Debates of Oct. 19th, 1994

The Deficit

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

Mr. Speaker, I obviously do not have the same familiarity with the Mazankowski and Wilson budgets that the member does because I did not work for them as he did.

I understand the member's analogy to jumping chasms. Let me simply say that may be the Reform Party's way, but in terms of chasms, we in the Liberal Party far prefer to build bridges.

Hibernia Project

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

He acknowledged yesterday in the House that he has no idea whether or not the Hibernia megaproject will be profitable one day. He said, and I quote: "We must complete this project because[. . .] we will be able to recover if not all at least a large part of the money invested so far". The Prime Minister does not even dare talk about profits.

Considering that this statement is in direct conflict with the smug optimism of the Minister of Natural Resources, how can the Prime Minister say that he is managing public money soundly, when he is not even sure that we will be able to recoup the billions of dollars we are sinking into that project?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. Let me assure the hon. member that this government believes that the Hibernia project is viable and that we anticipate a reasonable and fair rate of return on our investment as do all consortium members.

Let me suggest that the hon. member should appreciate that we in the Government of Canada define value in a number of different ways, only one of which is rate of return. I should remind the hon. member that many jobs have been created and many contracts have been let, many of those in the province of Quebec. Over half a billion dollars worth of benefits have gone to the province of Quebec.

We are building infrastructure. We are building a new source of energy security in this country. Therefore, I suggest that Hibernia on all counts is a valuable project for the long term prosperity of this country.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister must be one of the very few who imagine we can make money on a barrel of oil. We are going to see the end of the oil before we see any profit. If you want to talk about Quebec, Madam Minister, let us talk about it!

[The Speaker]

I remind the hon. member that he should address his comments to the Chair.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

If the Minister wishes to talk about Quebec, maybe she could explain to us why a shipyard was built from scratch in Newfoundland, where there was no expertise-as we can see today with the transfer of work to New Brunswick-while the shipyard in Lévis-Lauzon could have done the work instead of being threatened with closure.

The minister is telling us that she is having her arm twisted. As we know, the government withdrew from two other megaprojects, one in Regina and one in Lloydminster, in Saskatchewan.

Why continue to sink billions of dollars in Hibernia, when she actually acknowledges that it will never be profitable?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, let me try and answer at least some of the hon. member's allegations.

There are many indicators at this point that we will receive a reasonable rate of return on our investment. I suggest the member look at a recent Wood Gundy report which indicates that we will enjoy a reasonable rate of return on our investment as will all consortium members.

Let me suggest to the hon. member that when he talks about shipyards that he is referring to a recent contractual issue involving Vinland shipyards and Saint John shipyards.

I think many in this country, including my colleagues from New Brunswick, would be somewhat surprised to hear that the hon. member does not believe that the Saint John shipyard, one of the finest shipyards in the world in terms of instrumentation and electrical abilities, is qualified to participate in this contract.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, I appeal to you. If we could keep the questions short and the answers, it would be better for all of us.

Infrastructure

[Ed Harper, Reform, Simcoe Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, under the red ink book infrastructure plan, governments of Canada have borrowed over $4.7 billion in this $6 billion boondoggle and have created only 7,000 long term jobs.

Given the statement of the finance minister yesterday about everything being on the table when considering cuts to the deficit, will the Minister of Finance commit in this House today to axing the pork barrel program and saving taxpayers the last billion dollars?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I again want to remind the member about the projects that are going on in his riding which he did not object to.

Nevertheless, this program is creating not 7,000 but some 100,000 jobs. That is only the beginning because it is attracting additional private sector investment into many communities and that will create at least twice as many jobs at the end of the day.

The money that is used for the federal portion as has been said time and time again because it is in the red book-have a look, it is on reallocation-is a matter of setting priorities and spending smarter. That is what we doing with the money we are putting into it.

[The Speaker]

I want to thank you for keeping the questions short and the answers.

[Ed Harper, Reform, Simcoe Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister had taken the time to find out, he would have found out that I opposed the projects in my riding.

We hear about the red ink book, the lilac book and the green book. The only thing in common is that they are comic books.

The infrastucture program is up for review at the end of its second year. Given that the finance minister has admitted that the deficit kills jobs, will he kill the infrastructure program and create jobs?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to hear what the member thinks about some of the projects in his own riding that are putting people to work. He has never told me that. He certainly never told my office that.

This program is implementing what this government said it was going to do in providing a program that brings three orders of government together to get the economy moving. Provinces of all political stripes and municipalities of all political stripes applaud this program and are in fact joining together in a partnership that is helping to get Canadians back to work.

National Forum On Health

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Prime Minister. Clearly, without the participation of the provinces, the National Forum on Health will be just a lot of useless talk about health issues, and the Prime Minister admitted as much when he said, and I quote:

The forum is not a decision-making body. Its purpose is to look at the issue and make recommendations. This exercise is not binding on the federal government nor on the provinces. . . I invited these people to discuss the issue.

Since the fact that the provinces will not attend makes the National Forum on Health an exercise in futility, will the Prime Minister cancel the forum and save $12 million in taxpayers' money, to show he is really serious about dealing with waste in government spending?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, all participants, who represent the health care community in Canada, including all national associations, have applauded the government's initiative. The time has come to review a system that has served Canadians well so far. We must realize, however, that the system costs the Canadian economy more than 9 per cent of our gross domestic income. This is better than the United States, but not as efficient as systems in other countries.

We must find ways to work as cheaply and efficiently as we can to serve all Canadians, and we must have a dialogue with experts from all regions of the country. I think it will be a very useful exercise that will help us ensure that we can maintain adequate levels of health care for all Canadians across Canada, because health is everybody's business.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the Prime Minister refer, as he did yesterday, to establishing national standards, when health care is the exclusive purview of the provinces and at a time when his government, the federal government, is contributing less and less to health care financing?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, when I was an ordinary member of Parliament and we adopted medicare for all Canadians, the federal government's contribution in the health sector was practically nil at the time. We set up a national system of which Canadians can be proud. If the federal government at the time had not taken this initiative, we would not have a national health care plan that applies to all Canadians.

That is why we have a Canadian Parliament that sets standards for the benefit of all Canadians. Our system is the envy of other countries, because we treat our citizens well, whether we are talking about health care or other areas.

The Environment

[Ovid Jackson, Liberal, Bruce—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my riding of Bruce-Grey is very near to Lake Huron and we are susceptible to airborne particulates and pollutants from the state of Michigan.

Recently the state of Michigan applied to the EPA to lower the standards of emissions. Is the Minister of the Environment aware of the situation, and what she is doing to protest this step by the Michigan authorities?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, this happens to be an issue that affects the health of literally hundreds of thousands of people in southwestern Ontario.

As a result of the initiatives of not only the member for Bruce-Grey but also the southwestern caucus and the minister from Windsor, we have been in touch with the EPA directly. The Department of Foreign Affairs has spoken directly to the State Department of the United States.

We are not satisfied with the EPA's proposal to move forward with the lowering of the standards that could potentially negatively affect the health of Canada. This is why I am very pleased to tell the House that on July 26, along with my counterpart in the United States, Carol Browner, I entered a dialogue to start looking at the issue of joint airsheds from a shared point of view.

Airborne problems do not carry passports. We are going to tackle the problem together and we are going to find a solution that respects the health of Canadians.

Government Finances

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance says that Canadians can expect the deepest spending cuts in history, cuts that could total at least $6.3 billion in the next two years.

Is the minister willing to play a leadership role and make spending cuts in his own backyard, namely cuts to the federal office of regional development in Quebec, a program for which he is directly responsible?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of FORD-Q and very proud of the role FORD-Q plays within the province of Quebec.

FORD-Q, along with the other regional agencies and indeed with all of government, has already been subject to very severe fiscal discipline. No part of government is going to be exempt from a detailed examination of what it is doing.

The kind of thing we are doing on this side and on that side of the House is making government better. We are not only looking, as did other governments, at the 10 or 15 per cent of cutting that must be spent but we are making the 85 or 90 per cent that remains work well. That is certainly the case with FORD-Q.

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister says everything is on the table, which includes taxing RRSPs.

Will the minister commit to Canadians that he will make spending cuts including his own regional development program and not go after Canadian RRSPs?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the member was not there yesterday. We made it very clear that our preference in this whole action is clearly on cutting spending. We said that very clearly.

We also said, in relation to the tag end of the question which is an original one, I must say, that I am not going to comment on individual suggestions because what I really want is for Canadians to focus on the tradeoffs. I hope the member and his party would rise to that challenge.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General. In approximately three weeks, the Security Intelligence Review Committee will report to the Solicitor General on its inquiry into the Bristow and McInnis affairs as well as allegations of illegal activities. Surprisingly, after one month of inquiry, the review committee has not yet gone back to the main actor, Mr. Doug Lewis, who was then Solicitor General.

Does the Solicitor General find it normal that on the eve of the publication of a report which is supposed to reassure the people, the review committee has not yet questioned the former Solicitor General even though he is the main clue to this puzzle?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the Security Intelligence Review Committee has been created by Parliament in legislation passed by it to be independent of CSIS, of the government and of the Solicitor General.

Therefore I do not think it is for me to comment on how the committee does its work. The committee can take note of the hon. member's question and I look forward to receiving its report at the earliest possible date.