Debates of Sept. 18th, 1996

The Somalia Inquiry

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the terms of reference for this inquiry are well known. They are well established. The commission is to issue a report when it concludes its deliberations.

Those are the terms of reference given to the commission and those are the terms of reference with which the commission is comfortable. I ask the hon. members to await the conclusions of the commissioners.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is the Prime Minister who thinks that it is taking too long, it is the government who decides on the mandate. If he wants to have results and be able clean things up quickly and restore the credibility of the armed forces, why does he not ask for an interim report on the cover-up operation? Why does he not act quickly?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, once again members of the opposition are prejudging testimony and coming to conclusions about the evidence that has been presented to the inquiry. That is not the way the inquiry process works and that is not the way Canadian justice works.

I hope the hon. member will do everyone a favour and wait for the report to be issued by the commissioners so that everyone's testimony and all the facts can be judged in a clear cool light.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is amazing what can come out through the old process of word association.

Yesterday I asked the Prime Minister about cover up at the Somalia inquiry and for some reason he started talking immediately about the Watergate affair in the United States, a Freudian slip.

You may wish to check whether the tapes of yesterday's question period were erased. Surely the Prime Minister did not mean that the tampering and political interference at the Somalia inquiry had reached Watergate proportions.

What precisely was the Prime Minister trying to say when he drew some parallel between his handling of the Somalia inquiry and the Watergate affair?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I guess the leader of the third party needs a new speech writer.

I said earlier in French that we instituted the commission because we wanted to get to the bottom of the Somalia affair and receive recommendations so that we can change what has to be changed. When we were in opposition we did ask for a commission like that. We established that commission and we would like to have the report as quickly as possible.

The leader of the third party yesterday asked if we wanted to have the report before the election. I would be delighted to have the report tomorrow so we could act. We are not trying to cover up anything. We instituted the inquiry and we want the result in the shortest term possible so that we can have a report.

To please the party of the Leader of the Opposition, who wanted to have it before the election, I do not know when I will have an election. If I were him I would not hope for a quick election.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's comments on the Somalia inquiry have been contradictory and confusing and they are again today.

Yesterday the Prime Minister told the House he did not meet General Boyle until he appointed him chief of the defence staff. Yet his communications director told the Globe and Mail that the Prime Minister actually conducted the job interview.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Monday the Prime Minister said the Somalia inquiry would be allowed to do its work without political interference. Yesterday, however, the Prime Minister took a shot at the inquiry by saying it was too slow, too expensive and too hard on witnesses.

Will the Prime Minister explain these contradictions? Did the Prime Minister not know who General Boyle was until he was appointed or did he conduct the job interview? Is the inquiry independent or is the government telling it through the Prime Minister that it is too slow, too expensive and too hard on witnesses?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, of course I knew of Mr. Boyle because I had studied the files of many candidates and I had some recommendations. But I did not know him personally.

When he came I interviewed him, but I knew a lot about him and it was rather good. But I had not met him. Sometimes we know a lot about candidates in many fields without meeting them. I do that regularly in appointments. Because we receive recommendations and we name somebody, that does not mean that we had a beer with the guy the day before. That means that we looked at his cv, the recommendation, the abilities and we made a decision.

After I met General Boyle-he was on a short list-and I knew at that moment that he could fill the bill. Let him do his job. When the inquiry is done we will have the results. The sooner the better because yesterday the leader of the third party was afraid that the report would come after the election, so he should ask them to do it as fast as possible to have it before the election.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's handling of the Somalia inquiry and Somalia affair is symptomatic of the government's management of a lot of other things.

National defence is a $10 billion department. Its work is vital to the national interest. Its international peacekeeping is a source of pride for all Canadians, yet for three years under this government its affairs have been mismanaged and its reputation has been allowed to deteriorate with no end in sight.

Do not the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces and the Canadian public deserve something better?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, they really deserve the support of the third party for the very good job they are doing today in the former Yugoslavia, the job they are doing today in Haiti and in other places in the world. They are doing a good job.

It is because I have a lot of respect for them that I decided it was not to be a revolving door for the political leadership of that department. I gave them an experienced politician and a good administrator to do the job, to stay there and do what is needed to have the most modern armed force available that is possible at this moment.

Youth Unemployment

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Prime Minister.

Youth unemployment has reached disastrous proportions. If we consider both those who are unemployed and those who left the

labour market, many because they were discouraged, today at least 479,000 young people in Canada between the ages of 15 and 24 are unemployed.

How can the Prime Minister say he is satisfied with his performance on creating jobs when he knows perfectly well only one out of two young people has a job?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, no one will ever be satisfied with the situation of the unemployed in this country, whether we are talking about the young or not so young, as long as anyone remains unemployed.

The hon. member surely recognizes the efforts deployed, not only by the Government of Canada but by other levels of government and the private sector. This summer, for instance, about 60,000 young people across the country were hired thanks to the efforts of the Government of Canada. Furthermore, and I think this is worthy of mention, when we consider the efforts deployed by the private sector in partnership with governments and youth organizations, I think we will realize that although this is a major challenge, some progress has already been made, and even young people have admitted as much.

Of course, much remains to be done, but we are not the only country where youth unemployment is a major problem.

In fact, the hon. member is probably aware that this week here in Ottawa, we organized a conference on all aspects of the problems facing young people in Canada.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today there are 25,000 fewer young people employed than when this government came to power, and meanwhile the number of young people has increased.

What kind of hope can the Prime Minister give hundreds of thousands of unemployed young Canadians and Quebecers, when it is a fact that he himself excluded funds targeted to young people from negotiations on manpower policy transfers to the provincial governments which, as he himself has admitted, work more efficiently, preferring to spread funding around his government's employment programs for purely political purposes?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, if we seriously want to help young Quebecers and young Canadians across the country to find jobs, we must create a climate of stability within our economy.

If anyone is aware of the problems facing young people in the Montreal region, for instance, where we know the unemployment rate is very high, it is certainly the hon. member opposite. But we must all be aware of our responsibilities. If we want the private sector to play its role, which should always be to create jobs, we should provide the right kind of economic climate, and we should listen to young people like Mario Dumont, who know what has to be done in this country.

National Defence

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Defence talked about fairness. Let us explore that today.

Colonel Haswell has been charged. Corporal Purnelle has been charged. However, General Boyle receives preferential treatment after admitting that he lied to military police and that he broke the spirit of the Access to Information Act. Canadians are saying quite clearly that he should be fired.

General Boyle has admitted responsibility. Why will the minister not hold him accountable?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, not only has the hon. member and his colleagues shown contempt for the inquiry by continually reflecting on evidence at the commission, but today he goes further. He is reflecting on the military justice system. He is bringing forward the names of individuals who are now subject to certain processes within the department and within the armed forces. He is using their names and bringing them to the floor of the House of Commons.

This is something that must not be done. I am surprised at that. The hon. member, as a former employee of the armed forces, should know better than to do that in a public way. It shows contempt of the entire judicial process.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the only contempt is shown by the hon. Minister of National Defence.

It is interesting to note that the minister uses the shield of the Somalia inquiry when it is convenient to the minister. In other words, to protect his own sorry butt.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC]

Our armed forces personnel-

[The Speaker]

I am sure the House is used to colloquial statements, however, I wish we could stay away from the human anatomy in question period.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry. I would like to continue.

Our armed forces personnel know what it means to accept responsibility. It means that you are held accountable. Yesterday

the Prime Minister referred to the Watergate incident. In Watergate people were fired, people were charged and people resigned.

When will the Prime Minister fire the Minister of National Defence?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member must get his jokes from the same barber his leader uses.

We have here a group of people in opposition who congratulated the government when it established the inquiry. They do not want to do the decent thing and wait for the inquiry to do its work, to report and then make judgments.

[Translation]

Government Contracts

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. On Monday, the Prime Minister used the government's practice of tendering contracts to justify the fact that Quebec was not getting its fair share of federal spending on goods and services. I will remind him that a $2 billion contract for the manufacture of armoured vehicles was awarded in Ontario without any call for tenders.

In light of what he said on Monday, how can the Prime Minister justify his defence minister's decision not to require GM, of London, Ontario, to call for tenders from subcontractors, knowing that Oerlikon, of Saint-Jean, Quebec, could then have put in a bid?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as members know, about a year ago we announced one of the purchases which was outlined in the white paper for armoured personnel carriers. This was a solely directed contract to General Motors Diesel Division in London, Ontario. Negotiations are taking place right now between the government and General Motors under the auspices of my colleague the minister for government services.

There has been some concern about the nature of the work and how much of it will be done in Canada. A question has arisen with respect to the capability of a company in Quebec. Because of the concerns that the government and General Motors had, those matters were referred to an independent third party who has made a report.

The negotiations are between General Motors and the government. This is a commercial, contractual relationship which I am sure will stand great scrutiny.