Debates of May 4th, 1999

Premier Of Ontario

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if I could just add something to what my colleague the Minister of Industry said, the premier of Ontario is not only going to have to borrow the money. We gave him $900 million and reversed what the previous Tory government had imposed on the province of Ontario.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order. The hon. member for Fraser Valley.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is not much left but the Liberal government knows how to give things away. Let us look at this Nisga'a treaty one more time.

First of all it creates a state within a state, an idea which I think the Bloc Quebecois would find fairly palatable. This is sovereignty association in the heart of British Columbia. Not just that but this new kingdom of Nisga'a actually has constitutional superiority in 14 areas. The new Nisga'a government will have incredible powers, including the powers to tax, regulate trade and even dole out civil rights, if it so chooses, based upon a person's race.

Since when did the Prime Minister become a booster for sovereignty association?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear to me that the Reform Party needs some lessons in history. It is clear to me that the Reform Party needs to take some time to understand how Canada was built.

In our Constitution, the highest law in our land, we recognize and protect aboriginal interests. Section 35 identifies aboriginal rights as not being better rights than ours but being different by virtue of the fact that they were here first. The challenge we have as Canadians is to find ways and means in modern Canada to reflect those rights in a real and substantial way.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I always thought one of the cherished Canadian principles was equality of all citizens. That is something this party has stood for for a long time.

Let me quote directly from the Nisga'a deal: “In the event of an inconsistency between a Nisga'a law and a federal or provincial law, the Nisga'a law prevails to the extent of the inconsistency or conflict”.

If Canadian laws no longer apply, if parliament is no longer the supreme authority, and if the Prime Minister is no longer the top elected official, why have we created an independent state within our borders? That is what we have done.

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, here again the Reform Party shows its lack of credibility as it relates to understanding the treaty.

Through negotiations we have found ways and means to reconcile the interests of all parties. The Constitution applies. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies. The Criminal Code applies.

The Reform Party would do well to actually read the treaty so that its questions could be taken seriously.

Kosovo

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked the Prime Minister whether he had any plans to freeze the Canadian assets of close collaborators of the Milosevic regime. All I got was a very evasive answer.

I would therefore like to submit a very concrete case, that of Bogoljub Karic, a Serbian minister, who owns a television station in Yugoslavia, three companies in Canada, and a luxurious home in Toronto.

Does the Prime Minister not think that, by freezing the assets of this man, who is propagandizing for Milosevic and against NATO, Canada would be taking concrete action to step up the pressure on the Milosevic government?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has enacted a number of sanctions against the former republic of Yugoslavia including a freeze of the assets in Canada of the former republic and Serbian governments. Should multilateral sanctions be adopted in this respect, Canada could impose measures to freeze the assets of government officials under the Special Economic Measures Act.

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is a very simple one: Is the government going to freeze his assets? Have they been inventoried? Could the moneys seized in this way not be put into a fund to ensure the reconstruction of Kosovo?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, Canada could put in place the appropriate regulations if an appropriate international organization or association of states, most likely NATO in the current context, decides that such a measure should be taken.

Aboriginal Affairs

[John Cummins, Reform, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this treaty is a backroom deal negotiated by nameless, faceless bureaucrats without the direction of parliament. Today before the document has even been tabled in the House, the minister signed off on the deal. Next fall parliament we will be asked to rubber stamp the deal, no changes required, thank you very much. What happened to the democratic process?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member is suggesting is that the right of this House to consider a negotiated agreement and have full authority to accept or reject it is somehow not significant. I feel quite differently about that.

If the hon. member looks at history, the policy of Canada has always been to introduce to the House a signed agreement for full debate and consideration by parliament. Parliament can choose to accept or reject it and we will be bound by that decision.

On this side of the House we know that writing treaties in British Columbia is the right thing to do. We know that the treaty that we have with the Nisga'a is fair, affordable and right.

[John Cummins, Reform, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the right of the House is to amend legislation that is brought before it. The democratic process is being trampled in this deal. The government has made parliament completely irrelevant to the process. Under this Liberal administration, parliament has become an ineffectual, irrelevant talk shop.

Let us ask the real question. Is this treaty so bad it cannot stand the scrutiny of parliamentary debate prior to ratification?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, let us understand that the house of parliament can amend the enabling legislation. We have always introduced signed agreements. We introduced signed agreements for the Gwich'in. We introduced a signed agreement for the Nunavut land claims agreement, for the Sahtu Dene and Metis agreements, and for the umbrella final agreement for the Council of Yukon First Nations. Why would we do it any differently for the Nisga'a agreement?

Justice

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in response to Quebec experts who fear the negative effects of the principle of harmonization of sentencing, the Minister of Justice claimed, in a letter made public on Saturday, that her bill on young offenders merely encourages what she calls “consistency in sentencing” in Canada.

According to the minister, is there consistency in sentencing under Canadian law and the measures taken by Quebec with its approach?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows full well that the provision that is being discussed is a provision that exists presently in the Criminal Code of Canada. I point the hon. member to the fact that there continues to be regional variation in sentencing under the Criminal Code.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is confusing the Criminal Code and the Young Offenders Act. That is not reassuring.

For her bill to make any sense, does the minister realize that the principle of harmonized sentences, or if you prefer, the new concept of consistency in sentencing, implies that either Quebec must change its approach, or the Canadian west must? Quite obviously, the two approaches cannot coexist.

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

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case and I think the hon. member knows that. Our proposed youth justice system acknowledges the diversity of approach, the diversity of concern that exists among provinces and territories in this country. The youth justice scheme is one that provides sufficient flexibility to acknowledge that diversity not only in sentencing but in other aspects of the administration of justice.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Derrek Konrad, Reform, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, last night the Prime Minister warned Canadians that they should beware of political leaders who believe countries should be populated by people of the same blood. That is exactly what is happening with the Nisga'a deal. The government just signed on to a deal that will entrench government by race, government based on bloodlines.

Why does the Prime Minister point fingers at other leaders when he himself is guilty of entrenching government based on race?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, to my mind the Nisga'a treaty gives us the opportunity to yet again show how this side of the House, how the Liberal government, wants to make progress for the benefit of first nations in Canada.

I would like to remind the House of some of the approaches of the opposition. First of all, members will remember that their solution to the devastating poverty on first nations communities was to cut $1 billion from my ministry's budget. I would remind members that they were so committed to the Inuit in Nunavut that when we had the debate in the House, all they focused on was the Senate issue. Here is a good one. I want to remind the House that their enlightened solution at Ipperwash was to call in the army. Are we to take them seriously at all?

[Derrek Konrad, Reform, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, we certainly should take the Canadians who elected us to parliament seriously.

Let me give an example of how the Nisga'a treaty hands out rights and privileges based on race. If you are a non-Nisga'a you do not have a right to practice a profession on Nisga'a land; no lawyers, doctors, mechanics, shopkeepers without getting special racial permission.

Why does the Prime Minister want to entrench race based employment in the Constitution?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and the party opposite talk about race based decisions. Let us clarify this. It is not race based; it is rights based. If they would take the time to read the highest law of our land, the Constitution, and appreciate the unique and dynamic approach that Canada has taken in building a strong partnership with the first peoples of this country, they would be appalled at their own questions.

Millennium Scholarships

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, while a parliamentary secretary was intimating that the federal government could not appoint a government negotiator in the matter of the millennium scholarships, because the foundation manages the money of taxpayers, we learned that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs made a commitment on Saturday to Jean Charest to delegate a federal deputy minister.

Why did the minister, who knew there was a government appointment and a negotiator on the way, refuse to so inform the House? Why is he hiding this appointment he has been asked to make for quite some time?