Debates of May 25th, 1999

Funeral Of King Hussein

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I apologized to everyone for not being there. I wanted to be there. I could not get there.

I spoke with King Abdullah himself and he was very understanding. He told me that he was actually surprised that 30 countries, including Canada, were able to send representatives, with the funeral taking place 22 hours after his father's death.

He was ready to answer questions from the press. There were none. The proof that he was not offended by what happened is that Canada was the first country he visited in North America and he was very pleased with his talks with the Prime Minister of Canada.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the documents obtained by the media under the Access to Information Act are clear: the PMO is behind the Prime Minister's absence at the funeral of King Hussein. We will recall that the army exposed itself to public ridicule in order to protect the Prime Minister in this matter.

My question is for the Prime Minister. We would like to know now who ordered General Baril to assume the guilt in the place of the Prime Minister so as to permit him and his office to save face?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, really, they are so used to talking about humiliation that they would like General Baril to say that he was humiliated.

General Baril assumed his responsibilities. He knew very well that I wanted to be there. Neither General Baril nor I feel humiliated. Neither does King Abdullah, who was very satisfied with his meeting with the Prime Minister of Canada ten days ago.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The documents obtained by the media show that the army had a plane in readiness for the Prime Minister three days prior to the death of King Hussein.

This is totally opposite to what the Prime Minister said in this House for a week, when he maintained he wanted to go to Jordan but that the army had not been able to take him there.

In the light of this information, is the Prime Minister's conscience not bothering him a bit after the statements he made here in this House?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there was a plane ready; and the Minister of Foreign Affairs was able to go.

The fact of the matter is that I was not in Ottawa, I was in British Columbia. The plane was ready in Ottawa, but the plane was not waiting for me in British Columbia. This is what General Baril explained and what the Bloc does not understand.

The Environment

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, last year the environmental watchdog indicted the government for its environmental failures. This year it is an outright conviction.

Let me read the following, “There is no reliable data on the sales and use of pesticides”, and “Senior scientists from all departments consistently express deep concern about the government's declining ability to undertake research for the public good”. How long will the government tolerate this incompetence?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have received the report. I am very happy that we appointed this officer to look into the matter.

On the contrary, we decided there might be some problems and we needed a commissioner who would report to the House of Commons once a year. Each year in office he has given us the report we asked for. He is making recommendations and every department will make sure it has been studied and the corrections made. It was an initiative of this government that permitted the commissioner to make the report today.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it is time for the government to listen to what the environmental commissioner has to say about the government's record of performance.

He reports that the cracks in the foundation threaten the federal government's ability to detect, understand and prevent the harmful effects of toxic substances on the health of Canadians and their environment.

Is this government proud of its record? When will the government take seriously its responsibility to protect the health of Canadians and their environment?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, we put the commissioner in place and we respect his report.

In the last two years the government has budgeted $82 million to deal with toxic substances. Senior officials in all departments who carry out studies with regard to toxics are meeting together, analyzing the commissioner's report and will respond with an action plan.

National Defence

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the government's approach to expropriating provincial land in Nanoose, B.C. resembles that of a dictatorship. It is giving the appearance of negotiating in good faith only to use a sledgehammer to enforce its will when negotiations fail. This approach can only be viewed as threatening to all provinces that dare oppose the government.

The minister of fisheries said two weeks ago that he wanted to give B.C. every opportunity to reach an agreement yet two days later the government moved to expropriate.

My question to the Prime Minister is what took place in those two days after the negotiations that caused the breakdown? Why is the government exercising extreme measures in the imposition of its will on this matter?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the government wanted to negotiate for two years, since the British Columbia government indicated its concern and said that it would cancel the lease at Nanoose Bay, a vital defence facility. We have been attempting to resolve this matter and thought we were getting close. We were offering a lot more than the property was worth.

However, at the 11th hour the B.C. government threw in this red herring about nuclear vessels coming into the area. There are quite obviously no nuclear weapons being tested in the area and there never will be. This has operated for 34 years—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I take from that response that when negotiations fail we bring in the big guns.

Canadians expect the government to obey its own laws but we have seen the government breach contracts, ignore constitutional conventions and now commence an unprecedented expropriation. Pearson airport, helicopter contracts and APEC come to mind.

My question is for the Prime Minister. When did native rights and provincial jurisdiction become so insignificant that the government is willing to ignore them in pursuit of its own negotiation? What options did it consider before it brought in these harsh measures?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, this is a facility that is vital to Canada for defence and security purposes. In fact it is necessary for the testing of equipment that will be used under water for weaponry. If we were not able to do that then we would be putting at risk our Canadian forces personnel.

I have a hard time understanding the position of the Conservative leader, together with the positions of the Bloc Quebecois leader and the Premier of British Columbia. What a combination.

We are operating in the interest of Canada and in the interest of British Columbia in proceeding to keep that base open.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister had better add the Reform Party to that list because the issue is strictly expropriation.

The federal government is in the process of confiscating B.C. lands which belong to the people of British Columbia. In 1984 the federal government went to the Supreme Court of Canada to seek ownership. The Supreme Court of Canada said no.

Under the Constitution it belongs to the people of British Columbia. What has changed since 1984? What allows you to violate the high—

[The Speaker]

I ask all hon. members to direct their questions through the Chair.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we are following a proper lawful process with respect to this expropriation. We did not want to go with this process. We used every opportunity to negotiate. We offered them a lot more than what it was worth.

This defence facility should not have been linked to the Pacific salmon treaty in the first place. It should not be linked to other issues. We should deal with it completely on its own merit. This is a vital defence facility.

We have tried every means to settle this matter with British Columbia but it wants to play politics with it and it looks like the Reform Party wants to play politics too.

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

Mr. Speaker, the politics are obviously coming from the Government of Canada on this issue. Expropriation is the issue here. It is absolutely unacceptable. It violates the Constitution.

How does the government justify expropriation in this instance or any instance? Is it prepared to start expropriating all of Canada in the interest of national security?

I want to know what has changed since 1984. Is the government prepared to confiscate land which rightfully belongs to the people of British Columbia?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the seabed, in other words the mud underneath the water there. That is what we are talking about. We are talking about paying full market value, fair market value. We would not pay any less. In fact we offered an awful lot more than that and the government of the province of British Columbia turned it down.

The mayor of Nanaimo and the mayors and the community leaders in and around that area know the economic value of the Nanoose Bay range: $6 million to $8 million and many jobs for their economy. They want to keep it open.

Tainted Blood

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, from 1981 to 1986, the present Minister of Finance was on the board of the Canada Development Corporation. It owned Connaught, the company responsible for importing and distributing blood products, at the time of the tainted blood scandal.

We know that the government has made a decision to compensate only those who received tainted blood after 1986. Did the Minister of Finance abstain when this question was decided in cabinet?

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance is on his feet, but that question does not go to the administrative responsibility of the minister. The hon. Minister of Finance, if he wants to answer.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to respond.

Connaught Laboratories were a subsidiary of a subsidiary of the Canada Development Corporation. I was on the board, but I must point out that both Connaught and the other company, the parent company, had their own boards as well.

The government administrator, the one most involved, has said that this was not the kind of thing discussed in the CDC, and that he had no recollection of this event. Nor do I.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, did the Minister of Finance not have a hand in a decision that was very much in his interest, by denying all government responsibility toward victims of tainted blood prior to 1986, when he himself was—

[The Speaker]

That question is not in order.

Government Grants

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we now know that the Prime Minister announced a $600,000 grant in his riding months before the project had been approved, and coincidentally just weeks before the federal election. Since only the Prime Minister knows when an election will be called, it is clearly and simply a case of announcing pre-election goodies.

The Prime Minister would have us believe the grant was awarded after careful review, but program officer Lionel Bergeron thought differently when he said in a memo “This project has been announced by the Prime Minister. Its approval is urgent”.

How could the Prime Minister deny that he was just trying to influence voters in his riding by getting this grant before it went through the proper circle?