FAIT Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Monday, May 25, 1998

• 1602

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West—Mississauga, Lib.)): I call to order the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

It's our great pleasure this afternoon to have with us the President of Romania. We have been waiting in anticipation of your arrival.

A number of us have been to Romania. I was there in the fall and was extremely impressed with the progress your country has made.

Mr. President, I wonder if you would like to introduce the people who are with you. And since the meeting is very short, I will leave it up to you to address the meeting, and perhaps we would have time for questions after.

Before you begin, I'd like to make a little personal comment. In travelling around the world, I think Canada has already been very gracious to Romania, because we have given you the best of our ambassadors.

Thank you. You may begin.

Mr. Emil Constantinescu (President of Romania): Thanks for the ambassador.

Madam Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, members of Parliament, I'm pleased to have this opportunity to address the distinguished members of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade in the House of Commons.

Far from being just a moment of protocol in the agenda of my visit to Canada, our meeting today has its own significance, which I must define as extremely important.

[Translation]

This meeting is an excellent opportunity to give you a summary of the Romanian foreign policy objectives, and to give you an overview of Romania's economic potential. I have always preferred to deal with my partners openly and frankly, and to stay away from the overworked clichés of diplomatic language.

• 1605

[English]

There may still be many who wonder why Canada should be interested in relations with Romania, a distant country in eastern Europe, a country only too little known by the Canadian public. With your help, we can answer these questions and tap to our mutual benefit the new political and economic realities of Romania.

Bilateral relations between Romania and Canada can be defined as excellent, and this is also due to the parliamentary relations, which, through the substance they have gained in recent years, have contributed to stronger cooperation between our countries. Romania greatly appreciates the strong support awarded by Canada in our effort of integration into native structures.

The favourable conclusions presented in the evaluation documents prepared by the relevant parliamentary committees here in Ottawa have decisively contributed to the positive decision of the Canadian government, and for this I would like to thank you on behalf of the Romanian people, who have found in you honest friends who formulate criticism whenever it is necessary, but who also act in the spirit of friendship and truth and support warmly their friends.

Let me express my deep belief that the Canadian support for my country is a generous and indeed a striking expression of the sort of power Canada exerts in our contemporary world, having clearly identified the potentialities of its partners in eastern Europe. Your policies win, by the power of friendship, mutual respect, and positive action, a privileged position in the world of today and of tomorrow.

[Translation]

I would like to thank members of the Canada-Romania Parliamentary Friendship Group, who, in conjunction with their colleagues from their Parliament of Romania, have made a remarkable effort to strengthen the dialogue between their legislators on issues of common interest. The efforts made by Romania to succeed in being accepted as a member of NATO are based on very solid foundation.

With respect to international relations, Romania has clearly been promoting safety and co-operation. Romania is an extremely stable country in the region, and has both promoted and been one of the first to establish regional co-operation. Romania's good relations with all its neighbours, of which our treaties with Hungary and Ukraine are an excellent example, have won the unanimous appreciation of the international community.

[English]

The joint Romanian-Hungarian peacekeeping battalion is already a reality, and at the same time, Romania is practically the only European country where ministers belonging to an ethnic political party are part of government.

• 1610

Strengthening good neighbourly relations with Ukraine cannot take place by chance. It is a long-term concern for Romania, a country that is directly interested in consolidating the independence and sovereignty of the Ukrainian state.

The trilateral arrangements among Romania, the Ukraine, and Poland, and Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine are part of the common effort of ensuring a region of stability and security, of fighting against organized crime and elicit trafficking of drugs and weapons.

It is true that these achievements can be perceived as necessary but not sufficient guarantees and reasons for Romania's accession to NATO. Romania's legitimate divorce cannot be successfully resolved without the consistent and efficient support of the most important members of the international community.

[Translation]

As for ourselves, we promise to be frank with you, and to be fully deserving of the confidence you have shown in the new democratic Romania, and in the role it might play within the Alliance.

The establishment of consultation mechanisms among Romanian and Canadian Parliamentarians and experts from our respective departments of Foreign affairs and Defence will make it possible for us to learn a great deal about the achievements and successes of Canada. An experience like this is particularly useful now, just before the Washington Summit, at which Roumania will have to establish its priorities for action.

[English]

Certainly we are able, and it is in our interest, to develop Romanian-Canadian relations in all fields. As compared with the past, even to the recent past, Romania's new program of government has all the makings of a modern program. It is pragmatic, since it sets up an action plan with systems and responsibilities. It is also transparent and responsible before the public opinion in terms of implementing its objectives.

The accent placed on attracting foreign investment, restructuring, privatizing, establishing the legal framework, and combating corruption and organized crime and curbing bureaucracy will undoubtedly contribute to meeting the objectives of bilateral relations between Romania and Canada, especially in the field of economic cooperation.

We are very well aware that our political will must be met by facts, and we should find the necessary coherence and efficiency in the economic field, so as to allow us to look toward the future with confidence. However, we also know that we cannot succeed on our own. A significant increase in direct Canadian investment in the Romanian market is all the more necessary now, with the global and integrated economy of the contemporary world.

[Translation]

The energy, telecommunications, banking, agri-food, light industry systems and tourism sectors, to which we can add co- operation and the atomic energy sector, all represent major areas of interest for Canadian investors. The Romanian government and myself are determined to promote the development of Romanian- Canadian co-operation at every level. You'll find us ready to openly discuss all issues involved in our co-operative efforts. Together, we can find solutions and forge ahead. Thank you for your attention.

[English]

Thank you all.

• 1615

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you.

The way in which we conduct these sessions, Mr. President, is that we each take turns with questions.

I think we'll dispense with the ten-minute timeframe this time and keep it down to five maximum.

Mr. Grewal.

Mr. Gurmant Grewal (Surrey Central, Ref.): Thank you, Madam Chairman.

On behalf of the Official Opposition of Canada, I join my colleagues on the foreign affairs and international trade committee in welcoming the President of Romania, His Excellency Emil Constantinescu, and the members of his delegation to our committee.

Canadians are pleased to have Romania's first non-communist president in Canada today. In the 1996 election, if we try to recall those days, His Excellency's platform was to fight corruption, cut taxes, and take Romania closer to western Europe. To me, he looks like another “reformer”—both Reformer and reformer.

Going back in history, Canadians will still remember when in 1978 the Trudeau Liberal government, with Mr. Jean Chrétien in the cabinet, helped to prop up the Romanian communist dictatorship at a time when the people of Romania were suffering the repression and tyranny of one of the most brutal communist dictators in the whole Warsaw Pact, Ceausescu.

Dictator Ceausescu was a recipient of Canadian blandishments from Trudeau. Canada sold a CANDU nuclear reactor to the communist dictator in 1978, and provided a $1 billion line of credit through the Export Development Corporation in 1979. We know that Ceausescu ordered five reactors but built only one.

I would be interested to know what his government's plans are for the future. Is he still moving toward that nuclear build-up, or he has realized that there is no need in his country at this time to go ahead?

There's a second thing I would like to know very quickly, in the limited time I have, but first a comment. Canada has supported France in advocating that Romania be brought into NATO this year along with Slovenia, but due to the American shortlist, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic instead came on the agenda. We tried, and we will not succeed probably.

What will be his intentions to come into NATO, and how does he foresee that Canada could be helpful in achieving that objective?

Finally, Canada is the twelfth-largest investor in Romania at this time, or a year ago, probably. Canada signed an investment protection agreement with Romania. As I understand it, our investment in Romania is $42.8 million in various fields, which I hope will grow.

I welcome your views, sir, on economic cooperation, which you mentioned in your presentation. As well, I would like to know how you are enhancing economic cooperation between Canada and Romania.

Thank you.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Mr.President, could you try to do that in two minutes?

[Translation]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: I learned from my university experience that the questions are more interesting than the answers. I will answer according to each point asked.

Dictatorships pass, yet reactors remain. Thus I believe that the first group of the nuclear station of Cernavoda is a good thing. The fact that it is there, that it works, is a test of the cooperation of Romanians and Canadians as people, as technicians, as specialists. It was an opportunity for many talented young people from Romania to be trained in Canada for the construction and exploitation of a thermo-nuclear station. They have been successful in learning, and work now successfully. The electric power supplied by the Cernavoda power station is the cheapest when compared to the power generated by other types of thermoelectric stations which use oil, natural gas, coal or hydro-power. I am happy to be able to present directly to members of the Canadian Parliament the problems related to the continuing construction of groups 2, 3, 4 and 5. The Cernavoda power station is of the Canadian CANDU type. It is the only safe thermo-nuclear station in all of Eastern and Central Europe. All the other plants were built according to plans similar to those of Cernobyl, which caused a nuclear catastrophe which could have destroyed a considerable part of Europe. Even these days, the effects are being felt as far as East Germany. To this day, as a consequence of the Cernobyl accident, children with malformations are born, plants and animals are affected. In Romania's neighbourhood, Bulgaria also has an extremely unsafe nuclear power station at Koslogi [?]. Given the safety of our own power station in Romania, there is not a single opponent to nuclear power stations. Not only parliamentarians and the government, but also the entire population accepts the fact that this is a safe, non-polluting way to produce electric power. We are now facing the problem of finishing compound nr. 2, of which so far 35% has been built, and a financial arrangement for 750 million dollars was put forward, for which, surprisingly, a "sovereignty guarantee" was requested from Romania - 100% government guarantees, high interest rates, and short grace periods. We have had trouble explaining to Romanians why rich and powerful countries such as Canada and Italy, who have been participating in the project, need guarantees from a country, or the guarantees of the government of a country, which is having financial difficulties in the post-communist transition period.

Recently, in discussions with the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and other concerned persons, some interesting proposals have been presented for the financing of compound 2, because this presents great advantages. There is no need for extremely expensive programs costing hundreds of millions of dollars for site selection and installation. The infrastructure is already prepared, including facilities for adduction of coolant water from the Danube. The entire platform is prepared and partly constructed and, finally, the human resources are available. The only problem is a financial one and we believe that a favourable arrangement will be found for Romania which will also lead to a higher degree of safety and security in the region....

As for the second question, Romania ...

• 1625

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): I'm sorry, Mr. President, could you please save that? There are others who have questions. Could you put it on hold and answer it if we have time? Thank you.

Mr. Turp.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): First of all, Mr. President, I would like to welcome you before the committee, along with your Minister of Foreign Affairs and other members of your delegation.

Our party, the Bloc Québécois, is represented in this Parliament and has a 60 per cent majority of seats from Québec, 44 out of 75. Our first leader, Lucien Bouchard, is now Premier of Quebec, and you will have an opportunity to meet with him a little later this week.

There is a question I would like to hear your head of State answer. He just said that diplomatic language is something he does not always use. You, Mr. President, are the head of State of an emerging democracy. What is the main difficulty Romania is having in making the transition to a democratic system? In particular, I would like to know whether relations between the Romanian majority and the Hungarian minority is one of the difficulties you are encountering during the transition.

[English]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: The main difficulty in a transition period consists in the fact that as soon as you have solved a very difficult problem, it does not count anymore, and a new problem comes up which becomes the only important one. And after you solve this one too, the weight moves to another problem. I am very proud to say, because it is not my merit but the merit of the Romanian people, that we succeeded in one year and a half to create a consolidated democracy, in which human rights and the rights of all human groups are respected, and that it is functioning well. As far as relationships between majority and minority groups are concerned, incredible things have been achieved, incredible not only for Romania but for all Europe. We are the only country in which the party of the Hungarian minority is represented in the government by ministers, by a great number of state secretaries in key ministries, by prefects, the approximate equivalents of provincial governors (or premiers in Canada), in departments with Hungarian as well as Romanian population concentrations. This was possible because of a change in the public mentality, something very important not only for Romania. It is important for Europe, indeed for the whole world, because it demonstrates that it can be done. At this point in time the mechanism of world equilibrium is based on the system of fear, a negative model. The model of Bosnia-Herzegovina or Kosovo or Somalia is pointed out. It is said that: "if you do as they do then you will have thousands of deaths, rapes, destruction". This is, of course, an equilibrium, but an equilibrium of fear. I believe that positive models are much more effective. We could have had a Bosnia-Herzegovina in Transylvania, and we were close to having one. In 1990 we could have had a Kosovo, something which could have happened in Bucovina district in Romania, and extensive conflict could have occurred between Romania and the Ukraine; or between Hungary and Romania, as it was for centuries. At this time this are finally over, for centuries to come; and all this because the mentality of the population has changed.

A few years ago, when the population was asked through public opinion polls: "What are you most afraid of?", the most common answer was "inter-ethnic conflicts", "inter-religious conflicts" and "conflicts with neighbours". Now these concerns are on the bottom of the list, being almost insignificant. In the forefront are the problems concerning the standard of living, economic reforms, unemployment. And these are indeed Romania's real problems. Because Romania was very rigorously monitored but never financially aided. Massive loans have been granted to, and massive investment have been effected in the countries of Central Europe, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and others. This, however, was not the case and is not the case with Romania. Moreover, just recently, in an unjustified and unexpected manner, the rating of Romania as a country was reduced, not for banking or financial reasons, since the inflation leveled off, but because of political instability - something which does not exist. Yet I am here to tell you the truth, and I encourage more Canadian parliamentarians to come to Romania so that they will become directly acquainted with the truth. Our problems are related to the economic reform, given that a radical and rapid reform represents a big cost to be paid by the population. And my problem as president is to keep a balance between the speed and extent of the reform and its sustainability by the population.

• 1630

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you.

I know that you have another appointment fairly soon, but I was wondering if you could stay with us a few minutes longer to give others an opportunity. Do you have a little more time? About fifteen minutes. Thank you.

Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to join in welcoming President Constantinescu to Canada.

I guess alone among the members of this committee, I have had the privilege of visiting Romania on a number of occasions, the first time as one of the international observers of the election in 1990, and I've been back many times.

I'm delighted to see our ambassador here, Gilles Duguay, who has done a superb job in representing Canada.

I must say I'm a great fan of Romania. It's a beautiful country, with a strong people, a great culture and a great history, and I'm proud to be a member of the Canada-Romania parliamentary group, as well, and look forward to returning to Romania soon.

I have two brief questions. President Constantinescu, you talked about dictators coming and going. You're right, Ceausescu is gone, but one of his legacies lives on, and that is article 200 of the criminal code, an article that has led to great pain, and indeed in some cases to suicide of innocent people who happen to be gay or lesbian and who are criminalized in their conduct.

I know that you, sir, have taken personal leadership on this issue, and I congratulate you for that. I wonder if you could update our committee as to what the Romanian government intends to do to abolish article 200 and to replace it with criminal legislation that complies with the requirements of the European Union, and also if you could enlighten us as to any steps you've taken with respect to the pardon of prisoners who are convicted for adult consensual activity. I understand that a number of people have been pardoned by you. Of course this is an issue not of morality but of fundamental human rights. I'd like to know what the government is doing to abolish this article and what you personally are doing in terms of pardon.

The second very brief question is with respect to the landmines treaty. I was delighted to see that Romania was one of the countries that signed the treaty. I wonder if you might be able to indicate whether Romania intends to ratify the treaty at an early date.

• 1635

[Translation]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: I will try to give a short answer. I thank you for your questions. The Romanian Government has tabled in Parliament a bill concerning an amendment of the Criminal Code which will completely eliminate article 200. There will be no discrimination related to homosexuality. The bill is now debated in Parliament and will be approved. The majority—the parliamentary majority—is in complete agreement.

As far as presidential pardon is concerned, I have granted pardon to all of them. We have indeed granted pardons. At this point in time nobody is in Romanian jails for this reason alone. There are indeed criminals who perpetrated true crimes and who happened to be homosexuals. But this is not the problem. I enquired and I asked for a situation report. I met representatives of homosexual groups in Germany and the Netherlands, and when I returned to the country I issued a decree of pardon which was enforced.

As far as the anti-personnel mines are concerned, as you know...

Mr. Svend Robinson: For the landmines, I wonder if you could indicate how many prisoners in fact have been pardoned under this decree to date.

[Translation]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: Yes, if you can repeat.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I was just asking, under the decree, how many prisoners in fact have been extended a pardon to date by you, as president?

[Translation]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: There exists one person who was convicted not only on the basis of this article who was released immediately, and other persons who committed also other, less severe, offenses who have been granted pardon as well, up to a number of ten people. But generally speaking, the numbers are small, there is no "number", and it was never too great because, though the decree was on the books, it was not enforced. I likewise asked the Ministry of the Interior to make a survey in all prisons in Romania, and to report cases of abuse or discriminatory treatment applied against imprisoned homosexuals and lesbians. I want to assure you that the problem has been addressed with all seriousness. I come as a civilian and have militated from the beginning in this matter.

As far as the last question is concerned, the ratification of [the treaty on] anti-personnel mines, I would like to tell you that it will be ratified beyond question, since there is no political opposition [to it]. Here once again our problems are of a financial nature. Romania is a special case. The defense of Romania was based on anti-personnel mines. This was undr conditions in which the number of tanks and other defense systems was markedly reduced, and by the fact that Romania has produced and sold anti-personnel mines [abroad]. Hence, Romania will suffer great economic losses by adhering to this treaty, and thus we asked and continue to ask Canada to be open to giving financial aid to Romania, for the destruction of anti-personnel mines. Thus, we are politically wide open. I gave an immediate reponse to Prime Minister Chretien and instructed the Supreme Council of National Defense to give approval; but we have these financial problems.

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you.

Madam Folco.

[Translation]

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): I too would like to welcome you, Mr. President. It is a great pleasure to welcome you here today. Roumania is a country that has always shown enormous affection for the French language. I come from a province where French is spoken. So it is a particular pleasure for me to welcome you here today.

• 1640

I would like to begin with a comment, and then ask a few questions. My comment is in line with the statements made by my two colleagues, Mr. Turp and Mr. Robinson, both of whom asked about the minorities—Mr. Turp asked about the Hungarian minority, and Mr. Robinson asked about the homosexual minority.

A large number of refugee claimants arriving here in Canada say that they are members of the Hungarian community, and have been persecuted in respect of their property rights; many also claim to be members of the homosexual minority, which is protected by a specific statute, though that is a statute local courts of justice do not necessarily comply with. I would like to hear you views on that comment.

I also have a question about the Romany minority, which also seems to be subject to discrimination, perhaps not by the State—I don't know—but certainly by local communities. According to the information I have received, these Romany groups receive no protection from the State.

Lastly, I have a question on the composition of your delegation. I observe that both women with you are advisors. I was wondering whether you had any elected women—MPs or ministers—in your Parliament. Thank you.

[English]

Mr. Emil Constantinescu: I shall start with the last problem. Madam Professor Zoe Petre is first presidential adviser and a former colleague of mine at the university. She was dean of the Faculty of History. To date there are a fair number of women members of parliament, and recently one of the latter was elected vice-president of the Chamber of Deputies. In the course of the reorganization of the Foreign Ministry, I appointed a woman as its Deputy Minister - she is on my left-hand side - and I have lately appointed many women as ambassadors of Romania. Practically all of them have arisen from civil society and fought for human rights, especially for minority rights. The appointments to follow will also focus on this aspect. It is true that there are 25 women members of parliament and two women in the Romanian Senate. I repeat, this is not sufficient. Many deputy minister positions are filled by women, but this is still not sufficient. And there is also a problem specific to Romania: many women have preferred to venture into business, where they often dominate the field, especially in medium enterprises and banks. There was a mentality of forced, formal presence of women in politics in the times of Ceausescu, when women were promoted formally not for their own qualifications but in order to reach a certain quota of women members within the presidium.

Regarding the requests for political asylum, I would ask you that these be analyzed with attention because economic asylum is a normal fact of life. It is much better to live in Canada than in Romania, now. The social system, the benefits, the salaries are much better in Canada than in Romania. I would like all of those who complain about persecution in Romania, and who belong to the minorities you speak about, to appeal also to the President of Romania who, by virtue of his constitutional prerogatives, must protect the rights of all members of society. You will receive prompt answers on this subject, in each specific case. In my opinion, at this time, political asylum for people from Romania is not at all justified. But, of course, requests will continue without stopping, until Romania becomes richer than Canada. Then we might be receiving requests for asylum from Canada.

Concerning the Gypsy minority—this is a complicated problem. Firstly, I would like you to note that this is an European problem. It is not a specifically Romanian problem. It is a cross-border problem which must be handled with special care because it is mainly a social problem and not an ethnic one. Not even the Gypsies consider it as such. In order to clarify this, a national program was launched for the Romany (Gypsy) people. I myself am directly involved in this program. I have the right to speak from personal experience, since when I was rector of Bucharest University before becoming president, I took some measures: first, I introduced a course in the Romany language at the Faculty of Philology, then I invited teachers from the Romany minority to teach social assistance at the Faculty of Sociology. I created a positive discrimination situation in reserving a number of places for the Romany minority at the faculty, because theirs is mainly an educational problem. I participated, some weeks ago, at a meeting with representatives of the Romany people, who also have a member of parliament, elected by them. Thus, the Romany minority itself has the right to elect its own member to the Parliament of Romania, in the Chamber of Deputies, who represents their interests and who is part of a group that supports the government's policy. We are at the beginning, but nobody can solve this problem easily. There is a tendency which, I have to say to you honestly and sincerely, as I said from the start, there is a tendency to shift all the unsolved problems of the countries of Europe or the world to former communist countries of Central or Eastern Europe, who can be easily monitored.

I often think of what would happen if Romania were a very rich country, or the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were very rich and the rest of Europe would want to integrate into Central or Eastern Europe. How would we monitor the societies of Western Europe which have also inter-ethnic conflicts, inter-religious conflicts, problems with the Roma minority and all kind of other problems? It is very easy to cultivate a superior manner when dealing with societies which are struggling with transition and to ask them to solve in a year or two problems which took a hundred or two hundred years to solve in consolidated democracies. This is a problem we have to live with, often without being properly understood, and this is no good for anybody because such a superiority complex will fast generate arrogance, and arrogance is not a good premise for dialogue.

• 1645

[English]

The Vice-Chair (Ms. Colleen Beaumier): Thank you, Mr. President. I'm being signalled that you have to go to another engagement.

I'd like to, on behalf of the committee, thank you for appearing before us and allowing us all to have an opportunity to ask you questions. You're a very, very interesting country, and you're a very strong and wonderful people. Canada somewhat views you through the eyes of our ambassador, Mr. Duguay. It's a great pleasure and a great privilege to have you here today. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.