House of Commons Hansard #82 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was money.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, is this not proof of the government's contemptuous conduct toward its own soldiers, in ordering them to act against its official position and put their lives in danger in a war it calls unjustified?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, life is full of risks, especially military life, and the government must manage these risks. The government must consider a number of factors. The government takes this responsibility extremely seriously.
What the government has decided, all things considered, is that it is best, given all the factors I have already mentioned, to leave the soldiers where they are.
Leon Benoit Canadian Alliance Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Defence said that the Canadian troops taking part in the war in Iraq were not in direct combat situations because they were not allowed to fire unless fired upon. These men and women are serving in combat units and they are in combat zones.
Will the minister simply admit that Canadian troops are fully involved in the war or does he honestly believe that the Iraqi troops will not shoot at Canadians?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I have said what I have said. I have said it correctly. I have said that we will honour our decision that the soldiers there are not involved in direct combat and that they are authorized to use force in self-defence. I do not know how many times I have to repeat the answer to the same old question after question.
That is the position of the government. I wish members opposite would understand that point.
Leon Benoit Canadian Alliance Lakeland, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Defence said that Canada's commitment to the war on terrorism justified keeping those exchange troops in Iraq.
Since the minister admits that the war in Iraq is inseparable from the war on terrorism, which he did yesterday, and since he claims that Canada is dedicated to the war on terrorism, why will the government not stand fully behind our allies on the war in Iraq?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the first of those premises. The hypocrisy of the Canadian Alliance members is showing up one more time. They agree with us on the ships. They do not want us to bring our ships home. They agree with us on the exchange soldiers. They do not want to bring them home.
What is all the fuss? Once again they are scoring cheap political points on the backs of the brave men and women of the Canadian Forces.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, when there is a war, it is very likely that people will be taken prisoner.
When the Minister of National Defence ordered Canadian soldiers to go with the British and American units, when he gave them that order, what were his instructions to them in the event they were taken prisoner? Did he tell them that Canada would represent and defend them if that happened?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, the government will not answer hypothetical questions.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to get across to the defence minister—and I hope he will be somewhat receptive—that it is not asking him a hypothetical question to ask what instructions—that is straightforward—he gave soldiers the day he told them to go to war as members of other battalions. What instructions did he given them?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as we have said a thousand times already, we are not at war. What we are doing is honouring exchange agreements we have had with our allies for decades. These soldiers follow their orders in the field as they would in Canada. It is the job of soldiers to follow orders, and that is what they are doing.
Deborah Grey Canadian Alliance Edmonton North, AB
Mr. Speaker, yes, he has said what he has said. The government has an indefensible position on the war in Iraq. It says that it is staying out of the war but it sends Canadian troops over there into combat areas, claiming that “exchange programs” just do not seem to count.
Angie Little from Nova Scotia is a second lieutenant on an exchange mission with Britain's Desert Rats. She is fighting Saddam loyalists in Basra clearing landmines and explosives.
How can the government claim that it is not participating in this war, while troops like Angie's are risking their lives, no matter what category they are under?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, yet another example of hypocrisy out of the mouths of the Canadian Alliance members.
I said yesterday that they should put down their political tools for just one moment, stop telling us where we should be and where we should not be and honour those who are there in the region, thank their families and thank them for their service and let us all hope that they will return safely.
I think once again they are scoring cheap political points on the backs of the men and women of the Canadian Forces.
Deborah Grey Canadian Alliance Edmonton North, AB
Mr. Speaker, what a disgusting display of partisanship from that prince over there.
Let me just ask, regardless of whatever category they under, what about Mike Bullock, a Canadian Forces major presently serving alongside the British army in this conflict? His father, Mel, says, “He's extremely proud but demoralized by the lack of support by this current government”, not the official opposition.
Mike's commitment to Canada and to this war is unconditional. Why will the Prime Minister not stand up and give him the same unconditional support?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I have said time and time again that I support our men and women of the Canadian Forces. I acknowledge their bravery and their service to the country. I do not say this only in times when I can score political points. I say this all the time.
I will not enter into a competition with those people as to whether they or we care more about Angie Little and Mike Bullock and every other brave person of the Canadian Forces.
Andy Savoy Liberal Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. In recent weeks the government has introduced an action plan that will improve the efficiency and accountability of the gun control program. It is apparent that Bill C-10A, which is currently awaiting House approval, is a linchpin of this action plan.
Could the government tell the House what specific benefits will be delivered by Bill C-10A?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for this very important question.
We all know that we have tabled a good plan of action. Of course one very important part of that plan of action with regard to gun control policy is Bill C-10A. Bill C-10A will have a very positive effect and impact on the program. Just to name a few positive effects, we will simplify the requirements for licence renewal, for example, stagger firearms licence renewals as well, increase the use of the Internet and establish a pre-application process for temporary importation by non-resident visitors.
Therefore I look forward to the support--
Firearms ProgramOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. It is almost impossible to hear in the Chamber today. I know members are full of enthusiasm in their questions and answers but we have to be able to hear the person who has the floor. It now happens to be the hon. member for Windsor West, who sits a distance away from the Chair. If everyone is making a lot of noise I cannot hear.
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the government shelved a review of drug patent laws. As a result, drugs, such as Losec will have no generic versions despite being available in Europe and the U.S. This one example alone would save the health care system $100 million.
My question is for the Minister of Health. What side will she choose on the war on drugs? Will she side with big pharma or will she join Canadian patients and Roy Romanow? Will she stand up to the industry minister who is trying to gouge Canadian patients?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I think these remarks are totally uncalled for. If the information that was given to me is correct, this was a study under Standing Order 108(2) by which a committee is master of its own destiny. It obviously did the job as it saw fit. I think the hon. member, as all members do, should respect that members of Parliament have that kind of freedom in committee, at least on our side of the House, although perhaps not on his.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, today UN special envoy on the world HIV-AIDS crisis, Stephen Lewis, challenged Canada to offer leadership on the catastrophic pandemic facing sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and eastern Europe. This means Canada meeting its obligations to the global fund, which it has not yet done. It also means ensuring that generic drugs to prevent HIV-AIDS infection and to treat those living with HIV-AIDS are available.
Will the Prime Minister today commit to increase Canada's global fund contribution and to work toward the removal of barriers to generic drugs for HIV-AIDS? Will the government commit to do that?
Susan Whelan LiberalMinister for International Cooperation
Mr. Speaker, Canada has been meeting its commitment to the global health fund. We committed $100 million U.S. We have paid our first two instalments and will pay another instalment this year. On top of that, we have quadrupled the amount of money we are spending on HIV-AIDS from $20 million to $80 million per year. We put $50 million into the vaccine, particularly for sub-Saharan and all of Africa, to find a vaccine for HIV and AIDS. Canada is definitely doing its part.
Gerald Keddy Progressive Conservative South Shore, NS
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has stated that members of Canada's armed forces in Iraq “are in a situation of combat around them”. Members of the Canadian Forces and their families are not eligible for veterans' benefits unless cabinet passes an order in council and yet Parliament is kept in the dark.
Would the Minister of National Defence assure the House that such an order has been tabled to protect our military personnel in Iraq?
John McCallum LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House that the people who are currently in Iraq will receive exactly the same benefits and treatment in every way as did our soldiers in Afghanistan and in other areas of conflict. No distinction will be made.
Notwithstanding the fact that Canada is not at war, those individuals will receive treatment as good as and totally equal to what they would have received had we been at war.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
In her 2002 report, the Auditor General noted that a special new rule established by the Department of Finance, “...allows dividends from Barbados international business corporations...to qualify for tax-free treatment”.
Could the Prime Minister advise whether the former minister of finance, the member for LaSalle—Émard, stepped aside from all discussions regarding these new tax rules? Could he also advise whether the establishment of Barbadian subsidiaries of Canada Steamship Lines was discussed during any of the several briefings the former minister has admitted receiving about his businesses while he was minister?
Member for LaSalle—ÉmardOral Question Period
Saint-Maurice Québec
Liberal
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I have always said, and I will repeat, that the former minister of finance, when there was a question of there being a conflict of interest, always informed the cabinet and withdrew from the discussions.