section 745 to deal with the issues that have been raised in the public debate that has gone on now for some months in this country.

We have not ruled out the repeal of the section but I made the point yesterday that if we were to simply repeal, as the Reform Party would have us do, many people contend it would overlook the hard fact that serving time for murder are people in exceptional circumstances. That is exactly the illustration I made with the case to which the hon. member has referred.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would inform the justice minister that it is not just the Reform Party that wants the section repealed.

In fact, yesterday the Canadian Police Association told the minister it would not support anything short of an absolute repeal of section 745, and that includes many other people in this country. No amendments will be supported.

Why does the minister continue to tinker with this ridiculous law in the face of mountains of petitions, loud and persistent requests from victims, from police and from a majority of the members in the House of Commons?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the solicitor general and I have told the House, and as I told the police association yesterday, we are bringing forward proposals for discussion in caucus and in cabinet that will meet the issues that have been raised.

It is important for at least the members of this party, if my hon. friend is not able to do it, to draw distinctions and to look at cases that are different. As we consider section 745 we shall consider all of its implications.

The simple point that I made yesterday, I make today: all of those serving murder sentences are not necessarily in identical circumstances and we should bear that in mind as we look at section 745.

Canada Labour Code

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General.

On January 31, 1996, the following recommendation was made on page 55 of the report by the task force examining part I of the Canada Labour Code: "That the government undertake an examination to determine the appropriateness of allowing RCMP officers to unionize and to conduct collective bargaining under legislation other than the Canada Labour Code."

Yesterday the Solicitor General told the Canadian Police Association that he was refusing to allow RCMP officers to exercise their legitimate right to unionize. Does the minister not acknowledge that he has thus rejected out of hand the process of public consultation announced by the Minister of Labour concerning RCMP unionization?