Jean Chrétien

[Kanesatake Reserve, March 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the statement was made by Mr. Peltier. I do not think that any firm commitment was made in this respect by the Minister of Indian Affairs on behalf of the federal government.

[Maintaining Peacekeepers In The Former Yugoslavia, March 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we are over there under UN supervision, and we regularly discuss with UN leaders to determine where our troops should be deployed. These discussions are going on all the time. The troops are now in two locations. For the time being we will stay there, but, as the minister said, we may be asked to move and replace troops at another location. We have had similar rotations in the past, and as the minister pointed out yesterday, there may be more in the future.

[Maintaining Peacekeepers In The Former Yugoslavia, March 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the government has decided to maintain Canada's troops in the former Yugoslavia in the same configuration in which they are now. Every time changes occur, either in Bosnia or Croatia, there may be changes in troop deployment, and that is what the minister pointed out. However, Canada's presence in the former Yugoslavia will be maintained for the next six months.

[Turkey, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I will certainly look into that possibility. It might be a good occasion for the ministerial delegation to raise the issue of human rights with the government when it is there. One way or the other, I would like the question of human rights to be raised with the Government of Turkey.

Perhaps one way is to cancel the delegation or the other way is to send the delegation with a mandate to talk about it.

[National Defence, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has answered those questions. Ambassador Doyle was very well known in the public service. It is very difficult for a minister to presume that somebody knows somebody else in the department if they do not know them personally. Hundreds of thousands of people work in the government. Even in my own office it is very difficult to know if someone knows someone else.

When this came to light, an investigation was undertaken with the other members of the commission to determine whether she was qualified. There was consultation as to whether it was an impediment. We sought advice from outside and everyone said there was no impediment. However, Ms. Doyle decided for the

good of the inquiry to withdraw her name. It is sad because she is a very competent person.

[National Defence, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the inquiry involves a lot of people. I am not the type of person who finds someone guilty until there is proof.

I know Mr. Fowler and a lot of people in the Department of National Defence and the armed forces who have been involved in this problem. I am not presuming anybody has done anything wrong until the inquiry is over.

As far as Mr. Fowler is concerned, I have known him a long time. He has been an excellent public servant. He has rendered great service in many departments. He was the deputy minister of defence. He will testify like anyone else. I am not about to cast doubt on the character of any person who works very faithfully for the Government of Canada.

[Fisheries, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we have taken rather dramatic measures so far, but our goal is to find a solution through negotiation and preserve the species on the Grand Banks.

I think that our policy meets the support of all Canadians and we intend to pursue our efforts until we have the assurance that these fish stocks will be preserved for future generations.

[Fisheries, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we are still negotiating with the European Community on this issue. We have clearly indicated to the European Community that our intention was to develop a fisheries protection plan for this area. Our goal is to protect the environment and we will press our point.

We want to protect fish stocks for future generations. That is what is a stake and I think that progress has been made in the negotiations. We are urging the European Community to make sure that all vessels comply with international laws and refrain from harvesting fish that should not be harvested. Once an agreement has been reached on this subject, I am sure the problem will disappear.

I should tell the House that, when I spoke with Mr. Santer, the President of the European Commission, who took the initiative of phoning me yesterday, we talked about the need to give top priority to settling the conservation problem.

[Burundi, March 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, last week, I had a chance to discuss this kind of problem and the Francophonie with the Secretary General of the Francophonie.

We discussed the possibility for the Francophonie to get more involved in political problems, for instance in Rwanda and Burundi, more or less like we used the Commonwealth to try and find a solution to the problems in South Africa. We want the countries of the Francophonie to be able to intervene in circumstances like these, and I am entirely satisfied with the way the Minister of Foreign Affairs is handling this matter.

[Burundi, March 28th, 1995]

-and who took the trouble to prepare for Question Period, when I ask him to give information on behalf of the government, I think members should respect these people who are parliamentary secretaries and have certain responsibilities. They have information on the issue at hand.

In Burundi, as in the case of the country next door, Canada has always made a point of staying, whatever the circumstances. When all other countries had left Rwanda, only Canada stayed behind. We have always maintained a visible and occasionally unique presence, in the circumstances. In Burundi, we are now trying to avoid the worst. I think the information the House was given by the parliamentary secretary was very properly expressed and accurately described the government's position.