Jean Chrétien

[Labour Market, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I just answered the question. I said that there were agreements, that we would be renegotiating them and that those that are not negotiated to our satisfaction would not be renewed.

I did not say there would not be agreements. I never said that. I said that we would be renegotiating because, in some cases, the provincial governments were not abiding by the agreements. It is the government's intention, at least I hope it is, to make sure that all parties abide by the agreements they signed.

[Labour Market, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have been clear on this subject. I discussed the matter with Ontario, saying that we would not be negotiating an agreement. I said we had agreements with the other provinces, which are renewable every five years. I cannot predict at this point whether or not they will be renewed. In certain provinces, the agreements have worked very well. If they did not work very well in some cases, we will try to negotiate better ones.

[Labour Market, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I think I will reply in English.

As everyone knows, we did not sign with Ontario because it did not want its citizens to be aware of the money that was allocated by the federal government to the citizens of Ontario.

We signed agreements with the other provinces because the governments, although they did not deliver, had guaranteed on paper that they would make sure their citizens knew that most of the money came from the federal government.

[Labour Market, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I had discussions with the Province of Ontario. We did not sign an agreement with them regarding the labour market agreement. I told them that we had not signed with them but that we did with others and that the agreements are renewable every five years. Will they be signed in five years? I do not know, I will not be here.

I know we did not sign with Ontario because they would not want to be reasonable and accommodate the needs of the federal government to ensure that the people of Ontario were aware of how much money the federal government spends on them.

[Liberal Government, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the member is ignoring one fact: the member for LaSalle—Émard is a member of Parliament and there will be some community work on the preparation of the budget.

The members of Parliament work with the Minister of Finance. They make suggestions. If the member for LaSalle—Émard wants to make some suggestions we will be happy to hear them. Preparation for the budget has to start right now. As we have done over the last eight years, every member of Parliament with a good idea can give it to us.

Even the Leader of the Opposition was trying to find a new party, so we will have another new Leader of the Opposition in a few months. I never thought I would have a new one before departing.

[Liberal Government, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, there was one meeting where they discussed exactly that problem, the previous status of Mr. Robinson, his professional activities and how he could deal with the Privy Council. They had a gentleman's discussion and the conclusion was that he could not be a lobbyist and do that job. They did not discuss any matter but that. In the weeks to come, if there is some need of communication, there will be communication, and there will be absolutely no conflict of interest.

[Taxation, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, to me, the situation is very clear. We have longstanding relations with the municipal governments. Very often, these involve tripartite programs, with contributions from the municipal, provincial and federal levels. These programs have been around for a long time. The municipalities do not complain and the provincial governments all participate, including the Government of Quebec. The infrastructure programs are a very good example of cooperation between municipal, provincial and federal governments.

[Taxation, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, that is rather confusing. They must be talking to each other. He says it is exactly the same thing, so there is no change.

I can say, as the Minister of Finance did yesterday, that on the issue of infrastructure programs, we are helping municipalities to develop their infrastructure. That has been going on for generations. Canada's federal government has been involved in subsidized housing for a long time. We are even more involved now, and the municipalities are very happy.

[Taxation, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we have an equalization system to help provinces when their tax bases are lower than those of other provinces. That is the system. One cannot tell what will happen one, two or three years down the road.

The current system is clear: there is a federal gasoline tax and a provincial gasoline tax. We have no intention of increasing our tax for the time being, but if the provinces want to increase theirs, they can do so, they have the power to do so.

[Taxation, September 25th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance always says, each level of government has its own taxation powers. Those provinces that choose to increase their taxes on goods such as petroleum products are entitled to do so.

As for us, if we have a surplus in January, the first $2 billion will go to health, as agreed to in the health accord. That is our policy. There may be different policies later, but for the time being this is the policy of the government that is in office at this time.