Debates of Oct. 2nd, 2001

Terrorism

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we certainly welcome any of the Canadian provincial governments paying more attention to security. The premier of Ontario has hired the former commissioner of the RCMP and a retired Canadian armed forces general. I would like the member to know that we have the current commissioner of the RCMP and many current Canadians armed forces generals advising us now.

[Brian Pallister, Canadian Alliance, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's ambivalence is what is trying the patience of Canadians. First, here in Canada he denied that there was a problem. Then he committed us to military support on a TV talk show in the United States. Now he has taken the not so bold step of setting up a committee, a further excuse for inaction.

Canadians want us to join the rest of the free world in the battle against terrorism. Canadians want us to lead. Why does the Prime Minister not want to lead us?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am not like the members of the Alliance Party. I want to know where we are going. They want to send planes first, not knowing where to go. We have to find out. Now we are talking about acting.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs has been in charge of our committee here in Canada since last week. Governor Ridge in the United States is starting his work only next week. We are two weeks ahead of the Americans.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is increasing demand, including one from the Council of Europe, from which a delegation of parliamentarians has just returned, for the creation of an international coalition and for crimes of terrorism to be heard in the new international criminal court.

Is the government prepared to support the view that the future international criminal court should be the proper institution to judge crimes of terrorism, as the assembly of the Council of Europe voted last week?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is prepared to accept consideration of the idea of including terrorism within the role of this international criminal court.

At this time, however, we need the support of a number of other countries, and even their signatures, if the treaty is to take effect. The main objective is to get the other states to sign the treaty.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the meantime, precisely for the reasons given by the minister, and others, the legal commission of the Council of Europe proposed that a special criminal tribunal be created under the auspices of the United Nations by the security council.

At this time, other countries are supporting that position within the UN General Assembly.

Does this government intend to promote that idea so that arrested terrorists may be subjected to international justice?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

First of all, Mr. Speaker, yes we are prepared to consider the idea of having an international court for trying terrorists, provided that this would be a one-time process for the situation that occurred on September 11.

It must be kept in mind that more than 6,000 people lost their lives in America because of this situation. First of all, the United States must be satisfied that justice is being done.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in drawing up an anti-terrorist strategy we see true leadership, but not from the federal government which has that responsibility, but rather from the government of Ontario and from the premier's office and other provinces.

My question is for the solicitor general. If provincial terrorism plans exist, which prevails--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. It is impossible to hear the hon. member. The Chair has to be able to hear the hon. member. He might say something out of order. I invite all hon. members to listen to the question so we can all hear it.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if provincial terrorism plans exist, which prevails when a terrorist attack occurs, the national terrorism plan or the provincial plan?

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

Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate for hon. members of the House that very few countries, if any, have done more and are better prepared to fight terrorism than this country.

Let me remind hon. members, because I think sometimes they forget, that if one thinks about murder, high treason, sabotage, hijacking, using explosives, offensive weapons on aircraft, endangering the safety of aircraft, money laundering, possession of proceeds of crime, conspiracy to commit any of those offences are all covered in our existing criminal code, for heaven's sake.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we see laws on the books but we do not see laws in force.

In April we came to the House with Bill C-16 and we said that it was not a terrorist bill but we were called fear-mongers. The fact is that provincial governments prefer their plan much more than the federal plan that does not exist.

The national counterterrorism plan has not been agreed to by the provinces. It is still not clear if the federal plan would prevail in times of crisis. Provinces are putting together their own plans in the absence of a commitment from the solicitor general to national security.

Will the solicitor general immediately put an end to this leadership vacuum?

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say on behalf of the solicitor general and everybody in this government that we work closely with the provinces. We are integrating our investigation procedures; the RCMP with local police forces.

Commissioner Zaccardelli met last week with local police chiefs from all over this country. My colleague the solicitor general and I met with our provincial counterparts in Nova Scotia two weeks ago. In fact, the hon. member does not know what he is speaking about.

International Aid

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Toronto Centre—Rosedale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, some time ago Canada adopted sanctions against Pakistan. Yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister for International Cooperation announced measures to assist Pakistan.

Would the minister please tell the House why we have lifted the sanctions against Pakistan?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we acted yesterday to remove most of the sanctions against Pakistan as well as to announce the introduction of the possibility of Pakistan converting up to $447 million of loans that are owed to CIDA to social relief work within Pakistan, in recognition of the important contribution that Pakistan has been asked to make to the coalition against terrorism.

While I am on my feet, I want to mention that we have also expressed, both to the foreign ministers of Pakistan and India, our concern over the events that occurred yesterday in Kashmir. No matter where terrorism occurs, we must take action to prevent it.

Multiculturalism

[Betty Hinton, Canadian Alliance, Kamloops, Thompson And Highland Valleys, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the former president of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women said that American foreign policy is soaked in blood. Taxpayers paid $80,000 to fund the luncheon where Ms. Thobani made that speech.

Has the Prime Minister apologized to the American ambassador for sponsoring this meeting?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it was a conference on women and children that was organized in Canada. Some person there made an absolutely unacceptable speech and should be condemned for that.

At the same time, when we have a group meeting to discuss the problems being experienced by a group of people in Canada, we will not apologize to anyone for caring about those people who are having difficulty in our land, particularly women and children.

[Betty Hinton, Canadian Alliance, Kamloops, Thompson And Highland Valleys, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last year the federal government gave NACSOW over $130,000. It cost Canadians another $80,000 to fund a conference where outrageous anti-American remarks were made.

We support freedom of speech. However, why does this government force taxpayers to pay for this kind of drivel?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it was a conference of the Elizabeth Fry Society on violence against women and the sexual exploitation of women and girls. For example, some people present were Louise Arbour, Justice of the Supreme Court, and Senator Landon Pearson, people who are very well known for defending the rights of women and the rights of the underprivileged in our society.

Of course we condemn the statement that was made there, but we will not apologize to the people of Canada because we are helping organizations like that to fight for those who are experiencing difficulties in our society.

The Environment

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in her report, the Commissioner of the Environment says that since 1998, that is a few months after the Kyoto protocol was signed, no satisfactory progress has been made in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.

How does the government explain this harsh finding by the environment commissioner, if not by its own inability to implement measures to reduce greenhouse gases?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that the dramatic economic developments of the last few years which have so expanded the Canadian economy, have also expanded greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. That means we have a greater challenge.

What would the hon. member prefer? Would he prefer to have the greater challenge of dealing with greenhouse gases or to have the greater challenge of dealing with an economy that was in the dumps, as it was when we took office and which would have remained so had their opposition remained in power?

Health

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Pharmaceuticals play an important role in the maintenance of health and treatment of illness. However drugs represent the fastest growing component of health care costs in Canada.

Could the Minister of Health tell the House how he is working with his provincial counterparts to better manage pharmaceuticals and control these expenses?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, last week at our annual meeting, ministers of health from across the country made real progress toward managing drug costs to make sure seniors and other Canadians could have access to the drugs they need at reasonable prices.

Instead of the 14 separate assessments of cost effectiveness after a drug is approved by Health Canada, we have agreed on one single review shared by all governments. We have agreed to look at the whole issue of how drugs are prescribed and used to make sure they are used only in proper cases. We have also agreed to look at bulk purchasing to achieve economies of scale and save money. These are concrete steps making real progress for Canadians.

The House resumed consideration of the motion and of the amendment.