1987-06-10

Mrs. Lucie Pepin (Outremont):: Mr. Speaker, today, the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women published an important document, under the title: Battered But Not Beaten, an investigation of wife battering in Canada.
In this document, a sequel to the book on battered women published in 1980, we find women of all classes and all ages. In 1985, the majority of women in transition houses were young mothers. Fourteen per cent were under 20. Fifty per cent were between 21 and 34. More teenagers and pregnant women who have been battered by their partners are coming to these transition houses.
Many of these women are poor: 43 per cent were living on an annual income of less than $10,000, while 32 per cent had a family income of $10,000 to $20,000.
We also find immigrant, native, disabled, teenage and rural women in this group as well as women living on military bases.
Much has been done since 1980 and much remains to be done. A number of recommendations are directed to the Government, such as increasing personnel and funding for shelters for battered women, including special assistance for child care, the need for the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney) and the Minister responsible for the Status of Women to heighten the awareness of the Members of this House, and creating special shelters for batterers. The husbands or boyfriends, not the women, should have to leave the family home. And there is special emphasis on the need for research on the cause and dynamics of family violence and on the connection between violence, alcoholism and pregnancy.
In concluding, I want to say that battered women who choose to stay with their families do not do so out of weakness. In fact, the opposite is true, and this document praises their courage, saying that it takes extraordinary strength of character to stay in that kind of situation.


HIGHWAYS
Mr. John Gormley (The Battlefords-Meadow Lake):: Mr. Speaker, I have risen many times in this House to talk about the Yellowhead Highway which runs through Saskatchewan from Manitoba to British Columbia. It is considered, by those of us who live along it, to be the northern Trans-Canada route when travelling across the country. I have pressed many times for federal recognition of this highway and federal funding.
I was delighted when the Government of Canada agreed to a cost-shared $100 million upgrading of the Yellowhead Highway. I was particularly pleased when, just recently, we concluded the Canada-Saskatchewan-Yellowhead agreement involving $22 million of the $100 million to be spent in my home province. Some $15 million of that $22 million will be spent in the general area of The Battlefords-Meadow Lake. It will involve, for example, widening and enlarging the underpass near Borden. There is also a commitment to twin the Yellowhead between Saskatoon and The Battlefords and the first leg will begin shortly.
The Canada-Saskatchewan-Yellowhead agreement is very real evidence of co-operative federalism as the Government of Canada and the Government of Saskatchewan have committed themselves to working together. I would like to thank our Government and particularly the Progressive Conservative Members of Parliament who helped me to make this a reality.
* *
*


REFUGEES
Mr. Dan Heap (Spadina):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, June 9, was the forty-eighth anniversary of the black day in 1939 when the ship St. Louis, with 930 Jews seeking refuge from Hitler, was turned away by the Government of Canada, so that many of them died in Hitler's Holocaust. Yesterday Canadians in a

June 10, 1987
5, O. 21
dozen cities said: "Once is too often". They put on black armbands and publicly demanded that the present Government of Canada withdraw Bill C-55, the Bill which would do to Central American and other refugees what the Government of 48 years ago did to Jewish refugees.
In Nanaimo people joined a fast and public protest. In Calgary, Winnipeg and Saskatoon all heads of churches fasted one day and put on black armbands. MLA Anne Smart addressed a rally of Amnesty and the Open Door Society of Saskatoon. The entire caucuses of the Manitoba and Alberta N DP joined the one-day fast and are wearing black armbands. In St. John's, Newfoundland, and Halifax, Nova Scotia, churches, Amnesty, Oxfam and CUSO are petitioning residents against Bill C-55. Every Member of Parliament has been sent a letter by the Montreal Coalition for Refugees asking each of us to join in demanding withdrawal of Bill C-55, the anti-refugee Bill.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Mr. Don Ravis (Saskatoon East):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my deepest concern over the reduction of 55 employee positions in Saskatoon and another 47 positions in Melville by Canadian National.
I clearly understand the need for an efficient rail service capable of remaining competitive with other forms of transport. I also recognize the effects automation and modernization will have on the CN workforce. However, 1 cannot overlook the far-reaching effects this shuffle of 102 CN employees will have on these two Saskatchewan communities.
Some of these employees will opt for early retirement. However, most will have little choice but to relocate to Winnipeg where CN is centralizing its workforce. Saskatchewan generated $459 million in major commodities for CN last year. In fact 16 million tonnes, or 18 per cent of all goods carried on CN in Canada in 1986, originated in the Province of Saskatchewan. In light of these figures you would think CN, as a good corporate citizen, would take into account the effects these actions will have on one of its major revenue contributors.
I intend to organize a meeting of senior officials from CN and representatives from the federal, provincial and municipal Governments in order that an amiable solution can be reached reflecting the interests of these two communities and CN's commitment to serve Saskatchewan.


MINES AND MINING
Mr. Dave Dingwall (Cape Breton-East Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, in 1937 George Orwell vividly described the life of a coal-miner in these words: "In the western world the coalminer is second in importance only to the man who ploughs the soil". He went on to say that most of the things one imagines in hell are there; heat, noise, confusion, darkness, foul air and, above all, unbearably cramped space.
Tomorrow, June 11, 1987, is Miners' Memorial Day in Cape Breton. We are reminded of the important role coal-mining has played in the history of Cape Breton. Although many mining methods have changed since Orwell's time, the unique character of the miner, the courage and strength that Orwell so well described, have not.
The devastating fire at No. 26 Colliery in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, brings home once again just how dangerous a profession coal-mining is and how the people of Cape Breton have continually had to struggle against adversity. As we turn back the pages of history we remember the tragic loss of 69 men in 1917 in the methane gas explosion which took place in the Lingan mine, and the explosion in 1979 in Glace Bay. We especially remember the origins of Miners' Memorial Day which arose from a six-year series of protests culminating in the strike of 1925 and the death of William Davis.
We can be proud of the coal-mining tradition of Cape Breton and at this time we remember the contributions of all miners and all their families and, above all, we honour those who lost their lives in those tragic accidents.


HISTORIC EVENTS
Mr. Andrew Witer (Parkdale-High Park):: Mr. Speaker, this evening the fifteenth Ecumenical Memorial Service to commemorate the genocides and continued sufferings of the Baltic and Ukrainian nations will be held at the Notre Dame Basilica in Ottawa, followed by a candle-light vigil at the National War Memorial. Similar ceremonies will be held throughout Canada this weekend.
Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians, together with other captive east European nations, gather each year to commemorate the Baltic Holocaust and the millions of Ukrainians who fell victim to Soviet oppression. The service provides an opportunity to reflect upon the continued persecution and suppression of freedom, national cultures, religions and languages by the Soviet regime.
I urge all my colleagues in this House to join eastern European communities this evening and, by our presence,
June 10, 1987

demonstrate our commitment to the universal principles of freedom, liberty and justice.


REVENUE CANADA
Mr. Simon de Jong (Regina East):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday details of a secret government report which investigated the theft of confidential tax information on 16 million Canadians were made public in The Globe and Mail. This damning report is a sorry tale of sloppy and lax security, of unsupervised access to offices containing confidential tax information. Incredibly there was an absence of security screening of any type for employees having access to personal tax information.
The bad news does not end there. The report also concluded that officials in the Minister's Department should have foreseen these serious security problems at Revenue Canada long before the theft of the tax information.
In light of this telling and depressing report the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. MacKay) should now admit that his Department was negligent in protecting sensitive tax information that millions of Canadians entrusted to the Government. It must never happen again.


LABOUR RELATIONS
Mr. Gabriel Fontaine (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to welcome the National Citizens' Coalition spokesmen to Parliament Hill today.
The NCC is rallying support for Ontario Professor Merv Lavigne who for a number of years has been questioning the use of the Rand formula union dues for purposes other than the labour movement and collective bargaining.
After campaigning for several years Mr. Lavigne got a favourable ruling from the Supreme Court of Ontario on July 4, 1986.
Mr. Speaker, most of the money is used illegally by the socialist party across the aisle. So far I have made a number of interventions requesting the socialist party to enlighten us on the source and legality of its funding. Mum is the word.
At 3 p.m. today, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Lavigne will be in the hall of the Centre Block to explain his principle concerning the use of workers' money to Hon. Members and parliamentary reporters.


*S. O. 21 TRANSPORT INDUSTRIAL CLOSURES-EMPLOYMENT-REQUEST THAT GOVERNMENT RELEASE FUNDS
Mr. Jean-CIaude Malepart (Montreal-Sainte-Marie):: Mr. Speaker, in one month, six companies have announced they are closing their plants and laying off more than 2,000 employees in Quebec, mainly in the Greater Montreal area: Simmons, Coleco, McIntyre, Metallurgie generale, and Taran and Murdochville.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, it was announced today that the shipyard industry is experiencing its worst year in the past 25 as far as loss of employment is concerned, and the same applies to industries involved in railway car construction.
Mr. Speaker, I would urge all Conservative Members in this House to put pressure on the Government and the Minister of Transport to release funds to save over 2,000 jobs in Quebec.


FRIENDSHIP FESTIVAL '87 FORT ERIE, ONT-BUFFALO, N.Y. CELEBRATIONS
Mr. Girve Fretz (Erie):: Mr. Speaker, I want to make you aware of a special event that will take place in Erie riding this summer. It is Friendship Festival '87.
Friendship Festival '87 will exemplify nearly 175 years of peaceful and friendly co-existence between two communities, Fort Erie, Ontario, and Buffalo, New York. But more than the celebration of two communities, Friendship Festival '87 will symbolically highlight the warm and mutual amity that has existed between Canadian and American peoples for generations. These celebrations, as you might expect, will occur between July 1, Canada Day, through July 4, Independence Day, 1987.
What a celebration. What a party. Activities and events galore. Fun for everyone! Visit the tall ships. See the old planes by the Canadian Warplane Heritage Aircraft. Watch the CF-18 jet perform tactical manoeuvres. Behold the pageantry of a military tattoo, including precision marching and displays of historical arms from the 1812 period. Become part of the Heritage Day festivities which include a multicultural event featuring arts and crafts, food, and entertainment from around the world, together with over 100 vehicles, Canadiana, a spectacular outdoor concert, and fireworks.
All of this will be staged along the beautiful and scenic Lake Erie and attractive Niagara River. Fort Erie, the place to be this summer for Friendship Festival '87, July 1 to July 4. I invite you all.

June 10, 1987


REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION
Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, of course you are aware of the tremendous mismanagement at the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion, known as DRIE. That Department is now almost $100 million overcommitted in its funding for the 1987-88 year. Being $100 million over-committed after two months is tremendous mismanagement.
It is also very unfair that the Native Economic Development Programs have been put on hold despite the fact that those programs are not responsible at all for the over-commitment in that particular Department.
You should also be aware that according to the precedents and rules of the House, IRDP, which is the Regional Industrial Development Program is supposed to table its annual report in the House by June 1. It is now over a week past June 1 and we do not have that report. Where is that annual report? What is the Minister trying to hide, or is it just more incompetence by the Minister in charge of regional development?


STATUS OF WOMEN
Mr. William C. Winegard (Guelph):: Mr. Speaker, along with other Members of the House, I was present today when an important book was launched in Canada. Battered But Not Beaten by Linda MacLeod is about preventing wife battering in Canada. It is about the battered and the batterer. It is about the children who also suffer. It is about the shelters and the people who work in them, about the community and our response to a very serious problem.
But the book is also about hope, about love, about support for those who are directly involved.
It is about the progress we have made and the distance yet to go before we can fully understand, control, and ultimately prevent this vicious and particularly hurtful form of violence.
This book is a low-key, serious, sensitive, and enlightening exposition of a complex social problem.


ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Hon.   Chas. L. Caccia@Davenport: Mr. Speaker, many Canadians are asking do we really need nuclear submarines? Are they desirable from an environmental viewpoint? Would Canadians living near coastal waters be safe in the event of an accident? In recent years radiation accidents are reported to have taken place aboard nuclear-powered vessels, including a meltdown.
Experts say that accidents at sea or under the Arctic ice may damage a reactor core and release radioactivity. Although the probability of such accidents is low, it takes only a small release of radioactivity to cause widespread damage.
As reported in a national newspaper, it is the opinion of civilian emergency planners, environmental scientists, and veterans of the United States nuclear navy that the Canadian Government's plans to build nuclear-powered submarines may pose serious dangers to the environment.
The message is loud and clear. Canadians don't want nuclear submarines. The Cabinet should shelve this $5 billion idea of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Beatty).


THE GREAT LAKES
Mr. Ken James (Sarnia-Lambton):: Mr. Speaker, I am rising in the House today to thank the Government of Canada and especially the Minister of the Environment (Mr. McMillan) for their interest and efforts to find possible solutions to the high water levels in the Great Lakes. These abnormally high levels have been plaguing my constituency for a number of years. The people of Sarnia-Lambton thank the Minister for his action plan to assist in the reduction of lake levels.
The Government has recognized the essential role played by the Great Lakes. Lake Huron and the St. Clair River in my constituency are both well-known tourist areas. As well as this, they provide an avenue for commercial shipping, both Canadian and international. They separate Canada and the United States, yet in many ways bring us closer together as we share a common waterway. It is essential that we continue to protect these great bodies of water from environmental problems and shoreline erosion.
The Canadian Government recognizes their importance and appreciates the Great Lakes. By working with our American neighbours we can maintain and preserve the essential characteristics of this great waterway.
I call upon the Government of Canada to continue to respect and appreciate the Great Lakes. For the millions of Americans and Canadians who live on the Great Lakes, I urge the
June 10, 1987

Government to continue its efforts to preserve and protect our homes and jobs on the Great Lakes.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Right Hon. John N. Turner (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. The Government of France has issued drilling permits for an area in Canadian waters that is 100 times the area of St-Pierre-et-Miquelon and four times that of Prince Edward Island. At the Venice Summit, did the Prime Minister of Canada tell the Prime Minister of France it is illegal to issue drilling permits in Canadian waters, and has Mr. Chirac agreed to cancel the permits? Could the Deputy Prime Minister inform the House why the Prime Minister of Canada has allowed France to treat us so casually in this matter?


Hon. Don Mazankowski (Deputy Prime Minister and President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. gentleman is dead wrong in his assertion that the French Government has issued drilling permits in the area in question; that is absolutely false.
What has been issued are exploration permits. Such exploration permits-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, come on.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: -have gone back to 1966-1967. Canada has had exploration permits issued in this disputed area as has France. It appears to be sort of a paper exercise wherein the two countries are positioning themselves in such a way to exercise their so-called rights in the resolution of the disputed area.
I should say that the Government of Canada, through the Prime Minister and the Ambassador, has protested very vigorously. However, this is not a new development. It has been going on for quite some time. I find it rather surprising that the Liberals find it offensive today when they agreed to the same course of action in previous times.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!
Oral Questions


ISSUANCE OF LICENCE TO FRENCH GOVERNMENT-OWNED COMPANY
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, we do not accept that defensive assertion of the Deputy Prime Minister at all.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: The Deputy Prime Minister may call this a paper exercise, but for the people of Newfoundland having their waters taken away from them for the purpose of exploration, and having their fish taken away from them is not a paper exercise. It is their livelihood.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: I wish to ask the Deputy Prime Minister this. Is it a paper exercise to allow France to grant drilling or exploration permits, or any other type of permit invading our sovereignty, to a government-owned petroleum company in France, the same way that it would be illegal for the Government of Canada to grant a permit to Petro-Canada to drill in the Mediterranean? Is that a paper exercise? Is that an exercise he will not protest on behalf of the people of Canada and Newfoundland?


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. McDermid:: That is a stupid analogy.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, the Right Hon. Leader of the Opposition may want to posture, and perhaps in the process even blow a blood vessel, but the fact of the matter is that he is dead wrong. This is an exercise that has been going on for some time.
France first issued its exploration permits in 1966, which were protested by Canada. Canada issued exploration permits in 1967, which were protested by France. There has been a moratorium and an understanding during the course of this period of time that no drilling would take place. That assurance has been given. So nothing has really changed.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


CANADIAN POSITION-FRENCH PRESIDENT'S VISIT
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, the Minister got some very nervous applause from the Minister of Transport. I can understand that.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Crosbie:: I worry for you, John. We're afraid you might disappear before our eyes.


John Napier Turner: Yesterday in the House the Deputy Prime Minister said in response to a colleague of

June 10, 1987
Oral Questions
mine that there was a similar protest made by this Government in October, 1986. That protest was rejected by France. This was an issue before the French and the Canadian Governments when President Mitterrand was here. Why was this issue not taken up with the President of France, or at least the Foreign Minister of France, Mr. Raimond, when he was here? Why was this challenge to Canadian sovereignty not rebutted and rejected by Canada when we had a chance when the President was here in Canada?


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, we are going from the ridiculous to the sublime. The Right Hon. Member knows that this is a disputed area and that the two countries have been issuing permits in order to protect their own interests in terms of the bargaining process and the disputeresolving process that will take place.


An Hon. Member:: Speak for Canada.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: We are speaking for Canada. There is no drilling. The Government of Canada has reacted in a very vigorous way. That is why there is no drilling, and there will be no drilling as long as the disputed area remains in question.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


PRIME MINISTER'S MESSAGE TO FRENCH PRIME MINISTER
Mr. Brian Tobin (Humber-Port au Port-St. Barbe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. He knows that there are no conditions attached to these licences which state that the licences and the permits to explore will not be exercised until such a time in the far distant future when the matter of the dispute is resolved. He knows that.
Yesterday in the House he told all Members that the Prime Minister yesterday morning met with Mr. Chirac, the French Prime Minister. Will he tell us today what message the Prime Minister gave the French Prime Minister and what the response was?


John Napier Turner: Good question!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, it is a good question. I am glad the Right Hon. Leader of the Opposition agrees.
The Prime Minister met not only with Mr. Chirac yesterday, he met with him today. He also conveyed our views in writing. He informed the French Prime Minister that the action taken by the French in issuing these permits was inappropriately timed given the fact of the negotiations in which we are now engaged. But having regard to the fact that the permits that are issued on either side, either by France or by Canada, are equal in every respect, that is part of the bargaining process and the positioning the two countries are
taking in respect to the resolution of the disputed boundary area.


OVERFISHING BY FRENCH VESSELS
Brian Vincent Tobin: Mr. Speaker, we know what the message was. We now want to know what Canada will do to back up its position.
We are not in a normal negotiating process when France takes 20,000 metric tonnes more fish than has been allocated by the Government of Canada. We are not in a normal negotiating position when France claims 22,000 square kilometres of Canadian sovereign waters for exploration permits. That is not normal.
We closed ports on fish. What new measures is the Government, beyond paying lip service at the Venice Summit, prepared to take to ensure that Canadians and Newfoundlanders can look out across the water off the coast of Newfoundland and know it is ours and will not be exploited by any other nation? What measures, Mr. Speaker?


John Carnell Crosbie: Mr. Speaker, one has to wonder where this great voice was from 1967 to 1984.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Ms. Copps:: You were in the Liberal Party when he was in high school.


John Carnell Crosbie: The Hon. Member needs the assistance of the honourable fog-horn from Hamilton East.


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Carnell Crosbie: That issue started in 1966 and went on until 1984. After 1984 action was taken.
What have we done about the French overfishing? What the Liberal Party was afraid to do for all the years it was in power. We closed Canadian ports to French fishing vessels. They are hurting and they are asking us to change that, but we are holding firm until we get this matter settled in the interests of the fishermen of Atlantic Canada.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


ISSUANCE OF PERMITS-CANADIAN POSITION
Mr. John R. Rodriguez (Nickel Belt):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. It has to do with this drilling in Canadian waters by French companies.


Some Hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Riis:: There is going to be drilling.


John R. Rodriguez: The French Government has issued drilling permits.
June 10, 1987


Mr. McKnight:: No.


John R. Rodriguez: -to Total Petroleum.


Some Hon. Members:: No.


John R. Rodriguez: They are exploration permits.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: They are sensitive about the Gallup poll, aren't they?


John R. Rodriguez: They have issued the same kinds of permits which the Government issued to oil companies in Canada to drill on the Grand Banks.
What commitment did the Prime Minister get from Prime Minister Chirac with respect to withdrawing those permits whether they are exploration, drilling or whatever? What commitment did the Government get to withdraw them?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member is dead wrong. Drilling permits have not been issued. That has to be made very clear. The Hon. Member should know that there has been an understanding. There is a moratorium that has been in place since 1966. It is continuing and that has been reaffirmed. I repeat for the Hon. Member that no drilling will take place, notwithstanding the fact that exploration permits have been issued, on the part of either side.


REQUEST FOR WRITTEN UNDERTAKING
John R. Rodriguez: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Has the Government received in writing from the French Government that there will be no drilling in those disputed waters?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, that has been the understanding and it has been reconfirmed today verbally.


Nelson Andrew Riis: In writing?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: It will be confirmed in writing.


REQUEST THAT AMBASSADOR BE RECALLED FROM FRANCE
John R. Rodriguez: Mr. Speaker, it is fairly obvious that the Government has reneged on its responsibility to speak up for the rights of Canadians and for the rights of Newfoundlanders in this particular dispute the same as it reneged concerning the northern cod stocks.
Can the Deputy Prime Minister indicate how seriously we in Canada consider this matter? Is the Government prepared to recall our Ambassador for consultations?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, I can only say to the Hon. Member in the House that his obvious lack of
Oral Questions
knowledge of this issue will not impress the voters in St. John's East. That is all he is posturing for.


John R. Rodriguez: Answer the question.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: There is no need to recall the Ambassador. The Ambassador is carrying out his duties as he is instructed to by the Government of Canada.


CONTENT OF FRENCH PERMITS-MINISTER'S SCHEDULED VISIT TO PARIS
Mr. George Baker (Gander-Twillingate):: Mr. Speaker, after many telephone calls to Canadian officials in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources and in the Department of External Affairs, it is quite obvious that nobody in the Government of Canada knows what is in the present permits that were issued by the Government of France, and neither does anyone know what was in the permits issued back in the 1960s.
After telephoning officials in the French Government, it is quite clear that the permits are considerably different. The geographic area is not the same nor is the content of them. They are completely different. The Government of France says there is no moratorium on drilling off the East Coast of Canada.
Since the Minister of Transport is flying to Paris tonight to watch an air show tomorrow to sit back and relax, will the Deputy Prime Minister order the Minister of Transport to stop paying attention tomorrow to what French activities are in the air and pay more attention to what the French activities are in the waters off Newfoundland, present Canada's case, and get some answers?


John Carnell Crosbie: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to confirm that I am going to Paris tonight.


Some Hon. Members:: Stay there.


John Carnell Crosbie: Canadians can rest at home tonight easy knowing that I will be in Paris tomorrow morning.


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Axworthy:: What about the French?


John Carnell Crosbie: I am going to the Paris Air Show. Today, of course, it is the House of Commons hot air show that I am observing.


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Carnell Crosbie: The Canadian Ambassador delivered a strong protest to the high levels of the French Foreign Affairs Department today. He was reassured in very clear terms that the present exercise was nothing more than a paper one that had been going on since 1967. He was assured that the

June 10, 1987
Oral Questions
agreement entered into between Canada and France in 1967, when guess who was in power, whatever exploration rights were requested or given these would not give rise to actual drilling or other installations, would be maintained, and that that position would be confirmed in writing.
I suggest to the hon. gentleman that he stop bothering officials in the Government of Canada with silly inquiries this afternoon.


REQUEST THAT FRENCH DRILLING RIGS BE ARRESTED
George Baker: Mr. Speaker, the Minister's line yesterday was what oil company in France would come over all the way across the Atlantic to explore and to drill, spending millions of dollars over here when it didn't even know if the Government of France owned the territory. Obviously the Minister doesn't realize that Elf Aquitaine is not a private company. It is owned mostly by the Government of France and it is willing to spend millions and millions of dollars to lay claim to our shores off the East Coast.
My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Can he tell us when is the Government going to stop pussyfooting around and announce today that if any drilling rig comes into Canadian waters to explore for oil it will be arrested immediately?


John Carnell Crosbie: Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of arresting the Hon. Member, it is a question of certifying.


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Carnell Crosbie: The very oil companies that the hon. gentleman is going so wild about owned by the Government of France-it has some kind of ownership interest-got these original permits in 1967 when the great giant killer and his Party were in power, those ferocious defenders of what?


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


FISHERIES
Mr. Jim Manly (Cowichan-Malahat-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. Newfoundland fishermen after having spent thousands of dollars getting ready for the capelin fishery now see that the price being offered and the volume demanded by the chief buyers, the Japanese, are not sufficient to maintain that fishery as an economic fishery and they see their families robbed of important income for the coming year.
Is the Minister prepared now to take responsibility to ensure that Newfoundland fishermen will get an adequate and fair price for the capelin?


Hon. Thomas Siddon (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans):: Mr. Speaker, it is certainly not the intention of the Government of Canada that the fishery of Newfoundland be nationalized as might be the direction which the Hon. Member would advocate.
We are expecting a very successful inshore fishery in Newfoundland this year partly as a result of the corrective measures I took last autumn at the urging of the Newfoundland Inshore Fisheries Association. We cannot determine prices, or subsidize prices directly, for reasons the Hon. Member should appreciate. However, we are definitely looking forward to this year as a very good year for the fishermen of Newfoundland and Fabrador.


REQUEST THAT MARKETING AGENCY BE ESTABLISHED
James Douglas Manly: Mr. Speaker, it is not necessary to nationalize the Fisheries in order to have a decent pricing strategy in place. This problem happened last year. It is happening this year, and it will go on happening unless the Government takes action. The Minister should be aware of the need and desire for a proper marketing strategy and marketing agency for capelin. Is he prepared now to have a marketing agency for the capelin? And is he prepared to use some of the funds promised to the Atlantic area through the Atlantic Opportunities Agency to ensure that agency is able to function and get a fair price for Newfoundland fishermen?


Thomas Edward Siddon: Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that the demand for capelin has produced a new dimension to the Newfoundland inshore fishery which was of great benefit to the fishermen last year.


James Douglas Manly: It is good for all of us.


Thomas Edward Siddon: That is a fact, and we are looking at means of enhancing the opportunity the capelin fishery represents in additional ways this year. Discussions I have had with the Salt Fish Corporation and members of its board perhaps will envisage a marketing arrangement of the sort to which the Hon. Member has alluded.


PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE
Mr. Speaker:: I wish to bring to the attention of the Members the presence in the Gallery of a delegation of members of
June 10, 1987

the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, led by Mr. Jean Valleix.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF ROMANIAN VICE-MINISTER, MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Mr. Speaker:: I wish also to bring to the attention of the Members the presence in the gallery of Mrs. Olimpia Soloma-nescu, Vice-Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


INDUSTRY
Sheila Maureen Copps: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion I will direct my question to the Deputy Prime Minister. He should know that the possible closure or sale of Firestone in Hamilton involves 1,300 jobs. Given that the federal Government has spent $15 million to modernize that plant over the last five years, including the demand for job guarantees, what specific action is the Government prepared to take to protect those 1,300 workers in Hamilton who are facing either possible layoffs or plant closure as a result of the sale?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, I am informed that in 1986 this Government signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the tire manufacturing industry in Canada. In this case we have been in close consultation with the company's executive to see how this matter might be handled. The Memorandum of Understanding commits us to working very closely with all the companies in the industry on a continuing basis to address such mutual concerns as expressed by the Hon. Member.
1 simply want to assure the Hon. Member that that close relationship and co-operation are ongoing.


Sheila Maureen Copps: Mr. Speaker, the workers of Moncton heard that promise from that same Minister and in fact they were let down. We want to make sure the people of Hamilton are not let down.


JOB GUARANTEES
Sheila Maureen Copps: Given that the Minister has been in close consultation, he will know that there are discussions with both the Italians and the Japanese about the possible sale and/or closure of the plant. Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us specifically whether the Government is
Oral Questions
prepared to block that sale through its powers under Investment Canada if indeed these job guarantees, for all the current jobs, are not forthcoming?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the Hon. Member that in no way does this Government intend to let the people of Hamilton down, as we have not let other people down.


Brian Vincent Tobin: Why don't you talk about Moncton?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: That is manifested in the fact that some
840,000	new jobs have been created.


Brian Vincent Tobin: How about Moncton?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Insofar as Moncton is concerned, is the Hon. Member criticizing the fact that the new Atlantic Opportunities Agency is going to be located there-


Sheila Maureen Copps: What about Firestone?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: -which is going to create some 300 jobs? If he is, why does he not stand up and say so?


Sheila Maureen Copps: What about Firestone?


THE CONSTITUTION
[Stage Direction]
1987 CONSTITUTIONAL ACCORD-ABORIGINAL SELFGOVERNMENT
Mr. John Parry (Kenora-Rainy River):: Mr. Speaker, my question is, of necessity, directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. He will be aware that Premier Hatfield of New Brunswick recently added his voice to others in the Tory Party supporting the amendments to the Meech Lake Accord which were proposed by my Leader in his motion in this House on Monday, namely, that the elevation of territories to provincial status should not be subject to unanimity rule and that at the very least there should be a schedule in the Meech Lake Accord for the negotiation of the entrenchment of aboriginal self-government rights in the Constitution.
Given the increasing number of influential voices-


Some Hon. Members:: Speech.


John Carnell Crosbie: Order.


Mr. de Cotret:: Question.


John Edmund Parry: -supporting these amendments, will the Prime Minister at least canvass provincial Premiers to see if they would be in favour of including those improvements?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, the Premier of

June 10, 1987
Oral Questions
New Brunswick has long been an advocate of advancing the rights of aboriginal peoples in this country. Of course, he has taken a very major leadership role in federal-provincial conferences. We certainly welcomed that and I think he should be complimented.
I would hope he would call upon his provincial colleagues, the other Premiers, to work in unison with the federal Government in achieving what might be a consensus. But the Hon. Member knows there has been an agreement signed and agreed to, and the constitutional process is not shut. It provides for ongoing dialogue and adjustments. Clearly this could be an issue which could be placed for consideration in the next year.
The Government's position on this is very clear. We have attempted in every respect to work out an arrangement which would be satisfactory to all, and we will continue in our endeavours in that regard.


GOVERNMENT POLICY
John Edmund Parry: Mr. Speaker, in recent months aboriginal people have seen the breach of the James Bay Agreement, the breakdown of the First Ministers' Conference, the insulting omission from the Meech Lake Accord, a cap on post-secondary education, and most recently the Government has denied-


John Carnell Crosbie: Order.


John Edmund Parry: -to six bands in northwestern Ontario- established bands-the right to land for their own reserves. What, if anything, is the Government going to do for the aboriginal people of Canada before all the people of Canada send it to its just reward?


William Hunter (Bill) McKnight: Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member expresses his concerns in strange ways. The request by six bands in northern Ontario, newly created bands, to establish reserves and lands was a process which was discussed with those bands. The decision which was made was made because of the additional costs. Some $66 millions of dollars were needed. The only way this Government could find the dollars needed would be over a three-year period, not to provide housing to any bands in the Province of Ontario, or only to provide one-quarter of the housing needed over five years. I am sure the Hon. Member would not find that acceptable and neither would Indian leadership in Ontario.


ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
Mr. John Nunziata (York South-Weston):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Solicitor General. It concerns the very serious allegations by one of the Prime Minister's best
friends, Mr. Roger Nantel. Mr. Nantel has accused the RCMP of criminal activity by breaking into his offices and camouflaging the break-in to look like an ordinary burglary. Mr. Nantel further alleges that the RCMP were investigating "dirty money behind Brian", referring to the Prime Minister of Canada.
Will the Solicitor General categorically state that Mr. Nantel's allegations are without foundation? Or is there any truth to Mr. Nantel's allegations?


Hon. James Kelleher (Solicitor General of Canada):: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have this opportunity to advise the Hon. Member that I was advised by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police approximately two hours ago that its organization was not in any way involved in the break-ins as alleged by Mr. Nantel.


SPECULATION CONCERNING WALTER WOLF
John V. Nunziata: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Nantel is accusing the RCMP of investigating the Prime Minister. He speculated that the RCMP were investigating "rumours circulating that Walter Wolf was an international arms dealer who had largely financed Mulroney's operations". I ask the Solicitor General whether the RCMP has ever investigated the allegation that dirty money was used by the Prime Minister to defeat the then Leader of the Conservative Party, the Right Hon. Member for Yellowhead?


James Francis Kelleher: Mr. Speaker, as the Hon. Member well knows, the RCMP does not disclose what investigations it is carrying out at any particular time but I can assure the Hon. Member that the RCMP is a force of integrity and honesty and is the best force in the world.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


STATUS OF WOMEN
Ms. Lynn McDonald (Broadview-Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of National Health and Welfare and concerns a very distressing report on battered women in Canada which was released today. I wonder if the Minister will tell us if he will respond favourably to the prime recommendation of this report which is for federal initiatives for funding so that we can end this problem by reducing it gradually, and so that transition houses and shelters can work toward education and prevention so there will no longer be one million battered wives in Canada.
June 10, 1987


Hon. Jake Epp (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the report from the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women is an extremely important one. As was mentioned, for example, by the Hon. Member for Guelph in his statement to the House today, the report on which I had a briefing earlier from Ms. Gold lays out very clearly the wide-ranging complexities of the issue. I also think the report indicates that there has been some progress made but we have a long way to go yet.
I might say to the Hon. Member and to the House that this matter was placed on the agenda of the Minister responsible for federal-provincial social affairs in January. I intend to take the issue back and make further recommendations to my cabinet colleagues along with my colleagues who have similar responsibilities in this field.


FEDERAL INITIATIVES RECOMMENDED
Lynn McDonald: Mr. Speaker, for every one woman who enters a shelter for battered wives, another is turned away because of lack of funds. We still have a very long way to go.
I wonder if the Minister would be more positive in his response and would really deal with the fundamental recommendation that there must be federal initiatives so that there will be not just emergency response but a comprehensive approach to education and prevention for dealing with this problem and eliminating the shameful condition of the existence of battered wives.


Arthur Jacob (Jake) Epp: Mr. Speaker, I am not trying to minimize at all the recommendations made by the advisory council but I think Hon. Members should also keep in mind that there have been two changes made in the very specific area the Hon. Member has raised in her question. There has been an increase in the number of transition homes. I along with my colleague, the Minister responsible for CMHC, will have to expand that social housing so that there will be an additional number of spaces.
Second, I changed the Canada Assistance Plan regulation for a needs test. I felt that that was not appropriate. If a woman presents herself at a transition home, her needs are not financial, her needs are psychological and social and can be so identified quickly. That provision has been changed so that women can access those homes under the Canada Assistance Plan.
Earlier in my response I said that we will look at the report very carefully. I will come back to the House and my cabinet colleagues for further recommendations and action.
Oral Questions SUPPLY AND SERVICES


ADVERTISING CONTRACT-REQUEST FOR CANCELLATION
Mr. Don Boudria (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Supply and Services and concerns once again the very serious allegations made by Mr. Roger C. Nantel. Can the Minister if Supply and Services tell the House, in view of the unacceptable conduct of Mr. Nantel of which we were informed today by the Solicitor General, what specific actions she will take to cancel the contract Mr. Nantel has with the Government of Canada through Supply and Services as the agency of record, because of his unacceptable conduct? Will she fire him and will she do so now?


Hon. Monique Vezina (Minister of Supply and Services):: Mr. Speaker, I have already had occasion to remind the House that Mr. Roger Nantel is not registered with the Department of Supply and Services and has therefore never received a contract from my department.


REQUEST FOR JUSTICE
Don Boudria: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary. Whether we are talking about Roger Nantel, Roger C. Nantel, Nantel and Associates, Media Canada or Synchrocom, it is all the same. What does the Minister intend to do today to put a stop to this circus where someone who has a fat government contract can accuse the RCMP and everybody else and get off scot-free? How are we going to have any justice in this country?


Monique Vézina: Media Canada Inc. does have government contracts. We followed the normal procedures, and as I said previously in the House, we got better value at lower cost, compared with what was being done under the previous government.


ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Solicitor General and concerns the very serious allegations being made by Roger Nantel, the longtime friend of the Prime Minister. In view of the seriousness of these allegations, allegations of illegal break-ins by the RCMP to the Tory Party headquarters in Quebec and Mr. Nantel's office, will the Solicitor General agree to meet with Mr. Nantel to discuss his allegations and will he assure the House that there will be an independent inquiry, and that it will not be a case of the RCMP investigating the RCMP?

June 10, 1987
Oral Questions


James Francis Kelleher: Mr. Speaker, I have already advised the House earlier today that the RCMP was not involved in this break-in. Second, I can assure the Hon. Member that at the time of this break-in it was fully investigated by the Montreal Urban Police, the police with jurisdiction.


REQUEST THAT MINISTER SEEK INDEPENDENT INQUIRY
Svend Johannes Robinson: Mr. Speaker, in view of the seriousness of the allegation of Mr. Nantel, does the Solicitor General not recognize that it is important that justice be seen to be done and that it not be merely the Commissioner of the RCMP assuring him that the RCMP did nothing wrong? We have heard that before. Will the Solicitor General not ask for an independent inquiry into this matter to assure the House and the people of Canada that there has been no impropriety or illegality on the part of the RCMP as alleged by Mr. Nantel?


James Francis Kelleher: Mr. Speaker, I deeply regret these unsubstantiated allegations made against the integrity of this force.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


James Francis Kelleher: Mr. Speaker, if the Hon. Member or any other Hon. Member in the House, or Mr. Nantel, has any information which can assist the Montreal Urban Police to substantiate these allegations, then I ask them to come forward immediately.


RESEARCH
Mr. Jean-Claude Malepart (Montreal-Sainte-Marie):: Mr. Speaker, if what the Minister just said is true, why did she tell my colleague that no more figures will be released? Because 75 per cent of the 34 per cent for the National Capital area is on the Ontario side. That makes a big difference.
Daniel Johnson, the Quebec Minister of Industry and Trade, has said he would not be satisfied with mere crumbs, and he suggests that the Minister correct this injustice by having the federal Government establish its space agency in the corridor between Quebec City and Montreal.
Does the Minister agree with the suggestion made by the Quebec Minister of Industry and Trade?


Monique Vézina: Mr. Speaker, I am indeed honoured by the fact that the Quebec Minister has given me the privilege of deciding where this particular agency is going to go.
I will tell you why I asked my department to stop releasing the data collected by us. I tried to explain to the press that these data concern only the research and development being done by the Department of Supply and Services. And that is why I stopped the production of these figures because they were only confusing the issue.
Statistics Canada, however, will provide comprehensive statistics, and of course we, as the Government, have an abiding concern for maintaining social and economic equity in dealing with the provinces.


ALLOCATION OF FUNDS-APPARENT INJUSTICE TO QUEBEC- GOVERNMENT POSITION
Jean-Claude Malépart: My
question is directed to the Minister of Supply and Services. Some troubling figures have just been released indicating that Quebec is only getting a few crumbs, in terms of federal contracts for scientific research. In 1985-86, Quebec got only 16 per cent, which is $569 million out of a total $3.4 billion.
Considering those figures, could the Minister inform the House what her Government or Department intends to do to correct this unbalance?


Monique Vézina: Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member's insinuations are entirely ridiculous and are based on an erroneous newspaper article. Le Devoir has finally realized that we have a national capital and that research is done within the departments. Thirty-four per cent is therefore in the National Capital area, as you know, and covers both Quebec and Ontario, with 20 per cent for Ontario and 16 per cent for Quebec.


CHILDREN
Mr. Benno Friesen (Surrey-White Rock-North Delta):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Solicitor General. Last year the Minister established a Bureau of Missing Children headed by Inspector John Brookmyre. There is some concern that the bureau has been downgraded and I would like an assurance that that is not true but that in fact the program will move forward with vigour in order to secure the future of these children.


James Francis Kelleher: Mr. Speaker, I know the Hon. Member has long had an interest in this matter and I thank him for his question. I am happy to advise him that indeed Sergeant Brookmyre remains in charge of this unit. As a matter of fact, he is down in Chicago today with my Deputy Minister attending a conference on missing children.
June 10, 1987

We are indeed very concerned about this issue. As you know, I opened the missing children registry last August and am presently in the process of holding national consultations on the feasibility of opening a missing children information Center. There is very strong support for this initiative in Cabinet and we will continue along that line.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


REFUGEES
Mr. Sergio Marchi (York West):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of State for Immigration. Yesterday over 100 organizations and thousands of individuals initiated a national campaign to try to convince the Government to amend very serious flaws in its refugee legislation. Every single NGO in the country is unanimously opposed to the fundamental tenets of this legislation. Given all that, will the Minister begin to promote and defend the constituency he is responsible for in Cabinet by eliminating the pre-screening process and the safe third country concept which have the effect of turning people away even before they reach an oral hearing before a refugee board? Is he prepared to amend universally unacceptable principles?


Hon. Benoit Bouchard (Minister of Employment and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I think that the Hon. Member for York West is fully aware of the opinion of Canadians concerning the legislative measure we tabled with respect to immigration and the status of refugees.
I would suggest that the Bill will come up for second reading debate in the very near future. I am even more convinced that our propositions reflect the views of most Canadians concerning the measures we must take to let genuine refugees gain access to Canada.


UNIVERSAL ACCESSIBILITY QUERY
Sergio Marchi: Mr. Speaker, the Minister also knows the opinion of Canadians, some 75 per cent of whom want a fair refugee system. He and the Government are misleading Canadians if they continue to say that this system is fair and humane, because it is everything but.
While recognizing that no legislation is absolutely perfect, is it also not irresponsible to continue to ignore stubbornly the recommendation for universal accessibility, which was the centre-piece of a three-year consultation process? Why is the Government betraying that process now? When the Minister is long gone from his portfolio, how will he live with himself and his community in defending this legislation?
Oral Questions


Benoît Bouchard: Mr. Speaker, my friend from York West can say what he wants. I challenge him to deny that 83 per cent of Canadians want us to tighten up the regulations.


Sergio Marchi: Read all the statistics, Benoit.


CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REFUSAL OF APPLICATION TO LAUNCH YOUTH TELEVISION CHANNEL
Mr. Howard McCurdy (Windsor-Walkerville):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of State for Youth. After the expenditure of $800,000 of taxpayers' money and two years of hopeful and enthusiastic lobbying by young people for a cable TV channel which would serve their interests as well as involve them, the CRTC has denied a hearing of their application on the basis of a technicality. The Minister is an advocate for youth. What action does he intend to take in order to effect some change in the face of this distasteful and insensitive rebuff to our youth by the CRTC?


Hon. Jean J. Charest (Minister of State (Youth)):: Mr. Speaker, I have not been up-to-date on that issue but I can inform the Hon. Member that I am aware of representations made before the publication of the Caplan-Sauvageau report. As he also knows, that report dealt with part of that request put forward by that group. It is something to which I am at firsthand sympathetic. What we must also consider in dealing with this matter is the arms' length relationship that exists between the Government and the CRTC. In that context I will be very happy to look into the matter.


Mr. Speaker:: Short supplementary.


REQUEST THAT MINISTER INTERVENE
Howard Douglas McCurdy: Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the third Party's purported advocate for youth will take action at least to intervene in order to obtain either a delay of the hearings or a delay of the decision until the application of Young Canada Television can be heard?


Jean J. Charest: Mr. Speaker, whatever intervention we do undertake will have to be done in a quasi-judicial context. My predecessor did this in making representations before the committee but there are limits imposed upon a cabinet Minister by law. I can make limited representations in that context.
I would like the opportunity to look at it very closely and report to my hon. colleague because it is an issue over which the Government has a great deal of concern.

June 10, 1987
Members of Parliament


Mr. Speaker:: The Deputy Prime Minister on a point of order.


MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, I want to draw to your attention and that of all Hon. Members that there are three Members of this House who entered Parliament for the first time in the general election of June 10, 1957.
The Hon. Member for South Shore (Mr. Crouse), Nova Scotia, is still a tower of strength in our caucus and the House and a strong voice for freedom. He has served with dignity and honour and has made a tremendous contribution to this House, to Nova Scotia, and to Canada.
The Hon. Member for Cumberland-Colchester (Mr. Coates), Nova Scotia, has over 30 years served with dedication and commitment, never wavering in his loyalty to his Party and his country, serving in many capacities in the House and indeed in the Party. Most of all he has always been cognizant of and concerned about the welfare of his constituency.
Of course we must acknowledge in our midst the Hon. Member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton), Saskatchewan, who served as a Minister in that first Diefen-baker Government and subsequent Governments. His imagination and creative approaches to dealing with our mutual problems have certainly made a notable contribution to our country.
There are many other outstanding Members from other Parties who came into the House in the 1957 general election. Many have since gone on to other fields of endeavour. 1 would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of my colleagues, to congratulate and thank them all for their outstanding service and their distinguished contribution to this House and to Canada.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, while this may be somewhat unusual and unorthodox, I see in the Gallery the former Hon. Member for Ontario, the Hon. Michael Starr, who was also elected in 1957 and was the Minister of Labour in the Diefenbaker Government. I think it would be appropriate to acknowledge him as well.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to second the good
wishes of the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Mazankowski). What Canadian could ever forget that 30 years ago today John George Diefenbaker swept into power with a minority Government after a very, very charismatic campaign. I can say to all Hon. Members that there has been no more compelling parliamentarian in the history of Canada than John George Diefenbaker.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: At that time, the three Members mentioned by the Deputy Prime Minister were also elected to this House of Commons; the Members for South Shore (Mr. Crouse) and Cumberland-Colchester (Mr. Coates), both from Nova Scotia, and, of course, the Member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton) from the Province of Saskatchewan.
I want to say to all three hon. gentlemen that no greater tribute can be paid in this country than to enjoy the confidence of one's fellow citizens, for whatever length of time, but 30 years is a hallmark of which each of them individually ought to be proud. It is a tribute to the sacrifices they and their families have made. I want to congratulate all three of them most heartily.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: I, too, in breach of the rules, would like to recognize Michael Starr whom I knew as Minister of Labour and for whom I retained a very warm friendship. He enjoyed the respect of Members from all sides of the House when he was in this place.
Since the Hon. Member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain is here in the House this afternoon I want to say to him that in my view he has never been given the credit he deserves for having authored the northern vision. Mr. Diefenbaker made that a popular concept in Canada. He opened up our lands north of the 60th parallel to Canadian attention. The Roads to Resources program was his. The farmers of this country will always remember him as a spectacularly successful Minister of Agriculture.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: The only weakness in judgment he has ever shown is having hired Brian Mulroney as his executive assistant when he was the Minister of Agriculture. The only other person who had as good luck with his executive assistants was Davie Fulton.
In any event, to all three gentlemen, congratulations, a generous thank-you from your fellow citizens, and wishes of good health, good future. We are proud to have known you.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Nelson Andrew Riis: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to have the opportunity to rise on behalf of my Party and recognize the Members for South Shore (Mr. June 10, 1987

Crouse), Cumberland-Colchester (Mr. Coates), and Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton). We take great pleasure today in recognizing their contributions to the House of Commons and Canada for so many years. We appreciate the fact that through their efforts Canada is a better place today.
The fact that the three Members being honoured today have served this House for 30 years tells us a great deal about what their constituents think of them having given them the ultimate vote of confidence for so many years. The fact that these individuals have been in this House serving the people of Canada in this capacity for 30 years also tells us a great deal about their perseverance and their commitment to the principles of democracy and parliamentary procedure.
There are a handful of people in the House of Commons who command the attention of Members when they stand. When the Member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain stands and makes a speech in this House, he has the undivided attention of all Members. On behalf of my Party 1 would like to say that we appreciate and recognize the Hon. Members' contributions. We thank all three of them for making Canada a better place.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I thank all Hon. Members for mentioning the names of the three of us who are in the House today and that of Mike Starr. I would like to say something a little different from what would ordinarily be expected on this occasion.
I recall when a Member from one of the York ridings had been in the House for 30 years and the Prime Minister had made him an honorary Privy Councillor. The House began to scream "Speech, Bob, speech". He had never made a speech in 30 years. He rose in his place and made the shortest speech I think this House has ever heard. He said, "If you guys would speak a lot less you would last a lot longer", and he sat down.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: In the history of the British Parliament there was one Member who made one speech in the House which was so well received that he never spoke again for 40 years. When he went to Ireland to become a Member of Parliament in the new Irish House they asked him why he had kept quiet for so long. He was a very able person. He said, "When you do something you cannot do better at, take it as granted and do not try to do any better". His name was Hamilton too, but that is beside the point.
Some of you may have noticed that in the last few years 1 have not spoken as much as 1 used to. I have learned from fellows like Bob McGregor and the Irish Hamilton of 150 years ago.
I would like to make one serious remark. On June 10, 1957, Canada was living perilously close to a one-Party type of government. I do not mean that in any harsh sense at all. The
Members of Parliament
mere fact that the Conservative Party came back to power, with a minority Government admittedly, was the first break in this tendency.
In addition, never in the history of Parliament had there been so many veterans in the House. Those of us who had survived the war came in here in large numbers in the elections of 1957 and 1958. We brought back to this House an attitude which I think deserves some consideration at this particular moment.
We were well convinced that our efforts abroad would have to be repeated unless we learned to work together, not only within our nation but with other nations as well. I am doubly glad to see my friend, Mike Starr, in the Gallery because we set out to try to co-operate with the provinces.
I well remember in 1958 when we were hard pressed to provide jobs for people. We had a high unemployment rate in those days of about 6 per cent and were catching Hail Columbia from the Opposition. Bill Hamilton, the Postmaster General, and I were doing our level best to build post offices across the country and clear up the bush. We were spending a lot of money but not creating many jobs. Mike Starr suggested that we go to the municipal Governments which had lots of jobs they wanted done but no money.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: As the House very well knows, municipalities are the creatures of the provinces. But how did Mike Starr get around that? He simply proposed to the municipalities that all of these programs were eligible for help if they could get the consent of the provincial Government. One had to see the reactions of the provincial Governments. How can one turn down a request from a municipality to have something done in its riding when nothing has to be spent?
I can still remember Premier Duplessis of Quebec calling me and saying: "That Mike Starr, he is a devil. He puts a proposal before me that I cannot refuse". He thought the world of Mike, who was a very sensible person. He only dealt with Duplessis over the phone.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Let me also say that, to my recollection, Mike Starr was the first person to describe the type of program we were conducting with all the provinces and territories as a co-operative type of government. I changed that name somewhat, to co-operative federalism.
I was pleased that the succeeding administration of the Right Hon. Mr. Pearson accepted this doctrine. However, that administration made a slight mistake. It called all the provinces together to deal with them as a group. Confrontational politics could never work in that sort of situation. They must be dealt with individually and let each province have a different arrangement.

June 10, 1987
Unemployment Insurance
Today, I not only want to give credit to the Government of the day but to point out that we had a group of people in the caucus who were very conscious of the fact that the only way to keep peace in the world was to co-operate not only with our own institutions in the country, but to co-operate on an economic basis with all other countries in the world. We are one world economically, we are one country nationally, and the only way we can make it work is through co-operation. All that this Government has done is simply to put it in a written form. Thank you.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The Chair might say to the Hon. Member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton), on behalf of all Members of this place today and over many years, that we have heard some wonderful comments, and that was vintage House of Commons.
[Editor's Note: Whereupon all Hon. Members rose and applauded.]



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from Tuesday, June 9, consideration of the motion of Mr. Bouchard that Bill C-50, an Act respecting the treatment of pension payments in determining certain unemployment insurance benefit entitlements and to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971, be read the third time and passed.
Mr. Speaker:: It being 3.15 p.m., pursuant to order made Monday, June 8, 1987, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred division on the motion for third reading and passage of Bill C-50, an Act respecting the treatment of pension payments in determining certain unemployment insurance benefit entitlements and to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971.
Call in the Members.


STRIKING COMMITTEE
[Stage Direction]

Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion carried. Bill read the third time and passed.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Scott Fennell (Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the twenty-first report of the Striking Committee.
If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in this report later this day.
[Editor's Note: See today's Votes and Proceedings.]


CRIMINAL CODE
Hon. Bob Kaplan (York Centre) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-258, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity).


The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):: Shall the Hon. Member have leave to introduce the Bill?


Some Hon. Members:: Agreed.


Robert Phillip Kaplan: Madam Speaker, this is an amendment to the Criminal Code to permit the prosecution within Canada of war criminals found here. The Bill comes from a recommendation of the Deschenes Commission to the same effect. This recommendation has been agreed to by the Government. Although the report was received as long ago as last December by the Government no action has been taken. I intend by my Bill to show the Government one way, at least, of implementing that important recommendation and to urge the Government to get on with the job.
I hope I will have the opportunity to proceed with this Bill because I think it is effective. 1 want to note the strong legal opinions which the Deschenes Commission obtained upon which the recommendation is based to the effect that this is a valid exercise by Canada of its municipal jurisdiction to deal with criminals found within our country.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the first time and ordered to be printed.

Thomas Scott Fennell: Madam Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I move, seconded by the Hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Lewis), that the twenty-first report of the Striking Committee presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Nelson Andrew Riis: Madam
Speaker, it is my pleasure, and indeed, an honour to present petitions on behalf of the residents of Kamloops, Monte Lake, Copper Creek, Argenta, Kaslo, New Denver, Nakusp, Vancouver, North Vancouver, Burnaby, Delta, Lillooet, Bridge Lake, Williams Lake, 100 Mile House, Salmon Arm, Ladner, Surrey and other places.
The petitioners are concerned about the increasing number of chemicals used as herbicides and insecticides which they believe have been proven to have harmful effects on human health. They believe that these chemicals also produce short and long-term harmful effects on non-target organisms, soil and water. They are, therefore, asking the House of Commons to initiate a full public inquiry into the safety, testing, registration and regulation of the use of pesticides and the examination of alternative ways of controlling pests, such as biological control and plant-derived pesticides.


Mr. Cyril Keeper (Winnipeg North Centre):: Madam Speaker, 1 rise with a petition which indicates that troubles in many parts of the world are causing people to seek safety from persecution by coming to Canada.
Canada has established standards of refugee status determination but our existing procedures have broken down under unexpected strains. The standing committee of Parliament has proposed a new procedure for refugee determination which is quicker and fairer than the one now in force. This proposal has support among all Parties in Parliament as well as the Canadian Council of Churches, the Canadian Bar Association, the Canadian Jewish Congress and other groups and individuals.
Procedures recently adopted that turn away refugee status claimants from ports of entry before their claims are examined put real refugees at risk. Therefore, we, the undersigned petitioners, humbly pray and call upon Parliament to ensure that the Government and Parliament enact legislation that will

June 10, 1987
Petitions
embody the principles of fair and quick oral hearings of refugee claimants before a refuge board, independent of the Immigration Commission, universal access to such hearings for every claimant in Canada and an adequate opportunity to arrive in Canada to make this claim.


James Douglas Manly: Madam Speaker, I have a petition from a number of Canadians concerned that conditions in many parts of the world are causing people to seek safety from persecution by coming to Canada. They point out that in the past we have had standards for refugee status determination but that these have broken down under unexpected strain. They also point out that the standing committee of Parliament has established a new procedure which has the support of all Parties and of many other groups in Canada concerned with refugees, but that the present procedures which have been adopted turn away refugee status claimants from ports of entry before their claims are examined, which puts real refugees at risk.
Therefore, the petitioners call upon Parliament to ensure that the Government and Parliament enact legislation which will embody the principles of fair and quick oral hearings of refugee claimants before a refugee board independent of the Immigration Commission, universal access to such hearings for every claimant in Canada, and adequate opportunity to arrive in Canada to make this claim.


Daniel James Macdonnell Heap: Madam Speaker, I have a petition from a number of residents of Toronto who are concerned about the subject of unemployment insurance and point out the large amount of money spent in income transfers in other provinces and the necessary consideration of these things by the Forget Commission, but the unfortunate recommendations made by the commission which would force 62 per cent of the unemployed to live on less than $140 a week.
Therefore, the undersigned, your petitioners, call upon Parliament to reject any legislation designed to eliminate federal contributions to the unemployment insurance program and to reduce unemployment benefits for unemployed Canadians.


Daniel James Macdonnell Heap: Madam Speaker, I also have a petition from a number of people, about a hundred people, living in Toronto who are concerned about the low level flight training of pilots in NATO at the Canadian Forces Base in Goose Bay, Labrador.
Apart from the damage to the local native life, they point out that this training program is a provocative and aggressive war-fighting action that tends to endanger world peace.
Therefore, your petitioners call upon Parliament to ensure that the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney) will end all low level flight training at the Goose Bay Canadian Forces Base and cease negotiations with NATO for the establishment of a larger base there.


Daniel James Macdonnell Heap: Madam Speaker, finally I have a number of petitions, about a hundred petitions, from residents of Toronto who are concerned about immigration, particularly about the refugee program of the Government.
They point out that whereas the previous system broke down under strains, it is necessary to adopt the recommendation of the Standing Committee on Labour, Employment and Immigration, which has support from the Council of Churches, the Bar Association, the Jewish Congress, members of all Parties, and other groups and individuals, and which would particularly embody the principles of fair and quick oral hearings of refugee claimants before a refugee board independent of the Immigration Commission, universal access to these hearings for every claimant in Canada, and adequate opportunity to arrive in Canada to make this claim.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.


Simon Leendert de Jong: Madam Speaker, I have the pleasure of introducing a petition signed by numerous constituents living mainly in the City of Regina.
They petition Parliament to defeat the motion introduced on February 16 supporting the principle of the restoration of the death penalty in Canada.
The petitioners point out that to kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong is morally indefensible. They share the belief that returning evil for evil contributes to the disintegration of the moral integrity and social well-being of the society in which it is introduced.
They also point out that as a member in good standing of the United Nations, Canada should be supporting the United Nations in its efforts to eradicate the death penalty in all nations of the world, rather than undermining Canada's reputation as a leader among civilized nations.
Therefore, it gives me great pleasure to present the petition to the House.


John Edmund Parry: Madam Speaker, 1 have the privilege and pleasure to present today a petition which has been duly certified and signed by residents of Toronto, Kelowna, Whitehorse, Vancouver, Ladysmith, Sardis, Burnaby, and Kitimat, on the question of the Government's proposed changes to the criteria for admissibility of refugees to Canada.
June 10, 1987

The petitioners urge parliamentarians to support a system which will embody the principles of fair and quick oral hearings of refugee claimants before a board independent of the Immigration Commission, universal access to such hearings for every claimant in Canada, and adequate opportunity for refugees to arrive in Canada to make such a claim.



POINT OF ORDER


Mr. Pat Binns (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans):: Madam Speaker, I am not sure whether my point is strictly in order, but earlier today we recognized Hon. Members who have served the House for 30 years, since June 10, 1957.
I should like to recognize another Member who was elected on that same date and still serves this Parliament, now as a Senator of the Government of Canada. I am referring to Senator Macquarrie who was elected on the same date and has now served Parliament for 30 years.
He was a Member of the House until 1979 when he was appointed by the Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Hon. Member for Yellowhead (Mr. Clark), to the Upper House, the Senate.
Senator Macquarrie was first elected in the dual riding of Queens which included part of my present constituency.
Order Paper Questions
However, following a redistribution, he went on to represent the riding of Hillsborough.
1 know my colleague, the Hon. Member for Malpeque (Mr. Gass) who is seated beside me, would want to join in recognizing his fine accomplishments for the people of Canada and the people of Prince Edward Island in both this House and in the Upper Chamber.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

[ Translation]


QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Mr. Doug Lewis (Parliamentary Secretary to Deputy Prime Minister and President of the Privy Council):: Madam Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 128 and 138.

DRIE-GRANTS AND/OR LOANS WITHIN METROPOLITAN TORONTO REGION


Mr. Redway: Since September 4, 1984, did the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion make grants and/or loans to persons or corporations, nongovernmental organizations and governments within metropolitan Toronto and, if so, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) amount?


Hon. Michel Cote (Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion):: In so far as the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion is concerned, the answer is provided below.
Department of Regional Industrial Expansion Grants and or Loans within Metropolitan Toronto Region
	September 4, 1984 to May 5, 1987		
Company Name	Project Location	Purpose	AmountAdecon Energy Systems Inc.	Weston	Research/Development/Innovation	$ 100,000Asdor Limited	Downsview	Research/Development/Innovation	213,000Brown Boveri Howden Inc.	Scarborough	Research/Development/Innovation	330,500CDA Industries Inc.	Scarborough	Research/Development/Innovation	98,865CGN Videodisc Development Corp.	Toronto	Research/Development/lnnovation	125,000Commutron Limited	Scarborough	Research/Development/Innovation	215,648Daedalian Systems Group Inc.	Toronto	Research/Development/Innovation	23,293Dellcrest Children's Centre	Downsview	Research/Development/I nnovation	41,250Dominion Cellulose Limited	Toronto	Research/Development/Innovation	267,000Dufflet Pastries Inc.	Toronto	Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	50,000Echlin Canada Inc.	Rexdale	Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	95,000Electronic Health Machines Inc.	Downsview	Research/Development/I nnovation	100,000Erwel Inc.	Scarborough	Research/Development/Innovation	60,000G & B Automated Equipment Limited	Downsview	Research/Development/Innovation	300,000Gemtex Company Limited	Rexdale	Research/Development/I nnovation	223,000Herbrand Tools Corp.	York	Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	300,000Info-Power Software Corporation	Rexdale	Research/Development/I nnovation	47,369Institute of Corporate Directors in Canada	Toronto	Development Climate	73,027Interactive Image Technologies Ltd.	Toronto	Research/Development/I nnovation	100,000Intermetco Limited	Downsview	Research/Development/I nnovation	392,537International Council for Small Business	Toronto	Development Climate	60,000John T. Hepburn, Limited	Toronto	Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	1,560,000K-Line Insulators Limited	Scarborough	Research/Development/I nnovation	100,000
June 10, 1987
Motions for Papers
Kalun Communications Inc.	Scarborough
Legalware Inc.	Toronto
Magna International Inc.	Scarborough
Malcan Industries Ltd.	Etobicoke
Marsan Foods Limited	Agincourt
Marshall Industries Limited	Rexdale
McAsphalt Industries Limited	Westhill
Mirtone Industries Ltd.	Toronto
Numetrix Limited	Toronto
Ocean Food Company Limited	Scarborough
Penwood Manufacturing Inc.	Downsview
Plandata Electronics Ltd.	Toronto
Precision Electronic Components Ltd.	Toronto
Price & Knott Mfg. Co. Limited	Westhill
Remanco Systems Inc.	Toronto
Siegfried Krieser Industries Ltd.	Weston
St. Andrew Poultry Limited	Toronto
Toronto Kitchen Equipment Ltd.	Weston
Toronto Medical Corporation	Scarborough
Trigon Technologies Inc.	Toronto
Unic International Corporation	Scarborough
Waferboard Association	Don Mills
Walach Industries	Toronto
Westhead Industrial Systems Corp.	Rexdale
Zest Furniture Industries Ltd.	Toronto


Mr. Howie: For the fiscal year ended March 31, 1986, how many surviving widows
received war veterans' pensions?


Hon. George Hees (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Number of
Widows/Widowers Survivor Benefits Paid
42,042	Canadian Pension Commission survivor pensions
31,306	Allowances under the War Veterans Allowance Act.


Philip Derek Lewis: Madam Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.


The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):: The questions enumerated by the Hon. Parliamentary Secretary have been answered. Shall the remaining questions stand?


Some Hon. Members:: Agreed.


Philip Derek Lewis: Madam Speaker, notice of motion for the production of papers No. P5, in the name of the Hon. Member for Churchill (Mr. Murphy), is acceptable to the Government and the documents will be tabled immediately.
Madam Speaker, I ask that the remaining notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand.


The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):: Is it the pleasure of the House that notice of motion for the production of papers No. P-5 be deemed to have been adopted?


Some Hon. Members:: Agreed.
Research/Development/Innovation	40,626
Research/Development/Innovation	274,154
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	1,815,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	20,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	22,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	304,677
Research/Development/Innovation	62,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	150,000
Research/Development/Innovation	301,760
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	60,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	17,650
Research/Development/lnnovation	99,500
Research/Development/I nnovation	77,680
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	58,000
Research/Development/Innovation	1,459,293
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	36,783
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	179,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	185,000
Research/Development/I nnovation	18,600
Research/Development/I nnovation	450,318
Research/Development/Innovation	15,000
Marketing	89,055
Research/Development/I nnovation	23,600
Research/Development/I nnovation	200,000
Productivity/Modernization/Expansion	100,000
Motion No. P-5-Mr. Murphy:
That an humble Address be presented to Her Excellency praying that she will
cause to be laid before this House a copy of the Cape Breton Development
Corporation's Five Year Plan.


Philip Derek Lewis: Madam Speaker, I ask that the remaining notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand.


The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):: Shall all notices of motions stand?


Some Hon. Members:: Agreed.
*


Brian Vincent Tobin: Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure for me today to ask leave, pursuant to Standing Order 29, to propose a motion to adjourn the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the issuance by the Government of France of drilling and exploration permits to foreign and French companies to drill in Canadian sovereign waters.
I make this request in the interest of ensuring that Canadians, and more important Newfoundlanders, have an opportunity to air fully in the House all the consequences and implications of such extraordinary action which has been taken in recent days by the Government of France.


Mr. Shields:: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think my hon. friend is making a serious error in fact, which 1 should like to point out to the Chair.
June 10, 1987

In fact the Government of France has not issued drilling permits. Neither has the Canadian Government issued drilling permits.
The permits which were issued were exploration permits, issued by the Government of France and by the Government of Canada, into disputed areas. Both Governments have issued permits to-


The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):: At this time the Chair will reserve on the application submitted by the Hon. Member for Humber-Port au Port-St. Barbe (Mr. Tobin).
I would like, with the permission of the House, to go back to the previous item of Routine Proceedings.


Some Hon. Members:: Agreed.
CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FIVE-YEAR PLAN Motion No. P-5-Mr. Murphy:
That an humble Address be presented to Her Excellency praying that she will cause to be laid before this House a copy of the Cape Breton Development Corporation's five-year plan.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.