Debates of Nov. 20th, 2002

Lucienne Robillard President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, at present, in the public service per se, there are still fewer public servants today than before the program review.

That having been said, we are asked on a daily basis to invest more in certain areas and to provide our fellow citizens with higher quality services. It follows that we have an appropriate size public service to deliver these programs and quality services to all the people of Canada, including in Quebec.

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the programs. Outside of health, departmental expenditures in Quebec have increased by 7.3% since 1994, while federal departmental expenditures increased by 21.7% over the same period. That is three times more. Exactly three times more.

Will the federal government admit that, by collecting more taxes than its level of responsibility warrants, it is managing abundance while, in Quebec, there is a shortfall?

Lucienne Robillard President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, never before have I heard such a thing: a government being accused of good management.

Look at what we have done since 1993, at the fact that we have eliminated the deficit, reduced the debt and lowered taxes, and cut program spending. Then, they blame us for having managed the country's finances well.

The proof is in the pudding: the people of Canada voted for us again last time, and I think they will do so again next time around.

Pierre Paquette Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, during the same period, the expenditures of the federal departments increased by 21.7%, while those of the Quebec government, with the exception of health, increased by only 7.3%. When we compare the results of the two levels of governments, we can see which one really made an effort to manage properly.

Will the federal government admit that, by letting its departments' expenditures increase by 21.7%, it is obviously not, in spite of its claims to the contrary, the one that really made an effort?

Lucienne Robillard President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the level of public satisfaction with our government.

Let us look at the figures. We can toss numbers around. We can always interpret figures the way we want and use the approach we want.

Based on the gross domestic product, spending went from 17% at the time, in 1993, to 11.6% now, which is unprecedented. We also reduced public expenditures.

More importantly, we have provided good government to the citizens of this country, and Quebeckers recognize that.

Pierre Paquette Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to see: the federal government has made no effort in terms of management. The federal machine has a life of its own and the only real effort it has made has been to cut transfers to the provinces and to cut benefits for the unemployed, while the government keeps on raking in the money.

Will the government admit that, in this context, anyone can claim to have a good balance sheet and to be a good manager?

Stéphane Dion President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, if we want to compare what is comparable, let us compare Quebec with the other provinces. Let the Bloc Quebecois explain why taxes in Quebec are 40% higher than the average, and why Quebec is one of the provinces with the largest debt, if not because it is run by a government that should take a good hard look at what it is doing, instead of always blaming the federal government.

Alexa McDonough Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, according to a memo to cabinet leaked to Le Devoir , the government is changing its position on NAFTA chapter 11.

That investor-state provision protects investors' rights to make money over environmental and labour standards. The government used to say that it opposed it. Now this leaked cabinet memo says that it wants to expand it.

Could the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that when it comes to expanding chapter 11 the government's position now is the sky is the limit?

Pat O'Brien Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade

Mr. Speaker, I guess the leader of the NDP has not been in the House when the Minister for International Trade repeatedly made it quite clear that the government does not support simple replication of chapter 11.

Having said that, with some $389 billion of Canadian funds invested overseas, obviously we want to protect such investment.

Wendy Lill Dartmouth, NS

Mr. Speaker, today, as we applaud the winners of the Governor General awards, our government continues to undermine our book publishing industry.

This summer Canadian heritage allowed Amazon.com to enter the Canadian market. Today we learned that Distican has been sold to Simon and Schuster with Canadian heritage approval.

The heritage department is responsible for the Investment Canada Act as it pertains to the cultural sector.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell the House what steps she will take to stop the sell off of our book publishing industry and put teeth back into the Investment Canada Act?

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I think the proof of the success of the Canadian book publishing policy is that this year for the first time we have actually had three Canadians nominated for the prestigious Booker Prize.

If we look at the incredible authors who are here in the audience today, they are from diverse backgrounds and diverse parts of the country. It is probably the healthiest industry of its kind in a country of similar size. I think we should applaud book publishers and especially the authors.

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Krever report recommended that all hepatitis C victims be compensated. In 1998 the government rejected that advice and limited compensation to those who were infected between 1986 and 1990.

The RCMP has now laid charges against four doctors, the Red Cross and an American pharmaceutical company in the tainted blood scandal. Those charges reach back before 1986.

Is the government prepared to reconsider its decision to limit compensation and will it now help all the victims of the tainted blood scandal?