Debates of Sept. 26th, 1996

Reform Party

[Ed Harper, Reform, Simcoe Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last night I had the pleasure of attending the first Reform nomination meeting to choose a candidate for the next federal election.

Over 1,000 attended the meeting in Owen Sound for the Ontario riding of Bruce-Grey. Of the three outstanding candidates, Murray Peer was elected and will carry the Reform message to the voters.

The enthusiasm and support shown for our candidate and our policies was surpassed only by the profound disappointment toward this government's lack of vision or any plans to deal with job creation, tax reduction, criminal justice reform and the separatist threat.

Murray Peer will not have to respond to broken promises on jobs, the GST and MP pension reform. He will be able to assure the voters that they will be listened to and have their voice heard in this place. He will offer the voters a platform with a new vision for Canada and an opportunity for a fresh start to building a new and better country for our children and our grandchildren.

Teen Smoking

[Brenda Chamberlain, Liberal, Guelph—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians should be concerned about the issue of teen smoking.

I recently met with Dr. Cunningham, director of the addictions division of the Homewood Health Centre in Guelph. Dr. Cunningham reminded me that new smokers are almost always teenagers. It is extremely rare for adults over 20 to begin smoking.

According to the information we discussed, it takes only four cigarettes, smoked in a row, for a young person to become addicted to nicotine. Many people believe that tobacco is addictive. We must all be vigilant where tobacco products are sold and advertised and we must look at treatment programs aimed to help our kids quit.

Our children are our future. They deserve no less than an all out effort to discourage them from smoking and to help those who smoke quit. Let us give them a helping hand in the battle against tobacco.

Quebec's Plan For Sovereignty

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Vaudreuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's intergovernmental affairs minister, Jacques Brassard, said yesterday that: "Whether it is the Superior Court, the Appeal Court or the Supreme Court, Quebec's position remains the same. A judge remains a judge. We feel that this is not a matter for judges, regardless of the level of the court".

The PQ government just indicated that its independence project is above the laws and the courts. It tells voters that a separatist government can flout the laws of this country if they do not serve its sovereignist cause.

Quebecers should wonder about the type of society and justice that they can be guaranteed by a government which, in order to justify its independence project, does not hesitate to disregard the fundamental laws of our country.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, like a schoolmaster drilling his students, I am going to try to get a very simple idea across to my colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois.

For 30 years now, you have been getting this message from all the economic stakeholders in Quebec, from the analysts in credit rating agencies, from a majority of Quebecers in the last two referendums, and recently from certain union and political leaders in Quebec.

Yesterday, it was the mayor of Montreal, Mr. Bourque, today it is Paule Doré, the president of the Montreal chamber of commerce, who has added her voice to all those who are calling for an end to the political instability created by your plan to separate.

Perhaps if they hear it often enough, they will finally get it.

Sale Of Electricity From Churchill Falls

[Bernard Deshaies, Bloc, Abitibi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this week the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs described the contract to sell electricity from Churchill Falls as unfair. He almost went so far as to advise Newfoundland to go back on its agreement, as that province did once before, with Meech.

There are three facts regarding this contract that must be remembered. Only Hydro-Québec was willing to invest in a dam in Newfoundland in the mid sixties. In 1984 and 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the validity of the contract for the sale of electricity. Hydro-Québec's profits from the signing of this contract are comparable to the profits made by the other dams built during this period.

If he is looking for unjust causes, the minister has only to recall how Newfoundland got its hands on Labrador. In 1927, his Liberal predecessors ceded Labrador to Newfoundland, without Quebec's permission.

The minister should therefore stick to the job he has been assigned. He already has his hands full.

Middle East

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Reform Party and all Canadians I would like to condemn the growing violence on the West Bank in Gaza and call on the Israeli and Palestinian leadership to spare no efforts in immediately re-establishing peace in this very serious situation.

Years of effort in the Middle East peace talks are hanging in the balance and the peace and security of all citizens in the affected areas are in jeopardy. So the time for decisive leadership is now.

Canadians care deeply about what happens in the Middle East and they deplore the kind of violence we see today. Therefore I call on the Canadian government to immediately speak with Israeli and Palestinian officials to forcefully urge an end to the violence and to offer whatever diplomatic assistance that might be helpful in restoring calm and restarting the peace talks.

Peace is a fragile thing and we must not stand by and watch it be destroyed.

Interprovincial Job Exchange

[Denis Paradis, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the young students from British Columbia, Alberta, Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Brome-Missisquoi and elsewhere who took part in the interprovincial job exchange this summer join with me in thanking the people at Human Resources Canada and Heritage Canada for their enthusiastic support, Nancy Beattie, the co-ordinator for her exceptional work, and especially the host families and the employers who took them in.

The students and I would also like to thank Canadian air carriers, as well as VIA Rail, not to mention Ontario Northland, who allowed the students to travel for free. These young people earned a

few dollars, improved their second language, and, above all, learned to know and appreciate a culture different from their own. A big bravo.

Clifford Olson

[John Nunziata, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, 15 years ago Clifford Olson raped and murdered 11 innocent children.

This summer he applied for early release under section 745. Last week we learned that 12 tapes were produced at the request of the FBI and the RCMP so that Clifford Olson could explain how he raped and murdered his victims. We also learned that five of those tapes were released to Clifford Olson's lawyer. Clifford Olson has written to me, offering to send me those tapes for $300.

Enough is enough. Not only did he offer to sell the tapes to me and presumably to others, he forwarded hard core pornography in his correspondence to me. How can a convicted killer and rapist have hard core pornography in his cell?

Correctional Service Canada must be held accountable for the treatment it is giving to Clifford Olson. Exactly what was the deal in order to produce those tapes?

Marianne Limpert

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton—York—Sunbury, NB]

Mr. Speaker, this summer was marked by the Atlanta Olympics. I want to take this opportunity to offer my congratulations to Marianne Limpert from Fredericton who did our country proud by winning a silver medal in swimming in the 200 metre individual medley.

Marianne is the first New Brunswicker ever to win a medal at a summer Olympic Games, and her hometown gave her a hero's welcome when she arrived back, even naming a street after her, Limpert Lane.

She now holds the Canadian record in her event and there will be a Marianne Limpert scholarship fund launched on October 4. It is important that we continue to support amateur athletes so they are able to follow their dreams. I know Marianne has inspired many young Canadians to attain their personal bests.

I look forward to meeting with Marianne when she and Fredericton's Hal Merrill, Paralypmic bronze medalist, meet with the Prime Minister next week.

Pearson Airport

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a sure thing that Canadian taxpayers will be paying the Pearson airport piper because of this Liberal government's pathetic performance.

All indications point to a federal settlement where Canadians will be expected to fork over in excess of $60 million for a contract cancellation that this government guaranteed would not cost a penny more than $35 million.

We can probably expect that Canadian travellers will be stuck with a new tax in the future and will all pay it at the airport.

Three years of lost opportunity, multimillion dollar compensation payments and a new airport tax, that is what the people of Canada got from the Prime Minister's irresponsible decision during the 1993 election.

They won the election but once again Canadians lose. It is the Canadian taxpayer who will pay for the Liberal screw-up on the Pearson airport deal.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, in a departure from our usual procedure, I wish to draw to your attention the presence in the gallery of Mr. István Szent-Iványi, State Secretary of the Hungarian Foreign Ministry.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Referendums

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today the Minister of Justice has decided to call upon the Supreme Court on the referendum question, stating as his reason, and I quote: "To leave this issue unresolved would pose a serious threat to orderly government in Quebec and in the rest of Canada".

Could the minister explain to us why order and good government would be threatened today, when this was not the case in 1980, nor in the last referendum in 1995? If the government is going before the Supreme Court today, is the real reason not that it has nothing to offer Quebec and is afraid of losing the next referendum?

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

Mr. Speaker, the questions being asked in the referral to the Supreme Court of Canada are entirely based on the position taken by the attorney general of Quebec himself in the Bertrand case.

Everyone believed that the primacy of the rule of law here in Canada was obvious, and the unilateral declaration of independence by Quebec was illegal and irresponsible, yet the attorney general of Quebec stated for the first time a few months ago that

the courts and the Constitution have nothing to do with the process by which Quebec is proceeding toward sovereignty.

It is, therefore, the responsibility of this government to clarify and determine these basic questions. We have asked the questions in this referral in order to clarify and precisely determine the primacy of the rule of law in Canada and the fact that a unilateral declaration of independence is illegal and irresponsible in Canada.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister also stated today, and again I quote: "Any government that suggests it would throw Quebec and all of Canada into the confusion of a unilateral declaration of independence is being profoundly irresponsible. It is a formula for chaos".

But who are the ones being irresponsible? The Government of Quebec for proposing, after obtaining a democratic mandate from the people of Quebec to negotiate on an equal basis for the first time in its life, or this government for wishing to impose the same legal framework as was in place for Meech Lake, where a single MP from Manitoba, or a province like Newfoundland, could decide Quebec's future? Which is the irresponsible one?

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

Mr. Speaker, what we want is the same thing the people of Quebec want, that is to say an orderly process to settle the challenge facing us. That orderly process is the primacy of the rule of law, the courts and the Constitution, and in the aftermath of a referendum we shall have the Constitution and an orderly process.

With the process the hon. member proposes, we will indeed have chaos, because a unilateral declaration of independence is irresponsible. On behalf of all Canadians, including the people of Quebec, we have chosen to refer these questions in order to clarify the underlying principle concerning the Canadian system.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, some fine Constitution, one rejected by all Quebecers. There is no political party in Quebec-be it the federalist Liberal Party of Quebec or the Parti Quebecois-no government which has recognized the Constitution. It was imposed upon us in the dead of night by the Prime Minister.

The minister tells us that he is calling upon the Supreme Court because Quebec has no right to declare its sovereignty unilaterally. I wonder why Quebec could not make its decision to become sovereign on its own, while Canada could make a unilateral decision to keep Quebec in Canada against the will of Quebecers. How can it be that some are allowed to do what others are not? Is that what you call democracy?

[The Speaker]

Dear colleagues, let me remind you that you must always address the Chair.

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

Mr. Speaker, much as the hon. member wants it to be, the issue here is not whether the population of Quebec can express itself freely. That has never been in doubt. We have had two referenda in the past and if the present Government of Quebec has its way, there will likely be a third I suppose. However, that is not the issue.

The real issue is that the present Government of Quebec states that right after the referendum, if the result is what it wants, the present legal order will come to an end and it will unilaterally walk away from Canada, from this country. That is simply out of the question.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice. During his minister's statement this morning, the Minister of Justice said, and I quote:

The leading political figures of all the provinces and indeed the Canadian public have long agreed that this country will not be held together against the will of Quebecers clearly expressed.

Could the minister explain exactly what "the will of Quebecers clearly expressed" means?

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

Mr. Speaker, there were several ways in which I referred to the clearly expressed will of Canadians this morning.

For one thing, it is the clearly expressed will of Canadians that the interest of Canadians throughout the country be taken into account on this question which affects them all. For another thing, I emphasized that it is the clearly expressed will of all Canadians, including those in Quebec, that we conduct ourselves in accordance with the law.

I also emphasized that it is the clearly expressed will of Canadians that when their leaders, including the leaders of the Government of Quebec, address issues on the public agenda, they do so in keeping with the values of Canadians: tolerance, accommodation, discussion, dialogue. That is the way Canadians want us to approach our issues, not by unilateral action, not by standing up and walking away from the table unilaterally. That is not the way we do things in Canada. That is the commonly expressed will of Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the Minister of Justice did not understand my question. I referred to "the will of Quebecers clearly expressed". That was my question. He is talking about the will of Canadians. I think the minister missed the point completely.

I think it would be only fair and reasonable to give him a second chance. I will put my question to the minister again. Could he explain exactly what "the will of Quebecers clearly expressed" means?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can answer that question. In fact I can say that if the hon. member wants to know what the clearly expressed will of Quebecers is, then she ought to look at the results of the last two referendums.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.