Debates of Feb. 16th, 1999

Citizenship Of Canada Act

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate today. I guess I am a bit embarrassed on behalf of the House at some of the things that have been said today.

It is very easy to pick a case and to characterize all cases as having the same characteristics. It is very easy to throw numbers around and suggest that somehow a greater number of people are engaged in a certain activity than in fact would be the case.

As an example, the member used the auditor general's report and the issue of some 20,000 applicants whose status appeals have been denied and who are to leave. I understand from the member that only 4,000 have left, which means there are 16,000 yet to be accounted for. I wonder if the member would not also agree that of that number it is very likely a substantial portion of those people are no longer in the country. In fact, they have probably left simply because of that.

I find the member's explanation astounding. I want him to explain it to the House as I think it is very important. He said those 16,000 people are in fact still here and that 80% of them will go on to become Canadian citizens. They cannot have it both ways. If they have made application under due process and have been denied, I wonder if the member could explain to me exactly how 80% of them will then go on to become Canadian citizens.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if the member does not understand that there are laxities and problems with the system, I guess that is the Liberal member's own choosing. We all know there are problems with the system. There are 16,000 people unaccounted for. We have no exit controls and no way of knowing.

The member says he does not have any problems with the system or he asks how we can go ahead and account for this and not play a numbers game. I will throw another number at him if he is not sick of numbers yet. In 1994 of the 230,000 immigrants entering the country only 14% were selected using the points system.

The points system as people may be aware—and I will just go over it quickly—evaluates incoming immigrants on education, job training, experience, occupation, arranged employment, age, knowledge of one of the official languages, whether or not they have relatives in Canada and whether or not they are self-employed. All these characteristics are used. Of the 230,000 we allowed into Canada in 1994 only 14% actually had anything to do with the point system.

If we want to talk about numbers, I could point to the 14% of 230,000 or the 16,000 people that are unaccounted for that should have been deported and tell the member that we have a numbers problem. If he does not believe it, he can read them for himself.

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, the member is being somewhat irresponsible when he says there are 16,000 illegals in the country who have been ordered deported and that 80% of them will become citizens. That just does not wash.

How can the member say that about 16,000 people who probably are not in the country? We do not have exit controls, but the fact of the matter is that if people are deported they will not be approved as citizens. For the member to say that is totally wrong. Furthermore, to have him say that Liberal lawyers are getting around the system is slanderous.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the member about outrage. Members across the way are challenging that maybe these 16,000 deportees, or should be deportees, are not on Canadian soil. Yet I have members in my own caucus who have gone on tours with police in the city of Vancouver where we all know—and we saw it on TV with our own eyes—about problems with Honduran gangs distributing drugs. He saw with his own eyes a fellow spit out $1,700 of crack cocaine from his mouth and he did not get charged. He did not get convicted. He did not get deported. That is not even on the record books. The ones we are talking about on the record books are the 20,000 who should have been deported and had an actual determination made. That fellow who spit out the $1,700 worth of crack cocaine from his mouth into a police officer's hand did not even get on the records.

[Werner Schmidt, Reform, Kelowna, BC]

Mr Speaker, we have before us a bill entitled “an act respecting Canadian citizenship”. The first statement inside is “This enactment replaces the existing Citizenship Act”. That means we have before us an act that we should first of all be discussing and debating in principle. We should be dealing almost exclusively with the principles that are involved in legislation of this type. This creates probably the most significant function of a Canadian citizen, of a Canadian person, than anything else they can possibly do.

I am a Canadian. I am a Canadian citizen. We should be able to say that with pride. We should be able to say with our hands on our hearts “I am a Canadian”. There should be no question that the number one concern here is that I am a proud Canadian. We are proud of our country.

I remember so clearly being at an international conference in Dallas, Texas. Twenty-five thousand people assembled in an arena. Not a single person in that arena was not singing the national anthem. Their hands were clasped over their hearts and they were singing with pride.

In Canada I have witnessed Canadians singing the Canadian national anthem with caps on their heads, slouching with their hands in their pockets with absolutely no respect for the national anthem. We should be proud to be Canadian.

I was born here. My grandfather was an immigrant to Canada. He chose to come here. I am so happy that he did. It is because of his citizenship in Canada that I today am a Canadian citizen.

What concerns me so very much is that the hon. minister chose to ignore certain things that have happened in her discussions across Canada. She was told across Canada that what we need to have are people who are citizens, who are born of those people who are Canadian citizens. What was her reply? The minister stated that she made no changes in this proposed act because there was no research done on how big a problem the citizenship at birth issue really is.

This is not a statement of principle. This is a statement of numbers. In other words, it does not matter whether it is a matter of principle whether one is a Canadian citizen, it is simply a matter of how many numbers are involved.

That seems to me to be the typical Liberal interpretation of legislation. Test the winds to see how many people say a particular thing and then the Liberals will do it; whether it is right or whether it is wrong has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand. I decry that kind of statement.

I will now move on to another part of this legislation which I think is rather significant. Clause 6 states that an individual shall be granted Canadian citizenship if they have a command of one of the Canadian languages. I will now ask a whole series of questions. I want to draw rather heavily, in fact in detail from a presentation that was made to the committee as it travelled across Canada by the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce.

These are the issues the chamber was concerned about. Who will be doing the standardized language testing? Will it be the federal government? Where will the testing take place? Is it a part of the acceptance criteria and does it have to be done in the country of origin? Will this be a major expense and undertaking?

It is important to note that there is a big difference between learning English in a country of origin and learning English in the Canadian context in Canada. There are tremendous cultural differences with respect to language use. Immigrants learn so much about Canadian society, language use and meaning through the first English as a second language classes they attend.

The chamber contends that as we understand it there is currently no universal valid test of English abroad. Who is going to do the language testing overseas? This will cause an even greater backlog than there is now. We assume there will be additional fees associated with taking these tests and that is okay with them. Does the language proficiency being proposed include labour readiness?

It appears as though the motivation behind the language recommendations is to discontinue support for any type of language training funding and to implement additional fees on top of the existing fee structure. That training would be totally payable by the immigrants. It is interesting that Canada will train Canadians in either official language but it is not considering investing in the training of immigrants in either official language.

In many aspects of this report it appears that Canada is purporting to put higher demands on immigrants economically and socially than what it expects of its own people.

We need to be very careful to put in place the kind of testing and validity that will give credence and acceptability to this clause.

Clause 34 is a single sentence: “The form of the oath of citizenship is set out in the schedule”. Is the oath of citizenship so unimportant that it can be relegated to a schedule of the act or is it as in the earlier part where the minister shall grant citizenship if the person pledges allegiance according to the oath? The minister on her own volition has proposed the following oath:

From this day forward, I pledge my loyalty and allegiance to Canada and Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada. I promise to respect our country's rights and freedoms, to defend our democratic values, to faithfully observe our laws and fulfil my duties and obligations as a Canadian citizen.

The significance here is in what is left out of the current oath that is asked of persons who wish to take Canadian citizenship. What is left out of the present oath are the words “heirs and successors”. It should be allegiance to the Queen followed by heirs and successors. That has been eliminated in the proposed oath. Why has that been eliminated? I can only speculate but the question in my mind is, is this the beginning of an effort on the part of the Government of Canada to eliminate the role of the Queen of Canada? It looks like that sort of thing could be happening here very subtly and very surreptitiously.

The oath adds a couple of very interesting phrases. It adds the phrase “respect our country's rights and freedoms”. I would like to ask the minister and all members opposite what exactly are the rights and freedoms of a country? And who grants those rights and freedoms? Do the citizens grant the rights and freedoms to the country? Does the country grant those rights and freedoms to itself? Does some other country grant those rights and freedoms to another country? Does the United Nations do it? Does the World Court do it? Who grants these rights and freedoms to the country?

The second phrase is “to defend our democratic values”. I am unalterably in favour of the values we hold as a democratic society. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you as a Reformer and a member of the official opposition based on one thing, that we work from the grassroots up and not from the top down. That is what we need to do. The defence of my values is the defence we want to do as individuals and as a country. It is absolutely imperative that it be there but this is done on an individual basis. I must do that and I myself pledge to do that.

If that oath is as important as I believe it is, it should not be relegated to the schedule in the back of the act. It should be part and parcel of clause 34 in the act so everybody knows exactly what they stand for. I am a Canadian, I am a citizen of Canada, I am proud of it and I want everybody else to know that.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on his intervention. The member has presented his views and the views of Canadians very clearly without resorting to anything else other than the facts. It is very important that all members take that point of view. I respect the member for that.

The member also knows that some statements have been made in this debate. I would like to ask the member whether he agrees with the statement that was made in the House by another member that Canada is advertising for criminals with regard to immigration. Would he support that statement?

[Werner Schmidt, Reform, Kelowna, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have just been handed an ad: “Guaranteed immigration to Canada with the purchase of a Fleet rent a car franchise. Total investment of $50,000 Canadian, approximately $30,000 U.S.”. “You are guaranteed”—underlined—“immigration to Canada, even with a criminal record. For information write 5950 Bathurst Street, Suite 1009, Toronto, Ontario, fax at Toronto, Canada [phone]”. I do not know who put that ad in the paper but I know the ad exists.

[An hon. member]

Was that the Government of Canada?

[Werner Schmidt, Reform, Kelowna, BC]

I do not know. I am not accusing anybody of doing it. I know there is an official ad.

The point is that I do not want to advertise that sort of thing. I also do not want to guarantee citizenship in Canada to anyone other than someone who is prepared to accept the oath that I mentioned earlier. We do not want people from a criminal element. We do not want that in our society. We do not want to advertise for them to come to Canada.

[The Speaker]

I see that it is almost two o'clock. The hon. member still has three minutes of questions and comments. If he wishes to handle them, he will have the floor at three o'clock for questions and comments. In his absence of course I will go to the next speaker who is from his party and they have agreed to split the time.

We will now go to Statements by Members.

Taxation

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is budget day 1999.

For more than 12 years parents have called for fair treatment. Treat parents equitably and stop rewarding just institutional daycare choices, leaving parents who choose other options out in the cold. Thousands of families were represented on Parliament Hill during the prebudget debate by the newly formed Family Tax Coalition.

These families carried the message one more time but louder than ever before. They called out again to give an equitable, refundable tax credit to all parents and let them determine the arrangements which best meet the needs of their families. The Reform Party agrees.

The Liberals continue to tell parents that parental or extended family care has no value. This is wrong. Canadian families, through the Family Tax Coalition, are tired of being ignored. This time the government must respond or it will pay the price.

Chinese New Year

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish all members of parliament a happy new year. Today is the first day of the year of the rabbit in the lunar calendar. There are many events across Canada to celebrate the new year. There are city parades, community celebrations and family gatherings organized coast to coast. Children receive red envelopes with gifts or candy.

It is also an auspicious day for the Minister of Finance to announce the federal budget. The year of the rabbit will bring prosperity, happiness and peace for all Canadians.

This Tuesday I am co-hosting with the Chinese federation of 21 Ottawa community organizations the very first celebration of the Chinese New Year on Parliament Hill.

Xin nian kuai le

. Happy new year.

East Coast Music Awards

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate all the winners from Sunday night's 11th edition of the East Coast Music Awards.

The gala awards show held in St. John's, Newfoundland honoured all artists from Atlantic Canada in 19 different musical categories, including jazz, country, pop rock, music in both English and French.

Bruce Guthro brought home five awards, making him Sunday night's biggest winner.

An event like the East Coast Music Awards is very significant in that it gives artists in the music industry an opportunity to showcase their talent and to be rewarded for their efforts. The music industry on the east coast is vibrant and in constant expansion.

Atlantic Canada region's music can be heard from coast to coast and abroad and adds riches to the wide range of Canadian talent. I would like my colleagues in the House to congratulate all those artists, the winners and the nominees who took part in this great music event.

Literacy

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is Freedom to Read Week and tomorrow is Literacy Action Day.

Books, newspapers and magazines are instruments of freedom. That is why I urge all Canadians to celebrate Freedom to Read Week and Literacy Action Day.

This year Freedom to Read Week will be celebrated in libraries, bookstores and schools in Peterborough and across Canada in a variety of ways. Libraries create displays of books that have been censored or challenged over the years. Schools feature classroom discussions on censorship.

The freedom of expression committee believes that freedom to read is essential to the democratic way of life and essential to the democratic process. To be able to read one has to be literate. Literacy Action Day sponsors include Frontier College, the Movement for Canadian Literacy and ABC Canada. The slogan of one of its sponsors is each one teach one.

The efforts of these groups to promote literacy and reading are particularly timely this year because of the government's efforts to protect our publishers—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Vancouver Quadra.

Public Complaints Commission

[Ted McWhinney, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general has now approved funding for counsel for those complainants appearing before the RCMP public complaints commission who were directly involved in confrontations with police at the APEC leaders meeting held at the University of British Columbia in November 1997. This follows a request by new commission head Ted Hughes based on unique elements in the APEC hearing as they had developed.

The minister's decision was made after receiving representations from several government MPs. It is an exercise in good faith and good constitutionalism.

Chinese New Year

[Inky Mark, Reform, Dauphin—Swan River, MB]

Mr. Speaker, today people of Chinese descent all over the world are celebrating the year of the rabbit, Chinese New Year.

Canadians of Chinese descent work in their communities across the country in finance, in the professions of law, medicine, dentistry and teaching, in engineering and high technology, various small, medium and large business ventures, in government and even politics. Wherever they are in Canada, Canadians of Chinese descent are making significant contributions, creating jobs, participating in their communities and improving overall standards of living.

To all Canadians I wish happiness and prosperity for this, the year of the rabbit.

1949 Asbestos Strike

[Denis Paradis, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, midnight February 14, 1949 marked the start of the asbestos strike in the Eastern Townships. This event, now 50 years behind us, had a significant social, political and religious impact on Quebec.

The asbestos strike marked a total change in mindset. From then on, major companies and government would have to respect workers' rights. This struggle for the recognition of Quebec workers was a difficult and complex one, for the Duplessis government wanted to force the unions to their knees.

Nevertheless, the outcome of this strike in Quebec was a transformation of labour relations in the workplace and an enhanced public awareness of the importance of trade unions in an industrial society.

Water

[Yvon Charbonneau, Liberal, Anjou—Rivière-Des-Prairies, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to the experts who met last week under UN auspices, nearly one billion people will be threatened with a water crisis if emergency measures are not adopted by all countries, both rich and poor.

There is no doubt that this alert needs to be taken seriously. The verdict is a direct and harsh one: by the year 2025, 970 million people could be facing a serious shortage of water. What is more, according to the same experts, up to one-third of humanity is liable to experience problems. The scientific community also acknowledges these problems, so it is vital for all governments to remain vigilant and to act as promptly as possible in order to avoid this crisis, which is becoming a constantly greater source of concern.

Why not deal with the matter immediately, instead of waiting for a full-blown crisis?

Nunavut

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was an exciting day for the people of Nunavut and a significant moment in Canada's history.

The residents voted in their first Nunavut territorial election. The election took place on February 15 so that Nunavut will have an elected government in place when the territory is formally created April 1.

According to the chief electoral officer, voter turnout was 88%, extremely high. This reflects the commitment that the people have in shaping a government that is responsive to their wishes and reflective of their culture and traditions.

This election is a very special moment not just for the 19 winners and voters but for all Canadians. Very few countries in the world are able to create new governments in a democratic and peaceful fashion. Canada is one of those countries and we all have reason to be proud.

I congratulate the residents and all the candidates who played a part in this historic event. This day marks the beginning of a new chapter in our nation's history.

Veterans

[Gary Lunn, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during the second world war 26 Canadian airmen were slated for execution at Buchenwald concentration camp.

This past December the Minister of Veterans Affairs responded with a mere $1,098 and stated “I am delighted to be able to close the chapter on this longstanding issue”.

Today Mr. Arthur Kinnis, spokesman for the survivors, has requested I return his cheque. Across Canada virtually all remaining Buchenwald detainees are doing the same.

Nearly 50 years ago these men fought against Nazi tyranny.

Australia and New Zealand have paid their Buchenwald survivors over $10,000 each. Now Canada offers just over $1,000 to the 14 remaining survivors. This is shameful. This is an insult.

I urge the minister to revisit this matter immediately and settle Canada's debt to the brave men of Buchenwald. It would be a disgrace to allow these men to die without the recognition they truly deserve.

Pyrocycling Of Bark

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to call the House's attention to the opening of a pilot plant in Jonquière using a new industrial process called Pyrocycling to recycle bark.

This is a very promising initiative, both for the jobs it creates and for the use it makes of the large quantities of waste bark available in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region.

This new industrial process will use heat to decompose bark into oils, charcoal, gas and water. The oils will be used in the particle board and plywood industry, while the charcoal will serve as a raw material in the metallurgical and mineral industry.

But that is not all. The plant will also demonstrate a new concept for producing electricity that will enhance Quebec's role in the renewable energy sector.

We wish these innovative folks good luck and every success in the future.

Veterans Affairs

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, our veterans went off to war to defend our rights, and it is because of the sacrifices they made that we have our freedom today.

November 11 is not the only day on which we commemorate these sacrifices. Another important custom allows veterans to wear their ceremonial dress at church funerals.

A recent directive prevented veterans from continuing to observe this custom in certain churches in southeastern New Brunswick. Many years ago, veterans took up arms to defend their strong belief in the freedom of our country.

I wish to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the efforts of the president of the Richibucto Legion, Henri Pietraszko, and to congratulate all the veterans and their families.

I also wish to thank Mgr. Ernest Léger for the understanding he has shown these veterans. Clearly, this is a custom they hold very dear.

Once again, congratulations, and a vote of thanks to Mgr. Léger.

Employment Insurance

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present some facts about employment insurance in Newfoundland and Labrador in response to comments by the hon. member for Burin—St. George's earlier this month.

The hon. member vastly underestimated both the contributions and the benefits to the people of this great province. The member stated that EI contributions this year would total $107 million. The member must have overlooked employer contributions which would bring the grand total of premiums to some $257 million.

The hon. member was even more in error concerning the level of EI expenditures. His estimate of $75 million for the year compares with actual benefit payments of $666 million to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in 1998. Fishing benefits alone totalled more than $84 million in this province. Those are the real facts.

Nunavut

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Nunavut held its first general election yesterday. The new legislative assembly has now been formed and will take up its duties on April 1.

The Bloc Quebecois wishes Nunavut's MLAs and future premier a productive and successful term in office.

A monumental task has been accomplished, but much still remains to be done. We are familiar with the legendary initiative and fighting spirit of the Inuit who have, for thousands of years, successfully braved a harsh climate and vast distances.

There is no doubt that Nunavut's Inuit will take up with pride and dignity the wonderful challenge of governing themselves. The Bloc Quebecois will be celebrating right along with them on April 1.