[asia-apec 774] Cda. Hansard, Oct.7/98, re: APEC'97

[Sharon R.A. Scharfe]

October 7, 1998

Hansard
House of Commons
Ottawa, Canada

Official Transcript (English Version only)

...

ORAL QUESTIONS

APEC SUMMIT 

Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general
is supposed to be the nation's top cop. He is supposed to enforce the law,
not prejudge it or jeopardize investigations that are ongoing like he did
last week. 

Why is the solicitor general still sitting in cabinet? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is very
clear, as I said on Tuesday, that the allegations which have been made are
unfounded. I denied them. The person I was speaking with supported my position. 

The hon. members are joining in this story when in fact there is no reality
in it. 

Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is a funny thing
that a Liberal lawyer might just agree and corroborate with him. 

Last week the solicitor general publicly bragged to his long time Liberal
pal on the airplane what a  hot rock he had become in Ottawa. Yet he bragged
at the same time about the secret Airbus investigation and about who the
fall guys might be for APEC. 

These petty boasts have betrayed sensitive government business. When will
the Prime Minister demand the solicitor general's resignation? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like
to refer the hon. member to what was said because she referred to Airbus in
the scrum by the member for Palliser, the famous member we have to watch for
all the time. 

“There was absolutely no reference per se to Airbus. I do not recall the
solicitor general ever saying the word Airbus in the course of the remarks
that were made”. 

Again the hon. member does not have her facts right, as usual. 

Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, it is a funny thing.
If a lawyer betrayed his client he would be disbarred. If a doctor revealed
sensitive information about a client he would lose his practice. However the
solicitor general discusses sensitive government business about Airbus or
individuals connected with it or APEC, and what does the Prime Minister do?
He defends him, supports him and brags him up. 

How could the Prime Minister defend behaviour that would have other
Canadians disbarred, banned, fined or fired? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I just said to
the hon. member that the member for Palliser said the word Airbus was never
used or heard by anybody or discussed. 

That is the best proof coming from that member. She knows it. She is
bringing it up, repeating it, having no respect for what is known in the
House, that there is some respect for the truth. 

Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, until now it has been a
sacred parliamentary rule that solicitors general do not talk about cases
that are under their jurisdiction. 

Yet this solicitor general felt at ease discussing Frank Moores and
Karlheinz Schreiber who are principals in the Airbus affair, if not by name
at least by implication. He was comfortable discussing the outcome of the
APEC inquiry, and he did all this with a fellow passenger on a public
commercial airline. That is a public forum. 

Does the Prime Minister not see that the solicitor general has compromised
the integrity of his position and that he must ask for his resignation? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is
absolutely no respect for the truth. There was no discussion of Airbus in
that discussion. 

It is not only the solicitor general or the lawyer; it is even the member
for Palliser who said that the
word Airbus was never mentioned in relation to any of this. 

Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, by refusing to ask the
solicitor general for his
resignation the Prime Minister is setting a dangerous precedent. 

It means that there is a new rule for solicitors general. It means that
confidential investigations under his care are fair game and open for public
discussion and debate, and even prejudgment in public fora.  

To restore public confidence in the position of the solicitor general, the
highest lawmaker in the land, will the Prime Minister do the right thing and
ask for his resignation today? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I repeat that
there was no discussion at all, according to the member for Palliser, about
Airbus. 

The hon. members have written questions. They are not quick enough to
correct them. They have to read them again. I am telling them not to refer
to Airbus. According to the member for Palliser there was absolutely no
discussion of Airbus during that— 

The Speaker: The hon. leader of the Bloc Quebecois. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in his letter,
Mr. Toole not only confirms that the topic of APEC was indeed discussed by
the Solicitor General last Thursday on the plane, he also states that he did
not interpret the words of the Solicitor General as prejudicial to the RCMP
inquiry. 

Does the Prime Minister realize that the Solicitor General's alibi is
nothing more than a letter from a friend, who interpreted what he heard as a
good little Liberal, and that it therefore does not have much substance to it? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member knows very well that an inquiry has been under way since Monday. 

All we are asking, and all the government wants—and the House of Commons as
well, I hope—is for the commission to look at the matter, hear witnesses
describe what occurred in Vancouver that
November afternoon, and report to the government, which will act accordingly. 

At this time, however, Parliament should let the commission do its job,
instead of speculating about
hearsay. 

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime
Minister would like the investigation to focus on what happened between the
protestors and the RCMP. But what we would
like to know is what the Prime Minister did, and what his Solicitor General
had to say on the plane. 

Does the Prime Minister not think that Mr. Toole's letter, his presence in
Ottawa yesterday, his statement that he had not been asked to do anything
further, all smack of someone following orders, just like the situation
between the RCMP and the Prime Minister? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I have
said, there is no need for concern, because I want the truth to be known. 

I owe no one any apologies for my favourable prejudice toward the RCMP. They
did an excellent job at the G-7 summit in Halifax. Prior to APEC, we had
visits by the President of the United States and the Premier of China, with
no problems whatsoever. For that reason, I had confidence in the RCMP in
connection with the important meeting in Vancouver. 

Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister may have
faith in the RCMP, but we in Quebec know what the RCMP is capable of. 

On Monday, the Solicitor General suffered a complete memory lapse.
Yesterday, he was able to make subtle distinctions about what he did or did
not say aboard the plane. 

Does the Prime Minister not realize that his Solicitor General's suddenly
revived memory has no credibility, makes no sense and leaves a bad smell,
and that he should demand his resignation? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, at 10 a.m.
yesterday, the Solicitor General rose in the House of Commons and made a
statement explaining his position, which was
confirmed by the lawyer with whom he had had a conversation. 

To me, that is good enough. As for the notes allegedly made, are they
accurate or not? When we are having a private conversation, we do not expect
the people around us to eavesdrop. 

I thought we had rules in this House requiring members to respect each other— 

The Speaker: The hon. member for Roberval. 

Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the only thing missing in
the Prime Minister's answer is the fact that a Solicitor General is supposed
to have enough common sense not to  discuss his business on a plane. 

I cannot blame the Prime Minister for wanting to defend his Solicitor
General, who is his shield. Does the Prime Minister realize that there is
not one single Canadian left who still has faith in the Solicitor General,
his shield, and that he should boot him out? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Solicitor
General has been a highly respected member of this House for as long as he
has been sitting in Parliament. 

Some hon. members: Hear, hear. 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien: He has been involved in every social issue brought
before the House of Commons, including the disabled persons issue. He has
traveled extensively to advance the cause of the most vulnerable in our
society. That is why I have faith in the person currently holding the
position of Solicitor General. 

[English] 

Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, Canadians have heard
compelling reasons why the solicitor general should go. 

Some hon. members: Oh, oh. 

The Speaker: The hon. leader of the New Democratic Party. 

Ms. Alexa McDonough: They are trying to understand the Prime Minister's
reasons for keeping him
on. 

If the solicitor general resigns, who will act as cover for the Prime
Minister? Is not that the real reason the Prime Minister refuses to fire the
solicitor general? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I spend most
of my life, every afternoon in the House of Commons, on this side. I have
never needed any cover to defend myself. 

Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not
need cover in the House of Commons; apparently he needs cover at the
commission. 

[Translation] 

The Prime Minister said it himself: Pelletier and Carle did not wait for a
subpoena. They volunteered to appear before the commission. 

Why is the Prime Minister refusing to do the same thing? Does he have
something to hide? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I ask everyone
to let the commission do its work. After that, everyone will know the truth. 

When we hosted summit participants from 18 countries, we had a mechanism in
place to ensure their safety and the peaceful conduct of proceedings, which
is standard practice the world over. The Government of Canada and the Prime
Minister had a duty to ensure that things went well in Canada. On the
occasion of other summits and meetings held in Canada, the police did their
work very well— 

The Speaker: I am sorry to have to interrupt the Right Hon. Prime Minister.
The hon. member for
Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough now has the floor. 

[English] 

Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, for weeks
the solicitor general has lectured the House about the impropriety of
comments on APEC. Yet all it took was a flight home and the solicitor
general became Mr. Chatterbox. 

He chatted about APEC, Airbus, and private citizens attached to the subject
of an ongoing ill-founded investigation. The solicitor general's lack of
judgment proves him unfit to be in cabinet. 

Will the solicitor general be accountable for his mistakes? Will he act
honourably? Will he resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in the
matter of acting honourably it has been established by the member across the
way that Airbus was never even mentioned, but this hon. member resurrects
the idea as if it was discussed. I think the request from hon. members hits
back in the other direction. 

Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, PC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime
Minister promised Canada a government of integrity, yet he has delivered a
solicitor general who talked openly about sensitive government matters in
public. 

The solicitor general took an oath to respect the rule of law and he
violated that oath on an airline chat about APEC and numerous businessmen
and politicians connected with Airbus. 

Who is reliable? Who is credible? Who is discreet? The solicitor general
general strikes out on all three of those. Will the Prime Minister now show
some integrity, some leadership and ask for the solicitor general's
resignation? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I quoted to
the House of Commons a statement by the member for Palliser to the effect
that he did not discuss Airbus at all. I cannot have a better witness than
the member for Palliser. 

The hon. member is the fourth member to use Airbus, when the solicitor
general and the member for Palliser have said there was no discussion of
Airbus. Who is not following the rules? He just wants to score cheap
political points. 

Mr. John Reynolds (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, my
question is to the Prime Minister. 

As the Prime Minister knows, our entire ministerial system of government is
based on confidentiality
and accountability. This minister had public discussions on the airplane.
Everyone can make  mistakes. He talked about the new international centre
for correctional studies in Canada. That is before the cabinet of this country. 

This minister violated an oath by talking about something that is before
this government. Should he not resign over that issue alone? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we have
debate. At this moment everybody is talking about the next budget. Everybody
is raising questions about what we should do.  

In the old days, nobody debated anything until the Minister of Finance
decided. Today we have participation because we have an open government.
When it is not confidential, I hope that members of the cabinet and the
caucus discuss with their constituents what the government should do. That
is democracy.   

Mr. John Reynolds (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, Ref.): Mr. Speaker,
learning from this
government we can say anything we want on an airplane, but just do not admit
it.  

Let me ask the solicitor general. At 3.30 p.m. on Monday, outside this
House, he did not know who the person was, male or female. Would he advise
this House what time he got on the phone and talked to Mr. Toole and asked
him to write a letter to defend him? What time did he do that on Monday? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I said
yesterday when the question was originally put, it was unfamiliar to me. I
could not recall who I was sitting with on the
airplane.  

Over the last five years I have taken that flight 300 times. Consequently, I
inquired to find out who was on the plane. I determined who was sitting
beside me. I made a phone call. I found out what the discussion was about.
That is the basis of my position and it is the truth. 

[Translation] 

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski—Mitis, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question is for
the Prime Minister. 

Even Mr. Toole, a member of the Liberal Party, does not wish to go any
further than what he has
written to cover the minister. Does the Prime Minister not realize that the
Solicitor General's defence is pretty slim and that he should do the
honourable thing and resign immediately? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we have
discussed this problem. What we want is for the commission to be able to do
its work as soon as possible, so that all Canadians will know exactly what
went on in Vancouver last November. That would serve everyone's interests. 

The Solicitor General rose in the House, stated his position, confirmed by a
letter from this lawyer, and I accepted that. I am confident that the
Solicitor General is perfectly able to perform his duties, given his
outstanding track record as a public servant in New Brunswick and his work
as an MP here in the House of Commons. 

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski—Mitis, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would ask the
Prime Minister not
to change the subject. 

We are not talking about the commission, but about his minister. Mr. Toole's
letter is clear. During the flight, the solicitor general discussed the APEC
investigation, and he should not have done so in his capacity as solicitor
general. 

What is the Prime Minister waiting for to do the only honourable thing,
which is to ask for the
resignation of his minister and, more importantly, to accept it? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I answered
that question yesterday and again today. The solicitor general has the
confidence of the government. 

I provided a clear reply and I am very proud to have a person of his calibre
and experience serving in my cabinet. 

[English] 

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, let us summarize here.
We have the solicitor general prejudging the outcome of the APEC inquiry. He
is publicly commenting on Frank Moores and Karlheinz Schreiber. Finally, he
is breaching cabinet security. 

As a Yankee's fan he must know that three strikes mean you are out. When is
the minister going to
resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, all three
of those allegations are false. 

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, let me put this in
words that the minister will understand. There are two exits in the front,
two exits over the way and two in the back. When is
he going to pick one and resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, this
entire exercise is on the basis of notes that were taken by a person who was
two seats away from me on a plane, when in fact the person to whom I was
speaking has substantiated my recollections of this discussion. 

I think it is unworthy of this place. I have too much respect for parliament
not to suggest that this is
unconscionable in this country and in this place. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. 

Regardless of the actual content of the discussions between the solicitor
general and Mr. Toole on the plane last Thursday, the fact remains that the
solicitor general should never talk about his files in a public place. 

Does the Prime Minister not agree that the carelessness of the solicitor
general makes him unfit to fulfil his duties, and that he must therefore
resign? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. 

Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, discretion is an essential requirement for a solicitor general.
It has now been proven that
this minister has loose lips. 

Is this not a sufficient motive for the Prime Minister to relieve him of his
duties immediately? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the solicitor
general rose in this House. He followed the tradition by making a solemn
statement, telling the House what he membered from the conversation. This
has been confirmed by the person to whom he talked, while someone was
snooping on them, contrary to the ethics usually followed by the members of
this House. 

As far as I am concerned, eavesdroppers are not of the same calibre as Tommy
Douglas and David Lewis. 

[English] 

Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, what is
unconscionable in this House is that this minister does not have the good
sense to resign. His indiscreet comments have convicted Staff Sergeant Hugh
Stewart without a trial. Headlines across the country indicate that he is
the fall guy. I thought people were innocent in this country until proven
guilty. 

I am going to ask the solicitor general again: Is he going to have the good
sense here today to resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I have
said many, many times, I have incredible respect for this process. I speak
of the process very often publicly, in support of the process and in support
of getting to the truth. I have done that on many occasions and I have done
it on many occasions in the House. I believe that we have an obligation to
let that process get to the truth.

Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the solicitor
general is attempting to fasten his seat belt and ride through the
credibility storm. It is unbelievable. He has obviously prejudiced the
outcome of this procedure. 

Because the solicitor general will not resign I will ask the Prime Minister,
is he going to ask for his resignation today? Yes or no? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, six times I
have said no. Maybe they are not listening. 

We have an inquiry that is looking into the matter at this moment. 

What is is amazing is that hon. members only have this to talk about. It is
a great compliment to the government when I see, for example, the opposition
finance critics getting up but not talking about  the finances of the nation. 

There is only one little problem. We want the inquiry to give us the truth
as much as they do and as soon as possible. They do not want to have the
truth because they have nothing else to talk about. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, since the Prime
Minister wants to speak of truth, Mr. Toole did not say in his letter that
the Solicitor General had not spoken of APEC
but that he had not interpreted the Solicitor General's words about APEC as
prejudicial. In other  words, the Solicitor General did speak of it. 

I am asking the Solicitor General if he will tell us today whether or not he
spoke of it, because his— 

The Speaker: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. leader of the Bloc Quebecois.
The Solicitor General now has the floor. 

[English] 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I spoke of
my respect for the process to get to the truth. 

...

APEC SUMMIT 

Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the solicitor
general talked publicly about fall guys in the APEC inquiry, presuming guilt
before the inquiry even takes place. 

When the solicitor general is questioned about this the Prime Minister
covers for him. When the Prime Minister is asked about it the solicitor
general stands up. 

I would like to ask the Prime Minister, since the solicitor general really
is Canada's worst security breach, why does the Prime Minister not stop
covering for him and start firing him? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have replied
to the same question many, many times. The answer is that the solicitor
general is a man with a great reputation, who has been a member of the House
for five years. He has been an extremely diligent member. He has said that
he has never debated anything in relation to things that were not part of
the public
discussion at any time with anybody, and I believe him. That was confirmed
by the lawyer with whom he was talking, but not confirmed by someone who was
snooping on him. Usually a snooper does not get his facts right. 

Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): That was then, this is now, Mr.
Speaker. The solicitor general mentioned Frank Moores and Karlheinz
Schreiber in his conversation with Mr.  Toole. 

If he was not talking about Airbus, exactly what was he talking about? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as has
been stated even by the member for Palliser, Airbus did not come up. The
rest of the conversation was private and the hon.
member has no right to bring a private conversation to the floor of this House. 

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. Speaker, it is fascinating
to see the reliance on the member for Palliser. The solicitor general has
now admitted that the hon. member for Palliser had it right about Airbus,
right about the sweat lodge, right about the Yankees and right about his
great future as an ambassador. 

The solicitor general cannot have it both ways. Will he now admit the member
also got it right about APEC? Will he fess up? Will he tell the truth? Will
he resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the member
for Palliser basically took a few words out of the air and fabricated a
story. This parliament is not going to operate on that level— 

Some hon. members: Oh, oh. 

The Speaker: On both sides we are getting very close in our language. I ask
you all to be very judicious both in the questions and in the answers. 

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my supplementary
is for the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister knows the Malaysian government
has brutally beaten former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar, has arrested
peaceful demonstrators and gay men and has jailed opposition MPs. 

Since the Prime Minister has said that human rights is on the APEC agenda,
does he agree with the Liberal member for Quadra that Malaysia is an
inappropriate venue for the upcoming APEC summit? Will he boycott the
Malaysia APEC summit? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of
the government the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Foreign Affairs
last week protested against the Government of Malaysia very openly. 

At this moment there is no member of the APEC nations planning to boycott
that type of meeting. Should we boycott the UN because they are at the UN?
Should we boycott every international organization because they happen to be
members of those organizations? 

I would like to repeat to the hon. member that as far as Indonesia was
concerned, President Suharto was— 

The Speaker: The hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Jean Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche, PC): Mr. Speaker, whether the
Solicitor General's conversation was a private or public one is not the
question. What is important is that the minister
responsible for the RCMP has revealed details concerning an investigation
that is under way to a citizen who is not a party to that investigation.
This is unacceptable. 

That conversation, coupled with his behaviour over the past two days, leaves
him no choice whatsoever. Will the minister do the honourable thing and resign? 

[English] 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, what the
hon. member is alleging is absolutely not true. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Jean Dubé (Madawaska—Restigouche, PC): Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the
Solicitor General will not assume responsibility for his actions. If the
Prime Minister allows the Solicitor General to retain his cabinet seat, he
is sending the message that he accepts his minister discussing, in public,
inquiries that are clearly confidential. 

Will the Prime Minister protect the confidentiality and integrity of future
inquiries? Will the Prime Minister show respect to this House by asking the
Solicitor General to resign? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the minister
made absolutely no allusion whatsoever to the Airbus inquiry. There was no
reference to it. 

Even the hon. member for Palliser has said that this matter was not
mentioned at any time. That, for me, is sufficient. If he had discussed it,
I would act differently, but he did not. If I am given concrete, real facts
with evidence to back them up, then I will act, but I will not act on
hearsay and rumours like these. 

                                    *  *  *
... 

APEC SUMMIT 

Mr. David Chatters (Athabasca, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the 1994 privy council
code of conduct, which all members of the front bench opposite claim to
respect, states public office holders shall act with
honesty and uphold the highest ethical standards so that public confidence
and trust in the  integrity, objectivity and impartiality of government are
conserved and enhanced. 

The Prime Minister and the solicitor general are making a mockery out of
these principles and embarrassing this whole House in front of all
Canadians. When will the Prime Minister ask the solicitor general to resign? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
understand what that oath is about. I respect it. I uphold those principles
in this House. I have upheld those principles around this commission's
inquiry. I take this extremely seriously. I know what the truth is and I am
very confident in this position. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the
Prime Minister. 

How can the Prime Minister consider what the member for Palliser says as the
norm, as reliable, when he speaks on the Airbus affair, but as inaccurate
and unreliable when he speaks on APEC? 

Should we believe him in the Airbus case, because it suits the Prime
Minister, but not in the APEC case, because it would mean having to fire the
Solicitor General? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in the Airbus
affair, both the minister and the lawyer said the same thing. Even the hon.
member, in his attempt to embarrass the minister with his fabrication,
recognized that he had not talked about Airbus. This is even better. 

[English] 

The Speaker: My colleagues, once again I ask you to be very judicious in
your choice of words today because we are getting a little carried away. 

                                    *  *  *
...

APEC SUMMIT 

Mr. Dale Johnston (Wetaskiwin, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general
says he did not discuss the Airbus affair on the airplane the other day. Yet
he did not deny bringing up the names of Frank
Moores and Karlheinz Schreiber. 

If he was not talking about Airbus, what was he talking about? 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it has
been established that we did not talk about Airbus. The conversation on the
aircraft was private and nobody should have been eavesdropping. 

[Translation] 

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in his letter,
Mr. Toole confirms that he and the Solicitor General discussed the matter of
APEC on the plane. 

The Solicitor General said yesterday that he had nothing further to say
about the discussion, since it was a private conversation. 

I would ask the Solicitor General if he considers it usual to discuss,
allegedly privately, but in a public place, a highly confidential matter
involving his duties. Does he consider that usual and responsible? 

[English] 

Hon. Andy Scott (Solicitor General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I
discussed in detail the public complaints commission's work, my faith in it,
my respect for it and my desire that it get to the truth in this matter.
That is what I discussed. 

                                    *  *  *
...

ARMS EXPORTS 

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): Mr. Speaker, my question is for
the Minister of Foreign Affairs. 

Customarily, the Minister of Foreign Affairs tables a report in this House
on Canada's arms exports. 

When will the minister be tabling this report so we may have an idea whether
the government sold weapons to Suharto's Indonesia, in 1996, for example? 

[English] 

Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
hon. member seems already to know what is in the report although it has not
been presented yet. That is the way the
opposition seems to work these days. 

I will be tabling the report very soon. I think the hon. member will find it
very interesting. 

                                    *  *  *
APEC SUMMIT 

Mr. Peter Mancini (Sydney—Victoria, NDP): Mr. Speaker, there is a well known
maxim in the law. I know it. The Minister of Justice knows it. The solicitor
general knows it. The Prime Minister knows it. Justice must not only be
done; it must be seen to be done. 

The public complaints commission investigating APEC is now mired in
controversy as a result of the revelations and the inaction of the
government on this issue. In the name of justice will the Prime Minister not
now do what I asked him to do three weeks ago and set up an independent
judicial inquiry to get to the bottom of this issue? 

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the inquiry
started on Monday and the testimony started this afternoon. 

The students will be witnesses. The RCMP will be witnesses. The people will
know exactly what the facts are. They will be in a position to judge whether
the RCMP acted according to what was normal under the circumstances. 

Three competent people were appointed to that body. They will report to the
government, as is their job according to the law which was set in
parliament, not by this government but by the previous government. 

                                    *  *  *
...

[end]

****************************************************************************
******************************************
  For more information on Parliamentarians for East Timor, Please Contact:      
  Sharon Scharfe, International Secretariat, PARLIAMENTARIANS FOR EAST TIMOR
Suite 116, 5929-L Jeanne D'Arc Blvd., Orleans, ON  K1C 7K2  CANADA            
  Fax: 1-613-834-2021                     E-Mail:  pet at web.net


"... where there are profits to be defended, law, justice, freedom,
democracy and peace are the victims."  -- Xanana Gusmao, Jailed Leader of
East Timor in Preface to "Complicity: Human Rights and Canadian Foreign
Policy -- the Case of East Timor" (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1996). 
****************************************************************************
*********************************************