Debates of April 30th, 1996

Referendums

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is anything to add to what the Minister of Justice has said. A referendum is always a consultation of the people. When there is a referendum, the laws of the country in question must be respected, first and foremost. There have been two referendums. If there is another, we shall see, but for the moment other things are in the works, and I do not know when there will be one. When there is, we shall see.

For the moment, however, the premier of Quebec says he wants an election first and a referendum later, and he is not prepared to say much more about it. Nor am I. In due course, however, as I have always said, things will have to be made very clear to avoid confusion.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, there are many who agree with that, but at least three government ministers made statements and comments yesterday on the situation. The Prime Minister should turn to his cabinet colleagues and tell them "Ladies and Gentlemen, move on to some other topic". That is what he should do.

Meanwhile, since the Minister of Justice, someone who is far from being a junior member of this government, has made statements of such importance to the future of this issue, how can the Prime Minister-I wish to ask the Prime Minister-how can he now state that the next referendum will be merely a consultation, merely consultative, when he himself, in speaking to the people of Quebec right before the last referendum, told them their decision would be irreversible? How can he reconcile the two?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the problem was not raised by the ministers. The problem was raised by the premier of Quebec this past Sunday, when he wanted to change the subject from Bill 101. He raised this completely hypothetical question and the minister responded.

As for my statement, I have nothing to take back. I have always said here, I took a two-week break and then the Bloc leader quit, but I always said and I repeat, we will not break up the country with a very tight majority vote after a judicial recount.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, we will gladly call it quits on that, but I would appreciate it if the Prime Minister would speak to his ministers, in order to avoid any ambiguity, and would let us know if he dares deny that, after obtaining a mandate from the people of Quebec in a referendum, the Government of Quebec can then effect sovereignty. Let him say it frankly, and then it will be clear. His ministers will stop talking about it and everybody will be happy.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I prefer to talk about something that is fact. Quebecers have twice decided to remain in Canada. That is what we ought to talk about.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, up to now, the Prime Minister's approach in constitutional matters has been to complicate rather than to simplify. A number of influential federalist business people are criticizing his lack of vision and his government's lack of planning in this matter. His ministers' contradictory statements in this regard bear eloquent witness.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Whom are we to believe in this government between the Minister of Justice, who accords no more than a consultative value to referendums, and the immigration minister, who claims that, if the rules were clear, the referendum would have a real value?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, when we have a referendum, we will ensure the rules are clear.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, and the Prime Minister is still at it. Instead of playing cat and mouse with such a weighty matter as constitutional issues, could the Prime Minister say clearly, once and for all, whether he accords Quebecers the right to decide their future democratically themselves? It is simple: yes or no, Mr. Prime Minister.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am not the one talking about these problems, it is Mr. Bouchard. If precisions are needed, it is the people of Quebec who need them at this point, because everyone wants a moratorium in order to create jobs and revitalize the economy, Montreal's in particular.

This is what Mr. Bouchard himself has called for. He called for an end to discussions on the Constitution and referendums and instead the creation of a climate favourable to investment in

Quebec. The important thing is for those opposite to state their position on Bill 101 within their own party.

Deputy Prime Minister

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Hamilton Spectator is full of letters from constituents angry and embarrassed by the Deputy Prime Minister's inaction.

Susan Kalbfleisch writes: "How can we teach our children that honour, integrity and personal responsibility are important when one of our leaders sets such a poor example?"

Ivy Brittain from Hamilton writes: "I don't think any of her constituents in Hamilton think too much of her right now. She was the one who said she would resign if the promise to abolish the GST wasn't kept".

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Why will she not put personal responsibility and integrity ahead of her political career and resign her seat now in the House of Commons?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the acting leader of the third party should concentrate her attentions at this moment on the awful statement made by the member for Nanaimo-Cowichan. It was just about the worst statement we could hear in Canadian society.

I am the leader of a political party. In that party are members of different colour. There are the members for Nunatsiaq, for Malton, for Bruce-Grey, for Etobicoke-Lakeshore. The member for Richmond and other members of other minorities are here and I will never ask them to go to the back. I am proud of them. They will always be in the front row of the Liberal Party.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[The Speaker]

I would ask that the questions should be directed to the administrative responsibility of a minister or the government.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I just say again that I am committed to the equality of all people in the country, and all politicians as well. When one politician breaks a promise after that promise has been made with real commitment, then it puts all of us to shame.

The Toronto Star in its editorial column states that the Deputy Prime Minister should quit now to help restore public faith in the system and face her voters in an immediate byelection''. The editorial went on to say:Her departure would also help staunch the tidal wave of public cynicism that has greeted Liberal pronouncements''.

I ask the Deputy Prime Minister, not her little answer man, if she will restore public faith in the political system, live up to her commitments and face the voters of Hamilton East in an immediate byelection? Will she do that today?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, she can throw books and show good behaviour like that in the House of Commons, but I would like to know if she will ask the member for Nanaimo-Cowichan to resign because he made a most outrageous statement. We have members of Parliament-one in the Bloc and one in the NDP party-who have admitted they are homosexual. They have the right to be in this House like anybody else.

To see these people trying to teach me a lesson today on ethics when they have colleagues who discriminate against people because of colour, language, sexual orientation and sex is unacceptable. I will not be put in the corner by the bully from Alberta.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, again we are talking about commitment and a promise that was made before the last election. That promise was made several times after the election.

The editorialist at the Globe and Mail today said that the Liberal's shameful performance in the GST affair feeds the very disillusionment with politics and politicians that brought these people to power in 1993.

The article went on to say that if the government truly wants to restore honesty and integrity to public life and teach Canadians to trust their leaders again, the Deputy Prime Minister must "do the honourable thing and resign".

I ask the Deputy Prime Minister again, will she in the words of the Globe and Mail continue to bring ``dishonour on herself, her government and-

[The Speaker]

With respect, I remind members that we cannot say something using someone else's words what we would not say here in the House of Commons. With regard to the word she used, dishonour, I would like the hon. member for Beaver River to withdraw that word.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw it and will let the Globe and Mail know that.

Will she do the right-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

The question has been put. If the question is to be answered, we will hear it.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, at this moment if I were a member of the Reform Party I would be very embarrassed to see the acting leader get up in this House and ask three questions after she has agreed with the member for Nanaimo-Cowichan.

One of the things that has made this a great country is that we have welcomed people from all parts of the world, people with different religions, different colours and so on. We have made one great family. I do not feel very comfortable to have a party with views like that in front of me in the House of Commons.

Somalia Inquiry

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

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

Yesterday the government lawyer objected to the Somalia inquiry being able to do its work properly. Today, the government must backtrack before the general outcry in reaction to this new attempt at a cover-up.

Are we to understand that the minister of defence shares fully the opinion of the head of the commission that the commission's mandate with respect to allegations of cover-up and destruction of evidence extends beyond the period initially foreseen and that it therefore includes allegations that a cover-up took place and is perhaps still taking place under the present government?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can make clear to the hon. member and to the House that the government does not question for a moment the right and the jurisdiction of the inquiry to look into the whole question of cover-up. That is well within the mandate of the commission.

The issue that was addressed yesterday was evidentiary in nature. Counsel for the government took a position with respect to the production of certain tapes and transcripts. That material has now been handed over and made available to the commission which has made a ruling in respect of it.

Last August the commission had occasion to consider the ambit of its mandate and in a written ruling released August 3 of last year, it expressly found it had the jurisdiction under its mandate to look into allegations of cover-up with respect to the incidents in Somalia. That is a position with which this government is in full agreement. From day to day at the hearing, we co-operate fully in assisting the commission to do that job.

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

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Justice has just said, if the commission's mandate consists in getting to the bottom of the allegations of cover-up, as well as the disappearance and alteration of documents produced under the present government, can the defence minister or the justice minister reassure us today that when the inquiry is over, the commission will table a complete report on this affair, including the names of those responsible and the appropriate sanctions, if any?

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

Mr. Speaker, the commission has its own counsel and will do what it is advised in making a report.

On behalf of the Government of Canada and the commission, particularly in relation to legal representation, we fully agree that the commission's mandate includes the right to look at allegations of cover-up.

We are committed to co-operating with the commission in that work. We invite the commission, expressly and implicitly, to make whatever finding is appropriate on the facts as it finds them in relation to the allegations of cover-up.