Preston Manning

[The Hon. Jean J. Charest, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to join the Prime Minister and other members of the House in extending best wishes to the hon. member for Sherbrooke as he departs the House for his new role in provincial politics in Quebec.

As parliamentarians we tend to look at decisions and changes of this nature from a political standpoint. But as all of us know, the people most directly affected by our career choices are our spouses and our families. So we also want to extend our best wishes to the hon. member's wife and children, to Michèle, to Amélie, Antoine and Alexandra, and to express the hope that this decision and change will open up new and exciting possibilities for them as well.

The hon. member for Sherbrooke has sometimes expressed the suspicion that Reformers dislike Tories, especially Tories from Quebec. I do not know where he got that idea. As he departs I want to take this opportunity to assure him that this is not the case. In fact, over the next few months we plan to be especially kind to Tories no matter where they are from and to inquire after their welfare and even to invite them home for dinner.

On a more serious note, the hon. member is leaving the leadership of the federal Progressive Conservative Party to join the Quebec Liberal Party for a principled reason. That reason is to create a stronger federalist alternative in Quebec and a better future for Quebec within Canada.

Federalists throughout the country, including the official opposition in the House, wish to offer our encouragement and best wishes to the hon. member as he undertakes this important task.

As the member for Sherbrooke will know, every defender and advocate of federalism in Quebec encounters the argument, invariably from sovereignists but also from sceptical and weary Quebec voters, that no one outside Quebec really wants to fundamentally change the federal system to make it work better.

If it will be of any help to the hon. member in laying that argument to rest, I want to assure him on behalf of official opposition members, all of whom come from west of the Manitoba-Ontario border, that Quebeckers who want to change the federal system, in particular to rebalance the powers, will find allies in our part of the country. If he assures Quebeckers that changes in the federation are coming he should know that we will do our part to ensure that change actually occurs.

To the hon. member for Sherbrooke, I say thank you, goodbye and good luck.

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to read some quotes about the hepatitis C tragedy.

Here is one: “Let's face it, if we are compassionate, we have to help these people”. Here is another: “When people are sick, you don't discriminate”. And this one: “We'll have to try to find a way. We're responsible”. Who said these things? The Prime Minister's backbenchers.

If the Prime Minister will not listen to the victims, if he will not listen to the premiers who are having second thoughts, if he will not listen to us, will he at least listen to his own members and change his mind on this decision?

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is a sign of courage to admit when one is wrong. It is a sign of leadership to change course when one is doing the wrong thing.

Today Quebec is talking about a no fault insurance system for victims of tainted blood. Premier Clark says he is not at all comfortable with the compensation package and is beginning to rethink his position. Other premiers and provincial governments will likely follow.

Does the Prime Minister want to be the last government leader in the country to admit he is wrong, or will he start to lead?

[Hepatitis C, April 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister assured the House that 13 governments were solidly behind his decision to abandon thousands of hepatitis C victims infected through the government's faulty blood system. Today it is starting to unravel. British Columbia Premier Glen Clark has had the courage to say “I am not at all comfortable with the compensation package”.

If Premier Clark is beginning to see that abandoning the sick is wrong, why can the Prime Minister not see it too?

[Hepatitis C, April 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard this cold-hearted rationalization before. It does not address the moral issue that is involved here.

There is no excuse for doing the wrong thing. There is no legal excuse. There is no administrative excuse. There is no accounting excuse. There is no political excuse.

I ask the Prime Minister again why he will not do the right thing and compensate all the victims of this tragedy.

[Hepatitis C, April 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, this is not an administrative issue. This is a moral issue. It is morally wrong for the government to abandon these victims of its own negligence.

The Prime Minister is concerned about his place in history. He wants the millennium fund to be a monument to himself and to his administration, but if he allows this decision to stand he will have his monuments all right, 40,000 of them in the graveyards of the country.

I ask him again. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and compensate all the victims of poisoned blood?

[Hepatitis C, April 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, tens of thousands of innocent Canadians contracted hepatitis C when they received transfusions from the government's blood system. Many are slowly dying.

The Prime Minister has authorized the health minister to compensate some of these victims but he has told the health minister to abandon the rest. He has created a two tier system for dealing with victims of government negligence.

Why will the Prime Minister not do the right thing and compensate all victims of poisoned blood?

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister adds insult to injury. The health minister went before the cabinet today to ask for $100 million to compensate sports teams and jazz musicians for lost cigarette ads. One hundred million dollars from the health minister for car racing, comedy clubs, and tennis tournaments.

How can the Liberal cabinet even consider spending $100 million on racing cars when thousands of hepatitis C victims remain uncompensated?

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I directed my question to the Prime Minister for a reason. We have heard the lawyer's answer. We have heard the accountant's answer. We have heard the answers of people who put limited liability ahead of human suffering.

In his report Justice Horace Krever said that Canada has a moral obligation to compensate all these victims. A moral obligation. I ask the Prime Minister, is he now saying that Justice Krever was wrong and we do not have a moral obligation to compensate all victims?

[Hepatitis C, March 31st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, on February 20 of this year the Minister of Health was asked about compassion. He was asked if he would extend a hand to the thousands of Canadians dying from hepatitis C in their blood. He said “This government will not walk away from its responsibilities”. But he broke that promise. The Liberals are now leaving thousands of Canadians to die without help.

I ask the Prime Minister, what would he tell these thousands of abandoned victims to do, just go away and die quietly? Is that his position?