Debates of Jan. 26th, 1994

Job Training

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as an instructor in a technical institute for many years, I too value the concept of fairness for students of all ability levels.

I would like to ask the minister how he proposes to ensure that there is an incentive for 18-year old dropouts to return to school and upgrade their skills and thereby assure that fairness?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly look forward to drawing on the hon. member's experience in the educational field.

It will be very important as this Parliament addresses the fundamental question of redesigning our training and educational programs to eliminate the disincentives, the problems and the barriers which now exist in many of our income security programs. These barriers provide disincentives to young people to get back into the work force and to get into training programs.

I look forward to that member's and to all members' participation so we can pool our best judgment and those of our constituents to make sure that the many young people who are denied opportunities now will have something to hope for in the months ahead.

Mil Davie Shipyard

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. Last week, my colleague, the hon. member for Lévis, alerted this House to the catastrophic impact that the closing of

the MIL Davie shipyard would have for the whole region of Quebec City. Some 10,000 direct and indirect jobs are at stake.

The business plan calls for a reconversion from military contracts to civilian contracts provides, among other things, the awarding of the contract to build the ferry for the Magdalen Islands.

This plan received the support of all the business stakeholders in the Quebec City region, as well as of all the Liberal candidates of Quebec City during the last election campaign, including that of Mr. Jean Pelletier, the defeated candidate in the riding of Québec and the current chief of staff of the Prime Minister.

Therefore, I would like to know when and how the Minister of Transport will fulfil the promises made by the Liberal Party, which claims to support the business plan developed by MIL Davie.

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the issue of the Lucy Maud Montgomery , which concerns my department, has been pending for a very long time. Of course, the Leader of the Opposition is aware of that since he was a minister under the Conservative government when the Lucy Maud Montgomery was to be replaced.

As for us, our responsibility is very clear. The Lucy Maud Montgomery will have to be replaced, either through buying a ship built at the MIL Davie shipyard or elsewhere, renting one, restoring the Lucy Maud Montgomery , or buying another ship overseas. My department is currently reviewing all these options.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the Minister of Transport still try to delay the review of this important issue after just stating in answer to the previous question that the federal government has been studying the matter for two years already and that the Liberal government has made a commitment to create jobs, while at the same time shipyard workers in Lévis are very concerned about the impending closure of their shipyard which should happen in a few months, given the fact that preparations have to be made before construction of the ferry gets under way. Given all those facts, how can the minister explain why it is taking so much time to reach a decision?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, it is of course very difficult to explain any delay in making a decision. It is true that we have only been in power now for two months and a half. The leader of the opposition was sitting on this side of the House for several years, yet no decision was taken.

I can assure the hon. member that the decision will be made soon.

Investment Canada

[Roger Gallaway, Liberal, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

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

As the minister is no doubt aware many Canadians are employed by companies that are operating subject to undertakings given to Investment Canada.

The investment review division of Industry Canada is now responsible for ensuring adherence to all undertakings filed when Canadian companies are acquired.

What action will the government take to enforce compliance with written undertakings given to Investment Canada?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member rightly points out that when investment proposals are reviewed, very frequently undertakings or assurances in writing are sought from the firms entering Canada usually with respect to reinvestment, business employment levels, performance of research and development, and so on.

The procedure followed is that usually about 18 months to two years after the investment is completed, Investment Canada officials meet with the company concerned and review the performance of the undertakings.

Where there is non-compliance for reasons which may be beyond the control of the company, efforts are made to redirect and refocus the undertakings and assurances. Where these are in turn not lived up to, remedies are available to Investment Canada under the Investment Canada Act to discipline the companies involved.

The Deficit

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Vegreville, AB]

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

During the election campaign this government promised to reduce the annual deficit to 3 per cent of GDP within three years. This promise was reiterated by the Minister of Finance in December.

Last week on the first vote of the 35th Parliament each and every government member voted against the motion to limit spending.

Why should the people of Canada believe this government is serious about deficit reduction and its own three-year goal when it refuses to take the first step to reduce spending by just 6 per cent this year?

[The Speaker]

The hon. minister can answer the question if he wishes, but it calls into question all of the members.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development -Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question.

We are going to hit our target through a combination of growth, cutting unnecessary spending and building more equity into the tax system. I can tell you that we are not and no one is going to hit that kind of a target with the kind of savagery the member has advocated.

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Vegreville, AB]

Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. In recent weeks the chartered banks have not matched the decreases in the bank rate with similar decreases in their prime lending rates. The banks say they are reluctant to do so because of this government's lack of commitment to specific deficit reduction targets.

Will the minister clearly state his deficit reduction targets for 1994-95 to help alleviate this problem?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development -Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, first of all this government has definite deficit reduction targets. Second, the banks did not say that. Third, what the banks said is that they were waiting to see what was going to happen in the United States. Fourth, the differential between the bank rate and the prime rate today is not by historical standards out of line. Fifth, the fact is that as a result of what this government has done the Bank of Canada is now leading the trend down, not the federal banks.

Canadian Embassy In China

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Monday we heard that construction on Canada's new embassy in China will have cost taxpayers more than $78 million, twice the amount initially budgeted 15 years ago.

Small luxuries for embassy staff include a swimming pool and gymnasium at a cost of one million dollars, and a garden with imported maples which cost five million dollars. The interior decorating bill alone for this sumptuous embassy will total nearly one million dollars.

In the light of current budgetary restrictions, at a time when the government is about to make cuts in programs designed for the neediest in our society, how can the Minister of Foreign Affairs justify this kind of spending?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I must say I agree with the hon. member who asked the question. I think some very serious mistakes were made when this project was carried out. Unfortunately, there are now a lot of people who want to be ambassador, just to be in this magnificent building that was put there by the previous administration.

I have asked my officials to ensure that further construction or repairs to government property abroad meet very specific criteria, and that there be no cost overruns.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the minister may recall that the decision to build the embassy was made 15 years ago, under the Liberal government.

And am I to understand from the minister's answer that he is formally committed to preventing future occurrences?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

The answer is quite simply, yes, Mr. Speaker.

Auditor General's Report

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

Yesterday the minister admitted spending $172,920 of taxpayers' money to deliver a speech at Harvard University. The amount of $172,920 is approximately three to four times the average annual family income in this country.

While I am new to this House I must admit that I have never heard such a valuable speech. I was wondering if the minister would be willing to redeliver this extraordinary speech for me and my hon. colleagues.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, that was the cost of the trip.

However, I think we have to clarify something to be just toward everybody. These planes have been there for a long time. We are trying to spread the capital costs on every trip. The cost was to go there and come back. When the plane is in the hangar not being used the capital cost is there anyway.

It is just as if somebody were to get up in this House today and say that the value of this building is more than a billion dollars and that we have to spread the capital cost among every member of Parliament. If that were the case, for the hon. member who just got up in this House, it is costing us $3 million.

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, obviously we are not going to be able to hear this valuable speech which I was wondering whether we would be able to.

Would the Prime Minister be willing to set a direction for his cabinet ministers to stop such reckless spending when it is not necessary?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, of course we have given very strict instructions not to abuse the utilization of these planes. But they are there for the service of ministers and the government.

That was the case for me for example. I needed a little holiday and wanted to travel on a commercial flight. I was told that for security reasons I had to take a government plane. The headlines in Le Nouvelliste were that I had spent half a million dollars to go on holiday. That is very unfair because it is not true. If the plane had been in Ottawa it would have cost exactly the same amount of money.

We have to tell the truth to the Canadian people. When you extrapolate like what has been done with the Auditor General's report you come to that crazy type of opinion that for example the cost to go to Vancouver is half a million dollars and you can do it with a rented plane for $20,000. Something is not working there.

The hon. member rather than use that type of extravagant figure should be more realistic and look at the real cost of travelling.

Fisheries

[Derek Wells, Liberal, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

The standing committee of the Senate on fisheries and the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council have both recommended that with regard to the Atlantic inshore fishery there is a need for more information on harvesting practices and gear selectivity.

I would like to ask the minister what steps are being taken by his department to respond to these recommendations.

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his excellent question.

In light of the survey results released in the last few days showing a further decline in Atlantic cod stock biomass this information which the member is seeking is indeed critical.

With respect to gathering more information about the appropriate use of gear to conserve our cod stocks, I in conjunction with the Minister of Human Resources Development announced a pilot project just before Christmas.

We have hired and we have trained a number of fishermen who have been displaced from the fishery, who are currently carrying out a survey of their peers. Initially the pilot project, up to 70 of them, was to call upon the experience and knowledge of the fishermen themselves about gear, gear selectivity, and their experience in the Atlantic.

That pilot project is now being assessed. In the middle of February the Minister of Human Resources Development and I will meet and assess it fully. If the process seems worthwhile, and at this point it does, we may expand it beyond southwest Nova Scotia and Cape Breton and look at further projects in New Brunswick, P.E.I., Quebec, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We think it is time to draw upon the knowledge, the experience, and the data base of the fishermen themselves in making these kinds of conservation decisions.

Research And Development

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

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

During the last election campaign, the Liberals, under the leadership of the present Prime Minister, committed themselves to investing an extra billion dollars into research and development over the next four years.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance repeated over and over again that the future prosperity of Canada depended on substantial investments in research and development. My question is for the Minister of Industry. Can the Minister give us his word that the government will effectively commit an extra billion dollars to research and development?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that the hon. member would show such an interest in research and development, as well as science, in Canada. I can assure him, and the speech from the throne confirmed it, that we do intend to set up a Canada Investment Fund, as well as research networks and other means to stimulate research in Canada.