Dick Harris

[Yukon First Nations Self-Government Act, June 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member opposite.

It is important to point out that no one in this House surely is going to say that the native peoples of Canada should be denied any type of rights, certainly not, and no one has said that today.

What we have commented on is the extension of rights exclusive to the native peoples under Bill C-34, exclusivity of rights not applicable to other citizens of Canada, rights that would be available to them under their own Constitution and in fact outside the Constitution Act of Canada.

Nowhere in this bill is there a reference that the Constitution Act of Canada would be supreme over any provisions of this bill. To suggest that there are people in this House who would want to deny rights to native peoples is a misstatement for certain.

[Pearson International Airport, June 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. minister for his answer.

I would like to ask him when he is making his decision as to the release of these documents if he would include as interested parties the Canadian taxpayers who are actually going to be footing the bill for this.

Will he include in his decision of releasing the documents that they are very concerned about the way this deal is put together and the amounts of moneys that are going to be paid out if any? They demand to have an answer and an assurance that this type of deal will never again happen.

[Pearson International Airport, June 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

On June 6 my colleague from Simcoe Centre asked the government if all documents related to the Pearson airport deal would be released to the public. He was promised that the Minister of Transport would respond to that question as soon as possible.

I would like to ask if the hon. minister would respond to that question today.

[Bloc Quebecois, June 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to some members in the House who sound as if they have been co-opted by Bloc Quebecois strategy.

The Bloc appears to have successfully softened its separatist image in the eyes of some members. During debate, question period, and statements some members prefer to use the words sovereignty or sovereignist rather than the more appropriate words separation or separatist.

I call on each and every member of the House who clearly opposes the destruction of Canada to demonstrate their clear understanding of the Bloc agenda by hereafter referring to the Bloc as separatists.

Let us send a clear message to the Bloc that their mushy terminology is not fooling anyone in this House or in Canada.

[Young Offenders Act, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, to enlighten the hon. member who just spoke, in an electronic vote to ensure there is one vote per caller, it is necessary to give a number which identifies that vote. Once the vote has been cast that number can no longer be used, just in case the hon. member was misinformed about the purpose of the PIN number. It is not an infringement on privacy. It is so the votes cannot be stacked or that multiple voting by one person cannot take place.

The member opposite is under no obligation certainly to cast his vote or take part in this type of a constituency poll. Perhaps that may be more suitable to the member's wishes because this government has for so long simply closed the doors, kept the public out and made decisions behind closed doors. I would like to ask the member if that is his preference, of making decisions in government that would affect the people behind closed doors without input from the public.

[Petitions, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the second duly certified petition which I support states that section 241 of the Criminal Code of Canada states: "Everyone who counsels a person to commit suicide or aids or abets a person to commit suicide, whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment of a term not exceeding 14 years".

The humble petitioners therefore pray that Parliament not repeal or amend section 241 of the Criminal Code in any way and to uphold the Supreme Court of Canada decision of September 30, 1993 to disallow assisted suicide, euthanasia.

[Petitions, June 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to present two petitions today, both of which I would like to say that I personally support.

In the first one, the petitioners are saying: "Wherefore the undersigned, your petitioners humbly pray upon Parliament to enact legislation that would give protection in law to pre-born human beings and, as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray". There are several names on the petitions.

[Health, May 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Health. I sent her the letter for her eyes only. She has the letter.

Ministers of the crown have stood in the House and have stated over and over again that the health care system is based on a principle of universality. Stout defenders of this principle who ignore the fact that Canadians like Mrs. Lopp are not getting the health care they need offer no hope.

Does the minister realize that the people who wait in these ever growing lines for health care will eventually hold her and the government responsible? When will the minister come out of hiding-

[Health, May 11th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health and has been inspired by Mrs. Helga Lopp of Prince George, B.C.

Mrs. Lopp has been waiting over two years for a vital operation to cure a life-threatening condition. Yet, because of cutbacks in the operating room assignment times, the one doctor capable of performing the operation has a backlog of over 300 patients.

The minister has repeatedly said in the House that the health care system in the country is healthy. I do not believe it. Reformers do not believe it. Certainly Mrs. Lopp does not believe it.

Is the Minister of Health prepared to stand in the House today and acknowledge that the Canadian health system is not well and that bold measures must be taken to restore the health care system so that it works in Canada?

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claimsettlement Act, May 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I said in my earlier statement that the response that we do not understand the aboriginal people or their concerns is a standard response when someone dares to criticize any form of agreement or any form of structure that is proposed within the aboriginal and federal government negotiations.

Perhaps the hon. member is right. Perhaps I do not understand or possess the intimate knowledge of the aboriginal people that he may have. That is probably quite natural, seeing that I am not an aboriginal person. What I do understand is this. The government and even the aboriginal people themselves have no clear definition of what the outcome of aboriginal self-government would be.

We have asked that question in British Columbia. It has been asked in almost every province. It has been asked in the House. I asked it of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and he had no answer to that question. That is the gist of what this is all about today. This agreement will provide for an immediate settlement of sorts but still opens the door for further extensive, complex negotiations of aboriginal self-government. There is no clear map. There is no clear direction. There is no clear agenda for where these negotiations will go or what they will end up with.

That is like starting a journey in a totally unknown territory and hoping you get to where you are going.