Debates of Sept. 30th, 1997

Member For Rimouski—Mitis

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is difficult for me to find the right words to express, fully but calmly, my outrage at what the Bloc member for Rimouski—Mitis had to say.

This separatist member, who is well known for putting her foot in her mouth, said last week, and I quote “As a French Canadian, I am a second class citizen”.

If we accept the member's logic, this means that Quebeckers who are against Quebec separating are second class citizens. This arrogant attitude is an insult for all the Quebeckers who prefer to remain Canadians.

This is yet another sign of the member's exclusionist mentality, and to add insult to injury, these statements are being made supposedly on behalf of francophones.

Donkin Mine

[Peter Mancini, NDP, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Speaker, just months prior to the last federal election the former Liberal member for Cape Breton—East Richmond authorized a $300,000 fund to be given to a private group to study the privatization of the Donkin mine in Cape Breton.

The people directly affected by this, the mining communities of Cape Breton, voted against this proposal and maintain their belief that the mine should be developed under the auspices of the Cape Breton Development Corporation.

Indeed, just last week the Liberal premier of Nova Scotia and the former Conservative premier of Nova Scotia both acknowledged that Donkin is the future of Devco.

The United Mine Workers of America, District 26, has called for Devco to develop the Donkin mine.

I call on this House and this government to initiate a full, open and federally funded study of the feasibility of developing Donkin as part of a three mine Devco operation prior to any privatization of the site.

Quebec Premier

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Lucien Bouchard uses Quebeckers' priorities in a shameless manner, in order to further his own interests, his partitionist interests.

Under the guise of an economic mission, he is promoting Canada's partition. Once again he is putting his own interests before those of the Quebec people.

Quebeckers want their politicians to devote themselves to job creation and the economic recovery. Therefore, I call upon Lucien Bouchard to adequately represent all Quebeckers.

Mr. Bouchard, it is not too late to transform this political mission aimed at promoting partition into a genuine economic mission.

Port Police

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is on a mission to eliminate the Canada port police. During the last Parliament it sought authority to disband the Canada port police through Bill C-44. However, the bill died on the Order Paper when the election was called. Despite this, the government has gone ahead and proceeded with the changes anyway.

These highly specialized forces focus on extremely important security issues for Canada, such as illegal immigration, illicit drug trading, exportation of stolen goods and security for foreign vessels.

Already this policy is resulting in inconsistencies in port policing from harbour to harbour, as ad hoc deals are made replacing the uniform federal system.

The government must provide the funds to ensure consistent, well trained police forces at every port and not allow a hodge-podge of enforcement arrangements all over the country which will make Canada the country of choice for illegal immigration and drugs.

International Day Of Older Persons

[Gurbax Malhi, Liberal, Bramalea—Gore—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is with appreciation and admiration that I pay tribute to the millions of Canadians celebrating the international day of older persons.

We set aside October 1 to increase public awareness of the tremendous contributions older Canadians continue to make to Canadian society. By caring for our elders we can teach our youth to be compassionate and caring.

The international day of older persons reminds us that every Canadian, regardless of age, has a right to participate fully in community life. They have a right to live fulfilling, independent lives and to travel about freely. In all cases, they have the right to be treated with dignity.

I encourage all of my colleagues to work toward achieving these goals, not just on October 1, but each and every day of the year.

Youth Strategy

[Claude Drouin, Liberal, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our government, together with the Quebec Community Futures Development Corporations, has launched an important program with an initial budget of six million dollars, aimed at people 35 years old and younger in communities served by all 54 CFDCs.

The Youth Strategy has three components: a fund for young entrepreneurs, a program for hiring youth advisors in the CFDCs and the extension of the Summer Employment Program for students.

The fund for young entrepreneurs is used to secure loans for projects in sectors identified as priorities in the investment plan of each CFDC. It will not only dispense some financial help, it will also provide support to the entrepreneurs in all of their endeavours.

Our government has determined that youth employment should be a priority. All stakeholders recognize that we must curtail the migration of young people from their native communities to major centres.

This Youth Strategy—

[The Speaker]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Tommy G. Thompson, Governor of the State of Wisconsin.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

National Unity

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, one of the disturbing things about the government's approach to national unity is that it always seems to be lagging rather than leading public opinion.

Prior to the last referendum the government seriously misread the discontent and the demand for change in Quebec. Recently it demonstrated a dangerous misreading of public opinion in British Columbia.

Why is the Prime Minister lagging rather than leading public opinion on the national unity issue?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, national unity is a very important issue for Canada. Some people will always raise some regional frustrations that exists in parts of Canada, but it is important to look at the whole situation.

We had some problems this summer, for example, with the treaty on fisheries. I was frustrated too. The President of the United States was very frustrated because he had to have the consent of 35 people before he could agree to a deal. This is a treaty that was signed when the party of Senator Carney was in power.

Of course we are trying to find a solution but it is not easy.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister missed the point.

Last week Premier Bouchard dared the prime minister to consult Quebeckers on the Calgary declaration. We urged the federal government to mail a letter containing that declaration to every Quebecker. Again the prime minister dragged his feet.

What is so hard about mailing a letter? You get the envelope, you get the letter and you put the letter together.

Will the prime minister become proactive on the unity issue, starting with a firm commitment today to mail the Calgary declaration to every household in Quebec?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I remember that in January 1996 we sent a statement to the people of Quebec explaining what had been done in the House of Commons. The Reform Party complained that we were spending money.

If he wants us to send something we will consider it, but before sending it I would like to see exactly what is happening in the provinces as they consult before deciding.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister is doing it again. He is hedging, he is lagging, he is dragging his feet just like before the last referendum.

Brian Mulroney damaged the national unity effort by his arrogance. This prime minister hurts the cause by his apathy.

If it is that hard to make a decision to mail a letter to Quebec, how can Canadians expect him to make the hard decisions required to unite this country?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have made a lot of decisions with respect to national unity. A lot of the grievances were cured after the statement in the Speech from the Throne of 1996.

We got out of mining. We got out of forestry. We got out of tourism. We offered to get out of social housing. We settled the manpower training program and many others.

The member wants us to mail a letter tomorrow. If his way to solve the problems of the nation is by mailing a letter, we better not have a post office strike.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has known for months that Lucien Bouchard was going to France to get support for Quebec sovereignty.

The government is always a step behind. It refuses to be proactive. Has the Prime Minister even talked to President Chirac in the last 24 hours? If so, what did the president say?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I looked at the statement made by the official spokesman of the Government of France. The lady said that there was no intervention and no intention of intervening and that the question was purely hypothetical.

Today there was a statement by Prime Minister Jospin that was very clear. I have discussed the problem many times with President Chirac. He knows it is a Canadian problem that will be solved by the Canadian people and not by the French government.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that just proves the point we are trying to make. The government is not prepared to deal with the Canadian unity battle.

A foreign leader rolls out the red carpet and the government does nothing. Why is the government always dropping the ball when it comes to the future of our country?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I made my views very clear. I can cite for the hon. member what Prime Minister Jospin said today:

It depends on developments that may or may not occur and that are subject to the free decision of Quebeckers, their political authorities, and the appraisal of Canada, its political authorities, whether France will be asking this type of question.

They recognize that it is a Canadian problem and that they will have to respect the views of the Canadian government.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said that the Canadian government could have made the same remarks as France regarding Quebec's sovereignty.

Can the Prime Minister tell us today whether he shares his minister's opinion, and are we to understand from this remark that the federal government would also respect a democratic vote by the Quebec people in favour of sovereignty?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers have already voted democratically on two occasions and decided to remain in Canada.

When will the Bloc Quebecois respect the voice of democracy, even in response to an unclear question? What we want is a debate about a clear question, not a winning question, but a question that is truthful. When Quebeckers know that, by voting for sovereignty, they will be leaving Canada, they change their minds.

All we are asking is that the question be clear, and we will take steps to see that it is.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know whether the Prime Minister has just told us he intends to bypass the National Assembly, when there has been a unanimous and clear resolution by the National Assembly that the Quebec people should be able to decide on its own future itself? And this resolution was supported not just by sovereignists, but also by the federalists in Quebec's Liberal Party, including the member for Bourassa, who is in the House today.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, when asked by a journalist: “Would France bypass the Canadian government and recognize Quebec as being independent?”, the premier replied: “That is a detail”. This detail is the key to the whole question.

And to this question, the French Prime Minister, yesterday and this morning, replied: “France is not indifferent, but does not wish to interfere. If Quebec is allowed freedom of expression, then Canada must also have the freedom to make up its mind. These questions must be asked in Quebec, and more broadly in Canada”. He even added: “A simple majority is not a principle, but democracy is”.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is trying to play down the significance of the statements made by the President and the Prime Minister of France, who very clearly indicated they would respect whatever decision Quebecers made.

My question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Are we to understand that he would expect France to sit back and act as if nothing had happened should the federal government arbitrarily reject the result of a democratic vote held in Quebec?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the root of the problem is that a provincial government does not have the authority to proclaim itself the government of a sovereign state. That has never been done. States have always recognized that the government of the existing state had its say in the matter.

If I had more time, but I know you would interrupt me, I would give you a whole list of statements made by the French government in other circumstances involving other parts of the world. Here is one, for example, about Chechnya, which says: “This is an internal affair that concerns the Russian Federation, of which Chechnya is an integral part under international law”. Regarding the Comoros: “France strongly believes in respecting the territorial integrity of any and all African states”.

And the list goes on.