Madam Speaker, with your permission, I will be sharing my time on this very important issue with the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche.
We were very honoured, or almost, by the presence of the Solicitor General in the House for a few minutes. Once again, however, it is apparent that the Solicitor General has more answers to questions when he is in an airplane, or a gym with a towel wrapped around his waist, than in the House. It is a little bit unfortunate, but I would rather see the Solicitor General in his suit, here in the House, even if he does not answer my questions, than in a gym.
The important thing is that the government has been telling us for weeks that we must put trust in the commission, in the process, in the commission's credibility. Our problems are not with the commission.
The commission itself admits, in two letters it sent to the Solicitor General, that in the interests of legal fairness to the complainants and of credibility in this exceptional situation, the students should be given legal financial assistance.
The government, probably the Prime Minister, told the Solicitor General: “Now listen, you are not paying for the students. Figure your own way out of that. It is your turn at the bat.” It is as clear as that. He comes and wastes our time in the House by trying to use up his full 10 minutes and saying almost nothing.
The commission is important. There is fear of creating a precedent. I was listening to the Parliamentary Secretary here in this House this morning talking about setting precedents, and all that. The precedent has been set. First, provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are being attacked. That is one precedent. The second is that an additional $650,000 is being given to the commission. This has never been done before. And nearly a year of preparation for the hearings. That too has never been seen before.
Lawyers are hired, not legal aid lawyers working for minimum wage. A whole gang of lawyers traipsing from Ottawa to Vancouver and probably earning hundreds of dollars an hour. I have no problem with their earning a good living, but I do have a problem with their being allowed to travel from Ottawa to Vancouver. Vancouver is a very fine city, but could the students there not also be helped to defend themselves properly?
This process is tainted with political influence. Everyone knows this, but the other side of this House will not admit it. There is fear of creating a precedent but, I repeat, the precedent has been set by the Prime Minister's political intervention at the APEC summit, via the RCMP.
A precedent has been set by the Prime Minister's buffoonery about the events in Vancouver. Only someone as foolish as those on the other side of this House could say everything is just fine and make ridiculous comparisons, like the reference to baseball bats. The Prime Minister may not be Mark McGwire but the Solicitor General does bear some resemblance to a baseball catcher, as he is the one who always ends up with the ball. This must stop. It is a matter of credibility.
The Solicitor General said it. For weeks now he has been discussing this issue with the Prime Minister and with cabinet members. He talks about it to everyone, but he refuses to discuss it in this House. He is probably not comfortable with parliamentary immunity in this House. We should all go sit on the lawn in front of the Parliament buildings, and perhaps we would get real answers to our questions.
This is unacceptable. Of course, it is a poor analogy, but it would not be the first time that administrative tribunals or quasi-judicial bodies have helped complainants. It may not be comparable from a strictly administrative point of view, but it is important.
The National Energy Board gave money to aboriginals, because they did not have the means to challenge the pipeline route. This is a quasi-judicial administrative tribunal.
When it was discovered that female prisoners in Kingston had been subjected to treatments that were in clear violation of human rights, they received financial assistance. Salaries paid to inmates are rather low. They receive some money every week for the canteen, but that is all. So, these women got some help.
Nobody objected to that. Nobody said “we are setting a precedent. We are now going to have to fund prisoners to go after police officers and prison guards and spark riots in all the jails”. Nobody said that. This was done once, and it was an excellent decision.
It is the first time that the RCMP complaints commission has to deal with such an important case. It is the first time that students, who simply wanted to show that they did not appreciate having dictators come to Canada, were charged in such a brutal manner.
This is very disturbing. Apparently, the Prime Minister and the Solicitor General talk to each other several times a day about this issue. We hope the Prime Minister will tell the Solicitor General “Listen, enough is enough. Go back to the dressing room for a few months. We will make a substitution. There will no longer be any political interference regarding what happened to the students at the APEC summit”.
I hope our Liberal colleagues will support the NDP motion. The member for Vancouver Quadra, for example, former secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, supported the request. The B.C. Liberals also agree that the students should get help. Things are being blocked here in Ottawa at the PMO.
I do not understand. I hope all the members, back and front benchers alike, will support the motion to defend the most important thing in this country: fundamental rights. I hope they will.
I would like to ask the member opposite to consult his colleagues and the people from British Columbia. It would be a good thing if the Liberal Party agreed to support the NDP motion to prevent abuse of the most fundamental rights.
I also hope that the members will tell the public and the students why they think the students do not need financial help to pay their lawyer. Talk about legal balance! It is totally disgusting.
So, that said, I sincerely hope that, in future discussions on fundamental rights and the Canadian Constitution, the Prime Minister does not go bragging about having signed the charter of rights. He did not invent the wheel either. The Bill of Rights existed under Diefenbaker.
The Prime Minister is gloating over that, but showing no respect for those whose charter rights have been trampled. This is very serious. The Prime Minister is breaking his oath to uphold the Canadian Constitution and all the related provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I hope that the student plaintiffs in Vancouver will get all Canadians and all Quebeckers to understand and accept their message so that this situation will never recur. One of the ways to ensure that it never happens again is for the back-benchers, the front-benchers, and those in between, to support the NDP motion.
If the government has managed to find close to three-quarters of a million dollars to fly lawyers off to one of the most beautiful cities in the country, Vancouver, I believe it could have given 25 cents on the dollar, as the saying goes, to the students. It could give the students just one-fourth of what it is spending on its lawyers' hourly fees and expenses for accommodation, transportation and so on. That would be a beginning, but it refuses to do so.
There is no bottom to the pockets of the government and the RCMP when it comes to the number of lawyers it can afford to send to the commission of inquiry. This makes sure the plaintiffs will be at a total disadvantage.