Ms. Nicole Roy-Arcelin (Ahuntsic):

Mr. Speaker, as the member for Ahuntsic, I am very pleased, on behalf of my constituents and myself, to congratulate Julie Payette who is originally from Ahuntsic, on being chosen from among 5,330 male and female candidates as Quebec's first and Canada's second woman astronaut-no doubt the youngest woman ever to participate in the space shuttle program.

Ms. Payette is an important symbol not only for women but for all young Canadians, whether they live in Quebec or any other province of Canada.

I want to point out the great scientific, intellectual, artistic and athletic abilities of my riding's new heroine. Good luck, Julie. We are very proud and honoured in my riding.

Hear, hear.

Hon. Warren Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grace):

Mr. Speaker, on April 1, I met with the Prime Minister regarding Mrs. Henriette Haddad, a Canadian citizen taken hostage in Lebanon in 1985 and not heard of since.

This meeting was held in the presence of Mrs. Haddad's son and friends of the family where the Prime Minister promised he would do everything possible to locate Mrs. Haddad and obtain her release.

To the Prime Minister's credit, he did write to the presidents of Syria, Lebanon and Iran requesting their co-operation and the government also sought UN assistance.

Consequently I was shocked yesterday to read a report that authorities were working to obtain the release of the last two western hostages in Lebanon, two German citizens, with no mention of Mrs. Haddad.

I plead with the government to follow this up immediately to make sure that Mrs. Haddad, the only Canadian hostage, is not forgotten and that a release is actively pursued.

Mr. Bob Horner (Mississauga West):

Mr. Speaker, research and development lay the groundwork for industrial success and Canadian companies are proving that the policies of this government have provided an environment where innovative technology can flourish.

Since the implementation of increased patent protection for pharmaceuticals five years ago, Glaxo Canada Inc., based in Mississauga, has increased R and D funding to nearly $30 million annually.

Over the next five years, Glaxo expects to spend over $270 million on R and D in Canada. These investment levels far exceed the commitment undertaken by pharmaceutical manufacturers to spend 10 per cent of sales on R and D.

Increased investment has meant increased employment opportunities for Canadians as Glaxo's work force has increased from 400 to more than 1,000 in the past five years.

Glaxo's commitment to Canada continues. In April the company inaugurated new corporate headquarters in Mississauga and broke ground on the same site for a $70 million manufacturing facility slated for completion in 1995. I congratulate the people of Glaxo Canada Inc.-

Mr. Speaker:

The hon. member's time has expired.

June 10,1992

Hon. Jean Chretien (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Acting Prime Minister.

Yesterday the Prime Minister confirmed that the government was indeed considering spending $4.3 billion to acquire military helicopters designed for fighting Soviet submarines, a threat that no longer exists today. Furthermore, these helicopters would be made in Europe, contrary to what the Minister of National Defence suggested yesterday to reporters.

Does the Acting Prime Minister not find it strange that the government is preparing to spend billions of dollars to fight Soviet submarines, when next week he will dine with Boris Yeltsin, the President of Russia? At that time the Russian president will ask for money not to fuel his submarines but to feed his people.

Hon. Mary Collins (Associate Minister of National Defence and Minister Responsible for Status of Women):

Mr. Speaker, the minister also indicated yesterday that no decisions have been made on this matter.

Obviously we take into consideration the change in the global situation as we look at our requirements. It is important to recognize that what we are looking at are replacement helicopters for our search and rescue missions over the oceans.

I am sure my hon. colleagues would agree that is a very important mission for our Canadian Armed Forces. I think there were over 200 lives saved as a result of those missions in the past two years. We must have capable equipment.

On looking at any decisions of this nature we will take into account not only the global situation and the capability but obviously the cost effectiveness of whatever equipment may be required.

Hon. Jean Chretien (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday when asked about whether we even need these helicopters the Prime Minister said: "I have not the foggiest idea".

That is the problem with members of this government. They do not have the foggiest idea what they are doing in this file and many other files. When we ask for money for

Oral Questions

infrastructure they have none, but when it comes to high-tech toys they spend money like drunken sailors. Tb be fair, drunken sailors spend their own money, not taxpayers' money.

How come there is money for helicopters like that and none for infrastructure when a lot of experts say that of course we will need some helicopters sooner or later but not these very expensive helicopters? They are not needed any more to fight Soviet submarines.

Hon. Mary Collins (Associate Minister of National Defence and Minister Responsible for Status of Women):

Mr. Speaker, first, with respect, I think the hon. Leader of the Opposition would want to reflect on the words he used to describe sailors. Men and women who serve in our navy are honourable and outstanding representatives of this country.

Second, I would also suggest to my hon. colleague: Is he saying, for example, that we should not have safe, capable equipment to provide search and rescue over the oceans? Should we not have safe helicopters that we can provide the fisheries patrol which I know is so important to members from the eastern provinces?

All of these are ongoing tasks of our naval requirements. We will be going through a process of review. The Minister of National Defence will be making recommendations in due course to cabinet about what the most appropriate equipment should be, taking into account all factors in order to meet those needs.

Hon. Jean Chretien (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

When asked about infrastructure programs the government has the habit of saying-and I have heard the Minister of Finance saying it in this House-that the municipalities do not have money to pay their one-third.

At the conference in Montreal the Federation of Canadian Municipalities did a survey and 87 per cent of the people there said that they were in favour of this program of one-third, one-third, one-third, and 83 per cent of them said they would have no problem finding the money to do the job at the moment. By a margin of five to one they said that the problems they were having in the cities today with their infrastructure were hurting business opportunities.

June 10, 1992

Oral Questions

What do we need more at this moment: to help our cities, to create jobs in Canada and not in Great Britain, or to buy expensive helicopters that are not needed, that type of helicopter, at this time?

Hon. Don Mazankowski (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition knows very well the security of our nation is clearly the responsibility of the federal government. Our defence capability is clearly the responsibility of the federal government. Those are clear priorities the federal government has to observe and has to implement.

Obviously he knows very well that the kind of infrastructure program he is talking about is essentially the responsibility of the provinces and the municipalities. I indicated to the hon. member on many occasions that he wants to go on a spending spree. He wants to go on a spending spree, suggesting that the provinces put up one-third, the municipalities put up one-third and the federal government puts up one-third.

There is only one taxpayer. The priorities of this government are to respond effectively in those areas of responsibility and jurisdiction that are clearly within the domain of the federal government.

Ms. Sheila Copps (Hamilton East):

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Acting Prime Minister. It is not a matter of spending but a matter of priorities. Yesterday the Minister of National Defence said that those criticizing the government's priorities regarding the acquisition of the British helicopters were guilty of appeasement. What an outrageous analogy.

Are 1.5 million unemployed Canadians across Canada who want jobs guilty of appeasement? Is the mayor of Montreal who wants jobs for the unemployed in his city guilty of appeasement? Are one million children who line up at food banks guilty of appeasement? Are 8 million Canadians who do not have adequate sewer systems guilty of appeasement?

Hon. Mary Collins (Associate Minister of National Defence and Minister Responsible for Status of Women):

Mr. Speaker, if I could iterate once again, I am sure my hon. colleague is quite aware of the national defence policy which came out last fall and was updated. It clearly set out what are the roles and responsibilities of national defence.

We have a budget within which we have to operate. Part of that budget goes for capital equipment. One of our approaches is to increase the amount of our existing approved budgets for capital equipment in order that our men and women will have the appropriate equipment. One of the projects within that existing budget is replacement helicopters.

This is a question of how we are going to deal with the issue within the Department of National Defence, recognizing that our budget has been constrained over the last few years and will continue to be constrained.

Nevertheless, we do believe that the replacement helicopters for search and rescue, for fisheries patrol, for drug interdiction, for all the new roles that our navy will be taking on, are very important priorities.

Ms. Sheila Copps (Hamilton East):

Mr. Speaker, in order of importance are the 1.5 million Canadians who are looking for work not important to this government?

What about the one million children right now who are lining up at food banks? Are those children important to this government? What about the eight million Canadians who do not have sanitary sewers?

We ask the government once again: Would it not be a better priority to put money into a public works program now to get Canadians working and help rebuild our cities? Is that not a question of real government priority?

Hon. Don Mazankowski (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance):

Mr. Speaker, is the hon. member suggesting that the Government of Canada should put Armed Forces personnel into equipment that is unsafe?

The helicopters that are proposed to be replaced are 35 years old. Surely she should take that into consideration.

June 10, 1992

In order for our men and women to carry out their responsibilities, to carry out and preserve the security and integrity of the country, we need not only personnel but equipment to do the job.