House of Commons Hansard #216 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was nato.
Peter Adams LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 15 petitions.
Eric C. Lowther Reform Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to the House today a petition from Canadians right across the country. This is the single largest petition received by this House during the 36th parliament. The member for Scarborough Southwest and I received these petitions this morning.
These petitions relate directly to the call by Canadians right across this country to take all measures necessary to ensure that the possession of child pornography remains a serious criminal offence and that federal police forces be directed to give priority to enforcing this law for the protection of children.
In presenting this petition I will close by reading the prayer that these petitioners are putting forward today. Your petitioners pray that parliament take all measures necessary to ensure that possession of child pornography remains a serious criminal offence and that the federal police forces be directed to give priority to enforcing this law for the protection of children.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by a number of Canadians, including from my own riding of Mississauga South on the subject matter of human rights.
The petitioners would like to draw to the attention of the House that human rights abuses continue to be rampant around the world, including in countries such as Indonesia and in Kosovo. The petitioners also acknowledge that Canada continues to be recognized internationally as a champion of internationally recognized human rights.
The petitioners therefore call upon parliament to continue to speak out against human rights abuses and also to seek to bring to justice those responsible for such abuses.
Svend Robinson NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition which is signed by residents of British Columbia, including from my own constituency of Burnaby—Douglas, as well as residents of Halifax, Nova Scotia on the other coast.
This is a petition opposing the presence of nuclear powered and nuclear armed vessels in the Strait of Georgia. The petitioners note that the agreement allowing the U.S. use of the Canadian Forces Maritime Experimental and Test Ranges, CF METR, in Nanoose Bay expired in June 1996, that the cold war is over and that this is a cold war facility, that this nuclear emergency response plan acknowledges the potential for a nuclear emergency at CF METR and that CF METR occupies land and water that are part of the sovereign claims of the Nanoose first nation.
They call therefore for cancellation of the CF METR agreement with the U.S. and an immediate ban on all nuclear powered and or nuclear weapons capable vessels from B.C. waters and harbours. They also ask that resolving the land claims of the Nanoose first nation be a priority issue and that CF METR be converted to peaceful uses.
Guy St-Julien Liberal Abitibi, QC
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I would like to table a petition from the Inuit community of Quaqtaq, in Nunavik.
The petitioners state that, at the present time, there are 16 to 20 people in three bedroom dwellings. The Inuit find the housing conditions in Nunavik extremely distressing. They consider the situation totally intolerable. It contributes to the high incidence of tuberculosis, infectious diseases and social problems.
The federal government must assume its obligations under the James Bay and Northern Quebec agreement as far as housing in Nunavik is concerned.
Jack Ramsay Reform Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order No. 36, I am pleased to present two petitions to the House today.
First, over 200 petitioners appeal to the House to amend the Divorce Act and protect the access and custody rights of grandparents who are in danger of being denied their grandchildren because of divorce.
Jack Ramsay Reform Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, in addition, I present today the concerns of a number of my Crowfoot constituents who petition parliament to reduce all taxation by at least 20% and abolish the GST.
Peter Adams LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Questions Nos. 219, 220 and 223. .[Text]
Question No. 219—
Rick Borotsik Progressive Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
What is the total estimated financial cost of the Canadian Wheat Board's 49 public forum meetings that are currently being held on Justice Willard Estey's grain handling and transportation review recommandations?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
A total of 61 meetings were held across the prairies to provide an opportunity for the Canadian Wheat Board to consult with farmers on grain transportation issues. The total costs of holding these meetings have not been finalized. Expenses for hall rentals and advertising will amount to about $40,000, and there will be additional costs related to travel.
Question No. 220—
Rick Borotsik Progressive Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
What is the monetary compensation each individual Canadian Wheat Board permit book holder will receive from the level of service complaint settlement with both CN and CP railway after accounting for legal costs incurred by the Canadian Wheat Board?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
The proceeds from the Canadian National, CN, settlement were distributed through the Canadian Wheat Board, CWB, accounts. The total costs of bringing the complaint was $2.7 million. A portion of this was legal fees. The settlement also included rate related benefits accruing to farmers in 1997-1998 and for the life of the agreement. Due to the confidential nature of the agreement, the value of the CN settlement was not publicly disclosed. The amount per permit book will vary depending on participation in the pool accounts.
The Canadian Pacific, CP, settlement is valued at $15 million. The proceeds will be paid to the CWB in 1999 and 2000 and then distributed to farmers through the pool accounts. The legal fees for the court case with CP were taken into account in arriving at the settlement amount. The amount per permit book will vary depending on participation in the pool accounts.
Question No. 223—
Paul Forseth Reform New Westminster—Coquitlam—Burnaby, BC
For each of the years 1994 through 1998, could the Department of Justice provide exact numbers of how many divorces in Canada were handled without the intervention of the courts?
Eleni Bakopanos LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
The Department of Justice's central registry of divorce proceedings has existed since the implementation of the Divorce Act in 1968. This registry was set up as a mechanism to detect and to inform courts and the parties of two divorce applications in different provinces with respect to the same couple.
This registry will ensure a court's jurisdiction in deciding on divorce cases as contained in subsections 3(2) and 3(3) of the Divorce Act.
The records of the registry indicate that the following number of divorces were granted without hearing by the court, by the calendar year are: 1994, 66,197; 1995, 66,200; 1996, 58,405; 1997, 56,258; and 1998, 57,335.
Peter Adams Liberal Peterborough, ON
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
moved:
That this House calls on the government to intensify and accelerate efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis in Kosovo through the involvement of Russia and the United Nations, and to urge NATO not to take actions that expand the conflict and stand in the way of a diplomatic solution.
Madam Speaker, in launching this debate this morning, I would like to explain why the New Democratic Party made the decision to use its opposition day, one of approximately three opposition days in the course of a year, to introduce this motion on Kosovo.
In the few minutes that are available to me, because I will be dividing my time with my colleague from Halifax West, the NDP defence critic, I want to say what this resolution means in relation to the critical point, the critical juncture we have reached in the desperate search for a speedy, peaceful diplomatic solution to the horrifying humanitarian crisis in Kosovo.
Since the Kosovo crisis began in March 1998, just one year ago, 700,000 to 800,000 Kosovars have been forced out of their homeland. Another 400,000, perhaps more than that, have been displaced within Kosovo. Massive damage has been done to the civilian infrastructure of Yugoslavia by the some 3,000 sorties flown by the NATO strike aircraft.
Canadians want to know, and they want to know now, that their government is doing everything humanly possible to bring the hostilities to an end, to bring an end to the atrocities being committed by the Yugoslavian government under Milosevic and to the military aggression. They want to be assured that the Kosovar Albanians are going to be able to return safely to live in their homeland in peace and comfort and security.
That is the goal. That is the objective that supposedly drew Canada into this conflict. It must remain our single-minded objective in the days ahead.
Frankly, we in the New Democratic Party along with a great many other Canadians are gravely disappointed with both the scope and the pace of the diplomatic efforts pursued by the Canadian government to date. Instead of bold and creative diplomacy, we have had boosterism, we have had followership for U.S. policies and for NATO tactics.
Lester Pearson would have used Canada's historic tradition and role as peace broker to seek a consensus for peaceful solutions. He would have done so even at the risk of offending great powers. Instead our Prime Minister has toed the NATO line and danced on cue. The past few weeks have been littered with missed opportunities where Canada could have exercised independently its influence to promote promising diplomatic initiatives, but it has not done so.
Today is not the day to dwell on failures, to dwell on omissions, to dwell on missed opportunities. Rather, it is the time, and this is the purpose today of this motion and this debate, to focus single-mindedly on what it is that Canada can now do, what it is that Canada must now do to provide leadership, to play a key role in bringing us to that diplomatic peaceful resolution of the Kosovo crisis.
Now, diplomacy needs to be given a helping hand. That is the objective of this motion, the objective of this debate. We must concentrate our efforts on what Canada can do, on the leadership Canada must show in working toward a diplomatic solution.
There is no question that there is a diplomatic window, a window that is open just so wide. It is not a big opportunity, it is not a guaranteed path, but it is an opening. It is opening because there have been countries that have taken initiatives. Italy, Germany, Russia and the United Nations have stepped forward. Heaven knows, we desperately need the involvement of the United Nations.
It is ironic that for months Canada has celebrated the fact that it has gained a temporary seat on the security council of the United Nations. Yet at the very first opportunity that it might have used that seat to further the cause of peace, Canada opted out. It said that one could not do anything with the security council. However, the potential for using that avenue still exists and we must use it. It is absolutely imperative that we get this issue back into the United Nations arena where it belongs.
In the last few days and over the last week there have been some promising developments. Early in the conflict the New Democratic Party pushed hard for Canada to take a leadership role in persuading NATO to accept the fact that only a genuinely international peacekeeping force would be acceptable in Yugoslavia and that NATO had to abandon its position that only a NATO dominated force would be acceptable to it as a condition for peace. Today NATO has finally moved to that position.
Early in the conflict it was clear that Milosevic was adamant that there be no international presence in Kosovo. Today he appears to have accepted that there not only must be an international presence, but that there needs to be international troops to ensure the safety and the security of Albanian Kosovars returning home or remaining in their homes.
Early in the conflict the New Democratic Party began urging that Canada persuade NATO to commit to a position that it would stop the bombing immediately if Milosevic would stop the atrocities and come to the table. We are not quite there yet, but we are getting there. We now have Russia taking diplomatic initiatives. There are signs of cracks in the Yugoslavian resolve to keep the atrocities going. There is a courageous deputy prime minister in Yugoslavia who is acknowledging that there must be some movement by Yugoslavia.
Now is the time for Canada to play a bold and decisive role in ensuring that we escalate, that we absolutely accelerate and intensify our search for diplomatic solutions and, conversely, that we do absolutely nothing to escalate the military action in Kosovo.
The government has finally recognized that the participation of Russia is key. Everybody who is following the situation in Kosovo knows that the participation of Russia in helping to find that diplomatic peaceful solution is key. What this means, if this government wants to be taken seriously as a peacekeeper in this country and around the world, is that this country must absolutely provide leadership in persuading NATO to abandon the madness of introducing an oil embargo and creating the spectre of military and naval blockades that would without a doubt preclude any possibility of Russia participating in finding a solution.
It is a time when we need the Government of Canada to show leadership and courage. This is not a time to expand the conflict in the air, at sea or on land. Canada must play no part in the ill-conceived naval blockade that can only serve to inflame tensions with the Russians and the Yugoslavs.
Finally, we ought to insist that Canada not send the additional CF-18 fighter planes which the government committed Canada to do. This is essential to indicate that we are serious about recognizing that any escalation of military effort is going to stand in the way of progress toward a diplomatic solution. This would give an important gesture, a concrete gesture that would underscore our commitment at this stage to secure a diplomatic solution to the Kosovo crisis. No less is required of us as Canadians and no less is required of us as citizens of the world.
Gordon Earle NDP Halifax West, NS
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to this very, very important motion.
Last Thursday I had the occasion to visit Winnipeg to attend a funeral which was held for a very close relative who had passed away. Funerals have a way of bringing to light the stark reality of life and death, what it is all about to be here on earth and what we accomplish while we are here.
While I was in Winnipeg I also had the opportunity to visit with my son who is living there. My son is a fine young man. I am not saying that just because he is my son, he is a very fine young man. He is a very peace loving young man and I am very proud of him.
We were sitting in a restaurant having a bite to eat and he said “Dad, I got in a fight not too long ago”. I was very surprised. I said “You got in a fight?” He said “Yeah. I was walking home and I saw this fellow who was drenched in blood. He was covered with blood. Another person, quite a bit larger, was standing over this person, beating him. I went over to talk to the aggressor. I said `This is not necessary. Calm down. Relax. Go home. It is all over”.
He was trying to bring peace to the situation. Then he turned to the fellow who had been beaten up and he told him there was no point in continuing with this, that he should just go on home. The person who had been beaten up listened and decided to go. Then my son turned around to leave because he thought the issue was over. However, the aggressor, accompanied by two other people, all charged him. One came at him from one side and one came at him from the other side, and the three of them were holding him. He looked at them and said “So it takes three of you”. He must have touched a chord with their kind of macho image. One fellow said “Let him go and we will fight one on one”. The aggressor who had beaten up the other fellow went after my son. My son, with his Judo instincts from his training days when he was younger, very quickly took over, pinned this fellow to the ground and held him so that he could not move. The others were quite surprised. They said “Let him get up and we will go”, and they backed off.
I was torn with conflicting opinions on the situation. I said to him “Jamie, I am proud of you. You did something that was good. You stepped in to try to help someone who was obviously in distress”. However, I also said “It was kind of an interesting situation. You were lucky because who knows what could have happened. Those people could have had weapons and they could have attacked you while you were down holding this fellow”. There were a lot of risks involved.
The bottom line was that he had to make a choice. He made a choice to take some risk to try to help someone who was in distress, who was at a disadvantage, who was being bruised and beaten.
I tell that story because it has similarities to the conflict in Kosovo, where people have had to make hard choices which involve risk. That was done at the beginning of this conflict. I do not think anyone questions the motive for becoming involved in the conflict. We were trying to assist people who were being taken advantage of and we were trying to end the suffering and the bloodshed. That was the motivation for becoming involved and for remaining involved in this conflict.
However, we are at a point now where we have to very seriously look at what this motion proposes, and that is intensifying and accelerating our efforts to find a diplomatic solution—and I emphasize the word diplomatic—to the crisis in Kosovo.
We know that in diplomacy there is always give and take on all sides. We cannot have it so that someone can say “This is exactly what I want and unless I get that I will not give anything in return”. Diplomacy always involves a matter of give and take. People involved in the labour movement know this. At the negotiating table there is give and take.
There are certain principles beyond which we do not go. For example, in this case we know that there are certain principles at stake; the principle of self-determination and so forth. We re-affirm our support for that basic principle. However, in negotiations and in diplomacy there is always give and take.
We are urging very strongly that the government take the lead in finding a diplomatic solution, involving Russia and the United Nations, to this very serious crisis. None of us can doubt the seriousness of this crisis. All we have to do is look at our televisions to see the images of the people who are suffering on both sides of the conflict. We see the suffering that is taking place and we know that the bottom line is that the conflict must end.
As I said earlier, when we attend a funeral it comes home very quickly that after all is said and done we all end up in that same position, lying in a coffin with the life gone from us. What people remember afterwards are the good deeds that we have done, the way we have influenced someone's life as we passed through.
I am reminded of a spiritual phrase which says that if I have helped somebody as I pass this way then my living would not be in vain. That is the goal which we must all strive toward, to not have our living be in vain and to try to do what we can to help people.
In this case we must help to bring about a diplomatic solution to this problem, to make sure that no action is taken which expands the conflict and makes it worse because we see that sort of thing happening quite often. It could very well have happened in the situation involving my son. He could very well have become involved in a situation where the action he took could have escalated things. Fortunately, he was able to take action to calm the situation and to use the appropriate amount of force necessary to bring an end to it.
It is because of our concern that nothing be done to expand or prolong this conflict that I move:
That the motion be amended by replacing the words “to take actions” with the following:
“to impose a naval blockade or take any other actions”
Jean-Paul Marchand Bloc Québec East, QC
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech.
The member expressed his sympathy for the devastation going on in Kosovo. The NDP clearly thinks this crisis could be settled without violence. However, does the member not acknowledge that Mr. Milosevic has violated every possible human principle and value and is one of the worst tyrants imaginable?
Does he also not recognize that extremely strong measures are needed to fight this head of state, who has no respect for people and denies their rights and is emptying Kosovo? Do they not understand that strong measures such as ground troops are needed in Kosovo to repulse the armies?
So long as the strongest measures are not taken against Milosevic and the Serbian government, this unfortunate conflict will remain unresolved.
Gordon Earle NDP Halifax West, NS
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his comments.
The example of my son being involved in a conflict addresses that issue. He came upon a very serious and dangerous situation where the human rights of a person were being violated. He diplomatically used every effort to bring that particular conflict to a conclusion, to the point where one of the parties actually left the conflict through his persuasion.
Strength comes in many ways and through various means. There is nothing weak about diplomacy if it is used properly. There is nothing weak about exploring all those diplomatic avenues. I feel that we have not explored all of them to their fullest. There is no harm in doing that in order to bring an end to this very serious situation.
Ted McWhinney Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Halifax West, and indeed the hon. member for Halifax, referred to diplomatic efforts.
I wonder if the hon. member would be in a position to advise us if he has considered the latest peace plan, the Simitis peace plan launched by the Prime Minister of Greece and communicated yesterday.
Gordon Earle NDP Halifax West, NS
Madam Speaker, I must admit that I do not have all the details of that particular effort, but we certainly feel that any and all efforts should be considered. It is also very important to get as much information as possible on all these efforts.
Certainly from my own perspective I would be more than pleased to offer any assistance in terms of discussing any of these issues directly with our ministers who are involved in trying to promote these plans. It is an important issue and all of us must contribute as much as possible to bring this kind of peace about.
Ted White Reform North Vancouver, BC
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member very closely. I wondered if he was receiving the sorts of letters from constituents that I am.
This is a letter from Ken Timewell in my riding, who writes “I beg you to work for a peaceful solution. The humanitarian solution being used by NATO is leaving behind too much destruction and too many dead”. He goes on to encourage us to use every possible tool that we can to encourage some sort of diplomatic resolution.
Is the member receiving many letters like this, the way I certainly am at the moment?
Gordon Earle NDP Halifax West, NS
Madam Speaker, yes, I am receiving, as I am sure many of our colleagues are, countless letters from people across Canada who are concerned about the situation and who are urging that peace be our main goal in this particular conflict.
People are expressing concern about the environmental damage that is taking place, the destruction of schools, the destruction of historic buildings and all those casualties that go along with the kind of conflict we see taking place. I am receiving lots of letter in that regard.