Debates of Oct. 12th, 2004

Port Security

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I first want to congratulate the hon. member on his coming to the House of Commons.

I want to tell the member that I am very worried. Last week, a checker at the port of Montreal pleaded guilty to conspiracy for importing $2.1 billion of drugs: 31 tonnes of hashish and 265 kilos of cocaine. We have every reason to worry about that. That is why we are talking about security checks and new measures, for $115 million. We will increase security in those ports because Canada cannot--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Niagara Falls.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is the problem. He says that they are talking about these things. They have been planning these things for a long time, and that is the problem with the Liberals. They are always planning but nothing ever happens.

They said that they would meet International Court security standards by July 1, yet the minister said that the ports were still sieves. Will the minister apologize to Canadians for compromising our security, and stop reading books about the problems and start fixing it?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the member that we are indeed doing something. My predecessor announced a $115 million program to increase port security. We want to make sure that background investigations are carried out to ensure that situations like the one at the port of Montreal never happen again. We will take action. We will make a difference. Canadian ports will be secure in the future.

National Defence

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence indicated that the Canadian navy will be conducting its own investigation into the tragedy aboard the Chicoutimi to determine the circumstances of this whole painful affair.

Does the Minister of National Defence not consider that those involved in the purchase and retrofit of the old British submarines could not be asked to investigate themselves? In order to shed light on this tragedy, the minister has to admit that nothing less than an independent inquiry is required.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, when a tragedy occurs such as that which we saw last week, an inquiry takes place within the Canadian Forces by the experts who have that capability. I can assure the member that what will happen is the inquiry will take place, answers will happen, recommendations will come forward, and subject to issues of privacy and national and international security, those recommendations and findings will be made public.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the tragedy aboard the Chicoutimi makes us fear for the crews of the other submarines.

As a safety precaution, should the minister not order all submarines to be docked until an independent investigation into the causes of the Chicoutimi tragedy has been completed?

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, our navy has full confidence in the security and capabilities of our subs. Having said that, as I said earlier in my responses, there will be an important announcement taking place later this afternoon with respect to what the subs will do in the near future.

Public Service

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, public servants have been negotiating the renewal of their collective agreement for some months now. Progress has been so slow that over 100, 000 of them decided to resort to strike action effective 12:01 this morning.

Can the President of the Treasury Board indicate to this House what steps he plans to take in order to settle this Public Service Alliance strike quickly?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, there were a great many people who gave up their Thanksgiving weekend and worked late into the night to try to bring these agreements to a close. They are very close; the tables are back right now, and I am confident that we will soon have an agreement that could be in the best interests of everyone.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we know, Parks Canada employees have reached an agreement in principle with the federal government. Since there is one conciliation board report for each negotiating table, does the government intend to use the reports from the various tables as the basis for settling this strike by the Public Service Alliance?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, I am considering a great deal of information, the conciliation reports, other studies that we have done in establishing our positions at the table. I am confident the negotiators will reach a conclusion shortly.

Canadian Heritage

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Clarington—Scugog—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Canadian Heritage claimed that her predecessor gave a speech at the Banff festival about the festival. There was not one word about the festival. The speech starts with, “Why Canada's election is so important” and ends with, “That is what this election campaign is all about. Thank you and voters willing, I look forward to seeing you next year”. If that is not a campaign speech what is?

Could the minister tell us why taxpayers paid for this election campaign trip?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister responsible for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, I think--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order, please. We have to be able to hear the minister's answer. She sits immediately to my right and I cannot hear a word. The hon. members who are taking such merriment from the question will have to constrain themselves at least for the next 35 seconds. The minister has the floor.

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as my official critic said, I think that she omitted a big part of the speech. The minister thought it was important to defend the role of the CRTC.

I am sure that my opponent, who was a member of the CRTC, will accept that she was right to defend the role of the CRTC and to defend the role of the industry also, which is a $26 billion industry and 740,000 jobs.

I am sure that everyone agrees that it was her role--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Durham.

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Clarington—Scugog—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yes, I was on the CRTC, but I was also on the board of the Banff festival, and the Banff trip and the Banff festival is not an election campaign stop.

That is why this speech is only on the Liberal Party's official website. This speech was so partisan that the department did not dare put it on its website.

Will this $50,000 of campaign expense be claimed as such with Elections Canada and be paid back to taxpayers?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister responsible for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, the speech is also on the government website. That was a very important event. The minister went officially because we are ministers even in an electoral campaign.

Between us, what is more important for someone in an electoral campaign is to be in her riding. The minister went there because she had to go, as I said last week, and because it was mandatory for her to go.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister says that there must have been a lot in between the opening and closing references to the election. There were. In fact there were a whole 811 words in this speech, in which there were 19 references made directly or indirectly to the Conservative Party and its policy and not a single one to the television policy of the government or the Banff festival itself. Virtually every one of these 800 words was partisan.

Why did the principal secretary to the Prime Minister spend $50,000 tax dollars on a campaign speech? Why does the party not repay the taxpayers?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister responsible for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, the minister thought it was crucial to defend the role of the CRTC. That is why she made the trip and she took the means to deliver the speech and come back to her riding for her campaign.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, imagine taking a Challenger jet across the country at a cost of $55,000 for an 800 word speech. I think that works out to about $72 a word.

Why would the Prime Minister appoint this person as his principal secretary who spent $55,000, who violated the Elections Act and who violated the government policy with respect to the use of these jets? Why does the government not at least have the gumption to stand up and apologize for taking taxpayers for a ride?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister responsible for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, she received an invitation in 2004. She accepted the invitation to attend as a speaker long before the election campaign.

The election was declared. She would have preferred to stay in her riding. She went there, delivered her speech and she came back. She did not mean to go back or forth. She did not go on a vacation. She defended the CRTC. The member should do so himself.

Foreign Affairs

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Knowing the implication of Canada in Afghanistan, not only with troops but also with the first ever recent presidential election, what is the position of Canada given reports of some irregularities during this election?