House of Commons Hansard #22 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was opposition.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, yes, I have done that with the other provinces. Again, as the hon. member knows from his previous incarnation as treasurer of Alberta, I did it at a federal-provincial finance ministers meeting when he was there. He knows I have done it and I am certainly open to doing it.
Stockwell Day Canadian AllianceLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, is he saying that he has polled each one of the provinces and they have said, no, that they do not want to reopen discussions? Is that what he is saying?
Let us hear clearly today what the result was when he asked each and every one of the provinces, as he has said he did. Which provinces said no to discussions, absolutely ruled them out, and which ones said yes?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I have raised with the other provinces the absolute necessity of giving Atlantic Canada the kind of headstart that it requires, and indeed the other regions of the country that have sought it.
I have discussed this with the provinces over a number of federal-provincial meetings. It is in that context that the federal government, following the concept developed by the Atlantic caucus of this government, put $700 million last year into the Atlantic strategy. We are not just talking about it, we have done it.
Randy White Canadian Alliance Langley—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, Alfonso Caruana is a senior member of organized crime. He is serving an 18 year sentence for shipping massive amounts of cocaine into Canada.
After one year he is living in comfort at the condo style Fenbrook prison dubbed club fed. His two brothers have also been cascaded to the low level Bath prison only a year after their sentences. In fact the nephew is out on parole after one year of his four year sentence.
Would the solicitor general mind telling the House how moving these inmates to lower levels so fast is achieving his goal of getting tough on organized crime?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague has stated quite clearly, the government has got strong on organized crime.
When offenders commit crimes they are evaluated. They could serve time in a maximum security institution and then a medium or a minimum security institution.
What happens in this country is that those who commit a crime must pay for the crime but must also be rehabilitated.
Randy White Canadian Alliance Langley—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, I do not know what to say to this. I guess it is how fast they go down.
The Caruana family has been given no reason to discontinue its extensive operations in Canada. As a matter of fact, a hit man from this same crime family was let into Canada while his wife's immigration file was given the special attention of the public works minister. Now several family members are being cascaded down as fast as it can possibly be done.
Why did the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration insist on open borders for these criminals in the first place, allowing them to come into Canada?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, I want to assure all Canadians that our borders in fact are well secure and our frontline officers are doing their jobs. Over 100 million people came into Canada last year. In fact there were over 200 million border crossings.
I would say to the member opposite, and to all Canadians, that over 100 million people entered Canada. What we attempt to do is ensure that those who have legitimate business enter as hassle free as possible. We also want Canadians to have access to the world because this is a trading country.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister for International Trade seemed exasperated by the answers of his American counterpart on the lumber issue.
The situation is serious, because in Quebec there are 30,000 jobs that depend on the softwood lumber industry.
Can the Minister of Industry confirm that Canada's position has not changed, will not change and will continue to exclude any transitional measure?
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, the minister was quite clear yesterday following his meeting in Washington. He stated very clearly to the Americans that Canada's ultimate goal in softwood lumber is free trade.
The government understands and appreciates that this is a very complex and sensitive issue. Discussions are ongoing now with senior officials. The ultimate goal of the government is clear: free trade in softwood lumber.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, just this morning, the president of the B.C. lumber manufacturers' association said that producers in that province, just like those in Quebec, are prepared to fight to have the free trade rules apply immediately, not as the ultimate or long term goal along with transitional measures, but immediately.
Would the government not be better advised to develop a strategy to support the lumber industry, instead of a strategy to negotiate transitional measures and possibly quotas? We are not talking about a long term or ultimate goal, we are talking about now, about the end of March.
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I think my colleague muddies the water when he talks about a quota based system. The government has absolutely no interest in a quota based system. The minister has said that repeatedly.
Discussions are ongoing throughout the country with the people and the different sectors involved in softwood lumber. The federal-provincial ministers have been meeting on this in the past, as my colleague knows, and senior officials will be meeting in the very near future on this. This is a very high priority for the government.
May I remind the leader of the Bloc Quebecois that the agreement does not expire until March 31.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, recent statements made by the Minister for International Trade are not at all reassuring, particularly since the parliamentary secretary told the House, yesterday and Friday, about a long term goal regarding free trade.
Will the government confirm today that a return to free trade in the short term, that is when the current agreement expires, is the only objective being sought in the negotiations with the Americans?
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows, the agreement is in force until the end of March.
The minister has made his position and the government's position very clear on what our ultimate goal is. There are serious high level discussions going on right now. The minister was in Washington yesterday. He made the government's position perfectly clear, and there is no intention to change it. The ultimate goal is: free trade in softwood lumber.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, based on the statements made by the minister and the parliamentary secretary, can we be assured that Quebec will not be used as a bargaining chip in the upcoming negotiations?
Pat O'Brien LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, the minister has made it very clear that the government governs for the whole country and that the concerns of the whole country and all regions of the country have been considered and will be considered in the ongoing negotiations.
My colleague knows that the Minister for International Trade and the provincial trade minister of Quebec met on this subject very recently. There is every intention to come up with a regime in trade that serves the entire country, which is free trade in softwood lumber.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State for Latin America has just returned from Colombia. He must now realize that paramilitary death squads in Colombia backed by $1 billion worth of U.S. military aid are committing political killings and kidnappings with impunity. The U.S. Plan Colombia, far from being a solution, will aggravate the conflict and the violence.
Will the Secretary of State for Latin America make it clear that Canada, together with the European Union and many others, does not support the total war strategy of Plan Colombia? Will he do that today?
David Kilgour LiberalSecretary of State (Latin America and Africa)
Mr. Speaker, I was not listening. Please repeat the question.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the problem, the government is not listening.
Fundamental human rights are being trampled in Colombia. Human lives are being trampled. In the interest of trade, the government seems absolutely indifferent to the human rights atrocities and the cold blooded assassinations occurring within Colombia's borders. At least 20,000 civilians have been murdered since 1996. Thirty-five trade unionists alone have been murdered since I raised this issue in the House last June.
Again I ask the minister: Why is Canada not condemning Plan Colombia's military approach—
Foreign AffairsOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. Secretary of State for Latin America and Africa.
David Kilgour LiberalSecretary of State (Latin America and Africa)
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. leader of the New Democratic Party would ask me questions more often, I would listen very carefully.
She is absolutely right. There have been catastrophic losses of life in Colombia. On average, 71 people die violently in Colombia each day. Canada has not supported Plan Colombia. We are providing aid separate and apart from Plan Colombia.
As the hon. member from B.C., who went to Colombia with me last week, knows, there is 20% to 30% unemployment in Colombia. People there desperately want access to Canadian markets. There are 40 million people in Colombia—
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.
We know that Yvon Duhaime sent this very peremptory letter to the Prime Minister just prior to the 1997 election. We know that the regional branch manager of the BDC said in July of 1997 that the auberge loan did not meet the normal policies and criteria of the bank. We know the Prime Minister intervened at least three times on behalf of Mr. Duhaime.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister tell us what happened between July 1997 and September 1997 to cause the bank to ignore its own—
Business Development Bank Of CanadaOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. Deputy Prime Minister.
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the bank did agree to provide a loan in a certain amount. I would like to ask the hon. member what happened to cause the local caisse populaire and the Quebec solidarity fund to join in that loan. Who talked to them? Why is he not alleging that there is something wrong with them? If he cannot allege and prove that, then there is nothing wrong with the interventions of the Prime Minister as local MP for the area.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the bank changed its position and we want to know why it changed in those two months.
Since the Deputy Prime Minister talks about documents, we have here the document in which the regional manager of the bank said that the auberge loan did not meet the bank's criteria.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister table in the House the documents and the arguments that caused the bank to ignore the advice of its own regional manager and accede to the directives of Yvon Duhaime and the Prime Minister to approve a loan that did not meet the bank's own criteria?