Debates of Nov. 22nd, 2001

Airline Security

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, again many of the criticisms that hon. members have on the bill actually are covered by the Aeronautics Act as it is. What I have said consistently is that we have been more concerned with ensuring that regulations are improved and enforced, and worrying about who does it and who pays for it at a later date, but that is under review. We are close to making a decision. That decision will be a very costly one. It is one that the Minister of Finance must take into account in his financial planning.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has missed an opportunity to instill public confidence in airline security. The bill fails to meet the basic criteria of public safety and is more concerned with increasing ministerial powers.

Why does the bill make so many provisions for interim measures? Surely public safety requires more than just a short term fix.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as I explained in an answer to the earlier question, the fact is that interim orders are required, not just for transport but for other departments, to deal with urgent situations. Ministers would have to obtain approval from the governor in council within 90 days after the order is made. The order would only be valid for one year. It would have to be published in the Canada Gazette within 23 days. Among other things, all this would be subject to judicial review.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the public safety bill provides that interim orders will not be verified beforehand, particularly in terms of their consistency with the enabling legislation.

How can the government justify exempting interim orders from a check to ensure they are consistent with the legislation?

What justification can there possibly be for taking this approach?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that provides protection, that makes improvements to legislation, not just to the Aeronautics Act, but also to other acts. It is a measure that is needed to protect Canadians.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in exempting interim orders from the application of sections 3, 5 and 11 of the Statutory Instruments Act, is the government not opening the door to worse abuses and an unacceptable broadening of ministerial authority, under the pretext of increasing public safety?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

No, Mr. Speaker, because we have a final appeal to the courts. That is the protection that exists in the system.

Justice

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the solicitor general said that he would not discuss the specifics of the case regarding cop killer Clinton Suzack. Well I can discuss the specifics and tell the House that Joe MacDonald, the Ontario constable, was shot execution style in the back of his head, not once but twice after his leg had been broken and he was rendered helpless.

I ask the solicitor general if, in his opinion, a cop killer should be in a medium security institution, a club fed of prison, so to speak, after serving six years of a life sentence, yes or no.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, we have thousands of individuals in institutions across the country and we have one of the best systems in the world.

However, I am aware of these concerns, as is the commissioner, and I can assure my hon. colleague that we are both looking into the situation.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is no answer. Corrections Services Canada is an example of a failed policy here.

Yesterday the solicitor general said that the placement of criminals is not a decision made by politicians. However the solicitor general is not only a politician, he is Canada's top cop. Ultimately, he is responsible for the safety and security of all Canadians inasmuch as he is responsible for Correctional Service Canada. Therefore, not if but when Suzack walks away from this club fed and kills or injures again the solicitor general will be to blame.

I ask the solicitor general--

[The Speaker]

The hon. solicitor general.

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, we have thousands of individuals in institutions across the country. I, as the solicitor general, do not indicate whether an individual stays in a maximum, medium or minimum security institution. That decision is made by Correctional Service Canada. We can have our opinion but it makes the decision.

Terrorism

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the U.S. deputy secretary of defence said that there is evidence that Iraq continues to build chemical weapons—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, Oh!

[The Speaker]

Order, please. It is impossible for me to hear the hon. member because there is so much noise in the House today. I wonder why.

I hope we can now hear the questions of the hon. member for Mercier.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the U.S. deputy secretary of defence said that there was evidence that Iraq continues to build chemical and nuclear weapons.

On Tuesday, the Prime Minister said in this House that military operations would not be extended to other areas unless there was evidence that such action was necessary. But he was talking about links between the attacks in New York City and Iraq.

Can the minister tell us if the recent comments of the U.S. deputy secretary of defence will change Canada's position regarding Iraq?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, it has long been known that Iraq has been attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction and has a sorry history with respect to them and the use of chemical and biological weapons even on its own people. We have sanctions against Iraq. Canada is part of implementing those sanctions against Iraq.

In terms of the operations that are presently going on against Afghanistan and any broadening of them beyond that, those decisions have yet to be made. The Prime Minister made that quite clear yesterday.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the fight against terrorism must not become a pretext to finish the gulf war and go after Iraq, at the risk of breaking the anti-terrorism coalition.

Considering the potential dangers and the possible abuse, should the Minister of Foreign Affairs not meet his U.S. counterpart to reiterate the position presented in this House?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, it has been said right from the beginning by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, by myself and of course by the Prime Minister that this campaign against terrorism is one that will be many years in length and it will be multi-dimensional. It is not just a military campaign, in fact the military campaign in all cases will be the last resort.

There are many other ways. We need to cut off the funding. We need to cut off the recruitment. We need to bring these terrorist organizations down so they cease to be a threat to the people in the free world, particularly the people of our country and our neighbour to the south.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is safe to say that we are all very proud of our soldiers who we may be sending to Afghanistan.

What we would like to know is how we are going to get them there and how we are going to get their equipment there. Yesterday the minister said that we did not need the Hercules aircraft to get them and their equipment there. He said that we could use the airbus instead.

Could the minister explain to us, if he possibly could, how we are going to get our military jeeps on an airbus?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear the hon. member talk about having pride in the Canadian forces because it was a colleague of his who got up in the House earlier this week and took the name that our loyal troops gave to their mission, Operation Apollo, and called it operation appalling. That party is appalling. That party has no respect for the Canadian forces.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

What is appalling, Mr. Speaker, is that the government would in any way question the commitment of this party to our military.

The government simply does not have enough planes to get our men and our equipment over to Afghanistan. That is a fact. How will he do it? Will he perhaps commandeer another ship like the Katie ?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, our troops and the light infantry battalion will be airlifted. We have never had a problem getting our troops into theatre before. They always get there. They are always among the first there.

There are other means, with our allies, that we can use to get our troops over there other than Hercules. Most of our Hercules can be ready to operate if we need them.

Afghanistan

[Carolyn Parrish, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's time honoured role and expertise in peacekeeping and post-conflict reconstruction will be greatly needed in post-Taliban Afghanistan.

Could the Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific share with the House the significance of a two day conference taking place in Ottawa today?

[Rey D. Pagtakhan, Liberal, Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific)]

Mr. Speaker, the member is right. The significance of this particular conference is enormous for the Afghan people and for humanity itself.

The Afghanistan Tomorrow conference, which I had the privilege of launching this morning, is aimed at developing a better understanding for Canada of the religious, social, economic and political dimensions in Afghanistan from the Afghan point of view by engaging relevant experts, as well, by developing the NGOs and the Canadian government strategies to develop alternatives for the reconstruction of Afghanistan.