CANADA

2nd SESSION  35th PARLIAMENT  VOLUME 136  NUMBER 66

OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD)

Tuesday, February 4, 1997

THE HONOURABLE GILDAS L. MOLGAT SPEAKER

This issue contains the latest listing of Officers of the Senate, the Ministry, Senators and Members of the Senate and Joint Committees. CONTENTS

(Daily index of proceedings appears at back of this issue.)

Debates: Victoria Building, Room 407, Tel. 996-0397 Published by the Senate Available from Canada Communication Group — Publishing, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa K1A 0S9, at $1.75 per copy or $158 per year. Also available on the Internet: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1446

THE SENATE

Tuesday, February 4, 1997

The Senate met at 2:00 p.m., the Speaker in the Chair. commercial jingle business while pursuing a full-time jazz career with The Montage. Prayers. Everybody has mentioned his gold and platinum records, THE SENATE his Juno Awards, his many films and TV scores, the Billboard No. 1 award, and his great contribution to this SPEAKER’S REMARKS ON RETURN TO CHAMBER country’s music industry. The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, before I call for Many stories took note of his Order of Canada...and, most Senators’ Statements, I wish to welcome back all honourable recently, his Lifetime Achievement Award at the recent senators to this chamber after the festive season. I trust that you Toronto Arts Awards. Others cited his many charitable all had a good Christmas recess. efforts, including that for Cystic Fibrosis and the National [Translation] Youth Orchestra. I hope that this session will be a friendly and a productive one. A few referred to the literally hundreds of appearances he made at telethons and benefits...not to mention the many [English] fundraising golf tournaments. We know that, aside from his many accomplishments, the SENATOR’S STATEMENTS essence of Hagood Hardy was his humanity, and his unfailing support and compassion for those friends and family he cherished. THE LATE HAGOOD HARDY Will Rogers said that he never met a man he did not like. TRIBUTE Hagood Hardy never met a person who did not like him. His Hon. Marie-P. Poulin: Honourable senators, on January 1 of music touched millions. We were lucky. He touched us. His this new year, our country lost a great Canadian: one who passing will leave a big hole in our lives but not in our contributed throughout his life to Canada’s human, social and hearts, because he filled our hearts to overflowing. He was cultural fabric. Hagood Hardy, composer, arranger and musician, our friend. passed away after a difficult battle with cancer. [Translation] At the funeral service, two of his close friends, Peter Giffen and Tom Williams, delivered very touching tributes. The Honourable senators, Hagood Hardy was a man in love. He following, honourable colleagues, is the eulogy pronounced by was in love with life, the life of our country, the country he Tom Williams, the co-founder of Attic Records in Canada, who chose. He transformed this love into music for us. Hundreds of said: concerts, over 35 records and 40 film scores. However, Hagood left us more than his music. He has, honourable senators, left us Over the past few days we have been reading about a responsibility as Canadian parliamentarians. He expressed it in Hagood in the newspapers, hearing about him on the radio, a speech to the Empire Club in Toronto, and I quote: and watching many tributes to him on television. [English] We have heard about his early days playing jazz at the House of Hamburg while still a student at the University of The most important thing for a government to remember in its policy toward the arts is that it can have the biggest Toronto. We have heard about his beginnings in the New impact in two major areas; those of nourishing and York jazz clubs, and his touring the country...his wife, enriching the atmosphere and environment for artistic Martha, and kids in tow...with such great jazz players as growth and development and of assisting in the distribution Herbie Mann and George Shearing. and exhibition of artistic work, both here and in the world at large. We have heard of Hagood and Martha bringing the family back to Toronto to give the children some stability during Thank you, Hagood Hardy. their high school years, and of his exploration of the February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1447

VISITORS IN THE GALLERY Competitive Position in Communications; and the State of Transportation Safety and Security in Canada. The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I should like to draw your attention to distinguished visitors in the gallery. They The Supplementary Estimate also covers certain security are two staff members from the Parliament of Yemen who are issues to ensure that the Senate is not the weak link in here to spend a two-week period with our staff to learn how we Parliament’s overall security effort. Some of these issues conduct our business. Their visit is the result of an official visit stem from recommendations made by the ad hoc committee which I made last year to Yemen, accompanied by Senator of senior officials, established by the Solicitor General. Robertson, during which we had a request from that nascent democracy for assistance in the further development of their The Supplementary Estimate also covers funds for a parliamentary system. computer/communication network so that the Senate I should like to introduce to you Mr. Lotfi-A-Al-sabahi and remains compatible with the House of Commons systems Mr. Mohammed-N-Al-komaim. and to adapt to technological changes in Government-wide financial and administrative practices. Hon. Senators: Hear, hear! Funds are also included to complete two replacement parliamentary committee rooms which were built by Public Works to compensate for the loss of rooms due to ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS renovations. These rooms require appropriate furniture in line with their use and design concept utilised by Public Works, in addition to simultaneous translation equipment to INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION meet official languages legislation. Respectfully submitted, FOURTEENTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE PRESENTED COLIN KENNY Hon. Colin Kenny, Chairman of the Standing Committee on Chair Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, presented the following report: The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this report be taken into consideration? Tuesday, February 4, 1997 On motion of Senator Kenny, report placed on the Orders of The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets the Day for consideration on Thursday next, February 6, 1997. and Administration has the honour to present its FIFTEENTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE PRESENTED FOURTEENTH REPORT Hon. Colin Kenny, Chairman of the Standing Committee on Your Committee recommends the adoption of a Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, presented the Supplementary Estimate of $2,861,000 for fiscal year following report: 1996-1997. Tuesday, February 4, 1997 This Supplementary Estimate is requested to fund unanticipated expenses and capital expenditures and will The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets result in significant savings. Initiatives recommended for and Administration has the honour to present its implementation include the transfer of East Block Security FIFTEENTH REPORT at net savings of $80,000 per year after an initial payback period of three years, which is significantly less than the Your Committee has examined and approved the Senate time Treasury Board uses as a guideline. Estimates for the fiscal year 1997-98 and recommends their adoption. As the Main Estimates are prepared 12 to 18 months in advance, a number of special studies being undertaken by The Expenditure Plan 1997-98 and a summary Senate Committees will be funded by this Supplementary accompanies this report. Estimate. These studies involve issues which are important to Canadians and include topics as the State of Respectfully submitted, Post-Secondary Education in Canada, including the Student COLIN KENNY Loan Program; the importance of the Asia Pacific Region, Chair especially with regard to trade; the Amendment to the Constitution concerning Term 17 of the Terms of Union (For text of appendix to this report, see Journals of the Senate with Newfoundland with Canada; our International of this day.) 1448 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this 3. Page 30, clause 53: Strike out lines 7 to 9 and substitute report be taken into consideration? the following: On motion of Senator Kenny, report placed on the Orders of “consumer debtor’s circumstances that leads the the Day for consideration on Thursday next, February 6, 1997. administrator to conclude, after consultation with the debtor where practicable, that such change could jeopardize the BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT consumer debtor’s ability to meet the terms of the proposal, COMPANIES’ CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT in writing, ”. INCOME TAX ACT 4. Page 38, clause 65: Add after line 40 the following: BILL TO AMEND—REPORT OF COMMITTEE “(3) Where all of the directors have resigned or have been Hon. Donald H. Oliver: Honourable senators, I have the removed by the shareholders without replacement, any honour to present the twelfth report of the Standing Senate person who manages or supervises the management of the Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, which deals with business and affairs of the corporation shall be deemed to be Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the a director for the purposes of this section.”. Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Income Tax Act. 5. Page 75, clause 118: Strike out line 27 and substitute the I ask that the appendix to this report be printed as an appendix to the Journals of the Senate of this day. following: (For text of appendix to report, see appendix to Journals of the “(C) for the firm’s own account,”. Senate of this day.) 6. Page 76, clause 118: Strike out line 6 and substitute the Tuesday, February 4, 1997 following: The Standing Committee on Banking, Trade and “count, and Commerce has the honour to present its (iii) any investments of the securities firm in its subsidiaries TWELFTH REPORT that are not referred to in subparagraph (i) or (ii); and”. Your Committee, to which was referred Bill C-5, An Act 7. Page 84, clause 121: Strike out lines 1 to 4 and substitute to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the the following: Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Income Tax “3. (1) This Act applies in respect of a debtor company or Act has examined the said bill in obedience to its Order of affiliated debtor companies where the total of claims, within Reference dated Thursday, October 31, 1996, and now the meaning of section 12, against the debtor company or reports the same with the following amendments: affiliated debtor companies exceeds five million dollars. 1. Page 4, clause 2: Strike out line 8 and substitute the (2) For the purposes of this Act, following: (a) companies are affiliated companies if one of them is the “person occurs at the time or date”. subsidiary of the other or both are subsidiaries of the same company or each of them is controlled by the same person; 2. Page 21, clause 30: and (a) Strike out line 4 and substitute the following: (b) two companies affiliated with the same company at the same time are deemed to be affiliated with each other. “be just and equitable in the circumstances.” (3) For the purposes of this Act, a company is controlled (b) Add the following after line 14: by a person or by two or more companies if “(18) Where all of the directors have resigned or have (a) securities of the company to which are attached more than been removed by the shareholders without replacement, any fifty per cent of the votes that may be cast to elect directors of person who manages or supervises the management of the the company are held, other than by way of security only, by business and affairs of the corporation shall be deemed to be or for the benefit of that person or by or for the benefit of those a director for the purposes of this section.”. companies; and February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1449

(b) the votes attached to those securities are sufficient, if Respectfully submitted, exercised, to elect a majority of the directors of the company. MICHAEL KIRBY (4) For the purposes of this Act, a company is a Chairman subsidiary of another company if The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this (a) it is controlled by report be taken into consideration? (i) that other company, On motion of Senator Oliver, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate. (ii) that other company and one or more companies each of which is controlled by that other company, or NATIONAL ORGAN DONOR WEEK BILL (iii) two or more companies each of which is controlled by that other company; or REPORT OF COMMITTEE (b) it is a subsidiary of a company that is a subsidiary of that Hon. Mabel M. DeWare, Chair of the Standing Senate other company.”. Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, presented the following report: 8. Page 84, clause 122: Add after line 28 the following: Tuesday, February 4, 1997 “(4) Where all of the directors have resigned or have been The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, removed by the shareholders without replacement, any Science and Technology has the honour to present its person who manages or supervises the management of the business and affairs of the debtor company shall be deemed TWELFTH REPORT to be a director for the purposes of this section.”. Your Committee, to which was referred the Bill C-202, 9. Page 86, clause 124: Strike out lines 21 to 30 and An Act respecting a National Organ Donor Week in Canada, substitute the following: has, in obedience to the Order of Reference of Wednesday, December 18, 1996, examined the said Bill and now reports “(4), the applicant also satisfies the court that the the same without amendment. applicant has acted, and is acting, in good faith and with due diligence.”. Respectfully submitted, 10. Page 90, clause 124: Add after line 10 the following: MABEL M. DeWARE Chair “(3) Where all of the directors have resigned or have been removed by the shareholders without replacement, any The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this person who manages or supervises the management of the bill be read the third time? business and affairs of the company shall be deemed to be a director for the purposes of this section.”. On motion of Senator DeWare, for Senator Keon, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting of 11. Page 91, clause 124: the Senate.

(a) Add after line 21 the following: ADJOURNMENT “(4) Where the monitor acts in good faith and takes Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Deputy Leader of the reasonable care in preparing the report referred to in Government): Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate paragraph (3)(b), the monitor is not liable for loss or and notwithstanding rule 58(1)(h), I move: damage to any person resulting from that person’s reliance on the report.”. That when the Senate adjourns today, it do stand adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, February 5, 1997, at (b) Strike out line 22 and substitute the following: 1:30 p.m. “(5) The debtor company shall”. The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators? Attached as an appendix to this Report are the Hon. Senators: Agreed. observations and recommendations of your Committee on Bill C-5. Motion agreed to. 1450 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

BELL CANADA ACT the afternoon of Wednesday, February 5, 1997, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 95(4) be BILL TO AMEND—FIRST READING suspended in relation thereto. The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, is leave had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-57, granted? to amend the Bell Canada Act. Hon. Noël A. Kinsella: Honourable senators, the request Bill read the first time. being made asks for leave to have the committee meet on two The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this days while the Senate is sitting. I have no difficulty with the bill be read the second time? granting of leave for today’s committee meeting. However, I have some difficulty with regard to tomorrow, although my On motion of Senator Graham, bill placed on the Orders of the difficulty may be resolved. Day for second reading on Thursday next, February 6, 1997. On the Order Paper, we see Motion No. 83, which speaks to a  (1420) matter directly associated with the work of the honourable senator’s committee. The debate on that motion was adjourned in the name of the Honourable Senator Kenny. LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS I know that the work of the Senate may be somewhat COMMITTEE AUTHORIZED TO MEET abbreviated today, and I hope that, in the ordinary course of DURING SITTING OF THE SENATE events, we will reach Motion No. 83 before 3:30 p.m., which Hon. Sharon Carstairs: Honourable senators, with leave of would give Senator Kenny the opportunity to speak to it. If not, the Senate and notwithstanding rule 58(1)(a), I move: then I hope we will get to it tomorrow. My concern is that I want to hear what Senator Kenny has to say about the motion as it That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and relates to the work of the committee. Constitutional Affairs have power to sit at 3:15 p.m., The Hon. the Speaker: I am sorry to interrupt the Honourable tomorrow, Wednesday, February 5, 1997, even though the Senator Kinsella. What is going on is out of order. Is the Senate may then be sitting and that rule 95(4) be suspended honourable senator refusing to grant leave? in relation thereto. Senator Kinsella: Honourable senators, I have no objection to The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, is leave the granting of leave with regard to today’s meeting. However, I granted? do object to the request for tomorrow being made today. Hon. Senators: Agreed. The Hon. the Speaker: The motion must then be amended. Is there agreement by the mover and the seconder that the motion Motion agreed to. be amended to deal only with today’s meeting of the committee?

ENERGY, THE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL Senator Ghitter: Your Honour, I am not quite clear, RESOURCES procedurally, as to what will happen tomorrow. As I said, we also have a large number of witnesses lined up to be heard tomorrow. COMMITTEE AUTHORIZED TO MEET DURING SITTINGS OF THE SENATE The Hon. the Speaker: If leave is granted, then you may proceed today. You will then need to ask for leave with respect to Hon. Ron Ghitter: Honourable senators, I wish to move a tomorrow. motion, seconded by the Honourable Senator Kenny. I understand that the unanimous consent of the Senate is necessary Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Deputy Leader of the in order to do this. Government): Honourable senators, it would have been helpful if the motions had been separate and distinct: that is to say, if the The committee is asking for leave to sit this afternoon and committee chairman had asked for leave to sit today at 3:30 p.m., tomorrow afternoon. We have a large number of witnesses who and given notice of tomorrow’s sitting at 3:15 p.m. That would are slated to appear before the committee on both days. have been the more logical course. Therefore, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 58(1)(a), I move: In view of the fact that some concerns have been raised, unless there is unanimous consent to grant leave for tomorrow’s sitting, That the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the then this is merely a notice of motion. It may be that Senator Environment and Natural Resources have power to sit at Kenny wishes to say something now on this matter. However, the 3:30 o’clock in the afternoon, today, and at 3:15 o’clock in Speaker may say that that, too, would be out of order. February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1451

Hon. Colin Kenny: Your Honour, in order to save the time of That, notwithstanding Rule 98, the Standing Senate the chamber, I intend to speak to Senator Kinsella’s motion in Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural order to agree to it, to support it, and to urge that it be passed. If Resources present an interim report, before submitting its there is unanimous consent, I could make my speech on that final report on the Bill C-29, to regulate interprovincial motion in about 30 seconds. That would alleviate Senator Kinsella’s concern. We could then move on with Senator trade in and the importation for commercial purposes of Ghitter’s motion. That might resolve the issue. certain manganese-based substances, relating to its findings on the following questions: The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, this is a most unusual way of proceeding. However, we are the masters of our (1) Is MMT-based petroleum the cause of OBD own rules. If it is the wish of the Senate to proceed in that way, malfunctioning? then by unanimous consent that can be done. (2) Does MMT in gas cause a health hazard to Honourable senators, is it agreed that we will hear from the Canadians? Honourable Senator Kenny on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kinsella before we settle the question of leave with regard to the motion of the Honourable Senator Ghitter? (3) Does MMT in gas cause direct damage to the environment?—(Honourable Senator Kenny). Hon. Senators: Agreed. Hon. Colin Kenny: I thank honourable senators for their [Later] indulgence. Motion No. 83 is a request by Senator Kinsella that studies take place in relation to MMT. I should like to indicate to The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, following the the chamber that I support this motion. I urge that all members of explanation from Senator Kenny, I ask again: Is leave granted for the chamber also support this motion. If they do, I am prepared to the motion proposed by the Honourable Senator Ghitter? table the studies forthwith.

Hon. Senators: Agreed. [Later]

The Hon. the Speaker: With leave of the Senate and Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Deputy Leader of the notwithstanding rule 58(1)(a), it is moved by the Honourable Government): Honourable senators, before we proceed further, Senator Ghitter, seconded by the Honourable Senator Kenny: do I understand that Motion No. 83 has now been disposed of? That the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, that is the Environment and Natural Resources have power to sit at question I was about to ask. Is it agreed, honourable senators, 3:30 o’clock in the afternoon, today, and at 3:15 o’clock in that we consider Motion No. 83 as having been debated? the afternoon of Wednesday, February 5, 1997, even though the Senate may then be sitting and that rule 95(4) be Hon. Senators: Agreed. suspended in relation thereto. Senator Kenny: Honourable senators, I request permission to Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion? table these documents. Hon. Senators: Agreed. The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, is leave Motion agreed to. granted?

COMMITTEE AUTHORIZED TO STUDY QUESTIONS ON Hon. John Lynch-Staunton (Leader of the Opposition): No. MANGANESE-BASED FUEL ADDITIVES BILL Senator Kenny is not replying to the motion. The motion asks that the committee present an interim report. I do not think Leave having been given to proceed to Motion No. 83: depositing documents is the same as presenting an interim report.

Resuming the debate on the motion of the Honourable The Hon. the Speaker: Then leave is not granted. Senator Kinsella, seconded by the Honourable Senator Doyle: Motion agreed to. 1452 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

HUMAN RIGHTS which, according to the settlement agreement, was “initiated and drafted by the RCMP and signed and sent by the Department of RACIAL DISCRIMINATION—SETTLEMENT OF UNITED STATES Justice” — contains, “...language...” that — “...indicates wrongly, LAWSUIT AGAINST TEXACO—NOTICE OF INQUIRY that the RCMP had reached conclusions that Mr. Mulroney had engaged in criminal activity...”, and therefore should be ignored Hon. Donald H. Oliver: Honourable senators, I give notice and treated as if it had never been sent, since both the Solicitor that, at the next sitting of the Senate, I will call the attention of General and the Minister of Justice cannot deny that this letter is the Senate to the matter of the lawsuit in the United States nothing short of sheer fabrication for purely partisan purposes? against Texaco with respect to racial discrimination that was Have the Swiss authorities been officially notified that this letter settled in November of last year. is riddled with gross errors, to say the least, and should be ignored, and that any action taken by the Swiss authorities as a result of these despicable accusations should stop forthwith? QUESTION PERIOD Hon. Joyce Fairbairn (Leader of the Government): Honourable senators, in the interests of being absolutely accurate and precise, I should like to take that question to the Minister of JUSTICE Justice. INVESTIGATION INTO SALE OF AIRBUS AIRCRAFT TO Senator Lynch-Staunton: Honourable senators, I hope that AIR CANADA—NOTIFICATION TO SWISS AUTHORITIES OF LATEST not only will the minister take my question to the Minister of DEVELOPMENTS—DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS TAKEN AGAINST Justice but that she will urge him to advise the Swiss authorities OFFICIALS INVOLVED—GOVERNMENT POSITION of the course that he and the government were forced to take at the beginning of this year, if he has not already done so. Hon. John Lynch-Staunton (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I wish to quote from a letter dated Following on that question, I should like to know what, if any, September 29, 1995, or, rather, from the unofficial translation of disciplinary actions or sanctions have been taken against those in that letter which was available to the Quebec Superior Court. It the RCMP and the Department of Justice who, acting in an states: official capacity, informed a foreign government that a former Prime Minister and two other Canadians had engaged in criminal The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada is activity, when they knew at the time what was finally admitted most kindly asking the Minister of Justice of Switzerland 14 months later, and then only on the eve of a lawsuit which, had for judicial assistance for the Canadian Government in the it been allowed to proceed, would have exposed this investigation of breaches of Canadian law... government’s perverted understanding of the presumption of The letter speaks of: innocence, namely that the RCMP and the Department of Justice never had a shred of evidence on which to base their letter? Now — an ongoing conspiracy to defraud the Canadian that we know what a fraudulent fabrication it was, surely the government of millions of dollars during the time that authors of this document cannot escape without some kind of Mr. Mulroney was in office, from September 1984 until his reprimand, if not suspension. I should like to know whether those resignation in June of 1993. who collaborated with this letter have been allowed to escape scot-free and to carry on with their responsibilities, or if any The letter continues: sanctions have been or will be taken against them for perpetrating this fraudulent, despicable letter which will go down — this investigation is of great importance to the Canadian in the annals as one of the worst actions ever taken by any government because it concerns criminal activities on the government of this country. part of a former Prime Minister. Senator Fairbairn: Honourable senators, I will also take  (1430) those specific questions to both of my colleagues. On January 6 of this year, a settlement agreement was I point out to Senator Lynch-Staunton, as I am sure he is announced between Mr. Mulroney, the government and the aware, that the Minister of Justice, shortly after the letter became RCMP following Mr. Mulroney’s action against the two. The public, instituted changes in the process of dealing with this kind fourth clause in the agreement reads as follows: of correspondence. Indeed, he indicated just yesterday that he has asked Mr. Allan Goodman, a former justice with the Ontario Based on the evidence received to date, the RCMP appeal court, to review the changes that have been instituted to acknowledges that any conclusions of wrongdoing by the ensure from an independent point of view that this kind of former were — and are — unjustified. mistake — this kind of error that has caused an apology from the Prime Minister on behalf of the government, from the ministers Have the Swiss authorities been officially notified by the who were involved, and I join with them in extending that Department of Justice that the September 29, 1995, letter — apology — will never happen again. February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1453

Senator Lynch-Staunton: Honourable senators, the question apology whatsoever for taking a lead to move that kind of is not whether the procedure was followed. The fault is not in the influence into that extremely troubled area. procedure. The question is on the major fault committed by those who contributed to the authorship of the letter. It is not the Senator Tkachuk: Honourable senators, I will await, I am procedure that is at fault; it is the content of the letter which is sure, the answer to the question I asked. I was asking about not riddled with lies deliberately put there to condemn innocent only the expenditure and who approved it, but the process of this Canadians. What will happen to those who contributed to that government. The Leader of the Government’s reply begs the letter? question of exactly how this entire affair came about.

The answer that former Justice Goodman is to examine the The Leader of the Opposition, Senator Lynch-Staunton, talked procedure does not answer the basic question of whether these about the process involving a former Prime Minister. It seems people will be allowed to get off scot-free for having tried to ruin that this sloppy way of conducting the affairs of the nation, to our the reputation of one former Prime Minister and two other great embarrassment before the rest of the world, goes on with Canadians, and God knows how many others. the Prime Minister himself, because he has told us that the reason he got on this foreign affairs escapade was that he was sitting Senator Fairbairn: As I indicated, I will take that precise home one night watching television reading a French novel question to my colleague. entitled Menaud, Maître-draveur. The images of the Rwandan refugees made such an impression on him that he felt he had no choice but to act. AFRICA  (1440) DESPATCH OF CANADIAN PEACEKEEPERS TO RWANDA-BURUNDI-ZAIRE REGION—SOURCE OF PAYMENT We later learned that perhaps he had not been watching TV FOR MISSION—GOVERNMENT POSITION and reading a French novel, but sitting in a restaurant with his wife and Minister Young, having dinner and laughing, joking, Hon. David Tkachuk: Last year, honourable senators, the probably talking about how they would proceed on the Zaire people of this country were treated to the spectacle of the Prime escapade. Then I am sure he received a call from his nephew, the Minister’s escapade in Zaire. For seven weeks, Canadian troops U.S. ambassador, who told him that an African relief mission is were sent to a corner of the globe to play cards and cool their just the thing he needs to win a Nobel Peace Prize. heels in empty airport hangars while the Prime Minister Honourable senators, I ask again: What was the process attempted to extricate himself from this dilemma. According to followed by the Prime Minister in deciding to send Canadian the Department of Defence, the Prime Minister’s folly cost the troops to Zaire? Could the leader provide us with a list of the Canadian taxpayers a minimum of $14.5 million. people he consulted? Did he speak to anybody in the department? Did he consult cabinet or the Treasury Board? What Who approved the expenditures of these funds? Was it the was the process, or was it the same process taken by Ms Prost cabinet, was it the Treasury Board, or was it a unilateral decision and the Minister of Justice regarding the former Prime Minister taken by the Prime Minister? of Canada? Hon. Joyce Fairbairn (Leader of the Government): Senator Fairbairn: Honourable senators, I must say I feel a Honourable senators, I would disagree with my honourable little sorry for my honourable friend, who is left to sit submerged friend’s characterization of the initiative taken in November to in his embarrassment and humiliation on the occasion of an send troops to Zaire. international initiative taken by his country in a time of need. If my honourable friend recalls the context of the situation at Senator Lynch-Staunton: But it flopped. the time, he may remember that there were hundreds of thousands of human beings in dire straits in that area. There was Senator Fairbairn: He may choose to make fun of the Prime no movement of those people. Neither this government nor I Minister. He may choose to make light of the action. He may would claim that the evidence of an international grouping, ready choose to make light of the people who were involved and to take an initiative in that area, was what prompted, on its own, prepared. Those people included some of our own Armed Forces, those people to begin to move. It certainly was seen as a factor. who were prepared to play a significant role in that area if the need was proven. Senator Lynch-Staunton: They would not even let them into the country. Of course, the Prime Minister spent a great deal of time talking to leaders of a number of other countries. Of course, he received Senator Fairbairn: My honourable friend laughs, but I must advice from our ambassador to Washington, who was in a say that, in a case of international distress and emergency, if the position to help because of his own knowledge of that area and action of one country, supported by many others and the United his own recognized prestige in that part of the world. Our Nations, prevents a conflict and prevents massive cases of injury ambassador was being asked by the United Nations to go over and death, then I do not believe that Canada has to make any there as an envoy. 1454 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

Of course, the Prime Minister gave the situation very serious Senator Taylor: To the woodshed! thought. The Prime Minister of Canada may have been distressed watching refugees on his television screen but so were the Senator Fairbairn: From the vantage of my advanced years Canadian people, and the Canadian people were darned proud in comparison to those of Honourable Senator Tkachuk, I simply that their government did not sit back. Their government took a say that, yes, I will make those inquiries. I hope we can make the lead. Their government was instrumental in bringing about an honourable senator a little happier than he is today. However, let atmosphere that absolutely changed the dynamics of the situation me again say that there were intensive diplomatic discussions, in that area. leader to leader. There were phones calls.

Senator Lynch-Staunton: Oh, come on! Senator Tkachuk: Uncle to nephew?

Senator Fairbairn: Of course, they did, Senator Senator Fairbairn: There were extensive consultations on the Lynch-Staunton. diplomatic front through the minister and through the department. Of course, serious consideration was given to the Senator Lynch-Staunton: The rebels attacked the camp. possibility of Canada’s getting involved in helping. At a time Look up your history! when everyone else was sitting around and doing nothing but Senator Fairbairn: We can sit here in this comfortable worrying about it, we took the lead. We took leadership of that chamber, talking about hundreds of thousands of lives at risk. issue. We were helped by our allies. We were encouraged and, Canada played a part. Canada helped, along with its allies. indeed, supported by the United Nations. I feel sorry for Senator Tkachuk, that he was so embarrassed Things changed because the international community came by the actions of the Government of Canada on behalf of the together and gave an indication that it would not tolerate the concerns of the people of Canada. situation that was developing in that tortured part of Africa. It worked. I will try to get the honourable senator every bit and Some Hon. Senators: Hear! Hear! piece of information that I can. Senator Tkachuk: Honourable senators, I do not think the I have told the honourable senator about the process. Part of Leader of the Government in the Senate gets it. that process is being able to pick up a telephone and start action that will help children and adults, people who are living in war Senator Fairbairn: I get it. You do not get it. and poverty. We did help.

Senator Tkachuk: Honourable senators, I am not REFUSAL BY AFRICAN GOVERNMENTS TO PERMIT CANADIAN embarrassed for myself. I was trying to find out about the process PEACEKEEPING TROOPS TO LAND—GOVERNMENT POSITION because I think it is important. This never left the lips of the Prime Minister, but I will tell you this: I fear for this country Hon. John Lynch-Staunton (Leader of the Opposition): when soldiers — our sons and daughters — are sent on an Honourable senators, by way of a supplementary question, if this escapade to Africa because someone was watching some news mission was so essential and such a priority for the African channel on television and was probably sitting at a restaurant countries who were in such despair, why is it that Canadian having dinner while soldiers were directed to go across the ocean troops were not allowed to land in Rwanda? to deal with a situation about which he, his government, the cabinet, and the Treasury Board seem not to have known Senator Grafstein: For the obvious reason. anything. Hon. Joyce Fairbairn (Leader of the Government): I am asking the Leader of the Government, as a member of the Honourable senators, as my honourable friend will know, there is cabinet, to tell the Senate about the process so we will know, a great deal of national conflict and national politics in Africa. when other soldiers are sent somewhere else, how they will make We were trying to present an opportunity in a situation that was those decisions. If you make them this way, tell us that you make troubling to all the countries involved. Because of the history of them this way — that you sit around watching TV and someone war and migration in that area, we were trying to open an gets up and sends out the soldiers. That is fine. At least the opportunity to let those people move. Canadian people will know. Otherwise, tell us the process. Senator Fairbairn: Senator Tkachuk, really! I try very Senator Lynch-Staunton: They were already on the move hard — before we sent troops over. Senator Tkachuk: You sound like my mother! Senator Graham: No, no. Senator Fairbairn: I should sound like your mother, you are Senator Lynch-Staunton: Yes, they were. right, because you have been a bad boy! With great respect, dear, you simply do not know what you are talking about! Senator Fairbairn: They were not.

[ Senator Fairbairn ] February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1455

Senator Berntson: Had you landed there, you would have imprisonment of dissident Wang Dan, and a response to a been run over. question he raised on December 10, 1996, regarding the correlation of Canadian aid to the human rights record and Senator Fairbairn: This country would never be egotistical military expenditures of recipient countries. enough to say, “We changed it.” I have a response to a questions raised on December 10, 1996, Senator Berntson: Oh, yes, you would. by the Honourable Senator Prud’homme and the Honourable Senator Fairbairn: The world changed it through evidence of Senator Bryden regarding Radio Canada International and the their will that something would be done and that it would be announcement of its closing. done by people coming in if it could not be done by the people on the ground. I have a response to a question raised on December 13, 1996, by the Honourable Senator Pierre Claude Nolin regarding the Of course, there were hostilities toward any outsider coming in Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, effects of layoffs. at that point. However, the world believed it was worth a try. An effort was made. It did not end up in shooting and death. It ended up in an incredible migration of people. We played a part. We EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE were influential in getting others to come together. I simply say this ought to be an occasion where everyone can say that they CHANGES TO SYSTEM BY WAY OF REGULATION—EFFECTS ON were a little bit proud that this country did what it did. FISHING INDUSTRY—GOVERNMENT POSITION

 (1450) (Response to question raised by Hon. Gerald J. Comeau on Senator Lynch-Staunton: Let us have accurate answers. September 24, 1996) Those who were in the refugee camps for years were not released because of Canada’s concern and the support for it, lukewarm as Information on the proposed changes to the fishing it was, of other countries. They were allowed to leave the camps regulations has been widely distributed. When Bill C-12 because they were attacked by the rebels in Zaire. It was an received Royal Assent in early July, an Information Paper attack on the camps that opened them up and allowed the was sent to more than 150 industry representatives, MPs and refugees to flee, which happened to coincide with the pathetic others. Industry representatives were given briefings when efforts of this country to rally other countries that refused to they were requested. Upon tabling of the Regulations in the commit troops, but because we are Canadians they were all nice House on September 19, industry, MPs and others were to us. again sent letters and information about the forthcoming All the Americans were willing to do, reluctantly, was to give regulations. logistical support. We are talking about a force of 10,000. We finally got down to a force of 200 Canadians. We flew them over, Many of the changes to the fishing regulations resulted and when they got there, neither Zaire nor Rwanda would allow from the recommendations of The Task Force on Incomes them to land. They had to land at an airport in Uganda and stay and Adjustments in the Atlantic Fishery (Cashin Task there in the heat and do nothing until they were called back. That Force) which released its report in November, 1993, is Canada’s contribution to settling tribal warfare in Africa. If following 2 years of study. Changes introduced by that is all it is, we do not want anything to do with it. regulation are mainly positive for fishers. They include an earnings-based qualification requirement rather than one DELAYED ANSWERS TO ORAL QUESTIONS based on hours or weeks; a longer window during which a maximum of 26 weeks of benefits may be received; an Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Deputy Leader of the earlier and flexible start date for the qualifying period in Government): Honourable senators, I have a response to a keeping with the flexible start dates of the benefit periods; question raised by the Honourable Senator Comeau, on September 24, 1996, regarding employment insurance, changes and less complicated procedures for administration. These to the system by way of regulation, effects on fishing industry. changes will only come into effect on January 5, 1997. I have a response to a question raised on October 22, 1996, by Since the inception of the program in 1957, rules the Honourable Senator Forrestall, regarding the GST, governing unemployment insurance benefits for fishers have harmonization of provincial sales taxes and efficacy of policy. resembled, as closely as possible, those for regular claimants. However, because of the nature of the fishing I have a response to a question raised on October 30, 1996, by industry and because we are dealing with self-employed the Honourable Senator Andreychuck regarding the mission of Ambassador Chrétien to Rwanda, Burundi and Zaire. workers, some special rules are required. Authority to make these special rules is found in section 153 of the I have a response to a question raised on November 7, 1996, Employment Insurance Act (formerly section 130 of the by the Honourable Senator Di Nino regarding the trial and Unemployment Insurance Act). 1456 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

In keeping with the intent to make the employment Nations did not provide him with special remuneration for benefits program for self-employed fishers as similar as his work as Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the possible to that for other workers, the key changes affecting Great Lakes region. fishers were included in Bill C-12. The main provisions in Bill C-12 that apply to self-employed fishers are the The Government of Canada maintains its bilateral agenda declining benefit rate based on previous weeks of benefits with countries in the region and its policy goals are defined i.e. the intensity provision, and the clawback provisions. with Canadian interests in mind. The Government of The application to fishers ensures treatment which is Canada’s initiative in the region and its work in cooperation equitable for seasonal workers in all industries. In fact, with other contributing countries in forming the self-employed fishers, on average, have higher benefit rates Multinational Force, significantly enhanced Canada’s than regular claimants ($380 compared to $273) and would foreign policy objectives of averting a humanitarian disaster. be less affected by a reduction in the benefit rate due to Currently, with most Rwandan refugees returned to application of the intensity provision. Rwanda, and most displaced Zairians back in their homes, the worst of the bloodshed of civilians has passed. Arms GOODS AND SERVICES TAX were likely supplied to the various warring parties in Eastern Zaire by like-minded associations and/or HARMONIZATION WITH PROVINCIAL SALES TAXES—REQUEST FOR governments in neighbouring countries. DETAILS OF IMPLEMENTATION Ambassador Chrétien visited the region on a United (Response to question raised by Hon. J. Michael Forrestall on Nations mission assigned to him by the Secretary General October 22, 1996) and submitted his report to the United Nations Secretary Nova Scotia received its share of adjustment assistance General on December 11. He travelled and met with on October 18, 1996, the day the province signed the regional leaders as a representative of the United Nations. Comprehensive Integrated Tax Coordination Agreement Canada’s Special Ambassador to the region meets with (CITCA). The province received its full four year assistance leaders and attends meetings as a representative of the entitlement of $248 million on October 18, 1996, in order to Government of Canada. He represents the interests of the assist in covering costs associated with winding down its Government of Canada and speaks on behalf of the current sales tax, and provide fiscal stability in the transition Government of Canada. to the HST. The primary concern of the Government of Canada is the The amount of adjustment assistance available for Nova humanitarian aspect of the conflict in the Great Lakes Scotia was determined at the time of the signing of the April region. The safety and security of Rwandan refugees and 23, 1996, Memorandum of Understanding between the displaced people in Eastern Zaire, and the smooth Federal and Nova Scotia governments. Nova Scotia’s reintegration of returnees in Rwanda need the attention of adjustment assistance of $248 million, as determined under the international community and the United Nations. the adjustment assistance formula applied to all provinces, Ambassador Chrétien’s mission as the United Nations was agreed to at that time, and will not be subject to change. Special Envoy to the Great Lakes region and the Government of Canada’s offer to lead the Multinational Adjustment assistance funds were issued by cheque and Force demonstrated the Government of Canada’s deposited into the respective provincial bank accounts at commitment to humanitarian assistance in the region and financial institutions in Ottawa. Each province will make its rallied other governments to become involved. own policy decisions as to how adjustment assistance is to be included in provincial public accounts. CANADA-CHINA RELATIONS

AFRICA TRIAL AND IMPRISONMENT OF DISSIDENT WANG DAN—GOVERNMENT POSITION MISSION OF AMBASSADOR CHRÉTIEN TO RWANDA-BURUNDI-ZAIRE REGION—DEFINITION OF (Response to question raised by Hon. Consiglio Di Nino on ROLE—GOVERNMENT POSITION November 7, 1996) (Response to question raised by Hon. A. Raynell Andreychuk On October 16, the Canadian Embassy in Beijing made a on October 30, 1996) representation to Chinese authorities, to express Canadian concerns about Wang Dan having been detained for Ambassador Chrétien was paid his regular salary as 16 months without trial and the heavy sentence that he now Ambassador by the Government of Canada. The United faces. The Canadian Embassy reiterated Canada’s position,

[ Senator Graham ] February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1457

expressed earlier to China and at the United Nations of the Criminal Procedures Law reform which was put in Commission on Human Rights, that China is imposing place January 1st, 1997. unnecessary restrictions on the peaceful expression of political views. HUMAN RIGHTS

The Embassy has also emphasized the Government’s CORRELATION OF CANADIAN AID TO HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD view that notwithstanding China’s claim that the Wang Dan AND MILITARY EXPENDITURES OF RECIPIENT COUNTRIES case is strictly a “domestic legal matter”, Canadians expect a more transparent judicial process and the application of (Response to question raised by Hon. Consiglio Di Nino on the presumption of innocence, in accordance with December 10, 1996) international legal principles and with the intent of China’s revised Criminal Procedure Law, which was implemented In 1994, military expenditures as a percentage of GDP for January 1st, 1997. developing countries were approximately 2.6 per cent; higher than the Canadian equivalent number of After Wang’s trial, the Canadian Embassy in Beijing approximately 1.8 per cent, but lower than the OECD made a second demarche on November 5, 1996, to register average of 2.7 per cent. It is accurate to state that more than the fact that Wang’s conviction and heavy sentence have half of Canada’s major aid recipients presently spend more created universal concern in the Canadian public. The on their military as a percentage of GDP than Canada. Embassy noted that Canada has been encouraged by China’s However, the general trend in military spending in efforts to reform its legal system as a basis of a modern developing countries is downward (i.e., from 6.1 per cent of society and economy, but expressed its concern that the lack GDP in 1984) and many have security concerns which are of due process in Wang Dan’s trial constitutes a step not comparable to Canada’s. backward. Finally, the Canadian Government asked that this Nevertheless, the Government of Canada is concerned conviction be reconsidered during the appeal. The that these numbers remain high and in some cases impede subsequent rejection of the appeal by the court was a major development. Military spending has the potential to exhaust disappointment. scarce investment resources which could otherwise contribute to the alleviation of more obvious social and The Canadian government continues to raise human economic problems in a country. As well, far from their rights concerns with the Chinese leadership. The Minister of intended purpose, they contribute to negative security Foreign Affairs raised the issue with Qian Qichen during his perceptions and consequently further arms spending, September visit to Canada, as did the Prime Minister during thereby raising the risk of conflict. In recognition of these bilateral meetings with President Jiang Zemin in Manila and negative impacts, Canada has taken a number of direct and Premier Li Peng in Shanghai. The Canadian government is indirect actions. also committed to maintaining an active human rights dialogue at various levels. Though human rights abuses As a first step, the Government hosted a forum in March continue, it is through ties with China that Canada has been 1996 with concerned Canadian groups and individuals to able to contribute to significant reforms of China’s legal discuss possible approaches to this issue. As a result of these system. consultations, Minister Axworthy tabled in Parliament a Canadian Strategy Document entitled “Reduction of The Canadian Government is now proceeding with the Military Expenditures in Developing Countries” in June training of Chinese senior judges. The project’s objective is 1996. This paper, combined with the emphasis of “Canada to support the strengthening of the training capacity of the in the World”, established the policy basis from which Senior Judges Training Centre in Beijing and, thereby, to various actions have been taken. give China’s court system an international dimension via the training of a new generation of trainers, fully conversant Second, Canada has established a “like-minded group” of with Western judicial and legal theory and practice. These ten countries (Canada, U.K., U.S., Japan, Germany, Sweden, cooperation programs have the potential to be effective in Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Australia) and three the long-term and reinforce, with decisive actions within the international organizations (the IMF, World Bank and civil society, our dialogue with the Chinese government to OECD/DAC) to examine ways to address excessive military promote respect for human rights. The Department of spending. The objective is to promote consensus on a Foreign Affairs will be watching closely the implementation multilateral agenda for action. 1458 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

Donors are now pooling their resources to undertake Complaints were filed with the Commissioner of Official sub-regional case studies in Africa, Asia and the Americas, Languages concerning the impact of CBC’s reduction with the intent of presenting the findings at an international measures on service to minority language communities in symposium, hosted by Canada and the OECD in Ottawa, relation to the Official Languages Act and the Broadcasting March 18-19, 1997. The Ottawa symposium will be an Act. These complaints are currently under investigation by excellent forum to begin a productive dialogue with the Commissioner and it would be inappropriate for the developing countries. It will also help raise international and government to comment until this process is complete. Canadian public awareness to this issue. On March 20, the day following the main symposium, a half day public forum REQUEST FOR ANSWERS with interested Canadian groups and individuals is planned. Third, Canada has encouraged the International Monetary Hon. Noël A. Kinsella: Honourable senators, perhaps the Deputy Leader of the Government could give the Senate an Fund, the World Bank and the OECD to play a central role indication as to when we might have responses to questions in data collection and analysis, as well as to raise the profile raised by the Honourable Senator Forrestall, and to questions of excessive military expenditures as an economic raised by the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton on May 14, development, public expenditure management, and good 1996, and on June 4, 1996. governance issue. Canada recently highlighted the important role these organizations have in addressing this issue at the Halifax and Lyon Summits, the Annual Meetings of the IMF NATIONAL FINANCE and World Bank, and at various other donor coordination fora, such as the Commonwealth and the Francophonie. FAILURE OF CONFEDERATION LIFE—ESTIMATE OF MAGNITUDE OF Finally, CIDA has many initiatives which directly and LOSS—GOVERNMENT POSITION—REQUEST FOR ANSWER indirectly impact on the military budget and which assist in the demilitarisation of a society. For example, defence Hon. Finlay MacDonald: Honourable senators, I might also industry conversion, demobilisation of ex-combatants, inquire about the answer to the question I asked on October 30, de-mining, weapons buyback programs, strengthening of 1996, with regard to the losses incurred by the Confederation civil society to improve participation in public policy Life Insurance Company. making, and resource allocation decisions, as well as initiatives to encourage cooperative approaches to natural Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Deputy Leader of the resource management, such as water in the Middle East. Government): Honourable senators, I apologize. We do not have answers to those questions, but we will persevere and see if we cannot get those answers this week or at the earliest possible COMMUNICATIONS date.

RADIO CANADA INTERNATIONAL—ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSING—EFFECT ON COMMUNITY OF SACKVILLE, NEW BRUNSWICK—REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF GOVERNMENT POSITION ORDERS OF THE DAY (Response to questions raised by Hon. Marcel Prud’homme and Hon. John G. Bryden on December 10, 1996) FIRST NATIONS GOVERNMENT BILL On December 6, as a result of budget reduction measures, CBC had announced the closure of RCI. On December 12, POINT OF ORDER—RULING OF THE SPEAKER 1996, the Honourable Sheila Copps, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage, and the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy, Minister of Foreign Affairs, were pleased On the Order: to announce that government funding of $16 million had been identified for fiscal year 1997-98 to enable the Second Reading of Bill S-12, An Act providing for continued operation of RCI. self-government by the first nations of Canada.—(Speaker’s Ruling). CANADIAN HERITAGE The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, you will recall EFFECTS OF LAYOFFS ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF that when Senator Tkachuk attempted to move second reading of FRANCOPHONES OUTSIDE OF QUEBEC Bill S-12, an Act providing for self-government by the First Nations of Canada, a point of order was raised by Senator (Response to question raised by Hon. Pierre Claude Nolin on Stanbury who objected to the procedures because the bill lacked December 13, 1996) a Royal Recommendation. As debate on the point of order

[ Senator Graham ] February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1459 proceeded, it became apparent that the issues raised were indeed Speaker’s duty to defend the rights and privileges of individual significant. They relate to the right of the Senate to consider members of Parliament, particularly senators. legislation. In preparing my decision, I have spent a great deal of time reviewing the authorities on the subject of money bills in [Translation] general and the practices of the Senate in particular with regard to financial legislation. When Senator Kinsella spoke to the point of order, he drew attention to clause 12 of the bill and asked whether that clause is [Translation] attempting to give the power to tax. If so, he suggested that it would likely be “within the rubric of what constitutes an Honourable senators, to better explain the issues involved, I appropriation of public money.” This point about taxation was will briefly review the arguments that were presented by the seized upon by Senator Stanbury who felt that it added to the senators who spoke to this point of order. arguments he had made earlier. Senator Tkachuk replied that there would be no tax consequences to the Government of Canada from Bill S-12, since it would impose no taxes, but rather Citing rule 81 of the Rules of the Senate, Senator Stanbury “it would recognize the legislative jurisidiction of the Indian asked me to rule whether Bill S-12 is properly before the Senate, community to raise money by way of taxes and other since it could be regarded as a money bill requiring a Royal assessments. The power to tax arises from the Indian Act and is Recommendation, which it does not have. Senator Stanbury an action already authorized by Parliament... The bill only argued that bills requiring an expenditure of public funds cannot recognizes the power and moves it from the Indian Act to be introduced in the Senate. In his view, Bill S-12 would result in Bill S-12.” the expenditure of federal funds for the transfer of reserve lands to First Nations because of a need to conduct land surveys and Finally, Senators Twinn and Marchand spoke to the environmental audits. In addition, he argued that by extending to importance of the legislation. Senator Twinn also noted that he Indian corporations the tax exemption currently available to saw no added costs being incurred through passage of the bill. I Indian individuals under the Indian Act, a significant amount of wish to thank them and all other senators who participated in the potential tax revenue would be eliminated. Because costs seemed debate on this point of order. to be involved in Bill S-12, Senator Stanbury claimed that it is a money bill and therefore requires a Royal Recommendation. He noted that a previous bill on the same subject, Bill S-18, had [English] been ruled out of order on February 27, 1991, because the Speaker found it to be a money bill that lacked a Royal My obligation as Speaker is to apply the Rules of the Senate of Recommendation. Canada to the best of my ability. There are only two Senate rules that directly address the subject of money bills, and only one is [English] relevant to the matter before us today. Rule 81, which was cited by Senator Stanbury, states: Senator Tkachuk, having anticipated this point of order, argued that the Senate should proceed to consider this bill. He stressed The Senate shall not proceed upon a bill appropriating that the Senate should not continually narrow its focus and run public money that has not within the knowledge of the the risk of becoming irrelevant. Rather, senators must be allowed Senate been recommended by the Queen’s representative. to move bills in which they believe, as long as they do not overstep their constitutional bounds. Senator Tkachuk argued This rule extends to the Senate the constitutional requirement that the passage of Bill S-12 would have no impact on the public imposed on the House of Commons by section 54 of the purse of the Government of Canada and should therefore be ruled Constitution Act, 1867, which states: in order. It shall not be lawful for the House of Commons to adopt or pass any Vote, Resolution, Address, or Bill for the In speaking to the point of order, Senator Cools referred to two Appropriation of any Part of the Public Revenue, or of any reports of the Senate that have an important bearing on this Tax or Impost, to any Purpose that has not been first question. The more recent of the two is the ninth report of the recommended to that House by Message of the Governor Standing Senate Committee on National Finance on the subject General in the Session in which such Vote, Resolution, of Royal Recommendations, adopted by the Senate on May 29, Address, or Bill is proposed. 1990. The other is the report of the Special Committee appointed to determine the Rights of the Senate in Matters of Financial  (1500) Legislation, commonly known as the Ross report, adopted by the Senate on May 22, 1918. Senator Cools voiced her concerns By adopting rule 81, the Senate took the responsibility to about the so-called “money bills.” She also raised questions ensure that bills appropriating public money are initiated by the about the rights and privileges of individual senators and Crown and recommended to Parliament. Non-ministerial members of Parliament to move initiatives through their parliamentarians, including senators, do not have the opportunity respective chambers and the level of government control over the to introduce bills that would appropriate any part of the public parliamentary agenda. Senator Cools suggested that it is the revenue or of any tax or impost. 1460 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

The key question then becomes whether or not Bill S-12 by existing allocations established through previous legislation. appropriates public money. Past interpretations of rule 81 and Nor is there any language in the bill that effectively imposes any what constitutes an “appropriation” have sometimes been quite perceived appropriation. Yet these are the conditions to be broad, for instance when Bill S-18 was ruled out of order in satisfied when considering whether a Royal Recommendation February 1991. In that case, reliance was placed on statutes and should be attached to the bill. practices in the British House of Commons that have been adopted by our House of Commons to some extent. However, I Also, with respect to the concern about forgone tax revenue, I should like to remind senators that with respect to the powers of can find no basis for ruling the bill out of order. Bill S-12 would the Senate and the House of Commons in dealing with money extend to Indian corporations the tax exemption currently bills, the two chambers have not always agreed. Indeed, the Ross available to Indian individuals under the Indian Act. The report rejected the idea that British practice with respect to objection raised is that this extension would eliminate potential money bills was any part of the Constitution of Canada and noted tax revenue and therefore amount to an appropriation of public that claims by the House of Commons to the broader powers and revenue. However, there is no requirement for a Royal privileges of the British House of Commons were unwarranted Recommendation in cases where a bill proposes to reduce a under the British North America Act, 1867. charge or extend an exemption from a tax.

[Translation] Without sufficient evidence that Bill S-12 as drafted provides for an appropriation or creates a new charge, I have no authority In addition, the Senate’s National Finance Committee has to prevent debate on it. Based on the arguments that were expressed some doubts about the use of the current form of the presented, I find that a case has not been made that Bill S-12 Royal Recommendation. As the committee report of 1990 requires a Royal Recommendation. With respect to rule 81, the explained, prior to 1968, each bill or clause in a bill which bill is properly before the Senate. Accordingly, its fate rests with sought or authorized an appropriation was preceded by passage the Senate itself. in the House of Commons of a financial resolution that defined the amount and purpose of the appropriation. When I began my ruling, I mentioned that I had taken a great deal of time to review this matter. I recognize that this may have This resolution was recommended to the Commons by the been inconvenient to some senators, but the time was needed in Governor General and formed the basis of the subsequent bill. In order to sift through the debate on Bill S-12 and to review the 1968, the Standing Orders of the House of Commons were tangled history of money bills and the use of the Royal amended so that the Royal Recommendation would be given to Recommendation. It has been a challenging task. It has also the Commons in the form of a printed notice, rather than a revealed to me that something really should be done to clarify the proposed resolution. For several years after the change, the position of the Senate with respect to financial legislation and the notice of the Royal Recommendation still provided sufficient proper use of the Royal Recommendation. The Ross report and detail to explain the amount and purpose of the appropriation. the National Finance Committee report acknowledged these However, since 1976, the Royal Recommendation has taken on a problems and recommended further study. Perhaps the time has standard form, and the purpose and amount of any appropriation finally come for the Senate to follow up on those proposals. is no longer evident. Indeed, testimony before the National Finance Committee SECOND READING—DEBATE ADJOURNED indicated that the Royal Recommendation is sometimes attached to bills in which there is no apparent appropriation. As a Hon. David Tkachuk moved the second reading of Bill S-12, consequence, the committee recognized that members of both providing for self-government by the First Nations of Canada. Houses, including the Speakers, are now left without a clear statement from the Crown as to what appropriations are being He said: Honourable senators, before I begin my remarks, I sought by a recommendation. Seven years after the report was wish to thank His Honour for his ruling, and apologize if I have adopted, the problem still exists. been impatient over this process. However, I think he has done the Senate a great service by the ruling he has brought forward.

[English] Honourable senators, it is a pleasure for me to speak on Bill S-12, an act for self-government by the First Nations of In the case of Bill S-12 now before us, the task is not to Canada. I should like to bring to your attention words from a determine what the recommendation might mean, but whether document circulated by our colleague Senator Watt in February one is required at all. I have carefully reviewed Bill S-12 with of 1990 regarding the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal respect to the arguments that were made on November 27 and I Affairs, its possible functions, and the role of the committee have been unable to find any provision that clearly appropriates within the Senate. He wrote as follows: money from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Moreover, while Senator Stanbury indicated that clauses 16 to 27 might possibly Workable and well-developed proposals could be further involve an expenditure by government, it is not certain whether refined by the committee, and perhaps, at a later date, tabled these anticipated operations would be funded by a new as a Private Member’s Bill on behalf of the group in appropriation, which would require a Royal Recommendation, or question. February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1461

He called for an integration of the economic objectives of the There are those who are arguing for self-government based on aboriginal people into the Canadian economy, and he wrote: race — an Indian assembly to govern Indian people throughout Canada. This incredible and unbelievable idea is being discussed Their economic activities must support their values, culture, by aboriginal groups funded by the federal government, not with and aspirations in the same way that economies of southern a critical view, but as if there was some credibility, some spiritual Canada promote the interests, lifestyles, and ambitions of stamp of approval on the very idea of a government within a the non-aboriginal population. government, a parallel government, one governing aboriginals and another governing everybody else, with only one group of From the time I first discussed the possibility of introducing citizens paying taxes — government based on race. We, as this legislation in the summer of 1994, the question most often parliamentarians, acquiesce by our silence. Our silence can be asked of me was not what was in the bill itself, nor how it seen by certain vested interests as permission to pursue the affected our relationships with Indian reserves, nor even, fellow discussions of government based on race. senators, whether it was constitutional; it was: Why the Senate? That is a strange question to ask about a legislative body. My Honourable senators, we should be silent no more. There is reply is: Why not? At least it will be done in an open and reluctance to pursue the subject by those who are not aboriginals, democratic manner by parliamentarians. We will not merely be but, as Canadians, we all have a responsibility to discuss this meeting an executive agenda that for some reason caused past important matter. At some time we must act. The present deals, such as the Nunavut deal, to pass all stages of Parliament situation is, by itself, intolerable for all of us. in one day. It was on Friday, June 4, 1993, that the Nunavut deal was debated at second reading, read the second time, referred to Think of it: a department of the federal government with Committee of the Whole, reported without amendment, dictatorial powers overseeing and in fact governing the lives of concurred in at report stage, read the third time and passed — all Canadians of Indian ancestry on reserves. How can we justify a in one day. totalitarian regime within a democracy? There is some confusion in political fora about I noted that the bills dealing with the Yukon land settlement self-government. Everyone talks about it, yet no one does a thing and government agreement were also introduced with haste into about it. I think it is because no one quite knows what to do. In the Senate. At that time, some honourable senators took fact, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on the exception to the haste. Senator Andreychuk said: process of Indian self-government, yet no practical, concise, modern expression of native self-government has ever emerged ...both deputy leaders who are in charge of the process again from the major aboriginal organizations. reiterated today the difficulty for us to exercise our responsibilities appropriately when we receive legislation... Senator Buchanan was present as the Premier of Nova Scotia in the four constitutional conferences on Indian self-government These comments seem to suggest that, even after 21 years of in the 1980s. I attended two of those sessions. He can tell you negotiations and feasibility studies, we needed a mad dash for the about the tremendous expense of effort, time and money that finish line. went into a decade of constitutional negotiations with few results. Senator Watt was there, too. I agree that the quest of native people for viable self-governing communities within Canada requires results-oriented Honourable senators, I will always tell you that no practical, government, but I also believe in due process. There would concise, modern expression of Indian self-government has ever appear to be a reluctance to debate openly something that I emerged from the self-government unit of the Department of believe needs the examination, attention and focus of all of us in Indian Affairs, known by different names, the recent incarnation our Parliament. To negotiate in secret is wrong. being the “inherent rights unit.” The national leadership of the country has said that there must be ways by which we can  (1510) accomplish the public policy of self-government without constitutional amendment. The process we have been following of bureaucrats, lawyers, consultants and commissions is vulgar in its expenditures and is According to The Globe and Mail of December 15, 1994, the dealt with as though it were some top-secret, high-level Prime Minister said outside the Commons, in discussing negotiation. It would make disarmament teams blush. In the case constitutional proposals for natives, “I’ve always said there are of the Yukon bill, $90 million was spent in negotiations. Only ways to make changes without making constitutional changes.” 7,000 aboriginals were affected by the settlement. That is not a Minister Irwin, on March 12, 1995, said in his message to the way for us to do business. The repercussions of legislation such bureaucracy in his department, “They are to follow the Liberal as for Nunavut or the Council of Yukon Indians’ deal will be Red Book or else,” which recognizes the principles of monumental. self-government. 1462 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

The Charlottetown accord contained provisions that would land-based community or indigenous people may opt into, have entrenched native self-government in the Constitution. It provided such a community is federally recognized. To opt in, was not only rejected by the people of Canada, but it was each community must create a constitution that meets its needs rejected overwhelmingly within the reserve communities and provides the basic checks and balances within which the themselves. The recognition of “an inherent right of community’s government will operate. self-government” in the Constitution would not meet the needs or the aspirations of native peoples. It would not, by itself, break Once a community opts into this form of self-government, the dependency on welfare. It would not, by itself, end the economic community will be responsible for its lands, resources and crisis within the reserves. In short, it would not, by itself, solve community matters. The Department of Indian Affairs will have the challenges that confront native communities or redress no role in relation to that community. The community will enact historic injustices. laws that, with few exceptions, are territorially based. This proposal will recognize the local autonomy of communities of In analyzing the question of self-government, we have to start indigenous people to govern themselves and will remove the somewhere. We must not treat the problem as an aboriginal impediments blocking self-sufficiency. It will reduce the wasted problem. It is a legal vacuum; that is the problem. On reserves public moneys consumed by what I call the “Indian industry.” we see Indians asserting their rights to self-government from the establishment of casinos in Saskatchewan and British Columbia Under this proposal, only territorially based Indian to the confrontations between Her Majesty and the Iroquois communities previously recognized as a band, tribe, nation or Confederacy. There exists a legal vacuum in Canada, and other body of Indian people by an act of Parliament, including although there have been negotiations for policing and education the Indian Act, a treaty or agreement with the Crown, or by a to be controlled by the band councils on some reserves, the court order, may choose to be acknowledged as a self-governing Indian Act gives to the government such extensive power that a polity. The act does not require any negotiations, further treaties minister can rewrite the last will and testament of any status or agreements or any further public expense. It is enabling Indian. Indians on reserves are caricatured as dependants of the legislation. federal government. This system of economic dependency is being rejected throughout the world. In order to bring itself under this enactment, a community would be required to hold a referendum. The proposal would Meanwhile, when a few white people form a community in a present all relevant information to the electors of the community, territory or in a national park, they chafe under the system and together with a draft constitution in accordance with the immediately demand some form of self-government. We have requirements of the act. If the community approves the proposal territorial governments, we have municipal-type governments in by more than 50 per cent of those entitled to vote, then the Banff and Jasper, and lobbying by the towns of Field and community is brought under the act as a self-governing polity Waskesiu, townsites in other national parks. with the constitution approved by the electors. The majority required to approve the referendum is higher than the majority Bill S-12 grew out of negotiations that took place between the required pursuant to the Indian Act for the election of a chief or Sawridge Band of the Lesser Slave Lake, the previous council and the surrender of land by the community. government and officials of the Departments of Indian Affairs  (1520) and Justice. The Indian regional council that worked on these negotiations is comprised of nine Treaty 8 Indian bands The bill recognizes the community as self-governing within its representing over 7,000 members. They have adopted territory. “Indian territory” includes its reserves and other Indian self-government legislation that implements a legally binding land at the time it opts into this regime; lands declared as such by agreement, which was approved by the bureaucracy on April 12, the Governor in Council; land acquired in a successful land 1991, a committee of cabinet on October 4, 1991, and a cabinet claim; and land acquired as replacement Indian land in an as a whole on October 10, 1991. This legally binding agreement expropriation. “Indian land” is a legal term and embraces the remains to be implemented by way of legislation. concept of Indian title. It does not include lands to which the community holds mere fee simple title. Honourable senators, this legislation implements the agreement, which itself is the product of some protracted Since then, along with the assistance of the legal staff in the negotiations that went on between 1988 and 1991 between one of Senate, we have painstakingly drafted this bill, keeping its our member Treaty 8 First Nations and negotiations in the original intent and its purpose but expanding its value as Department of Justice and the Department of Indian Affairs. enabling legislation, fully supported at this time by all nine During the protracted process of negotiations, the federal reserves of the Lesser Slave Lake area. I believe that it can act as negotiators conducted extensive and ongoing consultations with a model for aboriginal self-government across Canada. I believe other departments, including departments within the provincial it is legislation that warrants the support of all honourable government. The legislation sets out a framework which any senators.

[ Senator Tkachuk ] February 4, 1997 SENATE DEBATES 1463

The bill is the fruit of the labour of many, including its chief ...the Ojibwa of Grassy Narrows are a truly broken people. drafter, James Ryan, Q.C. Mr. Ryan is recognized as one of the They neglect themselves out of an inability to believe that finest legislative drafters in the country. He was called to the they matter... Nova Scotia bar in 1950, the Alberta bar in 1951, and the Newfoundland bar in 1978. He was appointed Queen’s Counsel Grassy Narrows is a place of rape, murder, incest and in 1969. He was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Legislation in thoughtless vandalism. It is a place of rage and frustration. It is, the Justice Department from 1973 to 1975. While associated with as one of the older men said, “A diseased place to live.” Why did the Department of Justice, he was the principal drafter of this once-thriving community enter into such a legal hell? numerous federal statutes and regulations, including the Canada Development Corporation Act, the Maritime Transportation Shkilnyk suggests that: Union Act, the Proclamation and Public Order Regulations under the War Measures Act, the National Transportation Act, the It is one of the most compelling paradoxes of our public Canada Deposit Insurance Corporations Act, the Petro-Canada policy — that ever-increasing government expenditures on Corporation Act — something for which I will forgive him — Indians find an exact parallel in ever-increasing indices of and the Canadian Human Rights Act. social disintegration on their reserves. The drafters have been cognizant of the issue of the bill’s The more money you spend, the worse it gets. propriety as a Senate bill. It is in the context of the Senate that the bill was drafted. Recently, I received a press release from the Department of Indian Affairs with updates on the progress in Davis Inlet in the Honourable senators, we need to consider self-government. Do 1990s. Who can forget the pictures of the suicidal, gas-sniffing we seriously expect to consider the Assembly of First Nations as Inuit children broadcast around the world? The recent press a Parliament to govern those of Indian blood, or the other option release proudly states that there will be $1 million in funding to of negotiating with 600-plus reserves, each one operating under a support another 20 feasibility studies for the Innu, $4.8 million in different system of government? The present state of affairs and Davis Inlet and $4.3 million in 1994-95 for emergency services, policy vacuum would lead one to believe that all, or some, or a and another $3.1 million for 1995-96. That includes funding for mixture of the above options is under consideration. another 20 more feasibility studies for the Innu. Why is it that after all of this tax money — billions of dollars The minister’s information sheet states, in part, that in the last — free university education, no taxation, housing, that Mel five years the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Smith, in a paper entitled, “The Aboriginal Agenda,” was moved Development has spent approximately $18 million in Davis Inlet. to write: The provincial government has spent approximately $7 million. The federal government believes this money has been well spent The majority of Canada’s aboriginals grapple with social on renewing the community that was in crisis. That is the way we and economic conditions that are appalling and tragic. Only talk about it. We gloat and we brag about how much money we 28% of on-reserve status Indians, 40% of non-status Indians spend, but there are no figures to show that we have reduced the and 39% of Métis are employed. Only 5% of status Indians amount of human suffering and increased the economic graduate from high school and 40% do not get beyond advantage of the aboriginal peoples in our country. Grade 8. One third of Indians on reserves live in overcrowded conditions, and 40% do not have central I ask all honourable senators to take the time to study this bill. heating. Alcoholism, suicide, and crime rates are generally I ask that it go to committee where it can be studied. This is three times higher than for non-aboriginals. The quest of something we should all do. This is something that we need to do native peoples for viable, self-governing communities because we have not done it in Parliament for a long time. within Canada requires result-orientated government. Politicians always talk about such problem situations outside Canadian achievements in the area of native rights have often this place. They hire commissions and committees. People travel been remarkable, but with the helpful vigilance of native people and bill $600 a day, and they do this and that. We have been themselves, solutions to complex questions will yield tangible doing that for 30 years. However, we in the Senate and those in measures. Throwing money at this terrible issue will not help. the other place do not talk about it. It is beyond belief that we do not do so. We have an emergency situation here in terms of I came across a book entitled, A Poison Stronger Than Love by human misery, and we do not talk about it. If it were a number of Anastasia Shkilnyk. It is subtitled, The Destruction of an Ojibwa white people suffering the indignities that are endured on the Community. Perhaps some honourable senators will remember reserve today, we would be talking about it 24 hours a day in this the mercury poisoning issue of the 1970s in the Ontario reserve place. We would not be having commissions studying the of Grassy Narrows. To quote from the book, it states, in part: problem; we would be finding solutions. 1464 SENATE DEBATES February 4, 1997

I believe that the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Honourable senators will have noted that the report is all of Peoples will fulfil its due process by studying this bill. three paragraphs. The subject-matter addresses an issue that has Approximately 20 or more feasibility studies were done on Davis been part of national headlines for two or three years. Bill S-3 is Inlet. Perhaps if we sit down as a committee to debate this issue, an important matter, if only because the Canadian public something which we are starting today, then we will help by attention was drawn to this in the horrific case which took place studying them back to life, which is what we must do. At the a few years ago, where we were all witness to a serious flaw in very least we can offer a comprehensive view of what could be a the system. model for native self-government, for all intents and purposes. As I read the report, it recommends that the bill not be I believe that we should resolve to move with determination to proceeded with in the Senate for this reason: address our indebtedness to native peoples for having welcomed and assisted us in building present-day Canada. There is much to The recommendation is based on your Committee’s do to improve the lot of aboriginal peoples in Canada, and concern that Bill S-3 could infringe legal rights protected by Bill S-12 goes some way in moving along that necessary agenda. section 11(h)oftheCanadian Charter of Rights and On motion of Senator Hébert, debate adjourned. Freedoms.

 (1530) From my reading of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I do not think it is evident that there would be a CRIMINAL CODE successful Charter challenge should this bill be enacted.

BILL TO AMEND—REPORT OF COMMITTEE—DEBATE CONTINUED The report gives a simple statement without actually giving the reason why section 11(h) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms On the Order: prohibits this kind of enactment, which is what we require in order to understand the rationale of the committee. Frankly, I find Resuming the debate on the motion of the Honourable it difficult to accept a report that does not give the reason or Senator Carstairs, seconded by the Honourable Senator reasons. Losier-Cool, for the adoption of the sixteenth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Honourable senators, I should like to speak further on this Affairs (Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (plea matter, as I have some research underway. Therefore, I shall bargaining)), presented to the Senate on November 7, move the adjournment of the debate. 1996.—(Honourable Senator Cools). On motion of Senator Kinsella, debate adjourned. Hon. Noël A. Kinsella: Honourable senators, I have a few words to say on the sixteenth report of the Standing Senate The Senate adjourned until Wednesday, February 5, 1997 at Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. 1:30 p.m. CONTENTS Tuesday, February 4, 1997

PAGE PAGE

The Senate QUESTION PERIOD Speaker’s Remarks on Return to Chamber...... 1446 Justice Investigation into Sale of Airbus Aircraft to Air Canada— SENATOR’S STATEMENTS Notification to Swiss Authorities of Latest Developments— Disciplinary Santions Taken Against Officials Involved— Government Position. Senator Lynch-Staunton...... 1452 The Late Hagood Hardy Senator Fairbairn...... 1452 Tribute. Senator Poulin...... 1446 Africa Visitors in the Gallery Despatch of Canadian Peacekeepers to Rwanda-Burundi-Zaire The Hon. the Speaker...... 1447 Region—Source of Payment for Mission— Government Position. Senator Tkachuk...... 1453 Senator Fairbairn...... 1453 Senator Lynch-Staunton...... 1453 Refusal by African Governments to Permit Canadian Peacekeeping ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Troops to Land—Government Position. Senator Lynch-Staunton...... 1454 Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration Senator Fairbairn...... 1454 Fourteenth Report of Committee Presented. Senator Kenny..... 1447 Fifteenth Report of Committee Presented. Senator Kenny...... 1447 Delayed Answers to Oral Questions Senator Graham...... 1455 Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Employment Insurance Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act Changes to System by Way of Regulation—Effects on Fishing Income Tax Act (Bill C-5) Industry—Government Position. Question by Senator Comeau. Bill to Amend—Report of Committee. Senator Oliver...... 1448 Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1455

National Organ Donor Week Bill (Bill C-202) Goods and Services Tax Report of Committee. Senator DeWare...... 1449 Harmonization with Provincial Sales Taxes—Request for Details of Implementation. Question by Senator Forrestall. Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1456 Adjournment Senator Graham...... 1449 Africa Mission of Ambassador Chrétien to Rwanda-Burundi-Zaire Bell Canada Act (Bill C-57) Region—Definition of Role—Government Position. Bill to Amend—First Reading...... 1450 Question by Senator Andreychuk. Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1456 Legal and Constitutional Affairs Canada-China Relations Committee Authorized to Meet During Sitting of the Senate. Trial and Imprisonment of Dissident Wang Dan—Government Position. Senator Carstairs...... 1450 Question by Senator Di Nino. Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1456 Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources Human Rights Committee Authorized to Meet During Sittings of the Senate. Correlation of Canadian Aid to Human Rights Record and Military Senator Ghitter...... 1450 Expenditures of Recipient Countries. Question by Senator Di Nino. Senator Kinsella...... 1450 Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1457 Senator Graham...... 1450 Senator Kenny...... 1451 Communications Committee Authorized to Study Questions on Manganese-Based Radio Canada International—Announcement of Closing—Effect on Fuel Additives Bill. Senator Kenny...... 1451 Community of Sackville, New Brunswick—Request for Senator Graham...... 1451 Consideration of Government Position. Senator Lynch-Staunton...... 1451 Question by Senator Prud’homme. Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1458 Human Rights Canadian Heritage Racial Discrimination—Settlement of United States Lawsuit Effects of Layoffs on the Constitutional Rights of Francophones Against Texaco—Notice of Inquiry. Senator Oliver...... 1452 Outside of Quebec. Question by Senator Nolin. Delayed Answer (Senator Graham)...... 1458 PAGE PAGE

Request for Answers. Senator Kinsella...... 1458 ORDERS OF THE DAY

First Nations Government Bill (Bill S-12) Point of Order—Ruling of the Speaker...... 1458 National Finance Second Reading—Debate Adjourned. Senator Tkachuk...... 1460 Failure of Confederation Life—Estimate of Magnitude of Loss—Government Position—Request for Answer. Criminal Code Senator MacDonald...... 1458 Bill to Amend—Report of Committee—Debate Continued. Senator Kinsella...... 1464 Senator Graham...... 1458 Appendix ...... i Canada Post Corporation / Société canadienne des postes

Postage Paid Post payé

If undelivered, return COVER ONLY to: Canada Communication Group — Publishing Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9

Available from Canada Communication Group — Publishing Ottawa, Canada K1A 0S9