House of Commons Hansard #23 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was offenders.
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, we continue to invest in affordable housing. First of all, I should like to remind the House that the government continues to invest just under $2 billion a year into social housing.
We also have a mortgage insurance program under which more than 475,000 houses are built and insured every year. We have invested $300 million in the RRAP program, from which Quebec benefits.
As well, since we have been in government, the—
Sarkis Assadourian Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
After months of lobbying, thousands of letters of support and the signatures of over 2,500 petitioners in support of an exhibit in the Museum of Civilization to recognize all crimes against humanity committed in the 20th century, can the minister tell the House what action will be taken in reply to the tremendous support shown throughout the country for this concept?
Sheila Copps LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the member for Brampton Centre who has done an incredible job getting together 22 organizations from across the country to work on this very important issue.
I hope that all members of the House will be here to speak in support of private member's bill, Bill C-224, which will be debated in the House on November 30.
Leon Benoit Reform Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, the federal court has ruled that foreigners serving sentences in Canadian prisons are entitled to the same rights as Canadians. This means that even if criminals are under orders to be deported they can apply for unescorted day parole.
There is only one way to prevent these criminals from being released. Immigration officials must convince the IRB that they are likely to disappear.
Will the immigration minister promise today that she will fight every single request for parole, or will she just let them all walk free?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the member opposite and to everyone in the House that public safety is our number one concern. I have no sympathy whatsoever for foreign nationals who commit serious crimes in Canada. What this ruling means is that under the Immigration Act we will be able to and will argue for detention of anyone who poses a security threat to Canada or who we fear will flee if let free in our society.
Leon Benoit Reform Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, the minister simply did not answer the question.
The situation in British Columbia with the Honduran drug dealers proves that this is a serious situation. These people file refugee claims and then start selling drugs days after arriving in the country. They are caught, charged, convicted and, eventually, deportation orders are issued. However, by that time the immigration minister has no idea where to find them.
When will the immigration minister ever learn? Why is the Liberal government letting convicted foreigners, who are criminals and who have been ordered deported, just walk free?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely wrong. He is also confusing issues of law and order, which are policing, prosecution and the administration of justice, all of which are in areas of provincial jurisdiction, with our ability to deport and remove those who are inadmissible to Canada.
I would remind the hon. member that anyone who has committed a crime outside of Canada is not admissible to Canada. As I have said, I have no sympathy whatsoever for any foreign national who commits a crime in Canada and we will remove them as quickly as possible.
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, Versatile Tractor in Winnipeg is the last tractor manufacturer in Canada. Now that Ford New Holland and Case are merging, the U.S. authorities have ordered them to divest themselves of the tractor lines at Versatile, leaving virtually nothing at the Winnipeg plant. This will cost us 700 good jobs and it will drive a stake through the heart of the farm implements industry in Canada.
My question is for the Minister of Industry. What was the role of our federal government in the U.S. anti-trust hearings and the final deal? What steps did it take to represent our interests, to protect our jobs and to protect our important farm implements industry in Canada?
John Cannis LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member, this is an issue which is very important to the government. It is front and centre to this industry. Certainly we are always staying on top of it.
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, there is another issue. The federal government gave Versatile $45.5 million in R and D money to develop the very lines of tractors that we are now about to lose, such as the TV-140 bi-directional tractor, one of the best in the world.
As Manitobans scramble to find a new buyer for the Versatile plant, perhaps the minister responsible for western economic diversification can tell us if the federal government is prepared to offer similar grants and loans to new companies in order to attract industrial development that would compensate for the loss of the Versatile technology and for the loss of these 700 jobs in Winnipeg.
Ronald J. Duhamel LiberalSecretary of State (Western Economic Diversification)(Francophonie)
Mr. Speaker, the federal government has not accepted that this is a fait accompli.
We continue to work with the companies to try to retain the jobs and to see if we can expand the plant. With respect to additional investments, we will look at those when they are presented to us. To date none of this has occurred.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, while the director of CSIS continues to give the solicitor general and parliament the gold finger, it has come to light that this is not the first reckless handling of confidential information by CSIS. More shortcomings of CSIS senior managers are being exposed with each passing day.
In 1996 a CSIS diskette was left in a Toronto phone booth. It included sensitive documents including names of targets. Further evidence that CSIS is in crisis is the cancellation of the sidewinder investigation. Stay tuned.
The solicitor general states repeatedly that this is a serious matter, but then he shrugs and says that these things happen. When will the solicitor general show some leadership and suspend the director?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated previously the director informed me immediately. The issue which my hon. colleague brings up took place in 1996. It was reported to the solicitor general of the day and proper process was followed.
As I indicated previously SIRC issued a report. I received it. It was tabled in the House. It indicated also that proper procedural measures were taken.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, it took three years for the solicitor general to table that document. That is hardly a smooth, well working process.
CSIS is investigating itself. A newly appointed inspector general will report to him. The director who initially failed to notify the appropriate watchdog, SIRC, and covered the tracks of the agent will be trusted to provide co-operation throughout the investigation.
Does the solicitor general really believe that this in-house exercise of spy versus spy should give Canadians confidence and will truly expose the failings of his department?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what my hon. colleague does not understand. The director informed me. There is a process to follow. He indicated that the inspector general was conducting an investigation. He indicated that CSIS was conducting an investigation.
We all know in the House that SIRC has a mandate to review all the files of CSIS. Why does my hon. colleague not want to let the process work?
Mark Assad Liberal Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.
Two weeks ago, an agreement was reached between the Treasury Board and federal public servants on the pay equity issue. Since then, I have received several calls from those affected by the agreement. They want to know what happens next.
Can the minister tell the House what the next steps will be and when these people can expect to receive their first cheque?
Lucienne Robillard LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform members of the House that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has endorsed the agreement we reached with the Public Service Alliance of Canada regarding implementation of the pay equity ruling.
We are therefore prepared to move on to the next step, which is to calculate exactly what is owed each public servant. Our present employees can expect to receive their cheques in four to six months. The amounts will be calculated automatically and paid out by the departments they are currently working for. We have also set up toll-free telephone lines for our former employees.
Art Hanger Reform Calgary Northeast, AB
Mr. Speaker, in a recently released report the Conference of Defence Associations, an association of military experts, stated “The Canadian forces is on the verge of collapse”.
This crisis was due only to the slash and burn policies of the Liberal government. Yet, in light of this damning evidence the minister refuses to restore military spending.
How can the minister ignore all this evidence and yet continue to starve out our military?
Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian forces are not on the verge of collapse. It is true that financially we are stressed but by the same token let us not exaggerate. That certainly is an exaggeration.
The government has invested money in new equipment. It has either bought new equipment or is modernizing and upgrading all the major equipment our forces use. We have invested money in salary increases and the quality of life of our personnel because it puts them first and foremost, and we will continue to do that.
Odina Desrochers Bloc Lotbinière, QC
Mr. Speaker, in Quebec, there is a strong desire to undertake an infrastructure program as soon as possible. Everyone is calling for the negotiations on a new infrastructure program to begin.
My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Will she get on with the business of meeting these requests immediately and not wait until the year 2001?
Lucienne Robillard LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, I suggest the hon. member go back and read the Speech from the Throne, which clearly states that we will have an infrastructure program and that we will take the time to negotiate it with our partners.
Our target date is December 2000. We will negotiate in a serene context and we will do so first and foremost to meet the public's needs.
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has now had an opportunity to study Ralph Klein's medicare destroying missile.
Yesterday we heard warm and fuzzies. Today Canadians want action. Yesterday we informed the government that it could immediately invoke section 6 of the social union, which says that dispute avoidance and resolutions will apply to interpretations of Canada Health Act principles.
Surely that is what we are talking about today. Will the health minister take that step today?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, we all know there are problems and issues that Canada's health care system faces.
We have been working away the last six years to strengthen it, and we will continue to do that. The status quo is not acceptable. We have to make changes to improve health care in Canada, but the starting point has to be the principles of the Canada Health Act. That is why we do not share the approach taken by the Reform.
However, if the New Democratic Party wants to work with us in that regard, to join us in embracing the principles of the Canada Health Act and in urging all the provinces, not just Alberta but all provincial governments, to act on the principles of the Canada Health Act and strengthen public health care, it can.
Charlie Power Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL
Mr. Speaker, the supreme court has clarified the Marshall ruling and told the minister of fisheries for the second time that he can both make and enforce regulations.
Will the minister tell all fishers, both native and non-native, that they must obey current regulations until such time as they are changed? Further, will he instruct his fisheries officers to enforce the Fisheries Act so there is one set of rules for all fishers?