Debates of Nov. 25th, 1994

Canadian Peacekeepers In Bosnia

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I assure this House that I speak out of concern and based on warnings that have been coming forward for several months.

This is symptomatic of a larger problem. The Auditor General pointed out earlier this week that policy development systems in the Department of National Defence have significant difficulties, that capability objectives are not clearly stated, and that the Canadian forces are not always sure what they are supposed to be doing and what equipment they will use.

Will the minister in light of the situation in Bosnia in which Canadian troops have lacked clear objectives from the beginning make it a priority to develop objectives to avoid a repeat of the Bosnian morass?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little annoyed. We have had two debates in this House about the engagement, the deployment of our troops in Bosnia and Croatia. There was a consensus that Canada should discharge its obligations and stay there. This is not a matter of partisan debate. I realize some people have reservations. There was a consensus. We have tried to depoliticize this whole debate.

To link the Auditor General's report, which describes a situation that we inherited from the former government and one which we are correcting, to the current tragic situation on the ground in Bosnia is absolutely irresponsible.

Auditor General's Report

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his latest report, the Auditor General found that accounts receivable totalled $6.6 billion.

Last Tuesday, the Minister of National Revenue said, in an attempt to downplay the problem, and I quote: "The total accounts receivable stopped growing last year and is now declining. I believe that we will continue to be able to reduce that sum".

Would the minister agree that last year, the proportion of unpaid taxes, compared with net tax revenues, continued to rise, which would indicate a significant deterioration of the situation?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I can only repeat what I said to the House on two occasions last week.

The accounts receivable are in fact accounts receivable. They are not the area of the accounting system we regard as lost accounts which we will never collect. It is not that at all. Last year we collected $8.8 billion from accounts receivable even though the average level was at $6.6 billion. In other words, I can repeat to the House that we will collect the vast majority of the accounts receivable with interest in that $6.6 billion figure.

Canadians should know and fully understand there is not some pot of gold out there which can be brought in and then used to reduce the deficit. All the money in the $6.6 billion account which is recoverable and will be recovered with interest is money that is already taken into account by the government in its budgetary calculations.

The hon. member should recognize that this is normal business procedure. For us to try and collect the $6.6 billion immediately will result only in more companies in Canada going into bankruptcy and more honest Canadians being harassed for their last dime.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, would the minister agree that much remains to be done and that his department should immediately put in place a system that will accelerate the collection of large accounts receivable, as recommended by the Auditor General?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I can only say that one year ago yesterday I issued a press release announcing a series of measures to improve the recovery of moneys owing to the government. This ad resulted in some billions of dollars coming in. For example, in this fiscal year we anticipate it will result in an extra $3.8 billion coming in as a result of these new measures.

I sent that press release out to everybody, including the press gallery, one year ago yesterday. The Auditor General at the end of May when the fiscal year ended, four months after I sent out this report, looked at the year. Most of the months in that year were Tory months and not months that I was minister. He said there were certain things that needed to be done. My press release was in fact a preface to the Auditor General's report with respect to collections.

Two months ago the hon. member's colleague who is sitting at his right hand right now asked me a question about a speech of the Auditor General in Quebec City. I pointed out to him that it was something we were collecting and there was no question of this money not being collected.

National Defence

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Defence stated that as a condition of service if individuals have something to communicate they should communicate through their superiors. If the culture of the military is such that individuals feel compelled to remain silent for fear of retribution, is justice served?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to accept the premise upon which the hon. member's question is based. However, even if there were such concerns surely the announcement of an open and public civilian inquiry would allay any of those concerns.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister states that members of the service should speak only to their superiors yet these are the very superiors who suppressed evidence to start with. They have to have the freedom to go outside the normal chain.

The minister has stated there will be a public civilian inquiry into the Somalia affair. When will the minister table a terms of reference for the inquiry? Will the minister ensure that the inquiry is broad enough to reach the highest echelons of the Department of National Defence in Ottawa up to and including a previous minister of defence?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I said earlier that this inquiry will begin after charges are disposed of against one additional person and that this would not prejudice the appeals that would perhaps be going on at the same time.

With respect to the broadness of the inquiry, I have assured people that the terms of reference will be as broad as possible to answer every single question that hon. members might have. I would hope that these assurances would be accepted by the hon. member's party because they have been generally accepted by people across the country.

Auditor General's Report

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. The Auditor General reported that $700 million could have been saved on information technologies at National Defence, had the development of such systems been more carefully planned.

How can the minister explain that, once again, his department comes first overall in squandering, in spite of the fact that the Auditor General had drawn attention to this problem many times already in the past?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, again the Auditor General's report covered the term before this government was elected. Many of the problems he has outlined are being corrected. We agree with many of the points he has raised.

We obviously agree that improvements could be made in terms of management, especially in the information systems area, something which concerns me particularly. I have asked officials to ensure that all future projects in the information systems area are reviewed so that we do meet the expectations of the Auditor General.

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence cannot skirt the issue by throwing the blame on previous governments.

Does the minister not realize that it would be possible to cut $1.6 billion in his department's budget, as suggested by the Official Opposition, without impeding operations, just by eliminating squandering and unnecessary spending, given the new international order?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, again I remind the House that the hon. member's party has called for a 25 per cent reduction in defence spending. This would have severe ramifications on operations.

As we know, the defence committee just issued a report. It is being studied by the government and a white paper will be issued shortly.

If the hon. member has details of how we could save money I would love to receive them. He could table them in the House or send them to me directly. However I doubt very much whether he would have enough projected savings to account for a 25 per cent reduction in expenditures of the armed forces. If we do that, it would certainly have a great effect, especially in his own province as in all other provinces.

Public Service Of Canada

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.

The Auditor General says that the workforce adjustment directive must be changed if the government hopes to reduce the size of the public service. The minister is negotiating with the unions now to do just that. However the president of the largest public service union in Canada said: "We obviously will never agree to changes that would weaken the workforce adjustment directive".

Could the minister explain how he can change that directive to reduce job security when the union says up front that it will never agree to it?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I understood the President of the Treasury Board this week indicated that he was having negotiations with the unions on the possibility of changing the directive. However, I understood him to also indicate that other options were being considered. I think the work on this is continuing. Obviously we will have more than one option when the time comes to make the decisions.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, so far the government has honoured the workforce adjustment directive by encouraging voluntary departure. The cost this year in the Department of National Defence alone is over $120 million. In fact, some officials are receiving a golden handshake worth $200,000 a pop.

Will the minister admit that the government plans to cut $5 billion during its program review? This means it will have to change the workforce directive and if not through negotiation then through legislation.

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that as a result of program review the government will be downsized. It will be downsized for reasons that have been clear to the opposition and to ourselves for quite a while.

There is also no doubt that this will create a problem in terms of workforce reduction. We intend to apply the best possible measures including, as I mentioned, a modified workforce adjustment directive or other options as they become available.

Research And Development

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

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

The federal government spends $1 billion each year on tax incentives to encourage research and development, its main contribution in that regard being a scientific research and experimental development investment tax credit.

Does the minister deem acceptable that the government not exercise any control over the refund of investment tax credits for scientific research and not conduct any formal evaluation of the impact of this program on the Canadian economy, as the Auditor General pointed out?

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

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

The member is well acquainted with this government's commitment to scientific research and development. As he knows we are currently going through a program review and no final decisions have been taken.

The member also knows that this government has made a very strong commitment to this country's small and medium sized businesses because we believe that is where the new jobs will come. A central component of small and medium sized businesses is research and development. I believe the government will take the right steps to make sure the entrepreneurial spirit we are trying to rebuild stays on track.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to make the minister's hair go even greyer, but will he recognize that the federal government's lack of rigour in the administration of all these R and D investments accounts largely for the poor performance of Canada in that regard, with Canada ranking second to last among G-7 countries?

[David Walker, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General raised very serious questions about how the SRTC moneys were spent.

Under the old program up to 1985 the tax credit was given out before the expenditures and not after. The current system has much better controls on it. Through Revenue Canada we make sure that the proper expenditures are made before the tax credit is given out.

National Revenue

[Bill Rompkey, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.

The Auditor General was very positive about the minister's efforts to combat the underground economy to make sure that everybody pays his or her fair share in this country but he also said that much more could be done.

What plans does the minister have for combating the underground economy in future? Could he be specific about projects now in train or planned to combat this situation?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I have answered many aspects of this question previously.

As the hon. member comes from Newfoundland, I will point out that yesterday we signed an agreement with the province of Newfoundland. It is part of a series of agreements with all provinces across the country so that we can combine audit information and the work of our auditors. We can thus have much more efficiency in what we do. We can increase the revenues to both the provincial and the federal levels of government.

Perhaps most important, this helps cut down on the duplication of government work and the harassment of ordinary honest citizens who presently sometimes find themselves faced with an audit by Revenue Canada and three weeks later faced with another audit by provincial authorities, neither of which have talked to each other.

This new agreement will go a long way to encouraging better revenues for both levels of government and less hassle to the public of Canada.

Smuggling

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the underground probably has two tunnels, the one that the minister has been speaking about and the other one for smuggling into Canada. It seems as though the minister lacks commitment to the enforcement side of Canada Customs. The justice minister said that 70 per cent of the guns used in indictable offences are smuggled weapons and we have a well documented problem with liquor smuggling.

Does the revenue minister agree that his sorrowful lack of priority respecting customs enforcement places law abiding Canadians in jeopardy?