Debates of March 9th, 1999

Employment Insurance

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois has made two proposals to the government: antideficit legislation and a separate fund for employment insurance. The government rejected them both.

After getting business, the workers and the unemployed to pay for the 1990s' deficit, is the government not now getting ready to again use the same approach in the next recession?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, no.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the government is considering putting nuclear waste dumps on first nation lands.

I met with first nation leaders in northern Ontario on the weekend. Their communities do not want anything to do with nuclear waste dumps. The housing, the health, the social and economic conditions in their communities are appalling.

Is this the price that first nations have to pay to get decent services, to become Canada's nuclear waste dump?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the premise to the hon. member's question is completely false.

In response to the Seaborn report we indicated that we would be pursuing a process of consultation with aboriginal peoples as Seaborn recommended. In fact those aboriginal organizations have asked for that consultation in writing and we are proceeding to respond to them.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, last year an environmental panel rejected underground nuclear waste dumps. Despite that recommendation the government is going ahead, determined to find first nation communities so desperate for money that they will overcome their fears and welcome nuclear waste dumps.

First nations are insulted. Why will the government not show some respect for their communities and respond to their economic and social needs, no strings attached?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has indicated many times in the House both by her words and her actions, the commitment of the government to the aboriginal people of the country is full and with no strings attached.

With respect to the issue having to do with the proper management of nuclear fuel waste in the country, we have an elaborate report from Seaborn. We have the government's response to that. It is predicated upon full, open, public consultation, including with aboriginal people, and that is what we are proceeding to accomplish. No decision has been taken with respect to any sites or dumps.

Taxation

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, in late February I had the pleasure of visiting the Windsor region of Ontario. During this trip I also met with a group called Canadians Asking for Social Security Equality. This group is comprised of individuals who are Canadians that live in Canada but had to work in the United States and have returned home to retire.

Will the finance minister inform the House why the government has increased the tax rate on their social security by over 70% and will now be taxing their U.S. social security at an inclusion rate of 85%—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what in fact happened is that there was a tax treaty that had been signed with the United States. As a result of the actions of a number of the members on this side of the House who brought this matter to the government's attention, we in fact renegotiated the agreement with the United States saving those Canadians an enormous amount of U.S. tax.

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, while those Canadians were working they were taxed on of every one of their social security cheques.

For the 12,000 people who live in the Windsor area and the 54,000 people this affects in border communities across Canada, this increase has encouraged them to leave Canada and go back to the United States.

Will the Minister of Finance inform these seniors—they are seniors, the same people that his father represented in the House—what steps he will take to correct this injustice imposed on these seniors?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned to the hon. member, the fact is that this situation was brought about by certain actions of the U.S. government. The Canadian government as a result of the pressures brought by members of this particular caucus, many of whom are from the Windsor area, sat down with the Americans and renegotiated the agreement.

Yes, there is taxation involved, but the hon. member will certainly agree that all Canadians should in fact pay tax on the same basis. It is the essence of fairness.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we do not need another committee study. All we have to do is look at our tax forms and see the systemic discrimination that stay at home families and their children face.

By forcing Liberal MPs to vote for tax discrimination tonight, the Prime Minister is sending a shot across the bow of this Liberal dominated committee: don't you dare think for yourselves. If the committee is for real, why will the Prime Minister not allow a free vote and let the results guide the committee's recommendation?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member believes that there is discrimination, why did Reform members vote against the care giver credits, against the child tax credit and against prenatal nutrition? The reason they gave time and time again was that they did not want targeted tax treatment. They said there must be broad general tax reductions which would enforce the very discrimination they say exists.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister likes to ask questions but he does not like to answer questions.

It does not look like we are going to have a free vote on this. The minister is telling Canadians he is going to refer it to committee. How can Canadians believe there will be even an ounce of sincerity to address this issue when the finance minister at the same time is sending high priced government lawyers to the United Nations to defend the very same tax discrimination in the current system? How can he tell the committee there is an issue but tell the UN tomorrow that there is no issue?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, just think of what the hon. member is saying about this House and about the committee process. What he is saying is that there is no integrity and no sincerity in the process. He may be speaking about his own party's members on the committee but he is certainly not speaking about the government members on the committee.

Employment Insurance

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

There is something seriously wrong with the Minister of Finance's last budget. The minister forecasts a drop in Canada's unemployment rate, but he also forecasts an increase in EI payments.

Are we to understand that he has secretly decided to improve the EI system but has not put us in the picture?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what the member is to understand is that, when the economy is doing well, many more Canadians have jobs. This means that average salaries are higher and many more people are eligible for benefits. It is good news, not bad.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the Minister of Finance is mistaken.

I looked at the report by the government's chief actuary. For the past 26 years, every time unemployment went down, so did benefits. Every time unemployment went up, benefits followed. This has been the pattern consistently for 26 years.

Why would this pattern suddenly change this year? I think the minister is the one who is mistaken.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the reason is that this is the first time in twenty or so years that real disposable income has gone up. It is the first time that the level of unemployment has gone down and the number of jobs has jumped so quickly. It has been quite some time since the Canadian economy has been as strong as it is today.

Taxation

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, not surprisingly, the Minister of Finance has been misrepresenting the Reform position on this issue today.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order. Be very judicious in your choice of words.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the position of the Reform Party is that we ought to raise the spousal exemption to be equivalent to the basic personal exemption so that there are no second class citizens in this country, and that we should take the discriminatory child care tax deduction and turn it into a refundable credit available to all parents regardless of their child care choices.

Yesterday the minister for the status of women said that we should actually increase the child care tax deduction to increase the unfairness against single income families. Is this the lead the government is giving the finance committee, to increase the unfairness against single income families?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if there is any misrepresentation, it arises—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.