House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1993, with 68% of the vote.
Indian Affairs February 8th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. If he does not want the Oka situation to repeat itself, will the Prime Minister recognize that he must, in co-operation with the provinces and I insist on that point, enter very shortly into a process that will lead to the official recognition of Indian self-government?
Indian Affairs February 8th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. What the native people do not agree with are the provisions concerning the reserves which the Prime Minister implemented at the beginning of the 1970s, when he was minister of Indian Affairs, and which keep them in a state of dependence. Chief Mercredi admitted yesterday he no longer has control over the situation on the reserves.
His request for an amendment to the Indian Act which would recognize Indian self-government is fundamental but has not been answered yet.
Is it the intention of the Prime Minister to initiate, in the near future, a negotiating process with the First Nations in order to review those clauses of the Indian Act that are now obsolete?
Lifting Of The Embargo Against Vietnam February 4th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the President of the United States, Mr. Bill Clinton, announced that he was lifting the trade embargo against Vietnam. That embargo was imposed in 1975, at the end of the war between the two countries. The American President stated that this was done in an effort to clarify the fate of American soldiers still reported missing after the war between the United States and Vietnam.
We hope that this initiative will be successful and that a normal relationship can be established between the United States and Vietnam in the interest of those two countries and global peace.
Social Security System February 3rd, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my hon. colleague on his presentation. As a high school guidance counsellor, I was for many years in a position to meet workers who wanted to receive some occupational training and who had to wrestle with unemployment insurance rules. And I would have liked to say exactly what my hon. colleague said, that is denounce the fact that some people today are not receiving training because Canadian training policies are inadequate.
In addition to congratulating my colleague, I would like to ask him a question. Why must all of these programs be standardized across Canada? Why could the Government of Quebec not oversee occupational training, as labour unions and management are demanding? In fact, Quebec stakeholders are unanimous in calling for all of these programs to be administered by the Quebec government. Why is this not possible at the present time?
Aluminum Industry January 28th, 1994
A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Some aluminum producing plants in Canada are presently importing cheap Russian aluminum, then upgrading it for resale on the international market.
Is the minister contemplating the possibility of imposing countervailing duties on such imports of aluminum into Canada?
Aluminum Industry January 28th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.
The aluminum industry is presently going through a crisis brought about by massive selling of Russian aluminum on the world market. Producing countries are trying, so far without success, to reach an agreement with the Russians. In the event of failure, Americans might impose countervailing duties on imports from all countries. Our industry, which employs 20,000 workers in Quebec and Canada, exports 75 per cent of its output to the United States. Countervailing duties would have disastrous consequences for the industry.
My question is this: Given the importance of this industry in Quebec and Canada, what measures is the government going to take to prevent a confrontation between the various aluminum producing countries?
Cruise Missile Testing January 26th, 1994
I want to thank the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce for his remarks. I congratulate him on standing by the position he has held since 1983. I was surprised, however, by some of his arguments and I will quickly explain why. But I do nevertheless have a question for him.
The hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce began by listing the reasons why he is opposed to cruise missile testing. He described the cruise missile as a very dangerous, highly accurate weapon that is difficult to detect and that can carry nuclear warheads. I am somewhat surprised by this description because weapons are supposed to be dangerous. I do not think his is a strong argument because what makes a weapon effective is its
mobility, its ability to quickly reach its target, the enemy, its strike power and its invulnerability to enemy attacks. I fail to see how one can object to testing on the grounds that the weapon itself is dangerous. If the weapon were not dangerous, would anyone object to it?
Second, the hon. member claims that since the cold war is now over, there is no further need to develop weapons. But the cold war ended four or five years ago. One could quibble about the dates. The thaw came fairly quickly and if we look at the international situation, it is quite possible that the freeze could be on again, as happens quickly in Ottawa, judging from what I have seen.
The hon. member argues that allowing cruise missile testing will restart the arms race. I think this is somewhat of an exaggeration because we are talking here about allowing something that has gone on for the past ten years. We are not talking about an escalation here, merely about allowing our American allies with whom we have an agreement to conduct a certain number of tests each year. Our duly elected government renewed this agreement last year for a period of ten years. I do not see this as any kind of escalation in the arms race.
Lastly, in referring to statements made recently by U.S. President Clinton, the hon. member argues that the Americans will not be upset if we refuse to allow the testing to proceed.
I find these arguments somewhat debatable. Given the fact that these tests are restricted, that we are not dealing here with a new weapon that has suddenly been added to the world arsenal, does the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce not think that he is being a little alarmist in raising all of these arguments when similar tests have in fact been conducted in recent years?
Cigarette Smuggling January 26th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, hon. members will remember that, yesterday, we talked several times about cigarette smuggling in Quebec and eastern Canada, particularly in Saint-Eustache and in the Mohawk territories of Kanesatake, Kahnewake and Akwesasne.
I would like to point out in this House that the vast majority of the Mohawk people in these territories, as well as Mohawks living elsewhere in Quebec, Ontario and eastern New York, are peaceful people who are also concerned about increased cigarette smuggling and the violence associated with it.
The problem is caused by a small number of smugglers who take advantage of the laxness of police forces, especially the RCMP, in the Cornwall area and the Mohawk territory of Akwesasne.
Foreign Affairs January 25th, 1994
I want to thank the hon. member for Portneuf for his remarks. I would like to say a few words about how our people would feel if Canada were to play a greater role in peacekeeping missions and in the training of soldiers for such missions.
For the past few years, a rather lively debate has been taking place in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region on the possibility of locating a firing range in the area for the training of F-18 pilots. As you know, the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region is home to CFB Bagotville, one of the three or four major strategic bases in Canada. By the way, this military base operates completely in French. One of the principal arguments advanced by those who oppose the plans for the firing range is that we can no longer afford to have the armed forces play a traditional role in Canada today. These people want to transform CFB Bagotville into a training base for UN peacekeeping missions. While their intentions may be good, there are many problems underlying this proposal. The fact remains, however, that the people in my region would be prepared to see Canadian and Quebec soldiers go out on peacekeeping missions and maybe even do a little more than that.
People do not like to see television images of civilians suffering, of bombings, deaths and other atrocities. When we
look at the situation in some parts of the world where suffering is widespread, not just Bosnia but Somalia and elsewhere, I think it would not take much for our people to support a more active role by the UN in peacekeeping operations than has traditionally been the case.
Foreign Affairs January 25th, 1994
The hon. member for Burnaby-Kingsway is to be commended for the quality of his report. The hon. member went over there and met the people in charge. I think it is very important that he should tell us what he saw. We often read about it in the newspapers, in accounts by officials and diplomats, but these do not have the same impact as a report by someone who shares our values, who went over there and observed and reflected on what he saw.
I appreciate the fact that he did this for us as well. I am also pleased to see him expand the scope of this debate, because since I have been following this debate, I notice there is a possibility that we will maintain our forces in Bosnia. I think the hon. member went a little further when he asked us to consider the means we will give our troops and the means the United Nations will give troops on a peacekeeping mission to Bosnia. There is the whole dimension of reinforcing the mandate and peacekeeping operations of the people over there.
I think that is an important dimension. It is not enough to stay. What we do over there has to be effective and in the interests of the people themselves, since it is for their sake that Canada and other western countries are making an effort to maintain peace in Bosnia.