Nick Discepola

[Criminal Code, April 1st, 1998]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Waterloo—Wellington for his question. I praise him for the interest he has shown in the field of organized crime and protection of Canadian citizens.

The government has done numerous things. In 1996 we implemented the Witness Protection Act. In 1997 we implemented the Criminal Law Improvement Act. The most recent thing we did was implement the anti-gang legislation.

These are tools that we feel have gone a long way to help police attack gang activity and criminal activity. The RCMP as well as all the other law enforcement agencies throughout the country have one goal and that is a unified approach with a national strategy to combat outlaw and motorcycle gangs. However the responsibility and the jurisdiction for enforcement falls with the local authorities.

We consider all threats to the safety of police officers a very serious matter. I can assure the hon. member that all threats, whether made to the police or to a prison guard for example, are investigated fully and acted upon fully.

We need to deal with the problem of motorcycle gangs and more specifically with organized crime in a very organized way. I would like to inform the hon. member that to that end the Ministry of the Solicitor General on April 24, 1998 will be bringing together all law enforcement agencies from across Canada to assist in developing a national strategy against organized crime.

We have done some good work. There is still some work to do.

I want to thank the hon. member again for his question.

[Taxation, March 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question I would like to essentially put things in the proper perspective first.

The APEC conference and the security evolving around the APEC conference was one of the largest events in Canadian history. It involved over 3,000 police officers.

As international law dictates, it also involved Canada having a responsibility to protect the 18 heads of state who were attending the conference.

To that end, there were clearly defined zones for the demonstrators to freely demonstrate in public view of the 18 heads of state who were attending.

There were numerous complaints received since that incident and those complaints have been addressed directly to the Public Complaints Commission.

The Public Complaints Commission, as we know, is an independent administrative tribunal. It also has civilian members on it. They have the power to review all the complaints. They have the power to even conduct investigations and hold hearings. We look forward to those hearings.

On December 3, the Chair, Shirley Heafey, began the investigation into the RCMP's actions. On February 20, 1998, she also indicated that there would be a public interest hearing, which the member is calling for.

The hearings will start on April 14, 1998. We have every confidence that the Public Complaints Commission will do its job, that it will investigate everything it feels is necessary to investigate. We await the report.

In view of that report and the investigation that is ongoing, I would like to limit my comments at this stage.

[Inmates' Community Work, March 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out an example of community work and voluntary service provided to the community by inmates in the Canadian prison system.

Some inmates at the Bowden detention centre helped prepare the Canada Games, in Alberta, by shovelling snow on the ski trails in River Bend. The trail network had not received any snow, even though surrounding areas had got tons of the white stuff.

Under escort, six inmates worked seven days a week to prepare the trails. This effort is but one example of the services provided by inmates to the communities to which they will go back some day. This is a positive step for their social rehabilitation, which is a key objective of the Correctional Service of Canada.

[Supply, March 12th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, we really see the politics behind the motion. We really see the concerns of that political party. For these members, the issue is not concern for the future of young people, but instead the opportunity, and I have seen this in the last four years, to fan the flames of some so-called federal-provincial squabbles. I wonder whether they are more concerned about the future of young people than about receiving the money to help them.

The program put forward, as has already been the case for the last 30 or 40 years, is not a matter of federal or provincial jurisdiction. We are not intruding in the administration; we are not telling a province which education programs it has to implement and which books it has to buy. The millennium fund is aimed at giving a better future to young people. It gives them the opportunity to pursue post-secondary studies to better prepare their future.

If Bloc Quebecois members are really concerned about the future of young people, they will have to do what was done in the past, that is co-operate with the federal government, and we will be able to agree on the process and the administration. The Canada students assistance plan is already working well in Quebec. Quebec is managing it and, in the other provinces, it is the federal government that deals with it. There are other examples. With regard to the GST, we have administrative agreements with the provinces. Therefore, if they are really concerned, they should think about the future of young people instead of the future of separatists.

[Supply, March 12th, 1998]

Madam Speaker, first I wish to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for London West.

It is a pleasure to speak to this motion by the member for Lac-Saint-Jean. The pleasure does not stem from my agreement with the motion, but rather from the opportunity it gives me to underline some of the contradictions expressed up to now by members opposite. They contend that the federal government has no business in education, that it should simply hand the money over to the province and forget about it.

Our government thinks otherwise. We strongly believe that we have a role to play, as we have been doing for many decades, in educating and helping young Canadians.

As the year 2000 draws near, various countries are looking at different ways to celebrate and mark the beginning of the new millennium. To give one example, the city of London, England, is looking at ways to celebrate their event and is considering building a dome at the cost of several hundred thousand dollars.

Our government, on the other hand, has taken a different approach. We have decided to invest in the future of our country by giving young Canadians the opportunity to achieve their full potential through access to training to meet the ever more challenging demands of the next millennium. This is something that the Bloc Quebecois have a hard time understanding.

Nowadays, we are facing a most formidable challenge which we cannot avoid: competitiveness. Given the global economy, all workers must be highly skilled, because only those who can produce faster, better and cheaper have access to the markets.

The opening of borders, or even their gradual elimination, created a whole new attitude toward trade that industrialized countries must deal with. We believe that we must rely on the creativity, the imagination and the innovation of young Canadians to continue to carve out an enviable position in the knowledge-based economy.

Traditionally based on the development of natural resources, Canada's economy now depends increasingly on knowledge rather than resources. That is how we will be able to help create stimulating and well paid jobs for young Canadians.

The Government of Canada has a responsibility to support and encourage those who want to participate fully in the new economic, cultural and social environment in which we will be living from now on. That is what we undertook to do, and the Canada millennium scholarship foundation is one of the ways Canada can face up to this great challenge.

Bloc members, especially the member who moved the motion, are again making a mistake they made repeatedly in the past. They confuse access to education and education itself.

The role of the Canada millennium scholarship foundation will be to eliminate the obstacles limiting access to post-secondary education or to training in advanced technology, which are essential to get a good job in the new economy.

Nowhere is it mentioned that the foundation will interfere in education programs. As the Bloc members say, we know that education is a provincial responsibility, and the foundation's vocation fully respects this fact.

However, for decades, the Canadian government has been playing a role in the area of financial assistance for students, because it strongly believes that access to education must be enhanced through a concerted effort.

Preparing young Canadians to enter the new economy is a collective responsibility. This is not the prerogative of any level of government and should not be the subject of the narrow dogmatism which too often characterizes the Bloc's actions, as is obvious in the motion before us.

Of course education is a provincial jurisdiction. Programs as well as institutions and the quality of the teaching fall within the domain of the provinces. However, federal and provincial governments alike have long been working to promote equal opportunity by supporting the people who cannot afford to pursue their academic training.

Has that system served us badly so far? I do not think so. Canada has already undertaken to address the challenge of globalization and its efforts have been quite successful. Last year, Canada ranked fourth out of 35 countries for its competitiveness, according to the World Economic Forum.

Obviously, several factors contribute to such a performance, but the quality of our manpower training plays a very major role. The establishment of the millennium scholarship fund does not change anything in the workings of the present system and, contrary to what the Bloc Quebecois always claims, it does not encroach in any way on provincial jurisdictions.

The role of the federal government in this dates back to the post-war years, not February 24, 1998, the date of the last budget.

As the Minister of Finance has clearly explained, the Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation will be an entity at arms-length from the federal government. It will be administered by a board made up of members from the private sector and including one student. The Council of Ministers of Education, representing the provincial governments, will also be involved in the selection of directors.

It goes without saying that the foundation will consult closely with the provincial governments. What is more, the post-secondary sector will also be involved in designing and awarding the Canadian Millennium Scholarships.

Members will recall the Minister of Finance placed particular emphasis on the federal government's desire to avoid duplication in this area. We have done this continually for more than four years in other areas, and will continue to do so.

We will also remember the reaction of the Quebec minister of finance to the tabling of the last budget. As he did last year, Mr. Landry accused us of practising predatory federalism. Always given to verbal exaggeration, he added another adjective, abusive. His words predator and abusive may have rhymed in French but they are really a joke. The words he uses to describe the budget and the millennium fund are frankly laughable.

According to that same minister of finance, this was a budget of a unitary state which completely discards federal structures. I wonder if we can consider him to be serious.

There is no federation in the world where the central government does not play a role in financial assistance for students. For example, in the United States of America 75% of public scholarships and bursaries for students come from federal government assistance. In Germany 65% of publicly funded bursaries and scholarships are federal. What is more, in both of these countries the central government plays an even more direct role in education. That would never be the case in Canada, since we understand that this is a field of exclusive provincial jurisdiction.

All governments are called on to play a role in this field. It is crucial to the future of our children and our country.

It does not really surprise me that Bloc Quebecois members cannot understand that. That they have presented this motion today surprises me even less. If it suits them, the Bloc and their PQ head office do not hesitate to denounce supposed predatory federalism. However, when the PQ government accepts hundreds of millions of dollars from our government to pay for damage caused by the ice storm, the adjectives are different.

Alain Dubuc put the real question as follows in La Presse , and I would like to quote him because it is an excellent summary of our position. He writes: “Can Quebec, which has no economic strategy, logically, just for the sake of being different, refuse a project expressing in a dynamic way the importance of university education and knowledge? One suspects that the main fault in the federal project lies in it being just that: federal”.

I believe that Quebec's young people share the same aspirations as young people anywhere else in Canada. They want to achieve their full potential in order to take an active part in improving society. Let us not saddle them with our own limitations, our old quarrels; let us instead encourage them to equip themselves to build a better future.

[Air Transport, February 24th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Air Canada and Canadian Airlines were singing the praises of the liberalization of air services between the United States and Canada.

It has changed North American skies and has benefited Air Canada, which has increased its cross-border activities. It now operates over 1,300 flights a week on 72 routes between Canada and the United States.

This opening-up has meant many benefits for Canada and the Canadian economy. It has helped create jobs since 1995.

Canada is quick to welcome all forms of liberalization that will benefit Canada. While we must be cautious about the introduction of such measures, we must remain open to everything that involves relations between Canada and all other countries.

In short, measures of this sort are of interest to all international communities, in obvious contrast to the inward- looking approach of the sovereignists—

[Nagano Olympic Games, February 18th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes away from the usual business of the House, if I may, to speak of Canada's athletes, who continue to aim for their best ever performances in the atmosphere of intense pressure of the Olympic Games.

In recent days, we have seen such athletes as Jean-Luc Brassard, Stéphane Rochon, Ann-Marie Pelchat, Ryan Johnson, Tami Bradley, Mélanie Turgeon, Kristy Sargeant, Kris Wirtz, Marie-Claude Savard-Gagnon and Luc Bradet staunchly defending the Canadian colours in competition. For them, effort and perseverance were more than mere words. Are they not champions merely by making it to the Olympics?

Of course we wish victory to all our athletes, since that is what all of their efforts are focussed on, but we owe them particular thanks for putting us in touch with the most human aspects of ourselves: love for one another, pleasure in one anothers' achievements, and solidarity in effort.

We wish each and every one of our athletes good luck in the pursuit of their Olympic goals. They are the pride of our country.

[Research And Development, February 13th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, this morning we got some good news about research in the Montreal region. The government of Canada announced its participation in $15 million worth of investments for research at McGill University and the Université de Montréal.

The Montreal region is becoming increasingly known as an ideal venue for research and development. Our government is pleased to be associated with this reality, which will benefit not only the Montreal region but all of Quebec, which is already expending considerable efforts to attract investments in this sector of activity.

In our opinion, the image of our universities cannot help but be enhanced by such encouragement, at a time when our young people are increasingly choosing careers in this field of the future. Good luck.

[Reference To Supreme Court, February 11th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the pro-democracy coalition is today going to unveil its strategy in anticipation of the start of hearings on the reference to the supreme court of the matter of a unilateral declaration of independence by Quebec.

Quite frankly, there is nothing democratic about this coalition, which resembles the sort of pre-referendum sovereignist production we have all seen and which was tried out in the 1980 and 1995 referendums.

The Parti Quebecois is certainly working hard at courting Quebeckers who have twice rejected Quebec's separation from the rest of Canada to get them to change their mind the next time.

If the pro-democracy coalition really wants to be democratic, it should inform people impartially about the game the sovereignists are playing and let them know what democracy will look like under the Parti Quebecois on the basis of questions as vague as the ones put in the 1980 and 1995 referendums.

[Ice Storm 1998, February 4th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to take part in this discussion—which to me is not a debate—in order to have an opportunity to testify to the courage and solidarity that exists everywhere in Quebec, and particularly to pay homage to the hundreds and thousands of volunteers in the riding of Vaudreuil—Soulanges.

My riding is part of the Montérégie region. Jokingly, people were saying that maybe we should change our name to Montérégie-Nord. We were a bit neglected. It took emergency measures ten days to discover that there had also been an emergency situation in the riding I have the honour to represent.

The region, and the riding as a whole, took charge of things. They gave an example to be followed in future, which I shall explain. All of the stakeholders got together, held meetings to plan how to deal with the problem. This was a disaster, and all the problems that can go along with one cannot be foreseen. One just has to adapt.

I would like to start with heart-felt congratulations and thanks for all of the mayors and municipal councils, as well as the administrations of these 24 towns and cities. Without the co-ordination and devotion of these mayors, these councils, the volunteer firefighters, we might have seen results far different from the ones we see today.

We came through relatively well in our area because, as a region, we took charge of things, thanks to the concerted efforts of mayors, reeves and all elected representatives on both the federal and the provincial level, regardless of political stripe. The mayors made themselves available, heart and soul, night and day.

I would like to mention two in particular, although I am aware this does a disservice to the others, but they are exemplars of devotion and of how people who were victims of the disaster themselves devoted themselves to their community.

Mayor Richard Leroux of Rivière-Beaudette, in a corner of our riding, right near the Ontario border, was affected himself because he neglected his own home.

His roof collapsed, and the damage was worth between $7,000 and $10,000. Also, Michel Kandyba of Pincourt is today facing $30,000 worth of damage.

We always tend to criticize elected officials, but I take off my hat to the 24 mayors, especially the reeve, Mr. Luc Tison and the mayor of Saint-Polycarpe, Normand Ménard. On Wednesday, day 12, it was nearly minus 20 in the riding. I will not forget that. They were announcing two days of minus 20 and below. There was no wood in the riding. Everyone was busy contacting people everywhere, and the mayor of St. Polycarpe, Mr. Ménard, volunteered to co-ordinate the distribution of wood, thanks doubtless to the co-operation and help of the Canadian armed forces.

We have been talking about solidarity, and in our riding it was exemplary. Not only did neighbours and towns and cities join together, but everyone helped everyone else. This was the finest example I ever saw and perhaps the last I will see as a member of Parliament.

We had to adapt to these changing circumstances. It was almost a crisis and management by crisis and we had to adapt on an hourly basis. However, the mayors, the elected officials and the hydro officials, everyone had one common objective. I share part of my riding, the Soulanges area, with a PQ member of the national assembly and the other part of the riding with the leader of opposition, Mr. Daniel Johnson, and we put aside our differences for the betterment of our citizens. It worked very well.

If I had one recommendation for future plans it would essentially be that the control of a disaster be at the top level but that the dissemination of information has to be at the lowest possible denominator which is at the mayoral level. They are the closest to the people.

Time and time again I saw examples of how either civil protection people came into the riding not knowing the riding or hydro officials who were brought in from other areas did not understand the needs. However, when they talked to the mayor the mayor was able to tell them who was away on vacation or which house was only a temporary summer home and their hook-ups were not necessary. Their knowledge of their communities was proven invaluable.

We also showed how Quebeckers and Canadians can be ingenious. I would like to thank publicly the officials at Canadian National railways who provided us with a locomotion engine, an engine that we were able to hook up with the efforts of Hydro-Quebec and the co-operation of CN officials. This engine was taken off the railway tracks, put on the side and hooked up to feed 80 homes and 4 shelters. It was a very proud time for us to see that occurring.

I know I only have a few more minutes but I would also like to take the time to thank the many people in the riding.

I have already mentioned the volunteer firefighters. They poured their heart and soul into helping and looking after people's safety, sometimes for 18 or 20 hours a day. The Red Cross, the Canadian armed forces, we cannot say enough. I would, however, like to single out three officers. They are, first, Major Wadsworth, Warrant Officer Cooke and especially, a good friend — because we became friends—Lieutenant-Colonel David Fraser, who helped us hugely in our riding. He also spoke French and came from Edmonton.

The employees of Hydro-Québec, the RCMP—520 officers helped with public security.

There is also Correctional Services, the other department for which we are responsible. Do you know that minimum security inmates also helped Hydro-Québec teams remove branches, and so on?

I would particularly like to mention the Verdonck family, with their distribution centre and Belcan agrocentre. This rural business threw itself heart and soul into distributing generators that came from all over the place. Some were even received from the Kitchener and Owen Sound areas. One individual Greg Haney who was especially hard hit and who had been without electricity for two weeks could have taken a generator home with him and hooked it up. Instead, he gave it to farmers and others who were worse off.

I could not have managed without my staff, Monique, Sylvie and Jean. There were also my colleagues from elsewhere, from the Beauce and Gaspé regions, from Kitchener, from New Brunswick, who sent wood during this crisis. I would like to thank my family, and my wife Mary Alice in particular, because they did not see me for two weeks, as well as the hundreds of thousands of volunteers. They put their hearts and souls into helping their fellow citizens.

We always have memories. This is an event in history. We always look back and remember, just like when President Kennedy was shot, where we were.

I have beautiful memories and I have destructive memories of seeing the tree tops and the maple orchards destroyed. It is as if someone took a lawnmower and cut the tops, an estimated seven thousand square kilometres of them.

I have two beautiful memories. One is seeing young children about 10 or 11 years old in Ste. Marthe skating on the ice in farmers' fields waiving to a helicopter from the Canadian Armed Forces, thanking it for coming to help them. The other is St-Télesphore, a very French Canadian village, celebrating and singing in English happy birthday to a nine year-old girl celebrating her birthday in a shelter.

It shows that in times of need Quebeckers, Canadians, come to the aid of each other. I want to salute all these people in the riding of Vaudreuil—Soulanges and, more important, all Quebeckers and I thank all Canadians for their help.