Jean Chrétien

[Referendums, April 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I prefer to talk about something that is fact. Quebecers have twice decided to remain in Canada. That is what we ought to talk about.

[Referendums, April 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the problem was not raised by the ministers. The problem was raised by the premier of Quebec this past Sunday, when he wanted to change the subject from Bill 101. He raised this completely hypothetical question and the minister responded.

As for my statement, I have nothing to take back. I have always said here, I took a two-week break and then the Bloc leader quit, but I always said and I repeat, we will not break up the country with a very tight majority vote after a judicial recount.

[Referendums, April 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is anything to add to what the Minister of Justice has said. A referendum is always a consultation of the people. When there is a referendum, the laws of the country in question must be respected, first and foremost. There have been two referendums. If there is another, we shall see, but for the moment other things are in the works, and I do not know when there will be one. When there is, we shall see.

For the moment, however, the premier of Quebec says he wants an election first and a referendum later, and he is not prepared to say much more about it. Nor am I. In due course, however, as I have always said, things will have to be made very clear to avoid confusion.

[Plutonium Importation, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, what we want is to get rid of the plutonium. We want to see it used up, and we will see if it is possible.

The Americans and the Russians came to us because we have developed a unique technology, the Candu reactor. Other experiments will be done in other countries. However, since Candu uses heavy water and natural uranium, this system would be the best to get rid of the plutonium.

Obviously, if this cannot be done safely, without damage to the environment, it will certainly not be done, but we agreed to study the possibility. If we can do it, the Americans and the Russians would be very happy. In fact, the Americans are ready to pay us to dispose of it. But if we cannot do so safely, with no harm to the ecology, we will not go ahead.

[Plutonium Importation, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we accepted the invitation from the Americans and the Russians to see whether we could use up their surplus plutonium, because they are about to dismantle missiles, which leaves plutonium to dispose of.

As illegal trade in this element is also very dangerous, they have asked us if we could consider using up the plutonium to get rid of it. We replied that if we can do so safely, without damaging the ecology or creating health problems for anyone, that would be a contribution that Canada could make towards peace. Because if the plutonium is gone, then there is no longer a risk of it being traded illegally, among other things.

We therefore agreed to do a feasibility study. We are also told that, in the form of MOX fuel, it can be transported with no risk. We are now conducting studies, and if it is completely safe, of course, we will be prepared to help with dismantling the missiles, thus reducing the risk of nuclear war.

[Goods And Services Tax, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I believe I was right a minute ago when I said she was in grade seven. She does not know how to add. She should look at page 111 of the red book. It is all there and it is very simple; all the cuts we said we were to make and all the programs we were to implement.

She will be surprised but she will probably have to wait until she is in grade nine to understand.

[Goods And Services Tax, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, she has said she does not intend to resign because we are meeting the commitments in the red book, and she campaigned on the red book.

If we want to quote what people said in the past, after what the hon. member for Beaver River did yesterday, I quote what she said in 1991 or 1992: "The behaviour in the Chamber just drives me wild. I taught grade eight for too many years to think this sort of behaviour is cute". I guess she is now in grade seven.

[Goods And Services Tax, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is reiterating what is in the red book, so there is no problem. We drew up a detailed political program. We worked on it for months and months. We chose a text we wrote ourselves. There is no discrepancy between the red book, myself and the Minister of Finance, because the member who worked with me on the red book is now the Minister of Finance.

[Goods And Services Tax, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have just said we would have preferred a simpler system, more easily and quickly put in place. This is what the Minister of Finance has said as well.

I am not about to apologize, when I can rise in the House, pick up a text-one I have read here seven or eight times-in which we said the solution was a tax harmonized with the provinces, which would bring in the same revenues, because the government cannot afford to lose revenues right now.

This is just what we told our fellow Canadians we would do. I make no apologies for doing what is in the red book.

[Goods And Services Tax, April 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the Minister of Finance and I are in disagreement. The Minister of Finance is carrying out the Liberal Party's program, as it appears on page 22 of the red book in English and on page 20 in French.

He said, obviously, and I agree with him, that he would have preferred we proceed more quickly. He thought a system could be set up right away and more easily. However, we have chosen to go the route of co-operating with the provinces.

At this point we have the agreement of four provinces, and we hope that the other provinces will join with us, because it will ease things for consumers. For companies and people in business, it will be a lot easier, and we will have a harmonized tax all across the country.

I think the hon. Leader of the Opposition should read the statement by the Quebec finance minister, Mr. Landry, on this subject.