Debates of June 17th, 1996

First Ministers' Conference

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

On that topic, Mr. Speaker, we will review together the report prepared by the provincial governments themselves. They have prepared and submitted to the federal government a report that we have considered.

My feeling is that we agree on many aspects of this study prepared by the provincial governments themselves. This means we will be able to compare notes on these points and, if possible, improve the Canadian social security system. Our positions are well known. Take the five principles of medicare; they are respected by everyone. And just recently, the Government of Alberta, which had resisted complying, signed with the Minister of Health an agreement whereby the five conditions set out in the Canada Health Act will now be applied in Alberta as in every other province.

I would say we are making considerable headway in this area. Our Friday afternoon meeting on this subject will go along the same lines of ensuring that Canada's social security system provides all Canadians with a minimum level of protection, as everyone or almost everyone in this House hopes for.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the report the Prime Minister is referring to reflects the opinion of the majority of provinces. Quebec has always insisted on having control over social policies and their integration and making its own decisions in that regard.

By trying to take over-that is what this is-all social programs in Canada and trying to impose national standards as it did in the areas of manpower, forestry and mining, to name but a few, is the Prime Minister not using a sleight of hand to in fact centralize behind our backs by keeping all real decision making powers in his hands?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I find it very difficult to understand, when we are proposing to get out of some fields, that I suddenly become a centralisateur. It is a bit difficult for me to understand but I will reflect on it. They want the government to stay in manpower. Fine. If they wanted the government to stay in forestry, mining and many other sectors, it would. However, the government is not interested.

We want to ameliorate the federation and clarify the responsibilities so the citizens of Canada will have a better system of government at the provincial and federal level. This is the goal we are trying to achieve. I am convinced that by Friday most of the provinces will be very happy to accept new responsibilities and accept that the government is getting out of some responsibilities.

If the hon. member wants to tell the Quebec government that I should keep or increase the same responsibilities, that is fine with me.

Airbus

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has now admitted his lawyers are discussing a possible out of court settlement with Brian Mulroney over the Airbus affair. He has even said that such a settlement "would be very desirable".

I will tell the House what a settlement with Brian Mulroney would be. It would be an admission that the justice department has botched its investigation. It would be an admission that it had no evidence in the first place and tried to hide this fact from the Canadian people from the outset.

If the justice minister says his department is acting responsibly every step of the way, will he promise here and now not to do a closed door deal with Brian Mulroney?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member errs in two respects in putting her question. First, she referred to a justice department investigation.

The police are the people who investigate, and it was the Royal Canadian Mounted Police that conducted and is conducting an investigation into this case. The role of the Department of Justice, as the hon. member knows or perhaps should know, is that the international assistance group was asked to communicate to a foreign government a request for assistance in the course of that investigation.

The second error into which the hon. member fell was to assert there may have been no evidence from the outset. That too is a matter that relates to the police investigation. If the Royal Canadian Mounted Police chooses to start or conduct or conclude an investigation based on what it finds or does not find, that is for it to decide. The police in this country conduct investigations based on their own judgments.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the point. If the RCMP is investigating, let it investigate. Let us not talk about backroom deals and out of court settlements. This is absolutely ridiculous.

I will tell the House what else an out of court settlement would be. It would be a slap in the face to millions of Canadians who would be forking out millions of dollars to pay this off because of the minister's incompetence.

I want the minister to promise to me and to Canadians right here and right now that as soon as he signs this out of court settlement with Brian Mulroney the next thing he will do is sign his own resignation. Will he or will he not?

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

Mr. Speaker, the only person talking about backroom deals is the hon. member for Beaver River. The only person talking about the payment of millions of dollars today is the hon. member for Beaver River.

I am busy defending a lawsuit on behalf of the Government of Canada and the people of this country.

Status Of Women

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. On Saturday, between 5,000 and 10,000 women and men came to Parliament Hill to demand that the government fulfil the commitments it made during the last election campaign, including the provision of day care services and the creation of jobs. The Bloc Quebecois met with women's groups this morning, and it shares their concerns.

Given that the federal budget for day care services went, without any explanation, from $630 million down to $250 million, will the Prime Minister tell us what he did with the money that is missing and when he will give back to the children, through the provinces of course, all the money owed to them?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite obvious what happened to the money. The agreement that was suggested, put forward to the provinces, was not accepted by the provinces. The federal government then of course came back to the drawing board and is interested in having a discussion with the provinces.

If the provinces want to make a proposal to the federal government we would be very interested in seeing the proposal. When that happens we will make comments on it, when we know what the provinces would like to see in the field of child care.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is what happens when the government sets conditions.

On Friday, the Prime Minister said that, to eliminate child poverty, work had to be available for the parents. Since he intends to discuss the establishment of a job creation program during the first ministers' conference, will he make sure that, this time, unlike the last infrastructure program, there will be jobs for women?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where members of the opposition have been. We of course in this Parliament have talked about jobs and the economy over and over again.

Quite frankly, if they look at the results of the government they will know we have created over 600,000 jobs by the improvements we have made to the economy and by making sure we keep our eye on the ball.

If the member is not aware of the information and the improvements we have made to the economy and the improvements we will continue to make, all she has to do is ask for a briefing and we will give her the information that shows the government has done a good job and will continue to improve on that. We will show the results with other programs we have already put in place in the past.

Airbus

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in December the Minister of Justice told reporters he had passed on information to the RCMP about the Airbus affair. He said: "I have never had an instance occur where I passed information on and heard back from the RCMP in any way whatsoever".

Last Thursday, however, the minister told the House that the RCMP did indeed write back to him. I ask the Minister of Justice if he could simply explain this contradiction.

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

I am delighted, Mr. Speaker, but first let me correct another error I am afraid.

The research department for the hon. member's party consists of a clipping service from the Sun chain of newspapers, so it is very difficult for it to carry on.

Let me correct an error. The hon. member referred to a statement I made last December that I had communicated information about the Airbus matter, and that is wrong.

What I said, which is a matter of public record, is that in discharging my responsibilities as I saw them, when I was fixed with knowledge of alleged wrongdoing by the previous government, after consulting with my deputy and with the solicitor general, I passed that on to the police to do with as they might. They looked into the matter and responded by saying they were going to take no steps as there was no basis for doing so.

In terms of the most recent clipping from which the hon. member is working, I can also say that last December when I was interviewed by Mr. Koring of the Globe and Mail who put that question to me, I did say I had not heard back. I was reminded within a few days and then I pointed out to the Globe and Mail within a few days that indeed I had heard back. That is the fact.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, all last week and this week the Minister of Justice has been skilfully trying to get himself stepped back from this whole thing. We almost have to congratulate him for his sleight of hand. While he may think he is fooling people, he certainly is not.

I would like to allow the minister one chance to clarify the situation. The minister has related to us the way he remembers the event, but just to make it clear, in the interests of transparency and clarity, I ask the minister if he would please table the letter from the RCMP in the House. Will he do that?

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

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will.

Let me say this in response to the hon. member's question. He speaks about my skilfully trying to distance myself from events. That is not the case. What I have been trying to do last week and today is to explain and emphasize for the hon. member and his colleagues that we are dealing with two different matters. It is neither accurate nor appropriate to mix them.

On the first hand we have a Minister of Justice who receives information about an alleged wrongdoing in the past government who, in discharge of a responsibility, after consulting with the

deputy minister and the solicitor general, communicates that to the police. The hon. member for Calgary Southwest last week conceded that that indeed is the proper course.

A second and separate matter is the decision by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for its own reasons to commence its own investigation at a later time on the Airbus matter. It is separate. It is different. It is a matter for the police to decide.

If the hon. member can understand that those two matters are separate, he will be a long way down the road to understanding these matters.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice is using lofty principles to hide his improvisation in the Airbus affair. The minister must move beyond discourse and explain the facts.

Does the Minister of Justice confirm that he looked into the Airbus affair, in a personal and partisan manner, when he was a Liberal candidate in the 1993 general election?

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

No, Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge of what the hon. member refers to. I have told the House what is in issue in this matter. What is in issue in this matter is a police investigation. The role of the Department of Justice in that investigation has been made clear. Those are the facts.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, can the justice minister rise in his place and tell us on his honour that in no way-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Dear colleague, there is no question of giving one's word of honour; this is always understood in the House of Commons. We therefore have no need to speak about it.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I therefore ask the justice minister if he will rise in his place and tell us that he in no way made personal inquiries with anybody at all concerning the Airbus affair when he was a Liberal candidate in 1993?

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no idea what the hon. member is asking or referring to. The facts of this matter are before the House, as are the responses I have given to the questions that have been put.

Trade

[John English, Liberal, Kitchener, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade and concerns the Helms-Burton legislation. What is the minister doing to confront this attempt by the U.S. Congress to deny Canadians the legitimate right to do business with Cuba?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I announced today on behalf of the government our response to the Helms-Burton legislation.

We are attempting to protect Canadian sovereign interests, foreign policy, trade policy and the legal operations of Canadian businesses in Cuba. We have proposed amendments to the foreign extraterritorial measures act that would block any attempt by a company in a foreign country to carry out a court order within Canada on an objectionable piece of legislation like Helms-Burton. We have provided for a clawback provision that they can recover within Canada moneys and assets lost in the United States on such an action. Finally, the penalties have been increased for companies that follow the law of a foreign country as opposed to the law of this country.

We hope that this will act as an effective deterrent to prevent the kind of operations, the kind of court action which is envisioned by the Helms-Burton bill in the United States, a unilateral action which we believe is wrong in principle, wrong in purpose and wrong in practice.

In addition, we will be continuing with an action under the North American Free Trade Agreement. We will continue with the NAFTA commission meeting.

Pearson International Airport

[Jim Gouk, Reform, Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it seems these days the Liberals are out to cut deals to try to get themselves out of messes that a more competent government would not have gotten itself into. The Mulroney Airbus fiasco is only one example.

With this in mind, can the Minister of Justice tell the House whether he plans to try to reach an out of court settlement with the Pearson Development Corporation, or does he intend to try to pass legislation that overturns the rule of law and interferes with a court case in progress?