Debates of Feb. 12th, 1998

Jacques Chirac's Statement

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the sovereignists are using every means possible to demonstrate that Canada is a divisible country. They often use the example of other countries to prove their point.

They must have been surprised yesterday to hear the Canadian Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs quote a statement by French President Jacques Chirac on this matter, as follows:

France is one country indivisible. It is indeed made up of regions and provinces, each different from the other, each with its own population, customs, history and sometimes language. This is especially true of Corsica, whose identity and uniqueness are recognized by all.

Under the circumstances, then, it is hard for the separatists to pester France to back them up, as they did in the last referendum.

Senate Of Canada

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday one of the Senate's own members called on the red chamber to show some guts and expel absent Andy Thompson.

Who is this agent for accountability? He is Ron Ghitter, a red Tory bag man, a Mulroney sycophant, appointed in the dying days of the Tory chief's patronage orgy.

Who is this new found defender of the public interest? Last year he cost Canadians more than 150,000 tax dollars including $40,000 for travel alone.

Who is this model of excellence? Having shown up only 148 times since 1993, his attendance record is a pathetic 55%. What hypocrisy. Canadians simply do not buy this feigned outrage from an unelected and unaccountable political hack.

At least absent Andy Thompson has the decency to stay in Mexico and not pretend he is doing his job. As for Ron Ghitter, if this Mulroney hangover is so concerned about accountability, why does he not resign his seat so Albertans can elect their own senator?

[The Speaker]

I would encourage all members to temper their remarks in this statement period.

Pay Equity

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Moncton, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to address the issue of pay equity. On January 23, 1998 I a met for the second time with the local representatives of the Public Service Alliance of Canada regarding pay equity. They have made me aware of their views and are quite concerned about this issue.

This past fall I met with the President of the Treasury Board to make him aware of the concerns of the PSAC representatives in the greater Moncton area.

I can assure you that wage parity is of great concern, not only to the Public Service Alliance, but also to the Government of Canada.

The government has always given precedence to the option of a negotiated settlement. That is why Treasury Board took the initiative with the negotiations which began on April 15, 1997.

I would like to assure the Alliance and the government of my interest in finding a prompt solution to this impasse.

Railways

[Chris Axworthy, NDP, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Transport told Canadians that the government was proud of CN Rail, which is abandoning rail lines, farm families and farm communities across Canada, because it is now the fifth largest rail company in North America.

No doubt this deal is good for CN. It will be able to increase its use of Chicago and the North-South Illinois Central line. So long east-west rail links. Hello the Gulf of Mexico. That is exactly what the NDP and other critics said would happen as a result of the free trade agreement and NAFTA.

This is bad news for farmers and bad news for Canada because our rail system will continue to go downhill and because the government, the Reform Party and the Tories want it that way.

Wei Jingsheng

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West—Mississauga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to welcome Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng to Canada and to the House of Commons.

Considered to be the father of the democratic movement in China, Wei Jingsheng started the Xidan democracy wall movement in 1979 and was subsequently imprisoned for subversion.

After spending most of the past 18 years in prison, Mr. Wei was exiled on medical grounds to the U.S.A. last November, just six months after the publication of his book, The Courage To Stand Alone .

Mr. Wei will be appearing before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade this afternoon. All are welcome to attend.

As chair of the subcommittee on human rights and international development, I am especially proud to have the opportunity of meeting with the courageous Wei Jingsheng.

I welcome the hon. Wei Jingsheng.

Russell Maclellan

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, after being savaged by four painful years of Liberal government in Nova Scotia, the Grits needed someone to turn their provincial fortunes around. They found their Mr. Fixit in Ottawa in Russell MacLellan.

As an MP, Russell voted to decrease cash transfers to Nova Scotia from $638 million in 1994 down to $411 million by the year 2003. Nova Scotia needs a commitment from Ottawa to restore adequate health care funding for Nova Scotia.

Will Russell MacLellan work with the federal Progressive Conservatives in asking that the federal government restore the CHST floor based on the provincial level and not on the federal level, or will he continue to betray Nova Scotians as he has with the BST promise and his toll highway pledges and allow Ottawa to continue its massacre of Nova Scotia's health care system?

Aboriginal Affairs

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

Mr. Speaker, last month the federal government took an historic step in announcing Gathering Strength. This important initiative marks a new era in developing a renewed partnership with aboriginal people.

Inuit, Metis and First Nations have expressed support for Gathering Strength, particularly for the statement of reconciliation. Aboriginal Canadians who experienced atrocities at residential schools have waited far too long to hear that the government is deeply sorry.

The apology is not lip service. A $350 million healing initiative that will help those affected by residential schools is proof that the government is truly changing the way it does business with aboriginal people.

I applaud the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the entire Liberal government for their sincere apology to aboriginal Canadians. I look forward to seeing firsthand the rebuilding and renewing of Canada's relationship with aboriginal people.

Heritage

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, what is going on at the Department of Canadian Heritage? It is the department charged with the responsibility of preserving all that is good, wonderful and Canadian.

It has lost its rudder. Under this minister it has produced a calendar with Children's Television Day and even with Books and Copyright Week. The only thing they missed was the Iranian communist party and support of radical feminist objectives. However, Easter and Christmas were excluded.

Now it has produced a quiz asking which act created Confederation in 1867. The heritage department answer: an act of union. Wrong, oh bated breath. It was the British North America Act.

All is well. The minister has given Canadians a $20 million a year Canada information office. I just have one question. What kind of information is it disseminating?

Tribute To Sister Théodora Bernier

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my voice to that of all my constituents to mark the 100th birthday of Sister Théodora Bernier.

In her 81 years of religious life, Sister Théodora worked as a teacher in Quebec City, a nurse in Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré, a director at a community centre in Montreal, a director at a craft workshop in Rigaud, and a commissioner for 25 years.

Year-round and in all kinds of weather, Sister Théodora travelled the roads of Quebec, going from town to town and from door to door to sell crafts hand-made by nuns and thus help the work of the Franciscaines missionnaires de Marie in 77 countries throughout the world. She gained the admiration and respect of those who had the pleasure of meeting her.

Sister Théodora retired on October 30, 1995. She is an endearing person who is witty and has a sense of humour. She recently said “When I turn 100, I want people to sing and dance”.

That is what we will do tomorrow. Happy birthday, Sister Théodora.

The Economy

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, today the finance minister showed what is happening to this year's budget surplus. His priority is not tax relief. It is not debt reduction but more spending, pay raises for the top 3,300 government bureaucrats.

All Canadians would like a pay raise and the finance minister could give it to them by simply giving Canadians broad based tax relief.

Why does the finance minister think it is okay to leave his bureaucrats with more money in their wallets but not Canadian taxpayers?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. Since we have taken office we have said that the payoff for deficit cleanup, for cleaning up the balance sheet and for the tremendous effort of Canadians, will in fact be lower taxes. It will in fact be greater security for our social programs. We will continue on that vein.

The one thing I would say within that context is that it makes very little sense to me, given the importance of the public service and the tremendous dedication, that the Leader of the Opposition should attempt to downgrade their efforts for the country.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the finance minister was as concerned about the dedication of taxpayers as he is about the dedication of bureaucrats.

This is just what Canadians were afraid of, that the finance minister would spend any surplus on made in Ottawa projects, not on tax relief for ordinary Canadians: pay raises for the top bureaucrats, the $3 billion memorial fund for the Prime Minister, a sop to this minister, a trinket to that minister.

After the finance minister is done with all these Liberal spending projects how much money will be left for broad based tax relief?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that a party that is supposed to be based on market principles would refuse to recognize that the top executives in the public service are absolutely necessary to the nation. We need the highest possible quality.

When a lot of them are now going to the private sector because the salaries are higher, I am surprised the Reform Party would lack the foresight to be able to pay senior public servants that we need the price they deserve in the market.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, we recognize paying bureaucrats what they deserve, but what we want is to pay taxpayers what they deserve.

We still do not have the answer to our question of what is happening to the vanishing surplus. What worries Canadians is the finance minister's reports say there is a surplus right now. The spin doctors are now saying there will not be a surplus at the time when the budget comes down, that in fact there will be a $2 billion deficit.

Why are the finance minister's spokesmen predicting a deficit if the books say surplus? What is his explanation for the vanishing surplus?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I can see the jealousy of the Reform leader because we have been successful.

He is just trying to take away the credit of the Minister of Finance because the Minister of Finance and the government have been able to balance the books and now there will be money. Today he is no longer interested in the reduction of the debt. Today it is the reduction of taxes. Tomorrow what will it be?

For us it is very clear. Half the surplus is going for economic and social programs because we have problems in Canada that need attention, and the other half will be going for tax reduction and debt reduction.

It is clear, Mr. Speaker, and I am sorry the Leader of the Opposition—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Calgary Northeast.

Canadian Armed Forces

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in 1996 CTV news exposed the Canadian forces vulnerability to chemical and germ warfare.

An access to information document confirms this and I quote from that document:

The Canadian forces lacks automated chemical and biological detectors. The absence of such capability would result in mass numbers of casualties should there be a direct attack or be located downwind.

This minister has had two years to correct the situation. How dare he send our sailors into harm's way without adequate protection.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, there is adequate protection. We have some of the best detection and protective equipment of any country when it comes to dealing with chemical and biological weaponry. Those people who are going into that area, the 340 personnel, are going to be properly equipped. They are already properly trained. They will be inoculated. They will have all the equipment necessary.

I think it is irresponsible for the hon. member to put such scare tactics into the public eye, particularly for the families and friends of the people who are going into the gulf area.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is fairly probable that the minister does not know what is going on in his own department.

This document goes on to say:

Although [detection] systems are in place in the Canadian forces, these are not sufficiently responsive to permit the donning of protective equipment or [to] adopt protective postures which would significantly reduce casualties.

Adequate equipment is not expected until the year 2000.

How will our sailors know if they have been exposed to biological or chemical warfare agents? Is he hoping that the wind will always blow the other way?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Speaking of wind, Mr. Speaker, we are hearing a lot of it from across the aisle.

I think he said the document was about two years old. That is about where his thinking is.

Our people have the best equipment. They are well prepared and well trained to be able to deal with these circumstances. They will be as best protected as they can be.

1982 Constitution Act

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

Mr. Speaker, it has now been 16 years since the 1982 Constitution was unilaterally imposed against Quebec's wishes.

Next week, in a reference based on this same illegitimate Constitution, the federal government and its Prime Minister want the Supreme Court to deny the right of Quebeckers to decide their own future.

Will the Prime Minister admit that, politically and I would go so far as to say morally, the Constitution Act, 1982, does not apply to Quebec and that those who claim otherwise are guilty of constitutional heresy?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's Constitution was perfectly valid for the Government of Quebec when it asked us to amend it to allow a new school board system in Quebec. We cannot use the Constitution when it suits us and reject it when it does not. Here, as in France, the rule of law must prevail.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would remind members that the school board issue came under the 1867 Constitution. However, the words I quoted were the very words used in 1987 during the Meech Lake accord hearings by Yves Fortier, the federal government's lawyer for the Supreme Court reference.

Does the Prime Minister not think that the credibility of his spokesperson, Yves Fortier, is seriously compromised by the fact of his appearing before the Supreme Court to argue the exact opposite of what he claimed in 1987?

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

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Fortier was an ardent defender of the Meech Lake accord. His remarks, if they are to be quoted fairly, should be quoted in full.

Mr. Fortier described the 1982 Constitution as “an unfinished work” and he added: “As a jurist, I view 1982 as a turning point in Canada's constitutional history. It marks the patriation of our country's Constitution, the approval of an amending formula and, above all, the entrenchment in our Constitution of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”.

Whatever one may think of the Constitution Act, it is the law that applies in Canada.