Jean Charest

[School Dropouts, September 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development, who claimed this afternoon to share or have concerns about the younger generation.

If that is so, I would like to know why his government cancelled the Stay-in-School program designed to fight the problem of school dropouts, a problem so important that his own colleague, the Minister of Finance, criticized the Quebec government last summer for not paying enough attention to the problem of school dropouts.

Why did his government cancel the Stay-in-School program then?

[The Late Jean-Luc Pepin, September 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as I heard members pay homage to Mr. Diefenbaker and Mr. Pepin today, I could not help thinking that these two men, although coming from different parts of the country and having had very different, maybe totally opposite experiences, if they were with us today would both speak with equal fervour about Canada, each with his own point of view, as some others members in this House would.

Who knows, maybe it is a coincidence that we should be paying homage to both these men on the same day. As it has been said, Mr. Pepin was an intellectual but he was also a very sensitive man. He had an exceptional political career; that proves it is not always necessary to be aggressive to succeed in politics and it is not true that the political environment is always a very harsh one. On the contrary. Jean-Luc Pepin has always acted with a lot of tact and respect for others. It characterized his political career.

I am happy to stress that fact today for the benefit of all those who wonder if political men and women are people who still believe in the values Mr. Pepin cherished.

As my colleague just mentioned, Mr. Pepin was entrusted with very difficult departments and very complex issues. I am thinking, among other things, about the rail subsidies and the Crows Nest rate, two issues that were never easy to deal with, needless to say. He always took on the responsibilities with an exemplary sense of duty. He did the same thing when he co-chaired the Pepin-Robarts Commission. Colleagues from our party who had the pleasure and privilege of working with Mr. Pepin remember him as an absolutely exceptional man.

Jean-Luc Pepin and John Diefenbaker whom we have honoured today are two Canadians who, even though they came from two very different backgrounds, if they were with us in this House today would agree wholeheartedly on one thing and that is about Canada and its future.

On behalf of the party I represent and the men and women who knew him in this House I want to pay a special tribute to him. I extend our condolences to his family. I know he will be missed.

[Right Hon. John Diefenbaker, September 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in listening to the Prime Minister, I could not help but note the irony of his remarks and his experience in having the privilege of sitting in this House with the Right Hon. John George Diefenbaker.

He draws his comments from his own personal memory, in contrast to myself who was not yet born when Mr. Diefenbaker became Prime Minister of Canada in 1957 with a minority government.

I draw my remarks today from the collective memory of Canadians who will look back on this great man, sometimes with questions but most of the time with great admiration.

It is important to note that John G. Diefenbaker did not get elected the first time he ran. He ran for office many times before being successful.

At the outset of his life, he knew that the path he would walk would be his own and he remained true to that destiny. He became Canada's first western Prime Minister, the first Prime Minister who was neither of British nor French descent.

He brought a unique and rare style of politics to Ottawa. He took the populist firebrand politics of western Canada and made it mainstream. He came to this place with very deep convictions of what Canada represented. Most of all, he had very deep convictions in regard to our rights and our responsibilities.

In this regard, he meets one of the lasting tests of history. He has left behind a legacy that is still with us today: Canada's first Bill of Rights was the work of John Diefenbaker.

He also brought to national politics a vision of northern Canada. He was the first national leader to understand what it meant for Canadians to embrace this great, massive land, what it represented in our minds and in our imaginations in its limitless potential that he went on to describe as being something that extended from "sea to sea to the northern sea".

John Diefenbaker's passion for Canadians and Canada helped to attract people from across the country to politics. I still meet people today who say to me that I am a Diefenbaker Tory. I am sure that colleagues in the House have from time to time met those samw people.

I want to quote today one of those Canadians who was influenced by John Diefenbaker, the Right Hon. Joe Clark. He said following Mr. Diefenbaker's funeral in 1979: "In a very real sense, John Diefenbaker's life was Canada. Over eight decades he spanned our history from the ox cart on the prairies to the satellite in space. He shaped much of that history, all of it shaped him".

What we may begin to appreciate today, 16 years after his death, is his impact on the way which we view ourselves as Canadians.

John Diefenbaker helped form Canada into a country where it is possible for a man from Ontario but raised, educated and formed in the prairies to be embraced by all Canadians. He illustrated what one man can do in a country like Canada.

There is no doubt that John Diefenbaker helped shape this country into a better, broader and prouder nation than the one before.

Mr. Diefenbaker had qualities and faults, but we have to give him credit for supporting, when he was Canada's Prime Minister, efforts to reach Canadians in order to promote individual freedoms. At the time, he was criticized for not supporting the Official Languages Act, but let us not forget that it is thanks to him if bilingualism was introduced in several Canadian institutions.

And while he did not agree with some specific initiatives, he was always convinced of the importance of protecting individual rights.

There is no doubt that John Diefenbaker helped shape Canada, as I said, into a better place. As leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada in 1995, I am very proud to be associated with him.

[Bosnia, June 21st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister and it relates to the situation in Bosnia.

As the House will be rising for the summer, the Prime Minister and the government will know Canadians are extremely concerned about what is happening to our soldiers in that part of the world. Given the fact that the House is rising, I would like to ask the government whether it would make a commitment to voluntarily brief members of the House of Commons on a regular basis, in particular members of the Standing Committee on National Defence, so we can be kept abreast of what is happening in this ongoing situation.

[The Late Robert Lloyd Wenman, June 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the longest serving members of Parliament, Mr. Bob Wenman, who passed away peacefully at his home on June 13.

Robert Lloyd Wenman was born in Maidstone, Saskatchewan, on June 19, 1940 and would have been exactly 55 years old today. He had a distinguished academic career, attending the University of Saskatchewan as well as several prominent American schools. He trained as a teacher at Saskatoon Teachers College.

He first entered politics in 1966 at the age of 25 years. He was elected at that time to the British Columbia legislature. He was re-elected in 1969 and after a short time was also an alderman in Surrey, British Columbia.

He was elected for the first time to the House of Commons in 1974 and re-elected at every election afterward until he decided to retire from politics in August 1993.

During his time as a member of Parliament he held several posts, including parliamentary secretary to the minister of defence, and chaired the Standing Committee on Labour, Employment and Immigration.

Outside the House of Commons he gave generously of his time to many causes, the most significant of which was undoubtedly the United Nations.

Mr. Wenman was a member of this place who very early on became interested in environment issues, issues that related to the global population. He was interested in these issues at a time when it was not fashionable. I remember in the 1984 Parliament he was among a few members at the time who pursued some key issues related to the environment, one of them being, as I subsequently discovered in reading some notes following his passing away, South Moresby in British Columbia. That was an issue he pursued with the previous government, that of Mr. Clark.

He was also very interested in issues that affected global parliamentarians and chaired that group for some time.

He left his mark in a conference held in British Columbia called Globe '92. He chaired the UN global parliamentarians on habitat group. A consequence of the 1992 conference was the creation of the International Centre for Sustainable Cities, now located in the city of Vancouver.

He was also very interested, in his constituents and in the issues of his own area, among them Fort Langley, which I know something of because of previous responsibilities. I can assure the House that he certainly pursued the interests of Fort Langley with a great deal of vigour.

As friends and colleagues reflect upon his great contribution, which spanned 30 years of public life in Canada, and as we think back to the significance of that contribution, may I refer to someone you have just referred to, Mr. Speaker, your predeces-

sor, Speaker John Fraser. Upon learning of his passing away, Speaker Fraser said this: "Bob Wenman took his own direction, clearly from his own star".

As we look back on his life may we encourage many other Canadians to follow the star of Bob Wenman.

In closing, I want to extend our very deep regrets to his wife of 32 years, Donna, and his four children, Jill, Kiven, Ken and Kraig.

[Infrastructure, May 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister concerning the disgusting and irresponsible diversion of public funds by the minister of public works for a highway called "death valley" where more than 40 people have died over the last nine years so that he could pave a tourist trail in his own riding.

The Minister of Transport twice said this was a decision made by the provincial government. I have in my hand the agreement signed by both governments which says clearly both governments must approve any such project or deal. Why is the Minister of Transport misrepresenting the facts?

[Highways, May 15th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for the usual reception.

On Saturday I met with a group of truckers in Nova Scotia concerning Highway 104. They were protesting the diversion of $26 million in funds from the federal-provincial agreement to upgrade the highway for safety reasons among others and to encourage interprovincial trade.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Given the fact that this diversion has been denounced by the auditor general of Nova Scotia as not conforming to the agreement signed between both governments, will the Prime Minister rein in his minister of public works so that he stops sending money to his own riding at the detriment of the safety of the highways in Nova Scotia?

[Pearson International Airport, April 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. It concerns an issue that he raised himself during question period about people being presumed innocent until they are found guilty.

My question concerns the Pearson airport affair and the fact that during the election campaign on this very matter the Prime Minister said: "The people have a right to know all the facts". Since then we have found that there is no finding of fact whatsoever to support any wrongdoing. We have since learned that he has had a personal involvement.

I would like to know from the Prime Minister and the government whether or not they will hold a public inquiry on this whole matter.

[Points Of Order, March 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my point of order relates to question period. During question period the hon. member for Kootenay West-Revelstoke referred to a document relative to the Pearson development issue. I wonder whether with the consent of the House we could ask the member to table the document in the House of Commons.

[Points Of Order, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I sent notice to the Minister of Transport in relation to an answer that he gave in the House during question period with respect to a document from which he clearly quoted in relation to the Pearson affair.

I quote from the French version of Beauchesne, the sixth edition, at page 158, item 4, paragraph 495:

(1) A minister is not at liberty to read or quote from a despatch or other state paper not before the House without being prepared to lay it on the table.