Debates of Feb. 7th, 2003

Iraq

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's position on Iraq is clear and it is expressed in resolution 1441 of the United Nations Security Council. If the Alliance Party would prefer to follow other rules of engagement, other than those that are established by the international community, let it explain what those rules would be.

Border Security

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government is fuzzy on Iraq and also fuzzy on border security.

Since September 11, 2001, the Canadian Alliance has called for a continental border security policy, one that would allow the free flow of people and goods across our border.

Instead, why has the Liberal government not ensured an exemption from the 24 hour advance notice proposal that will hurt Canada?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to advise the hon. member at his convenience of the work that has been done under the thirty point smart border action plan that we have pursued essentially since September 11, but which was signed in December 2001, and of the establishment of the NEXUS and FAST programs that ensure rapid access across the border by shippers and frequent travellers in both directions. These are innovative new measures that make the Canada-U.S border one of the most intelligent borders in the world.

Justice

[Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in January 2002 an Edmonton man received house arrest for sexually molesting his nieces for 15 years.

The Canadian Police Association has called upon the minister to stand up for victims and repeal the house arrest provisions of the Criminal Code, yet the minister continues to defend these outrageous sentences.

Why does the minister continue to defend the rights of sexual predators but lack the courage to protect their victims?

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the government takes seriously criminal offences and in terms of house arrest it is part of the sentencing process. The tribunal, the parole board that orders house arrest, does so independently but with public safety in its view. It is the primary cause and the primary concern of the justice system.

[Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member does not even know what tribunal issues the sentences, but let us talk about balance.

In July 2002 an Edmonton businessman received house arrest after attacking his ex-wife with a knife. In October 2002 a Calgary man received house arrest for bending his nine month old daughter into a U-shape, snapping her spine and severing her aorta.

Could the minister explain to the Canadian people why he continues to defend house arrest for those who cripple children and abuse women?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is referring of course to very sad and tragic events, but the question which is asked today is basically a question of the sentencing scheme we have in place in Canada--

[An hon. member]

A scheme.

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

--the sentencing system that is in place. As I said, we have been discussing the question of sentencing with our federal-provincial colleagues, at the last meeting that we had before Christmas, and the justice committee is looking into it at this very moment.

When we are talking about protection of our Canadian people, protection as well of our children, there is a bill which is before the House and I just hope that actually they will--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Longueuil.

Iraq

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, many of us share the UN Secretary General's belief that war can be avoided. There is still room for hope and for peace. It is vital that all possible resources be made available to the inspectors so that Iraq may be disarmed through peaceful means.

Will the Minister of Foreign Affairs admit that these are the two fundamental objectives his government must pursue?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we certainly have the same objective, namely the disarmament of Iraq. I believe the Government of Iraq must respect the resolution adopted by the Security Council. This is the best way to avoid conflict in Iraq.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday President Bush said “The game is over”.

Given the obvious impatience of the American president to go to war, should the government's role not be to support the only other remaining avenue to peace, which is to promote to the maximum the inspection process currently under way?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we can promote the inspection process but the Security Council resolution must be respected in Iraq. If the inspectors do not have access to locations where weapons may be concealed, they cannot carry out the inspection the Security Council had in mind. This is why the outcome really depends on the decision of Saddam Hussein.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, several countries are hesitant about blindly following the United States as it heads down the warpath against Iraq and they are continuing to make concrete proposals to provide inspectors with more material resources, as France recently did.

Can the government tell us what additional material and financial resources it plans to provide UN inspectors for Iraq's disarmament process?

[Aileen Carroll, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the minister said yesterday, the initiatives on the part of other countries, such as those of the British and the French, are theirs to make.

We have been very supportive of the Security Council. We are satisfied very much with the efforts it is making. Our perspective is that we are to represent Canada and are doing exactly that.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the government reconcile its policy on Iraq—which until now has consisted of waiting and watching—with its rhetoric, in which it attempts to portray Canada as an important player on the international scene?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I think that Canada's role is based on our history, which involves supporting the UN process. I think that by asking the Security Council to pass a very strong resolution, we have followed Canada's traditional instinct, which is to help the world find peaceful solutions. However, there are problems that have to be resolved according to the process adopted by the Security Council.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday George Bush said the “game is over”. War in Iraq is not a game. Hundreds of thousands of lives are at risk, and Canada has no position.

What about the so-called proof as presented by Colin Powell, proof the Alliance wants to go to war over? The Liberals have yet to disagree.

Is the Prime Minister aware of reports that the U.K. intelligence dossier, praised by Powell, is copied from three articles, including a graduate student's? This is the evidence? Surely we are not going to go to war over this.

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it is always enlightening to be in the House where one party across the way thinks that we should agree with the United States even if the United States is wrong, and another party thinks we should disagree with the United States even if the United States is right.

We have expressed a very plain and principled position in this matter which is based upon the crucial role of the United Nations. The UN has adopted a strong resolution in 1441. The inspectors have reported once, somewhat disagreeably, on Iraq, even the hon. member must agree. There is more work to do.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, if there is a principled position, we have yet to hear it.

Canadians do not want this war. The world does not want this war. Will the government say nothing to stop George Bush from beating the drums of war without proof, without listening and refusing to rule out the possible use of nuclear weapons? Even U.S. senators are sounding the alarm bells.

If the Liberals will not tell Bush he is wrong on the war, will they at least say he is wrong to refuse to rule out the use of nuclear weapons? Will the government at least go that far and say that?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the only principle that the New Democrats seem to follow in this is that they do not like the United States.

I think it is important to look at the very words of the inspectors, Mr. Blix and his group, with respect to their visit to Iraq. It is important to consider the evidence, not just the recent evidence but the evidence of behaviour over a long period of time with respect to the conduct of the dictator in Iraq.

Canadians do not want war. The world does not want war, but the absence of conflict is not necessarily peace. The responsibility on the government in Iraq to respond to the UN--

[The Deputy Speaker]

Order. The right hon. member for Calgary Centre.

Health

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister acknowledged that Wednesday's agreed arrangement on health care is unfair to the three territories, where an exclusive per capita formula simply makes no sense. The Prime Minister promised to fix the problem on a bilateral basis.

The territories need more than another promise. They need a concrete agreement immediately that is not subject to clawback and provides a base that takes account of the unusual distances and challenges of the north.

Will the government today give a commitment in principle to conclude a fair agreement with the three territories, and will the Deputy Prime Minister undertake to report progress back to the House before the end of February?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the hon. member is aware of the arrangements for territorial financing which see the territorial governments receive per capita transfers significantly higher than those that are received by the provinces.

In fact, with the increase in the transfers to the provinces, for every $1 in increase per capita to the provinces, the territorial impact is $3.60 per capita in Nunavut, $2.88 in the Northwest Territories and $2.60 in the Yukon. The territorial financing formula does take into account those additional costs.