Address to Members of the Senate and of the House of
Commons Tabled and Printed as Appendix
Hon. Sharon Carstairs (Deputy Leader of the
Government): Honourable senators, I ask that the address of His
Excellency Nelson Mandela, President of the Republic of South
Africa, delivered to members of both Houses of Parliament
earlier this day, together with the introductory speech by the
Right Honourable Prime Minister of Canada and the speeches
delivered by the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the
House of Commons, be printed as an appendix to the Debates of
the Senate of this day.
British Columbia Task Force Research Studies on Major
Hon. Pat Carney: Honourable senators, this summer, the
British Columbia Task Force on Bank Mergers held public
consultations on the proposed mergers of the Royal Bank of
Canada with the Bank of Montreal, and the Canadian Imperial
Bank of Commerce with the Toronto Dominion Bank. The task
force also commissioned B.C.-specific research studies on the
impact of the mergers.
Earlier this month the task force's chair, David Rosenberg, a
Vancouver lawyer, and its two members Marjorie Griffen Cohen,
a well-known economist, and Blair Lekstrom, Mayor of Dawson
Creek, released their report. I have asked the minister
responsible, Ian Waddell, to send a copy of the report to the
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce,
which will be reviewing this issue.
However, I want to summarize some of the findings for
honourable senators. Public appearances before the task force
showed that those who support the mergers believe they are
crucial if Canada wants to maintain a competitive advantage in
today's global financial markets. However, anti-merger sentiment
was strong and is rooted in concerns about the negative impact of
the mergers on people and communities.
The B.C. research studies revealed that the probable impact of
the mergers would be the direct loss of 2,600 to 3,400 jobs
in B.C., and an indirect loss of 5,200 to 6,800 jobs in the
B.C. economy, using a relatively low multiplier. Some
75 per cent of B.C. communities could experience branch
closures as a result of the mergers. Of these, 119 communities are
now served by three or fewer financial institutions, and most are
vulnerable to closures.
Honourable senators, for example, communities with no
banking services now include Alert Bay, a coastal fishing centre
with nearly 700 people; Hudson Hope, which has more than
1,000 people and no bank services; and Fort Nelson which has
4,400 people and one bank. Also with one bank are the
communities of Nakusp, which has 1,700 people and Gold River,
which has 2,000 people. I was in Gold River this summer and it
is a beautiful community. As well, Lillooet has more than
2,000 people and only one bank. Armstrong has 4,000 people
and only one bank. Hope, with a population of 6,200 people, has
only two banks. Invermere, with a population of 2,600, has
two banks, as does Castlegar with 7,000 people. Honourable
senators can see why these people are worried about how
vulnerable they would be if banks closed.
According to the B.C. research, the mergers would have a
negative impact on small business financing in terms of less local
decision-making on loan applications, difficulties in obtaining
approval due to greater risk aversion by the merged banks,
increased service charges, and increased turnover of account
There is no evidence, as the proponents have argued, that bank
mergers could increase bank efficiency. Instead, the research
showed that they could result in a wave of cost cutting achieved
by the closure of full-time service branches.
This means job losses and increased time and travel for British
Columbians to get bank services, because, as honourable senators
know, the settlements are wide apart and separated by hours of
The task force's primary recommendation is that the proposed
mergers of Schedule I banks not occur, given that Canada's top
five chartered banks already have the highest degree of
concentration of banking assets among the OECD countries.
In the wake of its findings, the task force has called on the
federal government to take a number of initiatives in order, first,
to maintain Canadian ownership of our major banks and protect
Canadian sovereignty by limiting foreign control over our
chartered banks; second, to establish regulations regarding the
social and ethical responsibility of banks in the domestic and
international markets, including a commitment to rural and less
affluent communities; and, third, to ensure guaranteed access to
essential banking services.
The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable Senator Carney, I regret
to have to interrupt you, but your three-minute period is up.
Senator Carney: May I have leave to continue, honourable
The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Carney: The fourth initiative is to require banks to
invest in the communities they serve in order to build confidence
that our financial system works, and the fifth is to ensure
adequate disclosure of bank lending practices.
The provincial government has also been encouraged, first, to
enhance the role of provincially regulated bodies, such as credit
unions, insurance companies and securities firms; and, second, to
implement a program of tax incentives and contract compliance
measures to increase small business lending in British Columbia,
which the task force found to be currently insufficient.
The task force has also recommended that, before a merger of
Schedule I banks be permitted to proceed, Parliament convene
public hearings throughout Canada, including consultations with
the provincial governments, and that an act of Parliament be
necessary for any merger.
The other recommendations of the task force I will make
available to those honourable senators who have an interest in
Hon. Thérèse Lavoie-Roux: Honourable senators, today
throughout Canada people are participating in Alzheimer's
Coffee Break, la Pause-café pour l'Alzheimer, a nationwide
fund-raising and public awareness event which pays tribute to
World Alzheimer's Day, the international day of Alzheimer's
I would like to take a moment to bring to your attention the
seriousness of Alzheimer's disease and the need for more
research and services.
The principal cause of dementia is Alzheimer's disease, which
accounts for 64 per cent of all cases of dementia. As you are no
doubt aware, this is a progressive and irreversible dementia,
which damages the nerve cells in the brain and leads to loss of
memory, judgment and reasoning ability, as well as mood and
behavioural changes. As a result, patients lose the most precious
of human qualities, their dignity.
Over one quarter of a million Canadians suffer from
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, and since diagnosis
can only be confirmed upon autopsy, many more cases go
unreported. Furthermore, demographic trends indicate that the
expanding, aging population will result in an estimated three
quarters of a million Canadians with Alzheimer's disease in the
Alzheimer's disease is associated with the elderly. Indeed, one
in 13 Canadians over the age of 65 is affected by Alzheimer's
disease or a related dementia, and the prevalence increases to one
in nine among seniors aged 75 to 84. The most alarming
prevalence rate is among Canadians over 85. One person in three
is affected by the disease.
Although younger adults are not as likely to suffer from the
disease, there have been cases of people in their 30s and 40s
affected by Alzheimer's disease. Most commonly, younger adults
are affected by the disease in an indirect way as caregivers.
Because the disease is progressive and wears away at a person's
mental and physical abilities, persons with Alzheimer's become
increasingly dependent on family members for their care.
Alzheimer's disease is a family problem. It changes family
patterns, roles and lifestyles, and can lead to significant stress
and conflict, as evidenced in numerous Canadian studies.
Statistics Canada found that almost 3 million Canadians are
taking care of someone with long-term health problems, usually
an elderly relative, and that it is affecting their health and
demands on their time. The biggest proportion of the caregivers,
almost 20 per cent, are men and women between 45 and 64, and
almost 10 per cent are seniors themselves. Families need support
by means of education on the disease, help in coping, and
concrete services such as respite care.
Honourable senators, there are considerations relevant to
public policies of which I will make mention.
First of all, home care for Alzheimer's patients is a financial
burden to the family.
The Hon. the Speaker: Your three minutes are drawing to a
close. Honourable senators, does the honourable senator have
your permission to continue?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Lavoie-Roux: Although there are tax credits to
lighten that burden, a number of income replacement options are
not available to the Alzheimer patients or their caregivers who
need them. Since families are being counted on increasingly as
caregivers, a review of the measures in place for patients and
caregivers would, without a doubt, make it easier to keep people
at home in acceptable conditions.
I would also like to touch on the question of federal funding,
particularly via the New Horizons program, which provides
financial assistance for innovative projects on Alzheimer's. It is
essential for the funding of this program to be safeguarded, so
that we may learn more about the causes of Alzheimer's disease
and find yet more effective ways of providing the appropriate
The funding of the Canadian health care system is essential for
the protection of those affected by Alzheimer's disease. It is
absolutely essential to maintain the Health Canada criteria for
assistance, in order to provide the services required by people
with this disease.
As I speak today, there is no known cause or cure for
Alzheimer's disease. There have, however, been breakthroughs
in research, such as medications which treat some of the
symptoms of the disease, and there is hope for the discovery of
the cause and a cure for the disease. That we promote research by
means of grants directed at research on Alzheimer's disease
specifically is crucial to addressing this most important and
ever-increasing problem; and that we support people affected by
Alzheimer's disease and their family is paramount.
The Alzheimer's Society is a nationwide non-profit health
organization dedicated to helping people affected by Alzheimer's
disease. It funds biomedical research into the cause and cure of
the disease, as well as social and psychological research directed
at improving methods of care giving and the delivery of services.
In terms of caregivers, the local chapters of the Alzheimer's
Society provide a number of support and educational programs.
Their efforts are supported in part by the Alzheimer's Coffee
Break, which is being held throughout Canada today. Last year,
this public education and awareness campaign raised
I could add much more on Alzheimer's disease, but instead I
will just ask my colleagues on both sides of this chamber to
remember that this is a serious health and social problem, and
that we must not forget. We talk about the elderly, and studying
the elderly, which is good, - I am all in favour of that - but I
think more attention should be given to this disease that is
creating more and more victims every day.
I thank honourable senators for permitting me to briefly
address such an important health and social problem. As
parliamentarians, we have a role to play in increasing awareness
and promoting more research and services for people affected by
Alzheimer's disease. In many respects, if we do that, it will be
helpful to maintaining some equilibrium in the close social
environment of families with members affected by this very
The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, before I call the
next item on the Order Paper, I would draw your attention to a
group of students in our gallery from the University of Vermont.
They are here studying the Canadian parliamentary system.
Honourable senators may recall that normally the Honourable
Senator Prud'homme is the sponsor of this group, but he is,
unfortunately, in hospital at the present time.
On behalf of all honourable senators, I would extend a warm
welcome to the group from the University of Vermont.
The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message
had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-20,
to amend the Competition Act and to make consequential and
related amendments to other Acts.
Bill read first time.
The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this
bill be read the second time?
On motion of Senator Carstairs, bill placed on the Orders of
the Day for second reading on Tuesday next, September 29,
Commission of Inquiry on the Blood System in
Canada-Compliance with Recommendations-Notice of
Hon. John Lynch-Staunton (Leader of the Opposition):
Honourable senators, I give notice that on Tuesday, October 20,
1998, I will move:
That the Senate reaffirm its unanimous support of the
following motion passed without dissent on June 18, 1998:
That the Senate endorses and supports
recommendation 1 of the Commission of Inquiry on the
Blood System in Canada which calls upon provinces and
territories to respond to the needs of those who suffered
due to the management of the blood supply system;
That the Senate recognizes the leadership role played by
the Government of Canada in formulating a
Federal-Provincial compensation package for those
infected with Hepatitis C through the blood supply system
between 1986 and 1990;
That, in view of the fact that Federal and Provincial
Governments have agreed to revisit the original agreement
to seek a greater consensus concerning our response to this
national tragedy, the Senate urges the Government of
Canada and the Governments of the Provinces and
Territories to take positive action to address the needs of
those who suffer ill-effects from Hepatitis C contracted
through the blood system; and
That a copy of this motion be forwarded to each federal,
provincial and territorial Minister of Health.
Treatment of Protestors at APEC Conference by
RCMP-Jailing of Student Prior to
Hon. Terry Stratton: Honourable senators, my question is
addressed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and
refers to the APEC conference.
One issue rising to the fore is that of the jailing of a student
protester. Mr. Jaggi Singh spent the 25th of November in jail
because the RCMP feared he might rile demonstrators.
Honourable senators, please take note of the circumstances.
Mr. Singh was arrested and jailed for being suspected of legally
protesting. On this, the 50th anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, a student was jailed for protesting.
Singh stated, "You can't arrest someone for what they might do."
The circumstances are very ironic. Earlier today, we listened to
a great human rights champion who was jailed for 27 years for
the colour of his skin and his belief in equality. In Vancouver last
year, the very same Prime Minister who applauded President
Mandela had Jaggi Singh placed under arrest for his political
beliefs. Take note, honourable senators: This demonstrator was
arrested not for what he did, but for what the RCMP thought he
My question to the leader is: If it is found, for example, that
demonstrators such as Mr. Singh were improperly arrested and
jailed, does Senator Graham believe that those responsible for
those actions should be addressed to the full extent to the law? A
simple "yes" or "no" will do.
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government):
Honourable senators, I cannot answer with a simple "yes" or
"no" because my honourable friend is making false statements.
He does a disservice to himself, an honourable member of this
chamber, when he says that the Prime Minister of this country
was responsible for having this individual put in jail. He knows
that is not a fact; that is false. Responsibility rests with the
RCMP, and this matter will be addressed appropriately and
properly before the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Complaints
Senator Stratton: Does the Leader of the Government in the
Senate think it is appropriate that the man was thrown in jail for
what he thought or what someone thought he might do?
Perhaps Senator Graham could tell us whether the government
will launch a separate investigation of incidents and events which
fall outside the parameters of the RCMP Public Complaints
Commission. This has gone beyond the domain of the complaints
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, as my honourable
friend knows, the complaints commission has a very broad
mandate. Hopefully, as it evolves, it will deal with the issues
raised by my honourable friend and those raised by other
This matter has been the subject of some considerable
deliberation in both chambers of Parliament over the last three or
four days. It has caught the attention of Canadians. Of course
there is concern. However, a body - the RCMP Public
Complaints Commission - was established for the very purpose
of investigating such actions. I say let the commission do its
work. The commission was, quite properly, set up by the former
government of which my honourable friend opposite was a part.
Senator Stratton: Could the leader give us a list of the people
who serve on the RCMP Public Complaints Commission?
Senator Graham: I would be happy to provide that
information, but I do not have it at the present time.
Settlement with Ethyl Corporation on MMT-Repeal of
Legislation-Request for Particulars
Hon. Ron Ghitter: Honourable senators, could the Leader of
the Government in the Senate explain, in broad terms, the details
of the settlement the government made with Ethyl Corporation of
the United States with respect to the legislatively banned
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government):
Honourable senators, my understanding is that the Government
of Canada settled in the amount of $13 million US.
Senator Ghitter: Is that all, or did the government also
undertake to repeal the legislation passed by Parliament with
respect to MMT?
Senator Graham: The Government of Canada also undertook
to repeal the legislation.
Senator Ghitter: Is it the intention of the government to bring
forward legislation repealing Bill C-29, which was vigorously
opposed by the opposition in the Senate on a number of grounds?
I take it the government will bring forth legislation to repeal
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, it is not necessary to
repeal Bill C-29, just the section that applied to MMT at that
particular time with respect to Ethyl Corporation.
Senator Ghitter: I take it that, by Order in Council, the
Government of Canada intends to repeal legislation that was
taken through the parliamentary process at great length and great
expense, and that the parliamentary system will not then
specifically seize this legislation. The government has just
repealed it unilaterally. Is that what I am to believe?
Senator Graham: It is my understanding that the government
has the authority to deal with that particular section.
Senator Ghitter: Honourable senators, this is the same
government that retreated from its defamation lawsuit with
former prime minister Mulroney and paid some $12 million in
legal fees; the same government that backed off on Pearson
airport and paid probably $60 million plus; the same government
that is now stealing about $20 billion from businesses and
employees by misappropriation of employment insurance
money; and the same government which is now spending
$13 million to settle a dispute over a piece of legislation that was
passed by Parliament, repealing it unilaterally.
May I ask the honourable minister why the government does
not bring forward legislation to repeal Bill C-29 - for that is
what is happening - so that the matter may be adequately
debated and understood by Canadians, rather than hiding behind
orders of council?
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, the government
revoked the ban in July of 1998 because the measure had been
found to be inconsistent with the AIT dispute settlement panel in
June of 1998, and because there had been no substantiation of the
Senator Ghitter: Is it not true that the government was
warned by experts from throughout this land, and in hearings
before both the Senate committee and the House of Commons
committee, that this legislation would not withstand the test with
respect to trade, let alone with respect to its constitutionality, and
that government experts came forward in committee and said,
"Do not worry about it. Everything is fine." The government
which backed those opinions is now backtracking and saying that
they made a mistake; is that the idea?
Senator Graham: Concerns were expressed at the time.
Indeed, the Acting Deputy Leader of the Opposition brought
forward amendments on the ground that the evidence presented
at the time was not conclusive. A substantial representation was
made on behalf of the automakers. The government has reviewed
the situation and has acknowledged that the evidence was
In announcing the decision to revoke the ban, the government
pointed out that any new data on MMT would be examined in an
open and independent, third party scientific review process.
Furthermore, should the process indicate that MMT poses a
danger to the environment or the health of Canadians, action will
be taken under the appropriate legislation, namely the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act.
Settlement with Ethyl Corporation on MMT-Repeal of
Legislation-Referral of Scientific Data to Royal
Hon. Noël A. Kinsella (Acting Deputy Leader of the
Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise in this house today to
say to the Leader of the Government, "We told you so."
However, it is not something that we rejoice in, because it is
costing Canadian taxpayers in excess of $20 million Canadian.
Will the Government of Canada, today, accept our
recommendation that the science which was in question be
submitted as a question to the Royal Society of Canada in order
for us to have some clear, objective answers?
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government):
Honourable senators, that is a recommendation that I would be
happy to draw to the attention of my colleagues.
Dismissal of Independent Actuary Studying Canada
Pension Plan-Government Position
Hon. Donald H. Oliver: Honourable senators, my question is
for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. It concerns the
dismissal of Chief Actuary Bernard Dussault and, as a direct
consequence thereof, the termination of his work on the Canada
In an attempt to deliver fair and unbiased counsel on
government issues, actuaries are required to work independently.
Mr. Dussault was about to deliver a report that would allegedly
question the viability of the CPP. The probability of an
unfavourable report stems from information on which his last
report was based.
The government says the termination was based on
"differences" between himself and his supervisor, John Palmer,
Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Others may claim that
this was merely an attempt to subdue the production of his report.
Either way, the whole episode subverts our faith in the
Will the Leader of the Government tell us whether or not the
Auditor General will be called upon to investigate all the
circumstances surrounding this sudden departure?
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government):
Honourable senators I am not aware of any reference of this
matter to the Auditor General. The Minister of Finance
acknowledged yesterday that he was aware that there were
problems between Mr. Dussault and the Superintendent of
Financial Institutions. I wish to emphasize that the
Superintendent of Financial Institutions acts at arm's length from
I believe that the Minister of Finance acknowledged as well
that he was told that the Superintendent intended to confront
Mr. Dussault on whatever issues and differences there were, but
the Minister of Finance did not know about Mr. Dussault's
dismissal until the day after he had been fired.
Senator Oliver: Honourable senators, Mr. Dussault is not the
only actuary who could potentially produce an embarrassing
report to the government this fall. Within a few weeks the chief
actuary of the employment insurance program will produce his
annual report on the state of the Employment Insurance fund,
already referred to by Senator Ghitter today, and will likely say
that substantive cuts in EI premiums are in order.
Can the Leader of the Government assure the Senate that no
attempt will be made to stifle the EI funds actuary by threatening
to fire him for producing an honest report?
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, again, I wish to stress
that it was not the government which dismissed Mr. Dussault; it
was the Superintendent of Financial Institutions.
With respect to the Employment Insurance fund, we will wait
to see how things evolve. However, I wish to assure my
honourable friend that the government itself is not contemplating
any action of the form that he suggested.
I have no indication that there is anything that is out of the
ordinary. The Employment Insurance fund is under careful
examination by those responsible, and it will be examined by the
government in due course. An announcement will be made
whenever a final decision is taken.
Maritime Helicopter Project-Request for Particulars
on Timeliness of Project
Hon. J. Michael Forrestall: Honourable senators, some of
you will recall my references to the Leader of the Government in
the Senate as the "acting chief petty officer." If he demonstrated
that he was in a position to answer faithfully and truthfully the
questions being put to him, I undertook to pay attention to the
people who put together his briefing book.
On the basis of the replies that I received yesterday in the form
of delayed answers, we now have five different responses from
the answers that were given to us here on the floor of the
chamber. Anyone with nerve enough to do that deserves to
become a full-fledged chief petty officer of the Royal Canadian
Sea Cadet corps movement of Canada. To that end, I will present
the appropriate designation to the acting chief petty officer and,
henceforth, will refer to the minister as "chief petty officer."
Honourable senators, much depends on the minister's answer
to my next question. In 1994 - and this is now 1998 - the
defence white paper stated that the government would replace
new maritime helicopters before the end of the decade. Could the
minister tell me how the government intends to do this in less
than 16 months when it takes about four years to put such a fleet
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government):
Honourable senators, I would agree with my honourable friend
that it would be a difficult time-frame within which to operate
and actually produce the helicopters. However, as I said
yesterday, I am the eternal optimist and I hope an announcement
will be made in a positive way long before the millennium.
Senator Forrestall: Honourable senators, that has little to do
with my question. Physically, it cannot be done.
Mr. Eggleton, when he has a few minutes, should withdraw
that statement and give us an estimate of when these helicopters
will be replaced. Then the Canadian naval personnel who must
fly and maintain these venerable but aging pieces of equipment
will know just how much longer they must risk their reputation
and the lives of their men and women.
Could we have some indication of when this will happen? We
do not want to "hope" that it will happen before the millennium.
We want to know when it will happen.
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, if I could give a
precise answer to that question, I would not be sitting at this
desk. I would be in the office of the Minister of National
Defence, the office of the Minister of Finance or even in the
Prime Minister's Office. I can assure my honourable friend that I
take his questions very seriously. As I said yesterday, on a
weekly basis and sometimes on a daily basis, I bring these
concerns to the attention of not only the Minister of Defence but
also other ministers who have some responsibility on this very
Senator Forrestall: Honourable senators, I am asking the
page to take this badge over to the acting chief petty officer, on
receipt of which he will become chief petty officer.
Senator Graham: It is a great day for me, but probably a sad
day for all chief petty officers in the country.
Visit of South African President Nelson
Mandela to Ottawa
Assurance that Remarks of Senate and House of
Commons Speakers will be Appended-Government
Hon. Pat Carney: Honourable senators, I would ask the
Deputy Leader of the Government to clarify her earlier report to
us and determine whether or not the appended remarks regarding
Nelson Mandela will also include the excellent remarks by our
Speaker which were made on our behalf at the joint sitting of the
Senate and House of Commons.
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government): I
can answer on behalf of the Deputy Leader. Since it is Question
Period, I must respond to all questions. I quite clearly heard the
Deputy Leader ask for unanimous consent to have appended to
today's Debates of the Senate the remarks of President Mandela,
Prime Minister Chrétien, Speaker Molgat and Speaker Parent.
Commission of Inquiry into Treatment of Protestors at
APEC Conference by RCMP-Provision of Funds for
Defence of Students-Appropriateness of
Hon. Pat Carney: Honourable senators, I also have a question
for the Leader of the Government relating to the role of the
Prime Minister in the RCMP assault on the student
demonstrators at the time of the APEC conference. Earlier he
told honourable senators that we should delay our inquiries until
the APEC public inquiry has been completed. Nonetheless, can
he provide this chamber with information on what funding the
government is supplying to the student protestors who are
seeking this investigation into the violation of their constitutional
Further, could the leader provide information on what
government funding, either directly or indirectly through
government-funded agencies, is being made available to those
parties being investigated?
Hon. B. Alasdair Graham (Leader of the Government): I
am not aware that any funds are being provided to the students,
the so-called "complainants" in this particular situation.
However, I believe it is a fact that defence counsel is being
provided to members of the RCMP who are being investigated in
accordance with the provisions of the RCMP rules and orders
and the public complaints commission of the RCMP.
Senator Carney: Honourable senators, would the Leader of
the Government in the Senate determine what funds are being
provided to the students involved? It does not seem to me that it
is in the spirit of this chamber to have such a one-sided
investigation set up as the answer to the Prime Minister's
involvement in this affair.
Senator Graham: Honourable senators, I would have to look
at the precedents for such matters. I do not know that there are
RCMP members have government-provided counsel because
they, unlike the complainants, may be subject to disciplinary
measures flowing from the proceedings.
Senator Carney: The complainants were subject to RCMP
Senator Graham: Senator Carney is asking whether the
students, the complainants, will be provided with funds to carry
forward their complaints. I do not know if funds are provided in
such instances. However, I do know that the RCMP officers who
would be subjected to this investigation will be provided with
counsel because they could be subject to disciplinary action or
disciplinary measures flowing from the proceedings.
Senator Carney: Does the Honourable Leader of the
Government in the Senate consider that to be a balanced and fair
response to the concerns raised on this side of the chamber?
Senator Graham: I would be happy to take the honourable
senator's concerns forward to those most responsible.
Bill to Amend-Third Reading-Motions in
Amendment-Bill Referred Back to Committee for
On the Order:
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable
Senator Di Nino, seconded by the Honourable Senator
DeWare, for the third reading of Bill S-10, to amend the
Excise Tax Act,
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable
Senator Maheu, seconded by the Honourable Senator
Ferretti Barth, that the Bill be not now read the third time,
but that it be amended in clause 1, on page 1, by replacing
line 8 with the following:
"ture or other reading material, including any pictorial
representation or other expressive media approved for
use by an educational institution in its programs, but
not including any material that
(a) contains an age restriction imposed by law on its
sale, purchase or viewing;
(b) is either obscene within the meaning of section
163 of the Criminal Code, or of a pornographic
(c) contains more than five percent advertising.".
And on the sub-amendment of the Honourable Senator Di
Nino, seconded by the Honourable Senator Kinsella, that the
motion in amendment be amended
(a) by adding the word "or" after paragraph (a);
(b) by deleting the word "or" after paragraph (b); and
(c) by deleting paragraph (c).-(Honourable Senator
Hon. Sharon Carstairs (Deputy Leader of the
Government): Honourable senators, today I should like to
participate in the third reading debate of this important bill,
because it is a bill which is not just about taxes; it is about
principle. In a society that places such emphasis on education
and higher learning as does Canada, the ability to read and to
gain access to literature is, I would hope among all of us, a
In the debate on this bill and during our committee hearings it
was stated that literacy and productivity in the workplace are
clearly correlated. Therefore, our emphasis on literacy should be
all the more important due to the growing needs of a
knowledge-based economy. That having been said, there is at
least some uncertainty in my mind as to whether this bill has to
do with taxes or has to do with literacy.
I agree that our society attaches increasing importance to
reading and that it facilitates access to books. I do not, however,
think that this bill should be viewed as a panacea for promoting
reading and literacy.
Access to reading material is not just a matter of cost, as I
believe all senators will agree. I believe that a child's upbringing
and attitude to reading are also considerations. If the priority of
this bill is to stimulate these considerations, I should have liked
to see more emphasis placed on exploring how families and
young people in particular perceive literature. However, perhaps
that could not be addressed in this bill.
I do agree with the honourable Senator Di Nino that reducing
the cost of books for everyone can only facilitate access to
reading material for those who otherwise would not have easy
access and who may be at risk of underachieving in their literacy
Therefore, I would emphasize that the provisions of the bill
hold much merit on the grounds discussed in the committee.
However, since our committee studied this bill, amendments
have been proposed, and those warrant some consideration. I am
glad so see that Senator Di Nino, in his subamendment, agrees in
principle with the first two sections of the amendment proposed
by Senator Maheu. Clauses (a) and (b) of her amendment
alleviate my concern that this bill may inadvertently increase
people's access, and particularly young people's access, to
material that I would hardly refer to as "literature." While I do
not condone any form of censorship, this type of material is
hardly essential to the ideals we wish to promote through this
I have a further concern, however, with the deletion of
clause (c) which I believe may also have some merit. It would be
repulsive if passage of this bill were to alleviate the tax burden of
certain fashion magazines and tabloids which are put together
solely for the pursuit of profit and can hardly be deemed to be the
type of literature to which this bill would want us to grant greater
Honourable senators, advertising has created a society that
values consumption above all else and in which the ideals for
which this bill strives are hammered down under the pure weight
of commercialism. We are only perhaps seeing the tip of the
iceberg. Increasingly, our economy is placing pressure on firms
to find new ways to improve profits or to gain market shares.
Advertising is on the increase, and it is benefiting principally
larger firms with bigger advertising budgets.
Furthermore, the idea it promotes is, in many circles,
considered to be counter to much of what Senator Di Nino
wishes to improve with this bill. Advertisements do not generally
tend to focus on literacy skills; they focus on pictures, images,
and feelings. All of these things, when added to our literature, do
not help us to improve our skills and our knowledge but rather
contribute to what has been dubbed the "dumbing of society."
Therefore, I am very concerned about the content of advertising
based on this argument. It is an important factor to consider in
this amendment and deserves, in my view, a closer look.
However, there are other concerns that should also be
considered. Honourable senators, Senator Di Nino has expressed
his concern as to the effect of such an amendment on small
publications. Although Senator Maheu pointed out that many are
given away freely and thus do not come under the jurisdiction of
this bill, it is nonetheless notable that some are not, and these
papers would therefore be forced to make certain adjustments to
compete in the new market for magazines and periodicals that
this bill proposes to create by the addition of paragraph (c). What
effect, therefore, would this clause have upon smaller
publications, especially Canadian publications?
Senator Di Nino also points out, honourable senators, the
complicated task of determining how 5 per cent is tabulated.
How do we calculate 5 per cent advertising content? Will it be
done by column, by inch, by page, or whatever? Will different
formulas be required to assess different types of magazines or
periodicals? What about info-articles? Are they articles or
advertisements? Clearly, there are many questions to which we
do not readily have the answers.
Furthermore, honourable senators, and this is quite important,
Senator Di Nino points out several prominent Canadian
magazines and periodicals which would possibly not qualify
under the 5 per cent rule. How should they be taxed? Surely
Maclean's is the type of magazine we would want Canadians to
read for their weekly news commentary. What would the effect
be on advertising for Canadian publishers?
Honourable senators, I should like to reiterate my support for
the principle of this bill. However, from a practical standpoint,
some of the issues raised in the amendment by Senator Maheu
and the subamendment by Senator Di Nino warrant further study.
Motion to Refer Bill Back to Committee for Further
Hon. Sharon Carstairs (Deputy Leader of the
Government): Therefore, I move, seconded by the Honourable
That the bill be not now read the third time, but that it be
referred back to the Standing Senate Committee on Social
Affairs, Science and Technology, together with the proposed
amendments, for further consideration.
The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable
senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Lowell Murray: Honourable senators, I rise simply to
ask a few questions of the Deputy Leader of the Government. I
am the chairman, as she knows, of the committee which gave
quite a close study to the bill in its original form after it had
received second reading in this chamber. We heard quite a
number of witnesses from the government and from various
organizations, for the most part in support of the bill.
Am I correct in assuming that the Deputy Leader of the
Government supports the amendment proposed by Senator
Maheu but has reservations about the subamendments proposed
by Senator Di Nino?
Senator Carstairs: I must say that I have concerns about both
the third amendment proposed by Senator Maheu and also the
subamendment made to that third amendment by
Senator Di Nino.
Senator Murray: Naturally the committee will accept any
reference that is made to us by the Senate. Does the honourable
senator have in mind witnesses from whom we should hear on
these points? How would she propose that we proceed?
Senator Carstairs: Honourable senators, to answer Senator
Murray's question, I think we should hear from the advertising
community on this particular piece of legislation to find out how,
in fact, it would impact on them, and particularly from publishers
of small publications, many of which Senator Stratton made
reference to in this chamber.
Hon. Eymard G. Corbin: Honourable senators, I draw your
attention to the fact that the French text is completely erroneous
in several spots. I have pointed this out to the Clerk. I hope that
senators relying on the French are aware of the fact that the
French text differs completely from the English.
The Hon. the Speaker: You are right, Senator Corbin; there is
a very clear error in the Order Paper.
Does any other honourable senator wish to speak? If not, it is
moved by the Honourable Senator Carstairs, seconded by the
Honourable Senator Pépin, that the bill be not now read the third
time, but that it be referred back to the Standing Senate
Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, together
with the proposed amendments, for further consideration.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
The Senate proceeded to consideration of the twenty-fourth
report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets
and Administration (Committee budgets), presented in the Senate
on September 22, 1998.
Hon. Sharon Carstairs (Deputy Leader of the
Government): Honourable senators, I move that this report be
The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable
senators, to adopt the motion?
Status of Education and Health in Young Girls and
Hon. Rose-Marie Losier-Cool rose pursuant to notice of
Thursday, June 18, 1998:
That she will call the attention of the Senate to the
population, education and health, particularly of young girls
and women in many developing countries.
She said: Honourable senators, I agreed to co-chair the
Canadian Parliamentary Association for Development and
Population set up in October 1997 because I believe that
parliamentarians have a responsibility to examine the numerous
problems of population as it relates to education and
development. That is also why I have chosen this topic for my
first inquiry in the Senate.
It would be impossible for me to touch on all of the many
facets of this subject because the problems are too wide-ranging.
I will try to limit my remarks to one region, French-speaking
Africa, and to two points in particular: the education of young
girls and the reproductive health of women.
The United Nations Population Fund report entitled: "The
State of World Population 1997" states the following, and I
The Ugandan Constitution was recently amended so as to
recognize the precedence of women's fundamental rights
over traditional, local laws. Chile plans to pass a
constitutional reform enshrining the equality of women and
men in law. The Sri Lankan government recently approved a
Charter of Women recognizing that women have the right to
reproductive self-determination. In Colombia a new social
welfare law recognizes the right of women to sexual and
Unfortunately, honourable senators, despite all this legislation,
we are left with the fact that, on the eve of the 21st century, most
societies still consider women to be of less value than men. They
have less access to education than men do and therefore a more
limited choice of profession, with the result that they earn less.
In the 1980s, the school enrolment rate for girls dropped
considerably in many African countries. In 1994, the rate had
climbed to 67 per cent, still far from the 93 per cent of
industrialized nations. The enrolment rate of young girls in
secondary schools rose marginally to 20 per cent, less than half
the average in industrialized nations.
Honourable senators, as reported in the 1998 report for
Population Action International entitled "Africa's Population
Challenge: Accelerating Progress in Reproductive Health," girls
in Africa encounter many of the same barriers to education as in
other developing countries. Parents are often more reluctant to
invest in educating a daughter than a son when most women have
limited income earning opportunities, and in those cultures where
a daughter's economic contribution to her family ends at
The quality of instruction is generally poor, and schools
frequently teach skills irrelevant to real world employment
needs. Teacher attitudes, gender stereotypes in textbooks and
sexual harassment contribute to a poor climate for girls'
educational achievement. In many countries, school policy and
social pressures force most pregnant schoolgirls either to drop
out or to resort to unsafe abortion. In Botswana, teenage
pregnancy is the cause of 60 to 90 per cent of schoolgirl
As all honourable senators know, the most effective long-term
strategy to empower women is to encourage parents to send their
daughters to school, while simultaneously expanding economic
opportunities for women. In Africa, as elsewhere, a woman's
education is one of the most important determinants of family
size. Countries such as Botswana, Kenya and Zimbabwe, which
have invested heavily in education, have been the first to
experience falling fertility. An African woman with some
secondary education has more than two fewer children on
average than a woman with no schooling. Girls who stay in
school are more likely to marry later, have greater options in the
job market and a greater say in household and reproductive
As more girls move through secondary school, age at marriage
is likely to increase and fertility to decrease. So far, however, few
African women have gone beyond primary education. Indeed, in
many countries, more than half of the women have never
attended school. Illiteracy rates in Africa are decreasing but still
remain among the highest in the world, with one-third of all men
and half of all women not being able to read or write.
Furthermore, girls have a harder time than boys in gaining
access to education. About 10 million more boys attend school
than girls. The solid progress in girls' education since
independence is at a standstill. Honourable senators, we must all
remember that the most effective long-term strategy to empower
women is to encourage parents to send their daughters to school.
In addition to meeting the growing need for family planning
and reproductive health services, African countries must expand
access to education for girls and economic opportunities for
women. This will require significantly increased financial
contributions from African governments and households, as well
as from international donors. In sum, addressing poor
reproductive health and rapid population growth is a daunting
task requiring comprehensive action on many fronts.
Honourable senators, Africa is a special case. According to
projections, the future rate of growth is far higher than for any
other large developing area.
The population increase has slowed down in the past 20 years,
thanks in part to better reproductive health care, and family
Every year, however, there are 81 million more people on the
planet, the equivalent of one more Germany every year, or one
more China every 15.
According to United Nations projections, over the next
half-century the world's population will increase by 3.6 billion,
the equivalent of the present population of Asia.
According to a September 1997 OECD report by Carl Wahren,
former chief of aid administration, Cooperation for Development
Branch, the fastest population increase will be recorded in the
cities of Africa. Between 1985 and 2025, it is forecast to increase
by 440 per cent.
Compared to other developing regions, African countries have
begun only recently to adopt population policies and initiate
family planning and related reproductive health programs. The
central event in population policy over the past five years was the
September 1994 International Conference on Population and
Development, which took place in Cairo, and in particular the
program of action approved by the conference. The outcome
Governments...committed themselves to a programme of
action which places reproductive health and rights at the
centre of the population and development agenda.
Sub-Saharan Africa has faced sustained and high population
growth on its path to development.
Increasing at almost 3 per cent yearly since the mid-70s, the
population of sub-Saharan Africa has doubled in just 25 years. In
less than three decades, Africa's population is projected to
double again from the current level of 620 million. Nowhere,
however, is the reality of reproductive health further from the
ideal than in Africa. Young women face heavy social pressure to
marry and bear children very early. More than half of the women
have given birth by the age of 20.
The first of women's freedoms is freedom in matters of
procreation, and all others spring from it. Honourable senators,
every day - yesterday, today, tomorrow - 1,600 women die
from the consequences of pregnancy, because they have no
access to reproductive health services, including family planning.
As I speak, 800 million adolescents, the highest number ever
reached in a generation, are reaching adulthood.
These young people are today making choices that will affect
their lives and the future of the world we all share. The concerted
efforts of developed and developing nations to provide access to
family planning services over more than three decades have
slowed world population growth.
Voluntary family planning programs have had resounding
success. They have become for women and for families the
world over the best way to protect the health of mothers and to
ensure a future for their young children.
Since this sort of program began in the 1960s, the percentage
of women in developing countries - including China - who
practice contraception has increased from less than 10 per cent to
over 50 per cent, and the number of births per woman has
dropped from six to three.
Despite the success of these efforts, honourable senators, there
has been a drop in interest in support for international family
planning programs. Accordingly, the contribution to the cost of
administering the Cairo program, promised at the 1994
conference by industrialized donor countries - North America,
Japan, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand - now
represents not a third of its total cost, but a quarter of it.
Wherever women do not have access to reproductive health
services, children die.
Honourable senators, seven million children die each year
because their mothers were not physiologically ready to bear a
child or did not receive proper obstetrical care.
Generally speaking, healthy reproduction means looking after
the mother's health, with family planning and perinatal care;
following up on the baby with vaccination and nutrition as the
child grows up; looking after the health of the little girl, and the
teenager; and the man's health as well, with respect to
andropause, genital cancer, AIDS and STDs.
It does cover a relatively wide range of elements, which are
prioritized according to national specificities.
At the Cairo conference, industrialized nations agreed to
increase their contribution as a group from $1.6 billion US today
to $5.7 billion by the year 2000. This increased contribution
would be equal to one third of the total estimated cost to carry
out the program, while the remaining two thirds of the costs
would be borne by the developing countries themselves.
Unfortunately, the industrialized nations are not complying. In
many instances, their citizens have a hard time figuring where
the national interest lies and what role their country should play
in a world undergoing rapid changes we are only starting to
Honourable senators, in a world with open borders, where
everybody and everything - ideas, capital and disease - move
freely from one country to another, we cannot afford to turn our
back on the world.
In addition, decision makers and opinion leaders are not called
upon enough, if at all, to act and speak in favour of taking
appropriate legislative and regulatory action to promote healthy
reproduction, which also entails improving the status of women.
During the 24th regular session of the Assemblée des
parlementaires de la Francophonie, formerly known as the
AIPLF, which met in Abidjan, in July 1998, the Assemblée, in an
effort to take into consideration the various aspects of population
issues, made a number of recommendations, including the
The governments of French-speaking countries must do
their utmost to ensure that the commitments made at the
1994 international conference in Cairo are met;
At the summits attended by the heads of state and heads
of government of French-speaking countries, these leaders
must systematically take into consideration the size of the
population in the designing of all development programs;
What an exciting topic to submit to the young people who will
meet at the Sommet de la Francophonie, in Moncton, in 1999.
At the summits attended by the heads of state and heads
of government of French-speaking countries, these leaders
must develop and fund information and education programs
for young people, on health and on the rights relating to
In order to achieve these objectives, the governments, the
international community and civil society, including NGOs and
the private sector, must increase their efforts to make sure that
women and girls can fully exercise their rights to live in a world
that promotes their fulfilment.
On motion of Senator Andreychuk, debate adjourned.
Committee Authorized to Meet during Sittings of the
Hon. Michael Kirby, pursuant to notice of September 23,
That the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade
and Commerce, have the power to meet while the Senate is
sitting between September 29, 1998 and November 30, 1998
for the purpose of its study of the present state of the
financial system in Canada and specifically on the report of
the Task Force on the Future of the Canadian Financial
Services Sector, and that rule 95(4) be suspended in relation
The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable
senators, to adopt the motion?
AddressofHis Excellency Nelson Mandela,President of the Republic of South Africatoboth Houses of Parliamentin theHouse of Commons Chamber, OttawaonThursday, September 24, 1998
Mr. Nelson Mandela and Madame Graca Machel were
welcomed by the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien, Prime
Minister of Canada, by the Honourable Gildas L. Molgat,
Speaker of the Senate and by the Honourable Gilbert Parent,
Speaker of the House of Commons.
Hon. Gilbert Parent (Speaker of the House of Commons):
Colleagues from the House, colleagues from the Senate,
disgtinguished visitors, the Right Honourable Prime Minister of
Canada, Mr. Jean Chrétien.
Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker of the House of Commons, Mr. Speaker of the
Senate, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, mesdames et
It is an honour to welcome the President of the Republic of
South Africa, Mr. Nelson Mandela, and Madame Graca Machel to
Canada and to this Parliament.
Mr. President, eight years ago when you first addressed this
Parliament you had only recently been released from 27 years in
prison. Apartheid was still the law of South Africa and your
country was an outcast from the community of nations. Fresh from
prison, you were in the midst of a heroic and still uncertain
struggle to dismantle the apartheid state and end a shameful legacy
of racial exclusion, minority domination and institutionalized
Today all that is changed. A new non-racial constitution with an
entrenched bill of rights is in place. Public policy is vigorously
debated in 11 official languages, not only in the national
parliament in Cape Town, but in the nine provincial capitals as
well. A united and democratic South Africa has rejoined the
family of nations and under your leadership is playing a respected
and vital role on the international stage.
We in Canada are proud to have been associated with the
anti-apartheid struggle and to have assisted in your democratic
transition. The fight against apartheid was a cause which crossed
political lines and moved all my predecessors, from the stand of
Prime Minister John Diefenbaker at the Commonwealth
Conference in 1961, which resulted in South Africa's withdrawal
from that body, through the governments of Prime Ministers
Pearson, Trudeau and my predecessor Brian Mulroney.
In this our governments were reflecting the views of the people
of Canada. Canadians of all walks supported the anti-apartheid
movement individually and through their churches, their trades
unions, professional associations and non-governmental
Your return to Canada after eight eventful years gives the
people of Canada, who shared your vision of a free, non-racial
and democratic society, the opportunity to celebrate the profound
and irreversible changes that have taken place in your country.
And, just as important, it is an opportunity to pay tribute to your
own decisive role in engineering a remarkable, peaceful and
On behalf of all Canadians, I want to express our admiration
for the profound and peaceful reshaping of your country, and for
the spirit of tolerance and reconciliation which has guided that
In setting South Africa free you have also unleashed your
country's immense potential to be a force for peace and stability
on the world stage. In the few short years since you have become
President, South Africa has resumed its rightful place at the UN,
the OAU and the World Trade Organization.
It has become a vital partner in fashioning a safer and more
secure world. And it is fitting, very fitting, that the
Commonwealth, which closed its doors to the old South Africa,
will hold its next leaders' meeting in the new South Africa under
In the same spirit in which we supported your historic struggle,
today our two countries are working together to bring greater
peace and justice to the world on establishing an international
criminal court, on eliminating child labour, on extending the
non-proliferation treaty and of course as partners from the very
beginning in the Ottawa process and the international ban on land
Just as Canadians worked to help end the apartheid system, we
are also working to help build the new South Africa. We are
providing assistance in areas such as improving the accessibility
and quality of education, in helping to rebuild the justice system,
in linking our SchoolNet with young South Africans using
information technology to its fullest potential and in increasing the
trade and commercial links between our countries which are so
important to South Africa's economic development. The fact that
you are accompanied by an impressive commercial delegation and
the key business meetings you are holding here in Canada are
proof of the importance of that area.
Mr. President, the fact is that we in Canada care about South
Africa. Not just because of our attachment to the struggles of the
past, but because of our hopes for the future - the future of
We believe that, at the end of a century of conflict and
genocide, the only hope for the world is to learn to live together
in understanding and tolerance. In South Africa, you are working
to build such a society. You are rejecting separation based on
race or language or religion. You are tearing down old walls of
hate. And building new bridges of understanding. A new society
for a new millennium. A multilingual society. A multi-ethnic
society. A society that finds its strength in its diversity. And its
soul and inspiration in a common sense of humanity.
In Canada, in our own modest way, we have tried to do the
same. But we have not had the burden of history that has
weighed so heavily on your country for so much of this century.
While our goals and values are the same, our experiences have
If, after decades of hate and oppression, you can succeed in
building a new society, our hopes for this battered world as it
enters a new millennium can be just a little bit brighter.
Certainly, Mr. President, this is the inspiration of South Africa
to the world today. Just as important, it is the inspiration that you
provided to the world.
It is often said that there are too few heroes in the world today.
That may be. But today we are in the presence of a real hero. Few
people in our time, or from any century, have so symbolized the
spirit of freedom that lives within every human being as you have.
Your struggle was an inspiration to freedom-loving men and
women everywhere. But, in a sense, the courage, optimism and
generosity of spirit you have shown since your struggle have been
even more of an inspiration. Suffering does not only lead to
bitterness and disillusion, it can lead to wisdom and compassion,
and to a better world.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honour for me to present to
you the leader of his nation, the statesman of his continent and a
hero for the world, President Nelson Mandela.
Mr. Nelson Mandela (President of the Republic of South
Africa): Mr. Speaker, honourable Prime Minister, Your
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, yesterday I had the honour to
address the Congress of the United States of America. Because of
the warmth of the reception I received, I felt I should share a
secret with members of the Congress.
I said that one of my fondest dreams was to become the
heavyweight boxing champion of the world. As a result of the
warm reception I received, I said that I was in a position to
challenge the reigning world champion, Evander Holyfield. I am
compelled today to repeat that statement because the warmth I
have received here is no less than that I received yesterday.
I know that it is a rare privilege for anyone from another
country to be invited to address this hallowed institution of
Canadian democracy which includes in its roll of honour leaders
of world renown.
That I should be granted that distinction twice in eight years is
something that can only be understood as a tribute to the people of
South Africa by the Canadian people, to whom we owe so much,
and an expression of the partnership between us.
When I stood before you in 1990, it was as a freedom fighter
still denied citizenship in my own country, seeking your support to
ensure an irreversible transition to democracy.
Today I stand before you as the elected representative of the
South African people to thank you once again for helping us end
our oppression, for assisting us through our transition and now for
your partnership in the building of a better life for all South
Africans. We will forever be indebted to you.
Although we still have a long way to go before we realize our
vision of a better life for all, there has been a great transformation
in South Africa since 1990 and solid foundations have been laid.
The experience of all peoples has taught that our democracy
would remain secure and stable only if we could unite those who
were once locked in conflict and if our new freedoms brought
material improvement in the lives of our people.
On this day, 24 September, South Africa marks one of our most
important national days. Heritage Day is dedicated to the
celebration of the rich diversity of our people. As I speak,
representatives of all the language, cultural and linguistic
communities are gathered at a conference discussing how to give
institutional form to the commitment in our constitution to the
promotion and respect of the rights of communities.
In order that the memory of historical injustice and violations of
human rights should not remain as a continuing obstacle to
national unity, our Truth and Reconciliation Commission has
helped us confront our terrible past. Painful and imperfect as the
process has been, it has taken us further than anyone expected
toward a common understanding of our history.
If we lay stress on uniting the different sections of our society, it
is because unity and the partnership of all the structures of our
society are critical to the reconstruction and development of our
society in order to eradicate apartheid's legacy of poverty and
Though there are differences among us, as is natural in any
democratic society, in particular one in transition from a past such
as ours, they play themselves out within an allegiance to our new
democracy and within a broad support for the government's
We have therefore been able to make a good start in bringing
basic amenities to millions of people for the first time in their
lives: electricity, clean water, health care facilities, housing and
Our economic policies have turned years of stagnation into
sustained growth since 1994, along with improved productivity
and exports as we gear our economy for success in a competitive
We do face major challenges and problems. What is important
is that we are confronting them and we are confident that we will
For example, though our policies are creating new jobs, the
number falls short of what we need. In response government,
labour and business are therefore joining forces in preparation for
a presidential jobs summit next month in order to work out
together a strategy for sustained job creation.
As we democratize our society, setting up new institutions or
transforming old ones, we are also dealing with corruption. The
institutions of the new democratic order are dealing with the
corruption in our society. Among other things, we have appointed
a powerful commission headed by a judge to expose and root out
corruption in the public service and recover the proceeds.
Crime is still at an unacceptably high level but we have turned
the tide through the adoption of a comprehensive national strategy
that includes the reshaping of a police force whose former
function was merely the protection of minority interests and the
suppression of resistance.
And though we have made mistakes in government due to lack
of experience, it is also true that we have achieved much more for
our people than was ever done under the previous government.
We are all too aware of the great deal that remains to be done.
What is important is that we are united as a nation as never before
and determined to succeed, and that we have friends like Canada
who are working with us as partners.
Canada is an important presence in much of what we have
achieved and in what we are building.
Since our democratic elections, our relationship with Canada
has entered a new and vibrant phase, one that is growing from
strength to strength. In drawing up our new democratic
constitution we drew deeply on Canadian experience.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Government of
Canada for the technical assistance provided through the Canadian
International Development Agency and the International
Development Research Centre. Critical areas affecting
transformation have benefited, including science and technology,
places of learning, our labour laws and our courts. We look
forward to the continuation of this assistance.
One of the critical measures of the growing relationship
between our countries is the threefold increase since 1994 in trade
to a level close to 1 billion Canadian dollars per year. We expect
this expansion to continue. We have brought on this trip people
from the private sector and government concerned with the
economy. We look forward to a reciprocal Canadian team in South
Also with me are government representatives and officials
concerned with safety and security who have come to seek support
for the implementation of our crime prevention strategy, as well as
others concerned with health care.
In all these ways we are benefiting from not only financial
assistance and from your expertise and experience, but as well as
the affinities and shared aspirations which join us.
Mr. Speaker, on my way here today I had the honour of
unveiling, at your human rights monument, a plaque dedicated to
John Humphrey, author of the first draft of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. I would like, if I may, to pay tribute
to his contribution to the central philosophy of your country and
his dedication to the cause of human rights worldwide.
This is an area in which your country and mine march hand in
hand in practical action to make a living reality of the rights to
which we subscribe.
In this regard we think of Canada's hard work together with
other countries to bring to fruition the anti-land mine convention.
We were very proud in December last year to be the third country,
after Canada and Norway, to sign that convention here in Ottawa.
Canada and South Africa also together played a part in the
recent establishment of the International Criminal Court.
South Africa is increasingly being called upon to play a role in
peacekeeping, in southern Africa and in Africa as a whole. Our
approach is that we will play whatever part we can within our
limited means and within a multilateral framework, whether it be
the United Nations, the Commonwealth, the Non-Aligned
Movement, the Organization of African Unity, and the Southern
African Development Community.
Essential to our vision of a new and more humane international
order is the belief that inevitable as differences may be, they need
not and should not be resolved by the force of arms. We look to
peaceful resolution of differences because this is the only way in
which humanity can prosper.
It is in this context that South Africa has in recent days found
itself called upon to contribute its forces to a joint regional
security initiative aimed at assisting, at its own request, the
democratically elected government of a neighbour by securing a
measure of peace and stability.
Here too we look to Canada as a partner. We recognize Lester
Pearson as the founder of modern peacekeeping because of his
innovative intervention in the Suez crisis.
By the same token, we salute Canada's distinguished service
over many years in Cyprus, Bosnia, Somalia and more recently in
the disarmament process in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Speaker, Canada's internationalist record gives us
confidence to know that you understand and share our vision of an
African Renaissance. If history has decreed that our continent at
the end of the 20th century should be marginalized in world
affairs, we know that our destiny lies in our own hands. Yet we
also know that we cannot bring about our Renaissance solely by
our own efforts, since the problems we face are rooted in
conditions beyond the power of any one nation to determine.
Indeed, the turmoil in far off economies that we have had to
weather has, we know, affected Canada too. In the interdependent
world in which we now live, rich and poor, strong and weak are
bound in a common destiny that decrees that none shall enjoy
lasting prosperity and stability unless others do too.
These harsh lessons of our global economy were the focus of
attention at the summit at the Non-Aligned Movement held in
Durban in our country earlier this month. They have forced
themselves upon the attention of the world international
community. A debate about the global trade and financial system
that has been too long in the making has now been joined.
We urge you to join with us in seeking to redirect the system
and its institutions so as to cater for the needs of development and
the interests of the poor.
In so doing we would be affirming a fundamental principle of
all human society, namely that the existence and the well-being of
each of us is dependent on that of our fellows. In a globalized
world, that is as true of nations as it is of individual men and
Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, this occasion marks
something of a farewell. I am deeply grateful that it has been
possible, before my retirement from public life, to make this
second visit to a people that has made our aspirations their own.
You insisted that the rights which the world declares to be
universal should also be the rights of all South Africans.
But though it is a personal farewell and in some sense an
ending, I do know that it is also a beginning, marking the start of a
new and more profound relationship between our peoples.
Mr. Speaker, hon. Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen, I thank
you from the bottom of my heart.
Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!
Hon. Gildas Molgat (Speaker of the Senate): Mr. President
and Mrs. Machel, Mr. Prime Minister and Madam Chrétien,
Mr. Chief Justice and Madam, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues in
parliament, and ladies and gentlemen.
Mr. President, no words of mine can ever convey the depth of
feeling of Canadians toward you better than the applause that you
heard here this morning.
On behalf of the members of the Senate of Canada I want to
thank you, Your Excellency, for returning to Canada once again
and addressing a joint assembly of our parliament.
Just over eight years ago, on June 18, 1990, you spoke to us as
the Deputy President of the African National Congress. Just newly
liberated from a South African jail, you came to seek our
continued support in the final stages of that great struggle of your
people and yourself against apartheid and all other forms of racism
and discrimination. As you said at the time, the message you
brought was indeed simple: South Africa should be transformed
into a united, democratic and non-racial country.
Canada has some knowledge of how difficult it is to remain "a
united, democratic and non-racial country". It is because of your
skilful statesmanship and the wisdom and moderation of the
inhabitants and chiefs of South Africa whom you represent that
you have made such tremendous progress towards the goal you
and your compatriots have set yourselves. Perhaps you would
favour us with some advice?
A decade ago it seemed inevitable that the struggle against
institutionalized racism would lead to a violent and bitter civil
upheaval that would tear South Africa apart and leave the country
bitterly divided, prostrate, and in the hands of anti-democratic
regimes. This unfortunately has proven to be the fate of too many
countries, and at a terrible cost they have freed themselves from
the rule of one oppressive regime, only to fall victim of another
often more radical tyranny.
Eight years ago your address to our parliament gave us hope
that South Africa might avoid that fate. It indicated that your long
27 years in prison had not led to bitterness. Rather, it had led to
wisdom and the determination to use your immense personal
prestige in South Africa, in the African National Congress and
throughout the world to bring about a united, democratic and
non-racial South Africa through mediation and negotiation.
The theme of healing, of reconciliation and of building featured
largely at your inauguration as President of South Africa. At that
time you entered into a covenant to build, and, Mr. President, I
quote your very words:
-a society in which all South Africans, both black and
white, will be able to walk tall, without any fear in their hearts,
assured of their inalienable right to human dignity-a rainbow
nation at peace with itself and the world.
Those were stirring words, Mr. President.
In the years that followed your election to office, the
government you lead held fast to this noble ideal, although it was
not always easy. The challenge was a formidable one.
It has not been easy; changing a racially based, repressive,
democratically limited political structure in which the internal
power is in the hands of a privileged few has been a major, major
Furthermore, revolutionary political change gives rise to
exaggerated hopes of immediate, wide-ranging social and
economic improvement. Such expectations are difficult to meet.
Yet, with time, with deep personal commitment by yourself and
like-minded colleagues, and with broad support from your people,
you are bringing about long-lasting and deep-seated changes in
living conditions and social structure.
You are doing more than making dramatic progress in domestic
affairs. You are showing the world what can be done. You are
exercising a moderating influence on the world stage.
Under your leadership South Africa has become a continental
force of stability and peace. On behalf of the Senate of Canada I
thank you for sharing with us your knowledge about the progress
South Africa is making and your views of the world situation.
Canadians welcome the return of South Africa to active
participation in the work of the Commonwealth, the United
Nations and other international organizations, and we value very
highly the increasingly close relations between our two countries
symbolized this morning by your wonderful address.
Thank you for coming to Canada.
Mr. President, be assured that here you are among friends.
Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!
Mr. Speaker Parent: Mr. President, Madam Machel, Madam
Chrétien, my colleagues of the House of Commons and our
brothers and sisters of the Senate, distinguished guests.
On behalf of all members of the House of Commons and those
they represent, I thank you for your speech and welcome you and
your compatriots to the heart of Canadian democracy.
Whatever their age and occupation, Canadians have always
had a great affinity with South Africa and its inhabitants.
Mr. President, you have said:
I cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in
which all persons live together in harmony and with equal
opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to
achieve. But if need be, it is an ideal for which I am
prepared to die.
Neither the hardships of decades of imprisonment nor the
trappings of more recent power have caused you to lose sight of
Young South Africans were the first to honour you with their
idealism, their support and their willingness to sacrifice
themselves in the cause. Soon however your reputation spread
abroad and young people all over the world honoured you by
electing you honorary president of their university and college
Many other honours were to follow, not the least of them the
Nobel Peace Prize. But what has earned our greatest admiration,
Your Excellency, is that you have never turned away from the
ideal you espoused.
Mr. President, you could have preached and practised the
politics of vengeance and retribution, but instead you, sir, have
devoted your energies and influence to the process of healing and
You, sir, have chosen the path that uses political change as a
means of bringing about peaceful change in the hearts and minds
of individuals, as well as in society. That was the message that
you brought to the Canadian Parliament eight years ago, and that
was the commitment you made when you became the President
of South Africa. Sir, you have kept your word.
I choose my words carefully. You honour us who are here
today. You honour the Canadian people. You honour this place,
this House of Commons.
When historians write of the 20th century, beside the names of
giants who have advanced the causes of peace and democracy,
giants such as Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr., the
name of Nelson Mandela will be inscribed.
All of us thank God for you having been with us in this world.
You have made it, sir, a better ploace and we thank you.