Aileen Carroll

[Middle East, November 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the conflict in the Middle East has had a long and torturous history. Therefore it is with great satisfaction that we learn of the ground breaking peace agreement at Wye, Maryland.

The Palestinian and Israeli leaders, with the instrumental support of the United States and the moral support of King Hussein of Jordan, worked courageously to achieve the breakthrough agreement. We trust it will lead to a resolution of the conflicts and provide a better life for future generations.

We are already hearing and seeing protests from opponents to the agreement, but we can only hope that they will not be successful in undermining this achievement.

The leaders of both the Palestinians and the Israelis have been working hard for many months to find a mutually agreeable solution while constantly being under the threat of failure.

As in Northern Ireland, the agreement is an important step toward building trust between longstanding rivals. Those who are outside this conflict now have an opportunity to provide support for a peaceful resolution.

[International Trade, October 29th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade.

On the recent visit of the President of Ireland, Mary McAleese, reference was made to the excellent trade relations between Canada and Ireland.

Can the minister tell us how important these investment and trade links are to the Canadian economy?

[Kosovo, October 7th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I will comment and conclude with a question to my colleague regarding the willingness to take a risk and to act even when all the results cannot be within our control. Many of us have concerns, as I mentioned on Monday in an S. O. 31, about the attendant risks of a military intervention.

I recall as a young child in 1958 watching the tanks roll into Budapest and asking my father if we were going to help. I do not remember his answer because I do not think he had one. As a graduate student in 1968 I watched again as the tanks went into Prague and Dubcek. So many hopes and aspirations were stopped.

I fear the inertia that is a component of all that and perhaps the inertia in Europe today. In discussions with some of our colleagues from Europe I was told it was complicated. Indeed it is and there are risks when we take action but I fear having to watch on television the same scenes in Kosovo that we saw in 1958 and 1968. I believe my colleague would agree with me and I ask him if it is a risk we must take at this time.

[Kosovo, October 7th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the insight shared by the hon. member for Toronto Centre—Rosedale. Indeed, he underlines very well the dilemma.

Canadians have moved beyond their history in some regards. We have not carried the baggage of some of the European countries and, as such, we have been freer to take risks and, by so doing, have created a federalism that is indeed one of tolerance and one that grows and overcomes the dilemmas which we face.

Canada has a reputation internationally. At one time we referred to it as a middle power, and former Prime Minister Pearson exemplified greatly what roles a middle power could play.

I think today we still have enormous credibility in the international community. We must be peace brokers. We must exemplify tolerance in our own history when we attempt to hold it out as an example to as troubled a region of the world as the Balkans.

But indeed both sides must come forward through CIDA and through international organizations, through our parliamentary associations and the opportunity which they provide for us to stand witness to exactly what we believe and what we act on every day. I think we can reach out. I do not mean in any way to sound naive. The history is long. The hatreds appear to be even longer, but I think they can be remedied by what we bring to the table. But we must be willing to go to the table as well and to take the risks.

[Kosovo, October 7th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations secretary-general has released a report in which he lays the lion's share of the blame for the current humanitarian crisis in the province of Kosovo squarely on the shoulders of the Yugoslav authorities.

The humanitarian situation in Kosovo is disastrous, with hundreds of thousands of displaced people and refugees, some of whom lack shelter and basic necessities. What is most shocking is that many of these problems are due to the actions of the Yugoslav government against its own citizens.

In particular, the report points to a clear policy of the Yugoslav authorities intentionally driving civilians from their own homes and in many cases from their own countries.

We call on Yugoslavia and on President Milosevic as head of state with the ability to act with decisive authority to meet their obligations under international law and to lead the way toward a just solution.

We hold President Milosevic and all Yugoslav authorities fully accountable for the actions of their security forces and urge them to co-operate with the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in this regard.

The actions of the security forces are exactly what fuels extremism and violence in the Albanian Kosovor population. The Yugoslav government should instead show leadership by creating the conditions for meaningful dialogue on a political solution and by fully addressing the humanitarian crisis.

This can be achieved only by calling an immediate end to the offensive and repressive activities of the police as well as the military and by offering gestures of good faith to the Albanians of Kosovo such as a commitment to offer real, meaningful autonomy for Kosovo.

At the same time, we strongly urge the Albanian Kosovars to return to their earlier policy of peaceful engagement, to pursue their legitimate goals within the borders of the federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

While Canadians understand the frustration and anger the Kosovars feel, especially in light of the scant regard the Yugoslavian authorities have paid to legitimate Kosovar grievances, violence is not the means to a viable solution to the problems Kosovo and the rest of the region face.

Canada has long supported the diplomatic efforts being pursued to bring about a peaceful resolution to this region. The Organization for Security and Co-operation has been trying to play a constructive role in Yugoslavia but has been continually rebuffed.

United States Ambassador Hill is continuing his efforts to broker an autonomy agreement. The international community is working very hard to find a solution, but we need the co-operation of the combatants to do so.

Problems in Kosovo have recently developed into a major humanitarian crisis in which civilians are the main victims. But this crisis has not occurred in a void. Its current phase is intimately linked to the factors and to the individuals which created the conditions for the violent dissolution of the former socialist federal Republic of Yugoslavia and war in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina, with thousands of lives being lost.

Irresponsible politicians in the Balkans have for years set neighbour against neighbour with one key goal, the maintenance of power at any cost, and that cost is borne by their people. The suffering of their citizens, whether ethnic Albanians, Serbs or others, is rarely uppermost in these leaders' minds. Ethnic ties are betrayed at a whim when it serves the interests of such politicians. But they find playing off people's fears to be the most convenient and effective tactic. It is a tactic to which they frequently resort.

Canadians find such behaviour reprehensible. One's ethnicity makes little difference if one is hungry, cold, terrified and in extreme physical danger. Innocent victims are innocent victims, regardless of religion, language or ethnicity. Simply put, there is no such thing as collective guilt where individuals are held responsible for the crimes, real or perceived, of their ethnic kin. Recognizing this is key to any lasting solutions.

Canada has played a constructive role in all the countries of the former Yugoslavia since we first sent peacekeepers there at the beginning of this decade. We have paid high costs, most notably in terms of the 16 soldiers who lost their lives in the region. Other Canadians have tried through non-governmental organizations or international agencies to help the people of the western Balkans find their own peaceful, sustainable answers to these many challenges.

Canadian taxpayers have been generous in helping the peace process bring tangible benefits to ordinary people. We, in turn, have benefited enormously through immigration from the former Yugoslavia which provides a bridge between our countries.

We have no agenda to damage anyone's legitimate interests in that region. But we do have an obligation to make our voices heard when we see tens of thousands of suffering people whose human rights have been callously disregarded and who have in many cases lost all that they hold dear.

When international humanitarian law and international human rights standards are cast aside in the name of fighting and armed insurgency in a manner opposed to the letter and spirit of international law we must not be oblivious to the implications this has for all of us.

Members of this House must therefore condemn in the strongest terms the philosophy which lies behind the actions of all the combatants who commit atrocities against civilians in Kosovo.

Regardless of who commits such actions, the Serbian forces or the Kosovar insurgents, such actions will never lead to a just and peaceful resolution for the inhabitants of Kosovo.

We are all deeply concerned with the plight of the displaced persons within Kosovo and of Kosovo refugees fleeing into Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia and Hercegovina. Canada has contributed to the efforts of the UN, the UN children's fund and the Red Cross, and Canada will continue to do its part.

A stable solution reflecting the best interests of all ethnic groups in Kosovo is what is needed. There is only one source for justice, reconciliation and a lasting peace. While Canada and our partners in the international community do not seek to impose our own solutions, we cannot be neutral to the suffering being experienced and to the threat to international peace and security that is posed by this current crisis.

Through the United Nations and through NATO we must act to help end the suffering and bring about a lasting answer to these very complex problems. Time is running out.

[Yugoslavia, October 5th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is elementary to state that Canada as a country respects the rule of law and guarantees human rights and fundamental freedoms to all who live here. In the republic of Yugoslavia both of these basic principles are being violated daily. The situation has deteriorated beyond a level that can be tolerated by Canadians.

While the UN security council deliberates and waits for the Annan report, the New York based human rights watch yesterday blamed the international community for failing to take any serious actions to stop the killing of Albanian civilians.

The chances of finding a political solution to this rapidly deteriorating situation are fast disappearing. Pressure is mounting for military intervention with its all attended risks. The free world has no appetite for a repeat of Bosnia yet we continue to remain transfixed and inert.

[Businesslinc Project, June 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in the United States the unemployment rate is the lowest in 28 years. However the White House recognizes that there are marginalized constituencies and urban areas left behind in the rush to meet the challenges of global competitiveness.

Last Friday, Vice-President Gore announced several new private sector commitments to invest in low income communities. He launched an administration initiative to encourage large businesses to work with local small businesses in distressed areas. The BusinessLINC project includes such high profile partners as BankBoston, Prudential Insurance and Pfizer Corp.

As we in Canada struggle with similar realities of global competitiveness, I ask if there are aspects of this community reinvestment model which our large businesses such as bank merger hopefuls might consider as part of their contract with the people of Canada.

[Child Poverty, June 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, data just released by Statistics Canada indicate that family violence is an escalating social problem, but the most disturbing aspect of this social affliction that has not been made public until now is that children under the age of two are most likely to be murdered.

Data compiled through 154 police departments, largely in Ontario and Quebec, show that one in every five family murders was a child killed by a parent. Sixty per cent of sexual assaults were against children and one-third was at the hands of family members. This report echoes the findings of the National Council of Welfare called “Poverty Profile” which reports that child poverty is at a 17 year high of 21%.

While these two reports have not been related formally there are issues here that beg to be addressed when we consider future policy directions in our deficit free economy.

[Holidays Act, May 6th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, many Liberals think of Sir Wilfrid Laurier as the real founder of the Liberal Party.

When Canada's first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, was in power the chief opposition to Macdonald came from two recalcitrant reform groups: les Rouges of Lower Canada, a group of French speaking radicals whose chief target was the Roman Catholic church; and the Clear Grits, originally an assemblage of discontented Presbyterian and Methodist farmers from the area southwest of Toronto. While the Grits disappeared as an entity in the 1870s the term clung to Liberals and was still widely used a century later.

Laurier was an attractive man, an elegantly handsome lawyer from a Quebec country town, eloquent, ambitious and sensitive. Early in his political life as one of the young leaders of les Rouges he had realized that if his confrères were ever to gain office they would have to form an alliance with the English and at the same time soften their anticlerical stance by identifying themselves with a political program acceptable to the Roman Catholic church.

Laurier proselytized that these goals could be reached through stressing the liberalism of his party, demanding the separation of republican and anticlerical dogmas. What he was saying to both races was that les Rouges could take a moderate approach compatible with the philosophy of William Lyon Mackenzie, the first Liberal prime minister, and Edward Blake, the only federal Liberal Party leader in Canada never to become prime minister.

He emphasized compromise and admiration for the liberal reform ideals that were then articulated by William Gladstone in England and that were to have a hold on the imaginations of Canadian Liberals for decades to come.

Laurier served four terms as Prime Minister, from 1896 to 1911. He taught us Liberals many of our greatest principles, including the most important: the need to find and maintain common ground between anglophones and francophones.

The Liberals realize that Laurier won the 1896 elections because the Conservatives had lost sight of this fundamental principle of the Canadian federation.

For Liberals the lessons of Laurier's leadership went far beyond the French-English entente. He buried dogmatism, abandoning the ideological rigidities that had plagued les Rouges and the Clear Grits. He built his electoral strength on the organizational backs of Liberal provincial premiers, Oliver Mowat of Ontario, William Stevens Fielding of Nova Scotia and Andrew George Blair of New Brunswick. He brought them into his cabinet as power brokers for their regions.

He launched the building of a second transcontinental railroad and sought support from the business community, modifying his party's commitment to free trade in order to appease the country's new industrialists.

Laurier supported the aggressive open immigration policy of his minister of the interior, Sir Clifford Sifton, whose purpose was the settlement of the west. He talked optimistically about the glorious future of Canada.

Laurier's successes were turned into principles that Liberals have followed for decades. Despite some setbacks, Laurier on the whole skilfully walked the French-English tightrope throughout his years in office, balancing French Canada's racial fears and

Nearly a century ago, Sir Wilfrid Laurier predicted that “it is Canada that shall fill the 20th century”. When we look back at it, who could call him wrong? The challenge before us now is to find a balance or a compromise among ourselves and among our many interests to make the 21st century Canada's as well.

Sir Wilfrid Laurier believed immensely in his country. He held strong views of what Canada could be or should be. More important, he possessed vision for Canada and for Canadians.

For all of these reasons, it seems very appropriate to celebrate the beginning of the 21st century by amending the Holidays Act to honour this remarkable Canadian by designating Sir Wilfrid Laurier Day.

[Petitions, May 6th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition on behalf of certain constituents in my riding who object to nudity in public and who seek a remedy by requesting an adjustment to the criminal code.