Preston Manning

[José Mendoza, October 5th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this is not just one case. It is typical of many cases and the issue deserves an answer from the Prime Minister.

The federal government has spent over a quarter of a million dollars supporting the so-called right of Mr. Mendoza to drag out his stay in Canada. Now the privacy commissioner has launched a taxpayer funded inquiry to determine whether Mr. Mendoza's right to privacy has been infringed upon by immigration officials, the media and the member for Fraser Valley West.

I ask the Prime Minister, compared with the hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent on Mr. Mendoza's behalf, how much is being spent to repair the lives of Mr. Mendoza's victims.

[José Mendoza, October 5th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, last year a government official advised Tasha Peirson to stay a sexual assault charge against José Mendoza in exchange for his deportation.

It was the government's policies that then allowed Mendoza back into the country and reapply for refugee status. It is the government that is paying for the process that Mr. Mendoza is using to stay in Canada. Yesterday it was a government official who admitted that the immigration department was responsible for his escape.

I ask the Prime Minister, since it is the federal government that has been responsible for the mishandling of this case from start to finish, what responsibility will the government now assume for the safety and shattered lives of Mr. Mendoza's victims?

[Immigration, September 22nd, 1994]

Does the minister have any proposal for getting to the root of this problem?

[Immigration, September 22nd, 1994]

Perhaps the minister is out of depth on parliamentary procedure, Mr. Speaker.

We are talking about depth, Mr. Speaker. The real reason, and the minister knows this, for the difficulty in keeping illegal immigrants and foreign criminals out of Canada is that the Canadian courts ruled some time ago that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to anyone who is physically present in Canada regardless of how they got here or their criminal defects.

Surely this is not what the Parliament of Canada nor the legislatures intended. They did not intend that the charter would undermine the ability of Canada to protect the integrity of its own boundaries.

We can think of two ways to rectify this situation.

[Immigration, September 22nd, 1994]

My question, Mr. Speaker, for the minister is this. When is the minister of immigration going to assume full responsibility for immigration policy?

[Immigration, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the system does not work. When the minister denigrates the critic from Calgary Northeast he should remember that he is a 20-year veteran of the Calgary police department who with his colleagues has spent years dealing with the defects of the department's processes and the failures of its processes.

His perspective on this issue is not an academic or an interest group perspective, it is a street level perspective to which the minister should pay more attention.

The minister's department used to handle all dimensions of immigration including the refugee dimension. Since the quasi-judicial IRB was set up and populated by members of the immigration industry the minister denies responsibility for the defects of the-

[Immigration, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that while the Prime Minister and the Bloc were arguing about the cost of this referendum and the bill from Quebec, the total debt of the country just went up by a million dollars.

The minister of immigration has been giving tough talk and proposals to the House that purport to tighten up the loopholes that allow criminal immigrants to remain in Canada. At the same time his department has been giving the Immigration and Refugee Board guidelines that specifically expedite the refugee claims of such dubious characters as Algerian double agents, members of the former Ethiopian dictatorship and guerrillas from Latin America.

The minister gives the appearance of shutting the door to undesirable immigrants on the one hand, while allowing the IRB to open it right back up again.

How does the minister plan to resolve this glaring contradiction in the implementation of immigration policy?

[The Economy, September 21st, 1994]

I read the papers, Mr. Speaker, but I am more conscious of the fact that the government is spending $110 million more per day than it takes in, and a lot of other people recognize that as well.

If the Prime Minister cannot answer this question with clarity and resolve uncertainty in the resource industry perhaps he can say something that would calm the uncertainty among RRSP investors.

Yesterday the Prime Minister would not give a straight answer on whether the government is contemplating a raid on RRSP contributions. These investors are already organizing themselves to oppose an expected tax grab while we wait for an answer from the government on how many more dollars will seek a safer haven elsewhere.

My question is for the finance minister if the Prime Minister cannot answer. Will he clear the air on this issue by stating categorically that he is not planning a tax raid on RRSP contributions?

[The Economy, September 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister apparently has no idea of the uncertainty that these non-answers and political answers create with respect to investors and taxpayers.

Many resource companies, particularly in western Canada, are starting to make money for the first time in a number of years. They are in a position of trying to decide whether to invest those profits in Canada or take them elsewhere out of the reach of the government.

Since the Prime Minister, given his track record on this issue and the uncertainty, creates only more uncertainty by responding, will the finance minister clear the air by stating categorically that he is not planning any tax increases on the resource industry?

[The Economy, September 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal premier of New Brunswick has expressed the view that Canada will sink into a lower economic order if the federal government does not come to grips with the debt problem.

He says that the efforts of the provinces to control their spending are being held back by the federal government which has yet to show a clear demonstrable commitment to fiscal management that would inspire international investors.

The Prime Minister will not heed advice from members on this side with respect to this subject. He does not heed advice from the taxpayers and the investment community. Perhaps he will heed the words of his Liberal colleagues and provide a clear demonstrable commitment to sound fiscal management.

Will the Prime Minister publicly direct the finance minister to reduce the deficit, not by raising taxes but by further spending reductions?