Debates of Feb. 17th, 1994

Members Of Parliament

[The Speaker]

The Chair sometimes has difficulty when a finger is pointing one way but I know you are referring to me over here.

The Budget

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with the tabling of the federal budget just days away, concerns are being voiced from all quarters about possible tax increases as well as the elimination of certain tax provisions benefiting middle-income families.

Is the Minister of Finance aware that middle-income taxpayers have been overtaxed for ten years? Can he reassure them by promising to spare them this time around?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is aware that the previous government has imposed something like 38 or 39 consecutive tax increases. And it is obvious that the middle class, in fact all Canadians, have been crushed by the tax burden imposed upon them by the previous government, of which the leader of the opposition was a prominent member.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to having a little fun myself next Tuesday.

Just days before the budget, I ask the minister again, can he reassure families in Quebec and Canada by denying rumours of tax hikes for middle-income taxpayers, rumours of taxes on group insurance plans and rumours of a lower ceiling on RRSPs?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois critic for Finance is an economist who is very familiar with the rules of the game. He knows full well that three or four days before tabling a budget, it is not the place of the Minister of Finance to disclose its content. He knows full well that he will have to wait until Tuesday, and I do not see why he is not using more common sense.

Physician Assisted Suicide

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

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

My understanding is that the Prime Minister and indeed his party supported and actually pushed the previous government to enact the National Referendum Act in 1992, a special situation. Yet in his answer to me yesterday he said no to a referendum on the issue of physician assisted suicide.

Has the Prime Minister lost faith in the people of Canada so as not to entrust them with making a decision on this matter through a national referendum held at the same time as the next election?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the hon. member to check something. What was the cost of the last referendum? They are always talking about who is spending too much money. Is the hon. member saying that whenever members are traumatized and cannot make up their minds, they should spend half a billion dollars to help them do it?

We will use our best judgment and the people will have the occasion to judge us at the next election. I know we will win it.

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate I am actually speaking of a referendum at election time which of course defrays the cost.

The National Referendum Act covers more than constitutional matters. Surely the Prime Minister must have known that when he pushed the Right Hon. Joe Clark in a letter dated November 12, 1991 and I quote: "to give the federal government the power to hold a referendum".

Why is he then denying to the people of Canada that right on this special issue similar to the Constitution?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we will be in Parliament for four and a half years. During that time we might have 25 questions for the people of Canada. Because members of the Reform Party have no platform and no direction from anybody they want to ask their electors rather than having the guts to have a program and get elected on it.

Goods And Services Tax

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

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

Yesterday, appearing before the Standing Committee on Finance, the Auditor General warned the government about the high cost of replacing the GST by some other tax of a yet unknown nature. He pointedly noted that the implementation of the GST had cost government and businesses a total of more than $800 million.

Does the Minister of Finance share the view of the Auditor General that replacing the GST would needlessly cost millions of dollars to government and businesses, when those businesses are not yet totally familiar with the tax?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is really up to the committee to determine what is going to replace the GST. I believe that it is a very important exercise in democratic judgment. If the previous government had done so, perhaps we would not be in the mess we are in now.

This being said, the hon. member must know that I share most of the views of the Auditor General, and in particular the one which deals with the elimination of overlap and duplications between departments and agencies. The role of the Auditor General is to audit the books, while the role of the committee and the Department of Finance is to set the fiscal policy of the country.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of Finance not agree that, instead of replacing the GST, it would be wiser to simplify it, to iron out all its administrative problems and to take the necessary steps to collect all accounts in arrears which total more than $1.5 billion?

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

Mr. Speaker, simplifying the sales tax, reducing the cost, lowering the administrative burden, all that is part of our goal when we consider replacing the GST. And up until now I thought that was an opinion we shared, at least I thought that was the opinion of your critic for finance. If you have changed your mind, you should tell the committee.

The Environment

[Karen Kraft Sloan, Liberal, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the IJC today released a report that claims governments have not done enough to clean up pollution in the Great Lakes. It is clear that toxic chemicals continue to enter the Great Lakes system. There is evidence to indicate that this is damaging not only to the environment but to human health as well.

My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Does the government have any specific plans to resolve this serious problem?

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her question. I know she will acquit herself of her new responsibilities as the vice-chairman of the environment committee because she has a good record of concern about these issues.

The fact is that the IJC report is bad news for the 45 million people who drink water from the Great Lakes. It reconfirms our concerns that human health is affected both directly and indirectly.

In fact there is an international meeting to which I will be sending officials next week to continue the process of virtual elimination of toxins.

We expect to have a timetable and a framework in place within the next six months. We are very concerned that we sign the second phase of the Canada-U.S. water quality agreement to ensure that the decrease in sperm levels and the increase in breast cancer are dealt with very directly by elimination of toxins.

Underground Economy

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

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

The CBC reports liquor smugglers to be making profits of $105,000 per truckload and bribing Canada Customs officials to facilitate their trade. The finance minister talks of closing minor tax loopholes while smugglers are finding huge loopholes big enough to drive trucks through.

Does the government intend to expand the principles of its action plan on cigarette smuggling to include a broad attack on all sectors of the growing underground economy?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member had listened to the announcement I made in the House of Commons last week, he would know we referred to the fact that the task of the RCMP was not to act only against cigarette smuggling but also against the smuggling of alcohol, drugs and armaments. That is the mandate of the RCMP and the Department of National Revenue.

In order to succeed we have to spend more money. We gave more money to the RCMP and the Department of National Revenue to be well equipped to do the job.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question.

The government knows there is a direct link between high tax levels and the growth of smuggling in the underground economy. The government has set targets for deficit reduction and job creation.

I ask the Prime Minister: Has the government set a long-term target for tax reduction and can he tell the House what it is?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we said we wanted to reduce the deficit to 3 per cent of the GNP. I do not think I can add to what the Minister of Finance will have the pleasure of giving as his plan for this fiscal year, Tuesday next. The hon. member has only to be a bit more patient and he will have his answer.

Bosnia

[Jean-Marc Jacob, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, officials of the United Nations Protection Force asked for an additional 2,000 to 3,000 peacekeepers to ensure a genuine ceasefire and the withdrawal of artillery around Sarajevo.

During a scrum yesterday, the Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated that he is considering sending more Canadian peacekeepers and that the government would make a decision in the next few days.

Given the urgency of the situation, will the Minister of Foreign Affairs tell us clearly if Canada can give a positive reply to the UN's request to send more Canadian peacekeepers to Sarajevo?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that Canada is third in terms of the contribution made to the UN force in the former Yugoslavia. We think that we have already done more than our share in this regard.

Obviously, the United Nations are trying to get additional troops to ensure an effective ceasefire and to maintain peace in that region.

I believe that other countries can make a greater effort and we hope that they will follow our example and reply positively to the UN Secretary General's request.

[Jean-Marc Jacob, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unless I am mistaken, the minister just said that Canada is doing more than its share regarding this mission. Consequently, if it cannot get additional troops, the UN could soon be unable to maintain the permanent ceasefire which we were all hoping for.

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I understood the question, but I presume the hon. member wants to know if I agree with the UN request to increase its force. I believe the answer is yes. We have told other countries that we feel we are doing more than our share and that they should make an extra contribution.

Canada Customs

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

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

The Customs and Excise Union opposes an integration of custom officials into Revenue Canada, saying that their focus will shift away from border protection to tax collection.

The minister says that he is taking steps to ensure the security of our borders. Will the minister also assure the House that in this process the wording of customs officers' present job descriptions will not change?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the issue was discussed at some length in the House when we had second reading of Bill C-2. It was discussed again at the committee stage in the finance committee a short time ago.

The fact is that we intend to continue to have what I regard as one of the best customs services in the world for the non revenue aspect at the border. On the revenue aspect, that is collecting money, they do very well too but other things such as attempting to find children who have been kidnapped, attempting to pick up smuggled goods-drugs, arms, liquor or whatever-they do very well.

I can assure the hon. member that there is absolutely no intention on the part of this government of changing the fundamental role of the customs service at the border.