House of Commons Hansard #68 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was money.

Topics

Reserves
Statements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

David Price Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has done a fine job ignoring the reserves. It was not mentioned at all in the budget tabled three weeks ago. The government is boasting about injecting a little more money into national defence, but the Minister of Finance makes no mention of the fact that the reservists got nothing.

The Liberals are praising their budget, but I cannot see why. There is very little money in it for health care and education, immigrants are still charged an entry fee, and there is no funding for the reserves.

When it comes to natural disasters, reserves are the first group called upon in the country: the Saguenay floods of 1996, the Red River flood around the time of the last federal election, the ice storm in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. I could go on. What would Canadians have done without the reserve forces in these situations?

The government has used the reserves on many occasions since 1993. Why were they forgotten in the last budget?

Prime Minister
Statements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, behind the scenes at last weekend's convention of the Liberal Party of Canada, the Prime Minister took another dig at Quebec, adding to his already extensive track record in that regard.

This man, who is only too quick to dump on Quebec, has overstepped the limits with his comments about the sovereignist movement, a movement espoused by almost half of Quebecers.

“Let the sleeping dog lie”, he was urged, in an attempt to discourage him from introducing his clarity bill. Thinking it was safe to speak, the Prime Minister came back with “The dog is not sleeping, it is ailing”.

In The Golden Dog , 19th century English writer William Kirby wrote, and I quote:

I am a dog that gnaws his bone, I couch and gnaw it all alone. A time will come, which is not yet, When I'll bite him by whom I'm bit.

With all his canine reflections, the Prime Minister would do well to study this verse, for there is no doubt that Quebecers are impatiently awaiting the opportunity to let him know for the third time that, in politics, scorn and arrogance are a sure way to lose votes.

Racial Discrimination
Statements By Members

2:10 p.m.

Reform

Inky Mark Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, today is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It is unfortunate that we need a day like today to remind us that racism still exists in Canada. This vast country is made up people from all walks of life, many ethnic backgrounds and personal beliefs. We need to deliver the message every day, a message of respect, equality and diversity.

Perhaps it is best said in the lyrics of a song by Garth Brooks which state:

When the last child cries for a crust of bread When the last man dies for just words that he said When there's shelter over the poorest head Then we shall be free

When the last thing we notice is the colour of skin And the first thing we look for is the beauty within When the skies and the oceans are clean again Then we shall be free

There is no question that racism exists in Canada. We have embarked upon a new millennium. Let us all continue in the fight to end it.

Racial Discrimination
Statements By Members

2:10 p.m.

NDP

Rick Laliberte Churchill River, SK

Mr. Speaker, I rise to mark this day, March 21, the International Day to Eliminate Racial Discrimination. It is also a new season. Spring is upon us. It is with this optimism that I would like to share these words of prayer. As in the teachings of our elders, we must live among each other in harmony.

I extend this prayer to all our police officers who have embarked on the journey to our capital to meet with parliamentarians. In the Creator's name, give them strength and wisdom so that they may carry out their duties in the most humble and respectful way.

In my first language I would like to say:

I pray to the peoples of the east, to the peoples of the south, to the peoples of the west and to the peoples of the north, that we may live in harmony and raise our children in peace amongst each other and with respect to our Mother the Earth and all of our Creator's being and gifts, the four-legged, the winged ones, the swimmers and the crawlers that live with all of the plants and creation.

In the Creator's name, may we live in respect.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

March 21st, 2000 / 2:15 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Reform

Preston Manning Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, this morning Mel Cappe, the former deputy minister of human resources, testified at the human resources committee. He testified that there were no explicit guidelines focusing on pockets of unemployment when handing out HRD grants. This directly contradicts what the human resources minister has told the House concerning the justification for handing out millions of taxpayers dollars.

How does the minister explain this contradiction?

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, as I said on a number of occasions, it is the flexibility in the transitional jobs fund that has allowed for the majority of the investments to be made in opposition ridings. I ask the hon. leader to confer with and talk to members on his backbenches about how much they appreciate the investments that they have seen in their own communities.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Reform

Preston Manning Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, the minister did not address the question at all. It was raised by testimony at committee this morning.

The minister has been using this pockets of unemployment rationale for handing out millions of dollars of HRD grants. This morning Mel Cappe blew her cover on that subject.

I will again ask the minister to explain why there is a contradiction between what she told the House today and what Mel Cappe told the committee this morning.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, the whole point of the transitional jobs fund was to help communities where the levels of unemployment were significantly high and where they were stagnant and were not going to be reduced without assistance. We know that party would just like issues that go along with unemployment to fester and for these communities to have to struggle on their own. That is not the view on this side of the House.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Reform

Preston Manning Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, this party believes in fixing unemployment by lowering taxes.

The simple fact is that this morning Canada's most senior public servant contradicted the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada. My question is, who should Canadians believe?

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, clearly the Canadian public does not believe that party. The leader said that all we need to do is reduce taxes and everything will be fine.

Canadians know that it is not just through a reduction of individual taxes that will ensure that Canadians with disabilities get opportunities in this economy. Canadians know that trickle down economics will not ensure that young people get their very important first job in our economy. They know that trickle down economics will not improve the levels of literacy in this country. That is why we on this side of the House believe in grants and contributions.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Reform

Deborah Grey Edmonton North, AB

Mr. Speaker, talk about trickle down. When that money goes to Liberals and they give money back to party, that is what is frustrating.

The HRDC minister has been picking pockets of unemployment as her alibi for long enough. Today Mel Cappe blew the lid off her excuses. People say that if we ask the guilty the same question long enough and often enough, the truth is bound to slip out.

We would like to know today who is telling the truth.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, brochures describing the transitional jobs fund were available to all members of parliament for a good long period of time. Any member of parliament who was worth his or her salt went to the HRDC office and talked about these programs to see if they applied.

In the undertakings of this program we were intending and actually did create opportunities, along with partners in communities right across the country, for Canadians who otherwise would not have had opportunities to work.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:15 p.m.

Reform

Deborah Grey Edmonton North, AB

Mr. Speaker, the minister is not answering a very specific and a pretty simple question.

Mel Cappe said today in committee that there were no explicit guidelines. Now the minister turns around and says that they had all kinds of flexibility with guidelines. There are two different stories here and Canadians deserve an answer. Who should we believe?

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, both the clerk and myself talked about the issue and the use of flexibility in this program to ensure that Canadians who needed the opportunities provided by this government got them.

What is most interesting in all this is that when we look at the investments of transitional jobs fund money we find the majority of them in the ridings of opposition members.

Human Resources Development
Oral Question Period

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development told us that, as regards the Placeteco case, the original firm now exists as two companies, namely Technipaint and Placeteco. What she did not say is that Technipaint had to resubmit a grant application, while Placeteco did not do so, in violation of the department's administrative rules.

Could the minister explain why Technipaint had to resubmit an application, but not Placeteco?