Preston Manning

[Atlantic Groundfish Strategy, May 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, according to National Sea Products, 25 of its fish processing workers have left full time jobs for assistance under the Atlantic groundfish strategy. That is TAGS, the government's $1.9 billion temporary aid package for unemployed fishermen and unemployed plant workers. National Sea alerted the human resources development department of this development on February 16 but has yet to receive a response from the federal government.

My question for the minister is: How many of the 25 National Sea Products employees in Lunenburg were accepted into TAGS and what is the minister's response to this unsettling development?

[Bosnia And Croatia, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Reformers believe that Canadian peacekeepers are the best in the world and deserve to be supported where they are deployed. However the situation on the ground in Croatia and Bosnia has changed but the peacekeepers' mandate has not. There is no peace to keep.

Given that the Minister of National Defence vowed to withdraw our troops if their safety was threatened and if their ability to fulfil their mandate was in question, will the Prime Minister now order an immediate withdrawal of Canadian peacekeepers from the war zone in Bosnia and Croatia?

[Bosnia And Croatia, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in the Liberal red book they said they would not be camp followers with respect to foreign policy. That is certainly not the case in the former Yugoslavia.

Canada is contributing a disproportionate number of peacekeepers and yet we have little say in how they are deployed. We are not part of the UN contact group. Germany, which does not have one soldier involved in the peacekeeping mission, has more of a say than Canada.

How can the government justify being a major player in the peacekeeping effort while it remains a minor player in the decision making process?

[Bosnia And Croatia, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in the former Yugoslavia the Croatian army captures a rebel Serb enclave, Croatian Serbs then retaliate by bombing Zagreb, the Croatian capital, and Bosnian Serbs threaten to resume fighting and to ignore security council peacekeeping resolutions because they say the UN did not react strongly to the Croatian offensive.

Peace is nowhere on the horizon and there is growing danger that Canadian peacekeepers will become human shields in a full blown conflict.

My question is for the Prime Minister. What implications will this escalation of the conflict have on our peacekeepers' ability to fulfil their mandate and to deliver humanitarian aid in the former Yugoslavia?

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this advice is contained in ministerial briefing notes dated April 18, 1995. Many Canadians suspect from the minister's past behaviour that he does not read his briefing notes or follow the advice from his officials.

In the rash statements made by the minister with respect to self-government, do we not yet have another instance of an impetuous minister operating oblivious to the concerns of his officials and making rash statements publicly that he is advised against making privately?

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to hear the minister is dismantling the province of Manitoba.

The minister implies that the government is committed to the concept of self-government and resolving treaty issues. However at the same time the minister's officials are advising him in a slightly different direction.

I quote from the minister's leaked briefing notes which advise the minister to bring the high expectations of the aboriginal community to manageable levels so that the federal government will avoid being placed in a position of trying to explain why it is not keeping its red book promises.

My question is for the minister. Why is the minister in his public statements raising high expectations with respect to aboriginal self-government while being advised in private by his officials to reduce high expectations for self-government and to avoid red book promises?

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the government's red book contains many high-flown promises including one to proceed full steam ahead with the undefined concept of aboriginal self-government and generous interpretation of treaties.

Could the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development give us an update on what he and his department are doing to fulfil these promises?

[Seagram, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister will know from history books that the Liberal Party evolved from a group of reformers in pre-Confederation days who fought against the family compact, a closely knit group of elites, many of them related to each other, who subverted responsible government to protect and advance their personal and collective interests.

If the Prime Minister is really committed to integrity, surely he does not want to allow such a clique to develop around his government.

My question is very simple. How does the Prime Minister propose to prevent the formation and activities of this Liberal family compact, la clique du château libéral, from undermining the integrity of his administration?

[Seagram, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the question was about ethics and not the regulatory decision.

Power Corporation's DirecTv involving the Prime Minister's son-in-law just got the government to reverse a ruling of the CRTC for which the Minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible. Now the Bronfmans and Seagram board member Paul Desmarais who are closely related to the Liberal Party appear to be seeking the minister's help to get Investment Canada to leave them alone. We fear that the Minister of Canadian Heritage may be ending up as some sort of errand boy for an emerging Liberal family compact in the communications field.

What assurances can the Prime Minister give that the government's decisions in this rapidly developing communications field will not only be free from political influence but will also be free even from the appearance of political influence?

[Seagram, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as has already been referred to, the Seagram company acquired an 80 per cent interest in the movie giant MCA. Investment Canada may be required to make a ruling as to whether Seagram should be regarded as a Canadian company. While all of this is going on, the Minister of Canadian Heritage was apparently in Los Angeles being wined and dined by the principals to the deal.

Did the Prime Minister personally know about these meetings? Has he had the ethics commissioner determine that the minister has not once again put himself in a conflict of interest situation?