Jean Chrétien

[The Deficit, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the member will have his answer in reading the document.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, frankly, this is an exaggeration. The decision not to allow substitutes was taken last December. There was a Liberal government in power at the time, and I wish this had not changed. I did not pick the election date, and if the premier of Quebec is unable to leave Quebec for a few days to come to China with us, then Quebecers should tell themselves that we will be ably represented by Quebec businessmen and by a

member from Quebec who also happens to be the Prime Minister of Canada.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, last December the provincial premiers and myself reached an amicable agreement to work together. I invited them to come with me. Several of them said: "We would like to, but we cannot". Some of them called me to ask if they could send a representative and I told them they could not, because it had been agreed that the heads of each of these governments would be attending. So, I was not seeking confrontation. It is a Canadian delegation; the premiers have been invited and those who can are coming, and those who cannot are not.

I have been accused of provoking the provincial government, and yet the Minister of Finance, for example, is looking for ways to replace the GST and is seeking the co-operation of the provinces. But the government of Quebec has already said that it will not take part. When the Minister of Natural Resources, at the request of members of the Bloc Quebecois, attempts to do something for Canada's forestry development program, the Quebec Minister of Forestry refuses to attend the forestry ministers' conference in New Brunswick. Yet some very nice people show a willingness to work with the federal government. Last week, the premier of Quebec said that his sole objective in the months to come was to derail the federal machine.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

I would be delighted to represent the interests of the Bloc Quebecois as well.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we are not excluding anybody. It is a federal initiative. I am leading the delegation. I have offered provincial premiers to come with me.

At the beginning there were very few who thought they could come along, but enthusiasm has developed over the months with a growing number of business people coming from all over Canada. There is a large delegation of Quebec business people coming who have confidence. They want to be with me to work and create jobs for the people of Quebec. I am sorry the premier of Quebec and the premier of Ontario cannot come. They are not obliged to be there because I am going there representing all Canadians.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition should explain that the trip will involve only five or six days in China, not two weeks. After that, I am going to Hong Kong, then to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Council conference in Indonesia and, finally, to Vietnam. The business part of the trip is the visit to China, which will take three or four days. This is to create jobs. I am prepared to co-operate with all governments. As for the money we paid last week, we made sure that the promise made to Quebec was a genuine promise. I made that decision very carefully.

The Leader of the Opposition should have the courtesy to rise in the House and thank me for reversing the decision of the previous government, which did not want to pay. This was a case of Mr. Mulroney having said something in private but never having mentioned it, nor did Ms. Campbell, to the Conservative government at the time. I dealt with the problem. I am not afraid of how English Canada will react, on the contrary. All Canadian editorial writers approved what we did, with very few exceptions. The rest felt that we made the right decision. If people want to criticize me for being careful to avoid turning this into a controversy, I accept that criticism, but I can never be too careful with taxpayers money.

[International Trade, October 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, when we discussed these plans in December among first ministers, it was decided we would work together, and the Premiers said it was a very good idea for those who were able to do so to accompany me on this trip.

At the time, we thought about three or four would be coming along. Since then, there has been a lot of interest from the business community, and there will be a large number of people on this trip, including quite a few from Quebec.

During the summer, some Premiers who thought they would not be able to come had asked to be replaced. They were told that those who could would come along and as for the others, it was just too bad. In any case, this is a Canadian delegation that will include a large number of business people. There will be twice as many as we had planned. Canada, Quebec and the other provinces will be represented by the business people on the trip and by the Prime Minister of Canada, who also happens to be a Quebecer.

[Privilege, September 30th, 1994]

I have nothing to add, Mr. Speaker. I clearly related everything that happened during Question Period. There can be differences of opinion between one side of the House and the other. It is a matter for debate and not a substantive issue.

I admitted earlier that I talked about this with Mr. Mulroney. I said it clearly, and he confirmed to me that he would send a letter to make things as clear as possible. Read the letter and you will see. He explained to me what had happened and I said that I would wait for his written reply before stating that I was happy with all the answers. I took every precaution to protect the public interest by ensuring that there were other witnesses.

I am being criticized for being overly cautious. It is a matter for debate. Perhaps I should have been careless. Perhaps in the future I should follow the hon. member's advice of not thinking things through before acting, as the Bloc Quebecois would like me to do. I did everything not to embarrass anyone and give half-answers because in a conversation like this we talk about many things. As I see it, I said that I had not received Mr. Mulroney's answer because he told me he would send a written reply. I preferred to rely on his written answer rather than on a verbal discussion. That is what I clearly said here in this House. I was waiting for his final answer, which arrived within 48 hours as promised.

[1992 Referendum, September 30th, 1994]

Someone said "bankrupt", but I was going to say "totally confused". They are so disappointed that we paid.

[1992 Referendum, September 30th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Bloc Quebecois is totally-