Debates of April 10th, 2002

Question No. 110—

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

With respect to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) process: ( a ) what specific mechanisms have been and will be put in place to monitor, evaluate and address democratic breaches as they surface in any given member countries; ( b ) what strategy, if any, does the government have to interconnect in anyway with international funding agencies where loans are disbursed, should there be evidence of democratic breaches, evidence of corruption or lack of transparency or accountability; and ( c ) if no strategy exists, what steps are being taken to develop such a strategy?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

At the Quebec City Summit of the Americas, leaders endorsed the development of an Inter-American Democratic Charter “to reinforce Organization of American States, OAS, instruments for the active defence of representative democracy”. The charter is intended to complement the “democracy clause” in the Quebec City declaration, which establishes that “any unconstitutional alteration or interruption of the democratic order in a state of the hemisphere constitutes an insurmountable obstacle to the participation of that state's government in the Summit of the Americas process”. It thus goes well beyond OAS Resolution 1080, a mechanism for dealing with overthrow by force of democratically elected governments.

Foreign ministers adopted the charter at the XXVIII Special Session of the OAS General Assembly, which was held September 10 and 11, 2001 in Lima, Peru.

The preambular section clearly subordinates the Democratic Charter to the Charter of the OAS and strengthens the link between democracy and human rights. It also adds education, protection of the environment, workers’ rights and economic, social and cultural rights as important elements in strengthening representative democracy.

The term “inter alia” in Article 3 ensures that the list of essential elements of representative democracy outlined in this article is not viewed as exhaustive. The “separation of powers and independence of the branches of government” is covered in Article 3 as an essential element of representative democracy. Article 4 includes language clearly subordinating the military, and all state institutions, to duly elected civilian authorities while the strengthening of political parties and other political organizations appears in Article 5 as a “priority for democracy”. Article 7 states that fundamental freedoms and human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. Other elements include strong language against all forms of discrimination, race, gender and ethnic, in Article 9, reference to the importance of the protection of workers’ rights in Article 10 and specific mention in Article 28 that the participation of women in political structures is fundamental to democracy.

The central elements of the charter are included in Chapter 4, Articles 17 to 22, “Strengthening and Preservation of Democratic Institutions”. This section reflects the democracy clause from Quebec City and outlines a series of clearly defined, progressively tougher measures to address subtle, and not so subtle, threats to democracy.

The Inter-American Democratic Charter is a new political mechanism which has never been invoked. However, its invocation was considered by the OAS Permanent Council on January 15, 2002, in response to the deteriorating situation in Haiti. Although another solution was found to bolster OAS efforts in Haiti, invocation of the Charter remains a possibility should a lack of progress on Haiti persist.

The charter can be triggered: upon request of a member state for assistance from the Secretary General or Permanent Council; upon request of a member state or of the Secretary General for the convocation of the Permanent Council to assess a given situation; or by the Permanent Council so as to convene a special session of the General Assembly in order to adopt decisions to address a given situation. The situation itself would likely define who would trigger the charter, as outlined in Articles 17 to 22. The charter is a government to government instrument. It cannot be triggered by individuals, however, individuals can bring concerns and complaints about human rights issues to the inter-American system for the promotion and protection of human rights.

While the charter does not apply to the FTAA in that its scope is limited to OAS instruments, the “democracy clause” of the Quebec City declaration applies to all summit products, including the FTAA process and the activities of financial institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank. In addition to the various OAS instruments which support democracy in the hemisphere, the “democracy clause” therefore represents a further commitment to democracy in the conduct of inter-American relations in all areas at the highest political level.

Canada works closely with the major international financial institutions in the western hemisphere to ensure that the development goals of the member countries are met through adequate funding. Should there be an unconstitutional disruption of the democratic order in any of the countries belonging to the Summit of the Americas process, Canada would proceed to make its views known through our membership in the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, and the Caribbean Development Bank, as appropriate. Canada is represented on the boards of directors of all three institutions. Canada has worked and will continue to work with the hemisphere's major funding agencies to develop guidelines for dealing with corruption, transparency and accountability.

Question No. 113—

[Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance, Provencher, MB]

For all detachments of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and for each province and for each month of the year, how many spot checks for impaired driving were done by RCMP officers in the year 2001?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

The RCMP does not conduct spot checks for impaired driving specifically. The force conducts regular road checks, which address impaired driving along with various other violations.

The following figures from the operational statistical reporting of the RCMP represent the number of regular road checks conducted in the year 2001 per RCMP division:

“A” Division (Ottawa) -- 107

“B” Division (Newfoundland and Labrador) -- 757

“D” Division (Manitoba) -- 2,973

“E” Division (B.C.) -- 7,577

“F” Division (Sask.) -- 263

“G” Division (NWT) -- 356

“H” Division (N.S.) -- 1,763

“J” Division (N.B.) -- 4,197

“K” Division (Alta.) -- 6,870

“L” Division (P.E.I.) -- 453

“M” Division (Yukon) -- 43

“V” Division (Nunavut) -- 4

It is possible to break down these numbers by detachment, but this would be a very time consuming process and would create 670 pages of documentation. Should this be requested, sufficient time would have to be allowed.

The following figures represent the number of charges for impaired driving laid by the RCMP in 2001 per division:

“A” Division (Ottawa) -- 3

“B” Division (Newfoundland and Labrador) -- 546

“D” Division (Manitoba) -- 1,775

“E” Division (B.C.) -- 6,077

“F” Division (Sask.) -- 3,736

“G” Division (NWT) -- 255

“H” Division (N.S.) -- 1,326

“J” Division (N.B.) -- 1,487

“K” Division (Alta.) -- 6,192

“L” Division (P.E.I.) -- 297

“M” Division (Yukon) -- 153

“V” Division (Nunavut) -- 58

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Motions for Papers

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker]

Is that agreed?

The hon. member for Cumberland--Colchester on a point of order.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be up here in disguise today. I think you have the wrong riding and the wrong member. My riding is New Brunswick Southwest. However I take it as a compliment.

I draw to the attention of the House Motion No. P-32 regarding the production of papers. Mr. Speaker, I will read it to you with your indulgence so the House will clearly know what we are asking for. Motion P-32 asks:

That an Order of the House do issue for copies of all documentation including correspondence, memoranda, notes, minutes of meetings, reports, phone records, e-mails, and briefings pertaining to Lancaster Aviation and Airspares Network Inc. between the Minister of National Defence, the Department of National Defence and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

This is important because we must remember that the Government of Canada--

[The Speaker]

I am sure the hon. member knows that all motions for the production of papers are important. We do not want to get into debate on this point, but perhaps he could state what is his point of order because this unfortunately is not a time for speeches.

If he has a point or question I am sure he will ask the parliamentary secretary, and the House is waiting with bated breath to hear it.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I was very patient with you when you mistook me for another member and I need your patience just for a minute. The bottom line is that a U.S. felon convicted of drug smuggling and international money laundering has in his warehouse spare aviation and military parts owned by the Government of Canada.

We want to know where are those parts. What happened to them? We want answers. We have been on this for a number of months, in fact over a year. We had a motion on the floor for the production of documents on this very subject matter which the government voted down.

[An hon. member]

It is a cover-up.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

It is a cover-up. We want answers.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this concern. I assure him it is not a matter of a cover-up.

In fact the member has asked for voluminous records. I am sure the government will be presenting those in due course and I will look into the matter.

[The Speaker]

Is it agreed that all motions for the production of papers stand?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member has a choice. I will not hear a long speech again, but he can have the matter transferred for debate if he wishes.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order for clarification. Where does this leave us in relation to this matter? Does the minister simply get up day after day and deny us access to those documents? Where does this leave the House?

[The Speaker]

The hon. member, as I said, can ask to have the motion transferred for debate, in which case it would be transferred to the list of items of private members' business and would be debated, and I assume ultimately voted on.

If he wishes to have that done, that is an option available to him today. If he wants to do that, the Chair of course will accommodate him.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to do that because then we are subjected to the so-called lottery which is totally preposterous. I would have one chance in a million of getting the matter to the floor for debate. I want some guidance from the House leader as to where they stand--

[The Speaker]

The House leader has given us the guidance that he is standing it for this week, but I can assure the hon. member that it is automatically votable if he gets it transferred. That is the beauty of a motion for the production of papers.

Perhaps the member will want to discuss the matter with his House leader who is very knowledgeable of the rules of the House and will be able to give him very sound advice. We can proceed on that basis. We will move on to applications for emergency debate.

Request for Emergency Debate

[The Speaker]

The Chair has received a notice of motion pursuant to Standing Order 52 from the hon. member for Joliette.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as you mentioned, I sent you a letter to ask for an emergency debate on softwood lumber and the present situation in that industry, following the United States' decision to impose a 29% duty.

Such an emergency debate would allow us to take stock of the situation. I had the opportunity to visit the regions of Quebec and I know that the people are very concerned. Already we expect some sawmills to be closed, especially the small ones, in municipalities where they play an extremely important role. Often, the mill is the only business giving work to people and if it shuts down, so will the whole town.

Therefore, we could take stock of the situation in Quebec and in all of Canada, given the decision made by the United States, and we could examine whether it would be appropriate to develop an assistance plan for the industry. When I say the industry, I also mean the workers, the people in the plants. Finally, we could discuss the nature of the assistance plan.

Over the last few days, we had the opportunity to ask questions, especially to the Minister for International Trade and the Minister of Human Resources Development, but we did not really get any answers.

I think the members could compensate for such a lack of imagination by suggesting a series of measures, as the Bloc Quebecois has been doing for the last few days.

Therefore, I respectfully submit this issue to your attention.