Michel Gauthier

[Manpower, May 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, you will understand our concerns when the document refers to allowing the provinces to deliver active employment measures. It does not refer in the same terms to defining policy.

My second question for the minister is this. By reaffirming in these documents his responsibility to "ensure that funds are spent effectively and efficiently", does the minister confirm that the federal government is thus retaining responsibility for monitoring results and for final assessment of the programs?

[Manpower, May 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources Development has just this morning released a document presenting his manpower policy. Briefing Note No. 2 describes the post-negotiation arrangements with the provinces as "enabling the provinces to deliver active employment measures funded from the employment insurance fund".

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. Are we to conclude from this statement that the federal government reserves for itself the responsibility for defining policy with respect to active employment measures?

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, you will understand I am surprised to find the Prime Minister indignant over the opposition's distress when a new Canadian member is told to go and find another country.

The opposition's indignation, I remind the Prime Minister, is echoed unanimously by all commentators in Quebec and throughout Canada.

The very day of a momentous event in the history of Canada's Parliament and with this morning's praise of the quality of democracy and the freedom of expression in Canada, how can the Prime minister let one of his ministers tarnish, by his unspeakable remarks, the image of all those who sit or have sat in this Parliament?

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, by refusing to condemn his minister, as is his duty and as all Canadians consider he ought, does the Prime Minister realize that his entire government is associated with the unacceptable and discriminatory remarks of the Minister of Human Resources Development?

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister attempted to make light of the discriminatory and unacceptable remarks made by his Minister of Human Resources Development.

In the light of very strong reaction by all political commentators and by organizations like the Canadian Jewish Congress, for example, who reacted strongly to the minister's remarks, and now that he has had the time to reread what his minister said, will the Prime Minister dissociate himself from his minister's remarks-yes, or no? We await a reply.

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister should be careful with majorities as they may disappear quickly in certain circumstances.

Is the Prime Minister, by sticking to the comments made by the Minister of Human Resources Development, who urged the hon. member for Bourassa to choose another country, implementing plan B as a political expedient aimed at the rest of Canada, and taking members of cultural communities hostage by demanding that they share his political views if they want to become Canadian citizens?

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources Development, a government minister, has made a statement that is fraught with consequences for the future. All new Canadians are concerned, and rightly so, about a government minister stating that they must share the government's political views because they chose Canada and because Canada gave them Canadian citizenship.

The Prime Minister said essentially the same thing. My question is very clear: Does the Prime Minister, by refusing to dissociate himself from his minister's statement, support the comments made

by his Minister of Human Resources Development, yes or no? That is what we want to know.

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, clearly the Prime Minister has decided to let his Minister of Human Resources Development compound what he said yesterday about new Canadians. It is an insult.

My question is for the Prime Minister, and I think it is his responsibility as Prime Minister to respond. The Prime Minister was delighted recently by the suspension of three members of the third party for similar reasons. Is he going to act responsibly today as he ought as Prime Minister? Will he act quickly and demand the resignation of this minister, who brings shame onto the entire government with remarks he made that are clearly unacceptable in a democracy?

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has a short memory, but the blues bear witness. Hansard records what was said, exactly, and what was repeated and added to today just after the cabinet meeting.

My question, and it is a serious one, is for the Prime Minister. I would like to know how the Prime Minister can allow a member of his government, a minister, to decide that there are two sorts of citizens in Canada: those born and bred here, who may be either federalists or sovereignists, and new Canadians, who may only be federalists or find themselves another country, as he put it.

[Minister Of Human Resources Development, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Human Resources Development stated that he had had his fill of seeing a new Canadian sitting in the House preaching separatism. This unacceptable remark was made by a government minister and speaks volumes about the minister's opinion on Canadians by adoption.

Would the Prime Minister tell us whether the remarks of the Minister of Human Resources Development reflect his government's position on new Canadians?