Debates of May 13th, 1999

Minister Of Human Resources Development

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, first, I again categorically deny that a commissioner's investigator came to my office. This never happened. The fact that the National Post wrote this does not mean it is true. Bloc Quebecois members should learn that the National Post is not the most reliable source of information in Canada.

Second, the information commissioner said the law may have been defied in my office. The fact is that the file arrived at my office on March 24, while the debate had taken place in the House during the first half of February. This is a tempest in a teapot. They are desperately trying to achieve the winning conditions for a referendum that three quarters of Quebeckers do not want.

Immigration

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister dismissed the head tax on refugees as a little problem. Yet the Canadian Council for Refugees has documented that the head tax imposes on refugee families a vicious cycle of hunger, hardship, exploitation and despair.

Why does the Prime Minister not show a little compassion, show a little leadership, and scrap the head tax on refugees once and for all?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

First of all, Mr. Speaker, there is no head tax in this country.

Second, I think the Prime Minister was right to say that the leader of the New Democratic Party tried to raise an issue that is not an issue.

We are in a situation right now of an emergency evacuation. We are so proud about the welcoming of these people into the country by all Canadians. We all know that they want to go back to their country so the problem does not exist.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Council for Refugees has made it clear that it is a real issue, a serious issue. The UN High Commission on Refugees has condemned it. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has condemned it. Even the Liberal Party has condemned it. In fact the Liberals described it at their convention as “a heavy burden for those seeking to integrate themselves into the Canadian economy”.

If the Prime Minister will not listen to anyone else, will he listen to his own party and scrap the head tax on refugees trying to rebuild their lives in Canada?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of the difficult situation in Kosovo we did not see any political party in the country making political points on the backs of refugees.

I am really disappointed by what is going on right now. We are working for these people. Canada is one of the most generous countries of the world.

National Defence

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, in a preliminary report, a copy of which I received on the weekend, it is recommended that the Minister of National Defence cut our reserves from 51 units to 20 in the infantry, from 15 units to 7 in the artillery, and from 17 units to 10 in the armoured units.

The government has already cut the military from 80,000 to 60,000. Is the Minister of National Defence going to cut our reserve forces or not? According to the parliamentary secretary yesterday in the House the decision rests with him.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of cutting the military further.

The matter of reserves restructuring has to be noted in the context that we are still operating under the same reserves structure we had during the second world war. A lot of things have changed and there is a need for an update on it. Indeed, reservists, honorary colonels, people who I am sure the hon. member is concerned about, were involved in drafting this particular proposal which is now before us. At this stage it is only a proposal. There has been no decision made about it. I am happy to look at this proposal and other proposals.

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the record now shows that the minister is not going to adopt any of the recommendations that are in the report. I am so pleased to hear that. That is just what he said. He is not going to cut the reserves whatsoever. Is that what the minister is telling us today? Because how could he possibly consider the cuts that are recommended in that report which would absolutely devastate the reservists in Canada?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of cutting the reserves. However, there are a lot of other recommendations that deal with modifications, updating, reform for the reserves and re-roling of a number of the units. I consider all of those proposals to be valid for examination and I will examine all of them.

Supreme Court Of Canada

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has an opportunity to restore public confidence in the judiciary. Supreme Court Justice Cory is retiring. Canadians, legal scholars and even provincial ministers of justice want a more open process. “Judges should be known to the public as much as possible ahead of time”, stated retired supreme court Justice La Forest.

It is time to open up this pre-charter process. Will the Prime Minister take action and bring nominees to a parliamentary review before appointing them to the highest court in the land?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we do not want to do that because we have been well served with the system we have at this time. I do not want to import an American system that would not work as well.

One of the pillars of our system is the separation between the judiciary, the executive and parliament. It is the way that we guarantee the freedom of the people. I do not want people to come here and have to testify and expose their lives and after that go to the bench as they do in the United States. We do not want that system because we want to protect the—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Calgary Centre.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that even retired supreme court justices are calling for a more open process. Why is this government so averse to public scrutiny and accountability?

The current closed door process clearly does not have the backing of Canadians, especially in this era of increased judicial activism. What is it about a parliamentary review of potential appointments to one of the most powerful institutions in our country that the Prime Minister is concerned about? What is it about consulting parliament that offends the Prime Minister so much?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I find it very interesting that the official opposition continues to try to undermine important federal institutions like the Supreme Court of Canada. The official opposition quotes numbers from various studies. What it does not tell us is that in fact in those same studies Canadians have told us that they have overwhelming confidence in the Supreme Court of Canada as an institution of impartiality and integrity.

I do not think anything speaks more eloquently to the quality of appointment to that court.

Minister Of Human Resources Development

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to refresh the memory of the Minister of Human Resources Development.

The information commissioner's letter read in part as follows: “However, the file was sent for approval on January 28. Departmental officials took 74 days to agree to the release of all the material requested. The minister's office put its interests ahead of those of the applicant and defied the legislation throughout this period. This is completely unacceptable”.

[The Speaker]

The hon. minister may reply if he wishes.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Bloc Quebecois said that my office had deliberately held up certain information in order to prevent it from coming out during a debate in the House.

What I am saying is that the debate took place during the first half of February, but the document did not reach my office—because my office is what we are talking about—until March 24. It remained there for 12 working days.

I have already told my own office that I found 12 working days too long, and I can assure the House that we regret the delay. We have taken steps to correct the situation, and the documents were provided to the journalist in question.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the minister is responsible for his department, by virtue of ministerial accountability. If he does not know that, there is a problem.

How can the minister now try to divest himself of all responsibility, when never before has such a serious direct and unambiguous accusation been made against a government minister as that made in the letter from Canada's information commissioner? This has never happened before.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, despite the histrionics of the members opposite, I never said that I was not responsible for my department. But they said my office was aware of this matter since January 28, and I am saying that it was not.

My department has received 50% more access requests. We are taking steps to correct the situation. The delay is decidedly regrettable, but it was not intentional. We have already taken steps to address the situation.

But it is truly a tempest in a teapot, and I think the Bloc Quebecois members have motives entirely different from those they are claiming. They are much more—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Fraser Valley.

Arts And Culture

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, first taxpayers funded Bubbles Galore , the sex fantasy film that won the Freakzone International Festival of Trash Cinema award. What an honour. Today we learned that the taxpayer will also fund The Girl Who Would Be King , a drag king adventure that is due out in September. Two days ago the minister said that it was the Mulroney government's fault for approving this kind of flick, but The Girl Who Would Be King , which is no doubt another Oscar award winner, was approved by a council appointed by this government.

Will the minister accept responsibility for this decision? Will she do something to ensure Canadian taxpayers are not subsidizing the pornography industry?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to underscore that last year the Canada Council funded approximately 15,000 organizations, artists and writers to help build the culture of this country. Obviously as the minister responsible, I do not think the member would want a situation where the minister decides what films and what books are supported. I can underscore for the hon. member that the Canada Council has assured me it will be doing a revision of its conditions to ensure all applications are respectful of the public purse.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I appeal to you my colleagues once again to please let us hear the answer on one side and the question on the other.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the auditor general recently stated that when it comes to giving grants, the federal government has a very poor track record. He said that there are “problems in compliance, weaknesses in program design”—which is the problem here—“and instances of poor control”. In other words, taxpayers' money is being spent where no one ever intended it to be spent, and these films are a prime example. Even the minister said that she is concerned about the government funding for this kind of movie.

If the minister is genuine in her concern, will she rewrite her department's guidelines for giving funds to the Canada Council? Will she move today to cancel this latest grant which is going to help out the Canadian pornography industry?