Patrick Gagnon

[Department Of Canadian Heritage Act, December 15th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, of course I intend to support the government's new proposals for Canada's cultural sector.

When I hear the opposition condemning the very existence of Canada and the fact that Canada has done nothing for the French fact, I think that is absolutely untrue and unacceptable. Some people are looking for a definition of the Canadian nation, and it seems that originally, Canada was a word that meant "village" in one of the aboriginal languages. A village is a community where people live together, and these people have worked together to build a country.

I may remind the opposition that this Canada, this village we have created is the envy of the world. I could refer again to the view shared by the United Nations that Canada still ranks first as the best country to live in.

Consider how Canada developed. The first colonists who came to Canada wanted to make a new life for themselves. My ancestors, as those of the member for Quebec with whom I share the same surname, landed on the île d'Orléans in 1642. My ancestor, Maturin Gagnon, one of the first French settlers, wanted to start a new life. Obviously, through the years, there has been many changes and historical upsets, but I believe that Canada and its very existence as a country, has made it possible for the Canadian Francophonie to thrive.

I believe that this fact must not be ignored. I believe that the nature of Canada, as a state, resides in its linguistic duality, and the generous reception given to the cultures which have contributed to the development and the building of this structure called Canada. Among those who came were the Irish, the Scots, the Jews, the Asians and the Europeans, to name a few. People from 160 countries have contributed, in one way or another, to the creation and the building of the Canadian federation.

There are 6 million francophones in Quebec, more than one million of whom are new Quebecers, and anglophones who also contributed to the development of Quebec, as part of Canada, of course. Everybody was the better for it: Montreal became the first metropolis of the Canadian federation. The river brought people to Montreal, but I do not want to focus on the past, I want to speak of the future. This is the spirit of a true Canadian: someone who looks towards the next century.

And there are over half a million francophones in Ontario. A third of the population of New Brunswick is made up of francophones. There are tens of thousands of francophones in Manitoba and in the western provinces. They are there, they exist, they are counting on the support of francophones in Quebec to keep this country united.

I would go even further. Unfortunately, nationalists never take into account the contributions of francophones outside Quebec. Carmen Roy was not even mentioned. There is Angèle Arsenault, Édith Butler, even Roch Voisine. These are francophones outside Quebec who not only ensure in some way the French presence outside Quebec but could also be considered as some of the greatest figures of French culture in Canada.

I told you about the francophones outside Quebec but not about the success of bilingualism. Some vainly tried to prove quasi scientifically that bilingualism does not work. But there are more than 4.4 million Canadians who master both languages. I had the opportunity to go to Vancouver, where I made a speech to young people who, much to my surprise, spoke a more than proper French. This was music to my ear. I also received well written correspondence in French.

We must not forget that, in 1977, 237 schools offered an immersion program to 37,835 students. In 1988-these are Anglophone students registered in immersion programs-there were 1,500 schools and 241,140 students. Within ten years, bilingual and immersion programs increased by 700 per cent. I think what makes French so vital and attractive is the growing interest of many young English Canadians for the beautiful language of Molière.

Certain people have attempted to minimize and trivialize the efforts made by some provinces, but they overlooked the fact that more than 27,000 students in British Columbia, more than 26,000 in Alberta, 18,000 in Manitoba, and even 115,000 in Ontario go to immersion schools. It is very interesting to travel in English Canada and meet these young people who were able to benefit from this program. And believe me, Madam Speaker, these young people are very grateful for it.

Canada has an international reputation as a leader, for the way it treats its minorities, be they francophones outside Quebec or anglophones in Quebec. Of course, there are other minorities and, to me, this makes the strength of this country. This diversity of cultures, this meeting place of ideas, Madam Speaker, that is what Canada is all about.

[Department Of Canadian Heritage Act, December 15th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I have no trouble defining what I am and explaining who I am.

However, in this debate on Quebec nationalism, which has been going on for some time, there are people who claim that Quebec includes all minorities. But all I keep hearing from the opposition is that there are Quebecers whose ancestors settled here long ago and that the partnership and participation of other cultures has become irrelevant.

I am not asking the hon. member to tell me where I fit in but to tell me whether the English, the Irish and all other minorities are part of Quebec as we know it today. That is all I want to know.

[Department Of Canadian Heritage Act, December 15th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I would like to comment on the speech made by the hon. member for Québec.

I would like to know her definition of a Quebecer. I often hear the Quebec nation defined as including the English, the Irish and the Scots. Does it include the Jews and other groups or are we talking about old French Canadian families exclusively? I would appreciate her comments on this definition. How does she see the Quebec nation?

[Petitions, December 15th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I have a petition with 30 signatures of Canadians who wish to bring to our attention the fact that this petition calls for an amendment to the human rights code to include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination. The fundamental principle underlying the petition is to ensure that people are treated equally in Canada regardless of their sexual orientation.

[Communications Security Establishment, December 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I think we should bear in mind several aspects of the world situation, in other words, the geopolitical, strategic situation of Canada. As a nation with a population of 30 million and a member of the G-7, as a country with a fairly important position in the world, we have to consider not only Canadian industry but also the security of this country today and in the next century.

It would perhaps be useful, in a discussion about the Communications Security Establishment, better known as the CSE, to consider briefly Canada's foreign intelligence activities and the role of the CSE in this respect. First of all, I would like to explain what is meant by foreign intelligence. The term foreign intelligence refers to information on the resources, intentions and activities of foreign states, moral entities or individuals as they concern Canada's defence or the conduct of Canada's international affairs.

This may include information of a political, economic, military or scientific nature or indeed information related to the country's national security. We should also realize that, unlike many of its allies, Canada has no active foreign intelligence service. However, like most countries, Canada has set up a number of limited mechanisms for collecting and analysing information from other countries.

Earlier I mentioned the political context. Since the demise of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, there has been an increasing sense of instability. This is no longer the world we

used to know, where we had the Communists on one side, and the free world on the other, and when we knew who our enemies were. The world has changed considerably since the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989.

I think that today we live in a world that is far more insecure, unstable and uncertain-when we look, for instance, at Eastern Europe-a world where there is a certain lack of cohesion. We have all these small republics, the conflict between Russia and Chechenya, the dissolution of Yugoslavia and the problems of reconstruction in Eastern Europe. There are very real threats, not only locally, but internationally.

We no longer have the kind of control over nuclear arms that we had at one time, and unfortunately, this uncertainty has caused some nations to cast envious looks at Canada and the West. That is why Canada is not necessarily immune to the changes that have been taking place during the past five years, and especially as a result of the events and disruptions in Eastern Europe. That is, as you know, the political reality we are all faced with.

There are economic challenges as well. More and more, a number of countries, some of which we may have thought of as friends, are showing a great deal of interest in Canadian industries. I would say that, these past few years, allegations of industrial spying in the pharmaceutical industry have been increasing. In Quebec, there have been blatant cases of Quebec interests being targeted. They were spied on because they had knowledge and technologies that some of our allies, who will remain nameless, wanted for themselves. It makes us realize that we have knowledge that the whole world is interested in having. Why not use it?

The same with the airspace industry. Many countries have shown an interest for Canadian companies such as Bombardier and de Havilland. I also hear that we have companies specialized in high technology and biotechnology. There is no doubt that an increasing number of foreign countries are interested.

So, we are not immune to change, nor to other countries wanting to obtain information from Canada unlawfully, if not illegally.

I think that Canada has prospered because of the security we enjoy in this country, good understanding and economic and political stability between provinces, co-operation between the industry and the Government of Canada. But this security must be maintained and that is why I think that a communications security establishment meets that need not only to look after our interests, but also to ensure that military changes or upheaval outside Canada do interfere with scientific and technological progress on the home front.

There is no question that the world we live in is not an easy one. Personally, I would rather live an a world where there would be no CSE, no CIA, no M-5, no KGB, and no foreign interest.

I believe some people, and this is often the case for the Bloc, have concerns, whether they are founded or not, about the existence of the CSE and other such organizations we have known in the past. But we have a role, an obligation to protect our industries. That is why the CSE is more interested in helping protect Canadian industries trying to develop in an increasingly competitive world.

There is Eastern Europe and then, there are emerging Asian countries. Again, there is interest in the new Canadian technologies, the aluminum and paper industries in particular, where Canada has held on to a certain tradition of supremacy. In an increasingly competitive international environment, we need an intelligence service like the CSE to make sure that information stays in Canada and that such countries do not disrupt the operation of our businesses.

Canada is also a multicultural country. More and more of our people come from other countries.

Since Canada is a welcoming country, we have people coming from various countries in Latin America, Asia, Central and Eastern Europe. Sometimes, people return to Canada and settle here to destabilize the country.

There are even well-known and not so well-known ethnic groups facing internal conflicts that have unfortunate repercussions at the national level.

I think that my time is up, but I would like to say, in conclusion, that we need an intelligence service like the CSE, whose main concern is protecting Canadians in the international community and, unfortunately, because of the geopolitical realities prevailing here as the century draws to a close.

[Children For Peace, December 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise to thank over one hundred children from my riding who sent me drawings, as well as messages of peace, hope and friendship.

These touching messages come from pupils in grade two at École Saint-Paul, Maria, in grade four at École Père-Pacifique, Pointe-à-la-Croix, in grade one at École Bourg, Carleton, and in grade four at École Bois-Vivant, New-Richmond. Their drawings convey messages such as: "Every child has a right to

be protected", "I want children to live in love", and "Let us make sure fewer children die very young".

It is my hope that these messages will inspire all young Canadians, at a time when we are debating the gun control issue and on the day after the sad anniversary of the killing of 14 young women at Montreal's École polytechnique. Fortunately, these drawings are a source of hope for a better future.

[Unemployment Insurance Act, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, today marks the sad anniversary of the murder of 14 young women at l'École polytechnique in Montreal.

The government recognizes the devastating effects of violence against women and is striving to improve its response to help victims and to stop the offenders. As examples of the work being done in the Department of Justice to address the issue of violence against women let me mention the following.

The new firearms initiatives will provide a clear and effective response to try and prevent women from being killed by guns. Bill C-42 proposes amendments to the Criminal Code which would allow police and others to apply for a peace bond on behalf of a person at risk. Bill C-41 proposes sentencing reforms and would make abuse of a position of trust or authority in the commission of an offence an aggravating factor in sentencing. Dealing with violence against women remains one of the government's highest priorities in the justice area.

At the end of the week consultations will take place with women's groups on how to respond to the Supreme Court's decision to allow defence of extreme drunkenness, where a man had sexually assaulted a woman while intoxicated. The Minister of Justice has already indicated his intention to respond to the problems arising from the Daviault decision and is looking at a criminal intoxication proposal.

Dealing with violence against women remains one of the government's highest priorities in the justice area.

[Unemployment Insurance Act, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, in 1984, when the CSIS Act

became law, Parliament achieved two very important objectives. First, it created a civilian security intelligence agency, accountable through the Solicitor General to Parliament, and ultimately, to the Canadian people.

Second, in support of an additional measure of control and accountability for the activities of this agency, Parliament created an external review body-the Security Intelligence Review Committee, or SIRC.

SIRC has the legislative mandate to perform two kinds of functions. The first is to act as an administrative tribunal to hear complaints against the security service. The second, relevant to the issue before us, is to review the performance and activities of the Service.

Section 38 of the CSIS Act authorizes SIRC to review how CSIS performs all its duties and functions. More specifically, under section 54, SIRC can investigate any matter relating to CSIS's activities and then provide the Solicitor General with a special report of this investigation.

SIRC is entitled to obtain any information, including documents, reports and explanations from CSIS and the Inspector General to carry out its responsibilities. Clearly, SIRC has the authority and enabling powers to properly fulfil its mandate.

In conclusion, it would be in no one's interest, and certainly not the Canadian public's, to establish another review body to do what SIRC is already authorized to do.

Therefore, I would suggest that we put this suggestion of a royal commission to rest and await the report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee.

[Leader Of The Official Opposition, December 5th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to wish the Leader of the Opposition a speedy recovery.

Setting aside partisan rhetoric and the constitutional differences of opinion that oppose us, all my colleagues from the Liberal Party join me in telling the Leader of the Opposition that he is in our thoughts as he goes through what must certainly be the most difficult time of his life. We also wish his wife, children and family the courage to see him through this ordeal.

The words of support that flood in from all parts testify to the great parliamentary qualities of the Leader of the Opposition.

On behalf of all Canadians, I wish for the speedy return of the Leader of the Opposition among us, here in this House.

[World Trade Organization Agreement Implementation Act, November 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to respond to the comments of the hon. member for Chicoutimi with respect to the railway accidents at Brighton and Rimouski.

I would like to start by saying I probably travel more by train than any other member in this House and, incidentally, my father was on the train going to the Gaspé when it jumped the tracks, so what the hon. member said touched a personal chord.

I have nothing to add to what was said by the Department of Transport last week. Emergency exits, first aid kits and emergency evacuation procedures are all matters of concern. I may remind hon. members that the Minister of Transport, the government, VIA Rail and Transport Canada see these elements as a priority and intend to ensure there is a thorough investigation.

However, the Transportation Safety Board, as the minister pointed out, is the body that was created by Parliament to investigate transportation accidents, which it is doing in this particular case. If the investigation reveals any irregularities with respect to the ability to intervene, it will be in a position to advise Transport Canada immediately.

The police forces concerned, both the VIA Rail contingent and the public police forces, are either conducting their own investigations or pooling their efforts, as well as stepping up the application of regulations and their own readiness. Furthermore, VIA Rail has already started a preliminary review of the accident and internal procedures.

In concluding, I would like to quote what was said by the minister: "We are going to do everything we can at VIA Rail, at Transport Canada, and at the police forces. Every possible avenue will be explored to make sure that the people who travel in Canada on VIA Rail trains can do so in safety and security".