Jack Frazer

[Somalia Inquiry, March 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the justice committee probably has provided good recommendations but that does not deal with the problem of what happened at NDHQ after that report. It seems that there may have been several cover-ups at several levels, in Belet Huen, in Mogadishu and then the so-called damage control in Ottawa.

The commission may be able to answer the questions about Belet Huen and Mogadishu, but with the inquiry shut down it will not be able to establish the facts of what took place in Ottawa.

How does the minister intend to deal with this apparent attempt of a cover-up of murder?

[Somalia Inquiry, March 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, Major Armstrong appearing before the Somalia inquiry stated that in his opinion the shooting of Ahmed Aruush on March 4, 1993 was a murder.

He reported this to his superiors and it seems that headquarters in Ottawa was also advised. It then took six weeks to dispatch a police investigation team. Some think this sent a message that may have contributed to the torture death of Shidane Arone on March 16.

Neither the justice review nor the committee of four can tell the minister of defence what took place at national defence headquarters. How does he intend to find out?

[Points Of Order, March 13th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order regarding a motion moved this morning by the Minister of Labour. I refer to Beauchesne's sixth edition, citation 318(2), which is based on a ruling of July 14, 1977. It states:

A Member cannot rise on a point of order to move a motion-

If you will review the video and the audio tapes you will note, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Labour clearly called out point of order and the Speaker clearly recognized him on a point of order. While on that point of order the minister moved a time allocation motion on Bill C-66.

For a more recent ruling on this matter, I refer to a Speaker's ruling of November 20, 1996 at page 6503 of Hansard . The Speaker then ruled that there is only one kind of motion which can be moved on a point of order. He said:

In fact, there is only one motion that can be made on a point of order and that is the motion that was made by the member for St. Albert.

The motion that the member for St. Albert moved was:

That the member for Medicine Hat be now heard.

That being the only motion that can be moved on a point of order, the minister's motion for time allocation cannot be accepted because he violated the rules of the House. These rules must be followed to the letter because they are the only protection that the minority in the House has against the tyranny of the majority.

The minister was clearly out of order in moving his motion to cut off debate on Bill C-66 and I ask that you rule on this point of order, Mr. Speaker.

[Somalia Inquiry, March 13th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I did not hear an answer to my question. I was not talking about the Somalia inquiry. I was asking what the minister intends to do to restore trust in the Canadian forces by completing this investigation. Without full disclosure, these issues will never be resolved. This is far from being in the best interest of the defence department or the Canadian forces.

How do we fix something if we do not know what is broken? The inquiry was following terms of reference laid down by this government. Having disrupted that process, does the minister now intend to let the matter just drop and hope it will go away?

[Somalia Inquiry, March 13th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, previous allegations and recent testimony before the Somalia inquiry leave many serious unanswered questions about decisions made and actions taken at senior levels in the defence department.

Neither the committee of four nor the military justice review can resolve responsibility or culpability of the individuals concerned. With the inquiry terminated, serious issues will be left hanging.

How does the minister intend to overcome the loss of trust that comes with the perception that senior leadership has escaped investigation?

[Federal Public Service Pension Act, February 21st, 1997]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-376, an act to provide defined contribution pensions for the public service, the Canadian forces and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, to be managed and invested by a private sector manager, and to amend the Income Tax Act and certain other acts in consequence thereof.

Mr. Speaker, briefly the bill I have introduced will replace the public service, the RCMP and the Canadian forces pension plan by allowing it to put real money into a real pension account, managed by a professional manager at arm's length from the government.

This would mean that rather than deductions being taken from your pay and put into the general revenue account matched by a fictitious paper transaction, there would be real money in a real account. The best equivalent I can think of is the Ontario teachers pension plan which as we know is very healthy and well managed.

The people involved would have the choice of who manages the plan. They would have the option, if necessary, of contributing a little more, although the government is not obligated for more. I think this would put our pension plan on firm footing and take the taxpayer out of the game of supporting it.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

[Somalia Inquiry, February 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has no hesitation in prejudging the inquiry. His comments last Friday are a blatant example of his jumping to the wrong conclusion.

Clearly, the minister does not know what really happened in Somalia. Furthermore, he certainly does not know what really happened at national defence headquarters and seems determined not to find out.

Why is the minister more interested in stopping any investigation into the murder and cover-up than in establishing what really happened? Is this responsible leadership?

[Somalia Inquiry, February 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a recent military study identifies serious leadership problems. Leadership is probably the most important factor in an efficient, effective, disciplined and happy military.

The rank and file want to know that their interests come first in the minds of their leaders. Whether the minister likes it or not, the perception is that there is a problem in national defence headquarters.

Why is he shutting down the Somalia inquiry when it offers him a chance to clear the decks and re-establish confidence in national defence leadership?

[Somalia Inquiry, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, according to the defence minister, everybody knows what happened in Somalia so we do not need the inquiry commission.

Since the minister knows, perhaps he can tell us why no military police were sent to investigate the March 4 shooting, or why Major

Armstrong's medical report was ignored. Perhaps he can tell us whether Bob Fowler really did blackmail Kim Campbell and whether generals interfered with an investigation.

Since the minister knows the answers, will he tell Canadians what they are? If not, why is he so determined to avoid learning the truth?

[Indian Act Optional Modification Act, February 19th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, Reform Party members present will oppose this motion.