House of Commons Hansard #106 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was equipment.

Topics

FisheriesOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Victoria B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson LiberalMinister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, the one thing that the hon. member is clearly unaware of is my reply to the hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas.

What I indicated to him was that the document referred to is not a Canadian government document. It is not a document of the Government of British Columbia. It is not a document of the various other participants on the Canadian team in the negotiations with the Americans. It is an internal document of the delegation analysing the strategy and opinions of the American position.

Therefore it should not be described this way by either the Reform Party or the NDP because to do so damages the Canadian position in these—

FisheriesOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Beauharnois—Salaberry.

Middle EastOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Turp Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

While American Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is trying her level best to save the Middle East peace process, by receiving the Israeli Prime Minister at the last minute, a demonstration to commemorate the Nakba deteriorated into a confrontation between the Palestinians and the Israeli army.

Given the real difficulties in ensuring that the Oslo agreements are complied with, what steps does the Government of Canada intend to take to ensure that Israel meets its obligations under the Oslo agreements?

Middle EastOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Vancouver Quadra B.C.

Liberal

Ted McWhinney LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, we are aware that the process of negotiation is delicate, that it is ongoing and at this stage we best proceed by quiet diplomacy. We do wish to ensure that all members of the United Nations respect and obey security council resolutions.

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Dick Proctor NDP Palliser, SK

Mr. Speaker, the minister of agriculture will know that there is a very dry spring under way on the western prairies that is beginning to look increasingly like a drought. The timing could not be worse with an already sharp drop in farm income forecast and the sharp cuts in the department of agriculture.

Would the minister of agriculture please inform the House what contingency plans will be available in the event that this dry spring turns into a full-fledged drought?

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, we are aware that they could certainly use more rain in much of western Canada, as they could in other areas in Canada, and we hope that comes in the very near future.

We do have a very complete safety net system in place, crop insurance as well as NISA, the net income stabilization program for Canadian farmers. They will have the opportunity to draw upon the programs provided by the government and the ones they fund themselves, along with the provincial government and the federal government, if the need arises.

Canadian CitizenshipOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Diane St-Jacques Progressive Conservative Shefford, QC

Mr. Speaker, on the one hand we have the Minister of Immigration telling us that birth in Canada does not necessarily make a child a Canadian citizen, and on the other we have the Minister of Canadian Heritage telling us Canadian citizenship must be awarded to any person who is born in Canada.

May we know the real policy of this government with respect to immigration, regardless of the confusion that reigns within cabinet?

Canadian CitizenshipOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Westmount—Ville-Marie Québec

Liberal

Lucienne Robillard LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, first of all, this is not a matter of immigration but of citizenship. That is a totally different act and one that has not been re-assessed or reviewed by this Parliament in the past 20 years.

Some time ago, we received a report from a parliamentary committee of this House which made some proposals. We also have an independent report from three consultants with some suggestions. Based on these, analyses will be carried out within the department, and within months we shall be seeing a bill tabled in this Parliament.

ChiapasOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

Sarmite Bulte Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Latin America and Africa.

Will the Government of Canada be imposing economic sanctions in response to the work of the parliamentary delegation returning from Chiapas?

ChiapasOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Edmonton Southeast Alberta

Liberal

David Kilgour LiberalSecretary of State (Latin America and Africa)

Señor presidente, I thank the hon. member for Parkdale—High Park for her question.

I very much doubt that the government will have to impose economic sanctions.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all our colleagues who took part in this very important mission. I wonder why the official opposition did not participate.

ChiapasOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

An hon. member

A good question.

ChiapasOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

David Kilgour Liberal Edmonton Southeast, AB

The Minister of Foreign Affairs wishes to meet with these people as quickly as possible and I believe that the chair of our Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade also wishes to meet with those who took part in this mission.

National Hockey LeagueOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Reform

Charlie Penson Reform Peace River, AB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister for International Trade what the government is going to do about the unfair hockey subsidies of the United States.

Is this government going to request a chapter 20 dispute panel under the NAFTA or is it going to force struggling Canadian teams like the Senators and the Oilers to fight these unfair subsidies on their own?

National Hockey LeagueOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Halton Ontario

Liberal

Julian Reed LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of answering that question yesterday and I will repeat the answer today. I extend congratulations to the Reform Party for finally waking up and realizing that hockey is important to Canadians.

I would also point out to my hon. friend that a committee is holding hearings at the present time. We expect its report in the fall and we will look at absolutely every submission with due diligence.

Aboriginal AffairsOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs.

As part of its new aboriginal affairs policy, the Government of Quebec will be setting up a five-year economic development fund. Quebec will put in $125 million and hopes that the federal government will match this amount.

Given that this development fund, which has been received positively by aboriginal groups, emphasizes aboriginal entrepreneurship, and is consistent with federal policy in this area, will the minister undertake to put in the $125 million requested by Quebec?

Aboriginal AffairsOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Pierrefonds—Dollard Québec

Liberal

Bernard Patry LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Saint-Jean for his question.

I would simply like to say that the amount to be invested by the province of Quebec with respect to the First Nations falls exactly in line with the strategy put forward following the response to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People: let us share and work together.

The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development will definitely be working with the province of Quebec to promote the First Nations economy.

CrtcOral Question Period

3 p.m.

NDP

Wendy Lill NDP Dartmouth, NS

Mr. Speaker, Baton Broadcasting announced 334 layoffs across the country yesterday. Forty-one of those jobs were lost in the maritimes.

Baton bought CTV and made a commitment to the CRTC to serve the needs of local communities. It seems its promise was not worth the licence it was written on.

It is the CRTC's job to enforce regulations to ensure companies like Baton live up to their commitments. If the CRTC will not do it, it should be scrapped.

Will the minister of heritage tell us what she will do to make the CRTC protect local news and programming across the country?

CrtcOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Hamilton East Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I think all members of the House will join with me in sending certainly our sympathies to those families whose jobs have been lost as a result of this decision by a private broadcaster.

If the member has reason to believe that the licensing requirements are not being met, I suggest she forward that information to me. I will immediately ask the CRTC to review the licensing procedures that have flown from its original licence.

Business Of The HouseOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Reform

Randy White Reform Langley—Abbotsford, BC

Mr. Speaker, according to my legislative calendar we have about 20 days left for business in the House.

I would like to ask the government House leader if he could confirm that we have 20 days left to work in the House before the summer recess, and the nature of the business of the House for the remainder of this week and for the next sitting week.

Business Of The HouseOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Glengarry—Prescott—Russell Ontario

Liberal

Don Boudria LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, this question is almost as good as last week's question.

Tomorrow will be the day for consideration of third reading of Bill C-19, the labour code amendments, pursuant to a previous order of the House.

Next week is a constituency office week. When the House returns, it will be for the final sprint to the summer adjournment. The government's intention is to work very hard. We will continue to be concerned with a number of report stages and third readings.

During the week of May 25 we shall consider Bill C-36, the budget bill, at both report stage and third reading, and Bill C-29, the parks agency bill.

Tuesday, May 26 shall be an allotted day.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

SupplyGovernment Orders

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Bryon Wilfert Liberal Oak Ridges, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take part in this debate. I noticed that the motion deals with the failure of this government to provide political leadership. I am very surprised to see that given the track record of this government. Clearly their definition of political leadership and ours is different.

I am going to be splitting my time with the member for Nepean—Carleton.

I want to highlight a couple of issues and specifically talk about the reserves. Since this government took office in 1994 it has restored public confidence and pride in the Canadian military. We have given the forces a clear mandate to change the way we do business and get a bigger bang for the buck.

In 1994 we produced the defence white paper. We cut the bureaucracy and reduced the number of top military brass. There was procurement reform and 3,000 more soldiers were added to the army. We increased the number of reservists to 30,000. We have re-equipped the forces. This is clearly leadership, not failure.

I am surprised that the hon. member across the way would put such a motion forth. I am not going to dwell on the record of the Conservative Party or the comments we heard during the election from the Reform Party. I want to talk about positive things.

We hear a lot of negatives in the House so I want to talk about the positive things this government has been doing, in particular the leadership we have shown with regard to the armed forces and in dealing with the issue of the reserves and the total force concept outlined in the 1994 white paper on defence.

Beginning with the first principle, reserves are value added because they are so deeply embedded in Canadian society and our Canadian traditions. The militia idea goes back to the earliest days of New France. Citizen soldiers fought off attacks on their country in the 1770s and again in the War of 1812. They were the backbone of national defence after the establishment of the modern Canadian state in 1867. They kept their skills alive at a time when Canadians wanted to think about anything but war.

We have a proud military tradition in this country. One just has to look back to the first world war, Vimy Ridge; the second world war, D-Day and the battle of the Atlantic; recently the Persian gulf. Canada has participated in over 40 peacekeeping operations. This is a record we can be proud of as Canadians.

Canadians fought and died in Korea between 1950 and 1953. They have shown bravery. They were the shock troops of Europe in the first and second world wars.

The reserves in particular are a bridge between the regular forces and the Canadian public. They are made up of the Canadian public all across this country. Most important of all, the reserves are a vital and relevant defence resource implicit in the message of the total force. The reserves are not a frill or some out moded luxury. They are a necessity, an integral part of the Canadian forces. They are able and expected to augment and sustain regular units or, in some cases, execute specific tasks not generally carried out by the regular forces.

The militia has since the 19th century provided individuals and entire units for the whole range of army imperatives. Naval reservists have major responsibility for coastal and harbour defence and naval control of shipping. The air reserve is creating a national pool of trained personnel to supply air force deployments at home and away.

The communication reserve has been a leader in the implementation of the total force. The Canadian Rangers provide a military profile in our vast north and other isolated areas of this country.

During operation recuperation when we met the storm of the century with the largest peacetime deployment of the Canadian forces in our history, the reserves were there. The reserves supplied fully one-quarter of the more than 16,000 military complement which carried out essential tasks in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. The availability of these reservists demonstrates the value added effect of this service because we could not afford an additional 4,000 regulars to be available on such short notice for such emergencies. I know my hon. friend across the way would agree with that.

I am proud of what the reservists did during the ice storm of 1998 and what they did during the floods in Manitoba and in the Saguenay. I know hon. members feel the same delight as I feel that our men and women are cheered on the streets across this country for what they did.

As the chief of defence staff likes to remind us, the ice storm highlighted one of the Canadian forces' most essential roles, protecting the lives and possessions of Canadians in times of crisis.

I would be less than frank if I did not think and say that these recent operations in Canada have helped with restoring the contract of trust between Canadians and the forces. Reservists are every bit as important a part of this process as our regular forces.

When the government took office it very quickly made it a high priority to reform, modernize and upgrade the reserves as part of the program to improve the overall capacity and operational effectiveness of the entire force.

We need well trained and well equipped reservists, organized and cohesive and logical military structures which use resources more effectively than in the past.

I know it is easier to criticize than it is to provide solutions. The government has been providing solutions since 1994 on this issue. But again we will hear all the negatives. We will not hear the positives because of course that is not the job or the role of the opposition.

We have put a great deal of study into the restructuring of the reserves, including the convening of a special commission. The most complicated aspect of a restructuring program concerns the militia. We have decided to reorder the geographically based districts into brigade groups, organized along functional lines, again showing leadership.

The government is engaged in an evaluation program based on carefully thought out criteria and extensive consultation with the reserve constituency, notably honorary colonels of the reserve 2000 committee. The final decision will not be easy but I know that every effort will be made to make it fair and to make it equitable.

While the complex labour goes on the government has not stood still on other fronts. We have improved equipment available to reservists. The soldier project, Griffon helicopters for the 400 squadron at Borden and the 438 squadron at Saint-Hubert, and the delivery of maritime coastal defence vessels are some examples.

Over the past year we have introduced an improved pay and benefit package for reservists which, combined with the reserve force retirement gratuity, demonstrates the commitment to recognize and to compensate our citizen soldiers for their sacrifices.

With the assistance of the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs we are also examining in a comprehensive way the needs of people in the military. We must ensure we provide an appropriate level of support to the men and women of the forces and their families and that includes reservists. I know my friends and colleagues on the other side would agree with that.

The Canadian forces liaison council is making great strides in protecting civilian jobs and benefits of reservists. There are over 4,500 employees in the databank. Over 3,000 of them have stated their support of the reserves, while 1,800 have agreed to grant military leave to reserve employees.

Clearly we can be very proud of the work our reservists do. Concerning underrating and underutilizing reserves in the past, we are taking care of that. We find them indispensable and they have shown their commitment to their country.

SupplyGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

David Price Progressive Conservative Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Oak Ridges for his comments. I am always quite interested in the reserves, being a reserve member for six years many years back.

I find the member's comments, where he is talking about what we have done for the reserves, going in the wrong direction. Yes, we have added numbers to the reserves but we have cut down their hours. We have cut them to less than half and also we have cut out all the exercises they do. So what we are doing is cutting out their training. We are not giving them a chance to train properly. So instead of getting higher quality reserves, we are lowering the quality of our reserves and they do not deserve that, particularly since we are using reserves an awful lot these days overseas. It is important that they get good basic training at the reserve level so they can continue on at the regular level.

He was also talking about preparation and equipment and I thought I would mention at this point our submarines. He mentioned the 1994 white paper. The white paper was quite clear that we needed those submarines and it was a good deal. That was four years ago. We finally ordered the submarines, but it will take a couple of years for them to get here.

In the meantime this month we have another submarine that is being decommissioned and another one will be in September. That will leave us with one submarine. That is our total fleet. We will go for a couple of years with one submarine. It is not very logical. That submarine will not be out too much.

Maybe the member would care to comment on that.

SupplyGovernment Orders

May 14th, 1998 / 3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Bryon Wilfert Liberal Oak Ridges, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. friend for his comments. As far as the reserves are concerned we are going through a process. We have made improvements, as I said earlier in the House, whether it be in terms of pay and benefits or whether it be in terms of equipment.

Clearly the process is not finished. We obviously want to have the best equipped, the best trained reserves and armed forces generally. Rome was not built in a day and clearly we are improving. As far as submarines are concerned, we did not buy the nuclear submarines to which the previous government had committed itself, but we have an agreement now in terms of the four new submarines from England. It is excellent value for the Canadian taxpayer.

Obviously we do not want to be in a position as we were in preparing for the first and the second world wars when we did not have the necessary equipment. We want to make sure that if we are to send our forces overseas on peacekeeping missions or involve them in activities in this country we have the right personnel with the right equipment.

We even heard in the House today that the Government of Italy requested that Canada provide assistance. Again we have personnel who are recognized for their professionalism around the world.

SupplyGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Mark Muise Progressive Conservative West Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House are trying today to bring forth the concerns and the situation in the military.

I keep listening to the other side of the House which is pointing the finger at past governments. I do not know how far back they will go to past governments. I am expecting that soon they will be talking of Sir John A. Macdonald and blaming him for some of these problems.

Some of the concerns my colleagues and I have been addressing today are related to dollars. Others are related to how people are treated. Those are concerns that I believe most of my colleagues on both sides and I have. That is what we want to debate today. We are discussing these issues so people, parliamentarians and Canadians know there are concerns out there.