Finance Committee on May 28th, 2007

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

We're specifically talking about Saskatchewan here.

[Lorne Calvert]

That's what I'm speaking about, the dollars to Saskatchewan people. When the members of Parliament from Saskatchewan come home and say this is the best deal we've ever got, I think the members of Parliament from the Conservative government could say that to any province in the country.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

We can, absolutely.

Let's go to my next question. Is there more than one way to deliver $800 million? I talked about huge changes in the health care funding, secondary education, and infrastructure. Those are things my Saskatchewan constituents are concerned about, and we're delivering big time on top of the other moneys you just outlined.

[Lorne Calvert]

Mr. Ritz, is there more than one way to keep a promise or break a promise? The fact of the matter is that a promise was made to the people of Saskatchewan by yourself, by others who campaigned in our province, and by your leader. The promise was that 100% of the non-renewable resource revenues would be excluded, for a benefit on an annual basis of about $800 million. That's a very clear and simple promise made.

Did the national government keep its promise? The answer is no. In making the promise, sir, did you, did any other member of the Conservative Party running for office in Saskatchewan, or did the Prime Minister say to the people of Saskatchewan that there would be a condition on this promise, called a cap?

You were asked today in the House of Commons. I did not hear your answer. Prior to the election, did you or any of your colleagues inform the people of Saskatchewan that there would be a cap on this equalization?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Did the Province of Saskatchewan have input to the O'Brien report established by the member for Wascana?

[Lorne Calvert]

Mr. O'Brien did not make a promise to the people of Saskatchewan. Mr. O'Brien did not run for elected office in the province of Saskatchewan. My question is to our elected representatives in the national capital.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I can see why you're dragging at 26% in the polls, sir; you're not listening.

Did you have input in the O'Brien report?

[Lorne Calvert]

This is the level of debate we have.

Did we have input? You bet we had input, and we recommended precisely what I'm recommending to the finance committee, to the national government, and which I recommended to the former government of Canada. You bet we did.

Did I have a debate with Mr. O'Brien, as he presented to the premiers? You bet I did. I said to Mr. O'Brien, where does this 50% come from, when he was recommending 50% inclusion. And I asked Mr. O'Brien how was it that he was recommending a cap, the same question I'm putting to you.

But Mr. O'Brien did not seek election. He did not say to the people of Saskatchewan, we will exclude 100%.

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

On the definition in the equalization formula between a have and a have-not province, I see that GDP in Saskatchewan has gone up well over 10% in the last three years.

Can you explain to the committee how much it will go up in 2007?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you, Mr. Ritz.

We continue now with Ms. Wasylycia-Leis, for six minutes.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

Thank you all for being here.

Premier Calvert, let me start with you, and just ask a follow-up to all of these questions on the equalization arrangement. Again, could you spell out the nature of the commitment? Was it in writing? Was it a public statement during the last federal election?

And while you're answering that question, have any of the 12 Conservative MPs in Saskatchewan come to the defence of the promise or come to stand up for Saskatchewan?

[Lorne Calvert]

The commitment was made not in one, but in two election campaigns. The commitment was made in campaign literature distributed across our province and across the nation, in both elections. The commitment was made publicly, verbally, in campaign speeches. It was spoken to in the House of Commons by members of the then opposition. And it was committed to me in letter form, and committed, if I may say, to each provincial and territorial premier in a letter from Mr. Stephen Harper to the Council of the Federation. There is no debate, in my view, about the promise made. A debate has ensued about whether the promise has been kept.

Have there been protestations by the Conservative government members from Saskatchewan? Not to my knowledge. If there has been a protestation, it has been very quiet. This is in contrast, if I may say, to the Atlantic caucus of Conservative members of Parliament, who I'm reading about in the national press. I'm reading about Mr. Peter MacKay meeting with the government of Nova Scotia, seeking an opportunity to improve the approach to Nova Scotia. I'm reading in the national press about the Atlantic caucus—so described—meeting with the Prime Minister.

I'm not seeing in any press, national or local, the same kind of activity from the Saskatchewan caucus, which is of real concern to the people of Saskatchewan.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yet leading up to the time when the promise was actually broken by the federal government, I think—at least to my understanding from reading the press—that all 12 Conservative Saskatchewan MPs were out telling the public that natural resource revenues would be excluded from the formula. So it's a doubly hurtful situation.

[Lorne Calvert]

Indeed.

And again, I say, there was no mention of a cap.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Let me ask about the child care issue, which I don't want to neglect, because this is of fundamental importance to Premier Calvert, as he's already said, and to all of us here. The budget cut about $1 billion from child care. All it did was to transfer $250 million to the provinces—and that's over a few years, isn't it?

[A voice]

One year.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Over one year?

In this budget process, we can't do a lot to put money back in, because we'll will be ruled out of order. So I'm wondering if we shouldn't be trying to at least get the money the government has taken in taxation from the universal child care allowance, which is close to about $250 million. And couldn't we get the government, through this amendment to the budget bill, to direct that money toward the creation of spaces, so at least we would end up with half a billion dollars this year?

Would that be a worthwhile endeavour on your part, and what else would you suggest we do as a committee with respect to this budget bill?

[Nancy Peckford, Member, Council of Advocates, Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada]

I think that's very important. Doubling the commitment from $250 million to $500 million by taking the tax revenue from the UCCB would be very helpful. I think what's even more important is some accountability for these dollars. We saw in the media in the last couple of weeks how the $250 million is being put in the CST that is transferred to provinces and territories. Provinces thought they had significant money to work with. Now they've had that cut, so they're nervous about investing in long-term system building. It makes it very difficult for them to actually create the spaces that families need.

I think it's critical that we have legislation and that Bill C-303 be passed to ensure that the $250 million--and even better, $500 million--that's transferred to the provinces and territories be directed towards a system that will benefit children and their families.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

I appreciate that.

I would like to ask one more question about child care. Are we cutting off our nose to spite our face by not funding child care at a time when we have a huge skills shortage? Are we in fact taking trained professionals, especially women with children, and forcing them to give up their jobs or leave the country or whatever to provide for their families and keep their professional integrity, and as a result having to turn around and bring in cheap labour from offshore? In my cynical moments I wonder if this is a conspiracy to in fact lower the standards, increase the gap between the rich and the poor, and create a cheap army of labourers who can go in and out as necessary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you very much, madam.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Oh, sorry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Let us continue with the second round.

Mr. Thibault, you have four minutes.

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Thank you.

Premier, I thank you for being here and congratulate you for being here to represent your people.

As a Nova Scotian, I am to no end offended by our premier not having taken the opportunity to address Parliament, through the committee, about the insult of the Atlantic Accord in this budget. The promise was made on the Atlantic Accord that it was above and beyond any other program and that it was until 2012 and then renewable for another eight years. Now that it has become an either/or program, I think it's a great offence. I wish our premier had the courage that you show in representing your people here today.

I hear that another accord is being negotiated for Nova Scotia. I don't agree with it. I wish the Prime Minister would maintain his promise and keep the accord. Each and every year--until 2012 apparently--the province will be able to choose whether it goes into the new equalization formula or accepts the accord. If ever it accepts the equalization, it loses the accord forever. I think that is an insult.

It is a slight improvement. It was negotiated by three MPs from Nova Scotia. The Conservatives hold three out of 11 seats. In your province, I understand the Conservatives own 12 out of 14 seats. That's 12 out of 14. They must be able to negotiate a lot better than that. Exactly what are they negotiating? Do you know?

[Lorne Calvert]

I think that's a question better put to the Conservative members from Saskatchewan.

Let me say, generally, about the matter of the accord and the renegotiations that apparently are happening, I am supportive of my Atlantic colleagues seeking the best arrangements possible for their people. But surely we were set on a path to simplify equalization in this country. I fear what we've created is one equalization program for some provinces, now two, almost separate equalization programs in the Atlantic, and then Saskatchewan, being unique in the country--the only province, by the way, that is affected by the cap--without an accord.

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Nova Scotia would be affected by the cap also, as well as Newfoundland.