Debates of March 18th, 1994

Unemployment

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

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that changes in Canada's industrial sector are triggering major disruptions. In my riding, some workers are directly concerned because the steel industry can now produce a lot more steel with far fewer workers. Traditional jobs, which we were very proud of, are disappearing, in the steel industry as well as in other industries. These jobs must be replaced.

What the Minister of Human Resources Development is trying to do, with the co-operation of every department and province, is to set up a support system for those who will never be able to work again. The minister also wants to give those who are capable of working, and who are looking for work but cannot find any, the necessary tools to adapt to the new industrial reality.

Let us take the case of a 40 year old person who had always worked in the steel industry before being laid off. This person needs to be retrained to develop new skills and have access to new opportunities. This is what we are trying to do by bringing in changes which are very hard to make but also very necessary to ensure our competitiveness in the 21st century.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, now that she is sitting on the other side, the Deputy Prime Minister seems much less sensitive to the plight of the unemployed.

Does she agree that, instead of targeting the poor by reforming social programs, the government must implement a real job creation program, in compliance with the consensus reached during the G7 Summit on Employment?

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not think that as a member of the government I am any less sensitive to the people in my riding who have lost their jobs than the member opposite. I accept the fact that every member in the House hurts when a person in their riding loses a job.

The fact is that we need to put in place specific strategies on the one hand to make sure we are protecting the aged, the sick, and those people who have no chance, no means or no need to re-enter the workforce. They must have their income levels protected. At the same time we have to ensure that those people of my age who see the old jobs disappearing have the tools they need to get back into the productive workforce.

It is a delicate balancing act. It is going to cause some pain, but we will have to do it because without the pain of the change in the workforce we will end up in the 21st century with no new jobs for those people in my age group who need to get back into the productive workforce.

Hockey Canada

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

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

As the Deputy Prime Minister is aware Mr. Alan Eagleson, a former board member of Hockey Canada, is under indictment in the United States and awaits an extradition hearing in Canada.

Meanwhile serious questions have been raised about the financial dealings between Mr. Eagleson and Hockey Canada, a federal non-profit organization created by the Government of Canada and subsidized by the taxpayers of Canada to tune of over $3 million.

Would the Deputy Prime Minister provide to the House full financial disclosure of all aspects of Hockey Canada including the air travel logs and detailed income and expenses for Hockey Canada since Hockey Canada has been incorporated?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, as minister responsible for amateur sports I may be in a better position than the Deputy Prime Minister to answer the question.

It will be appreciated that the matter is the subject of court action and therefore it is inappropriate to comment on it. Quite apart from the court action, I would say that some money has been provided under the Canadian Heritage program to Hockey

Canada. There is no evidence that any of that money could have been misallocated and therefore cause a source of concern.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister recognized parts of that question it is because it was a question essentially put to the House 15 months ago by a present cabinet minister of the government to the previous government. The problem has been ongoing and the same essential evasion of an answer has been ongoing for quite some time.

Be that as it may, my supplementary question would be to the Minister of Justice. Would the minister assure the House of the government's full legal co-operation in pursuing the extradition of Mr. Alan Eagleson to face trial in the United States?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the extradition proceedings provided in the Extradition Act contemplate an application to court which may or may not be made if extradition is sought and ultimately a procedure by which I may be asked to pass upon the application for extradition proper.

I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment, other than to assure the hon. member that I have every confidence the system will work as it should.

National Defence

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. In a report on the defence choices that Canada must make in this post cold war period, a think tank called the Canada 21 council made some thirty recommendations on defence and security. It recommended among other things, that Canada builds three support ships for humanitarian aid and peacekeeping.

Could the Deputy Prime Minister commit herself today to implement this recommendation of Canada 21 and give the MIL Davie shipyards a mandate to develop the smart ship, a ship that could effectively support the Canadian contribution to peacekeeping?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. I think it is a good question.

The Canada 21 report the hon. member refers to was the result of a blue ribbon panel that looked at the overall security of Canada. I tell the hon. member the department has reviewed the recommendations at first blush and is still looking at them in detail. Some of the recommendations are not necessarily conducive to the Department of National Defence because they refer to security in the overall sense.

We are looking at all the recommendations. While I would not want to comment on this one specifically, I would take this opportunity to say that one of the strong recommendations with respect to defence is that a defence policy review be conducted. I am pleased to report to the House that it is well under way.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister a supplementary question regarding the MIL Davie shipyards. Could the Deputy Prime Minister tell us who in the government will be in charge of putting the case for the MIL Davie shipyards, one of the most important in Quebec, since the Minister of Finance, also responsible for regional development in Quebec, will not be in a position to uphold the campaign commitments of the Liberal Party due to his personal interests in marine transportation and to his reluctance to even talk about it to his Cabinet colleagues?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that marine transportation policy is a responsibility of the Minister of Transport. Indeed, he has answered questions on the matter, in the House, on several occasions. The hon. member said, as did his colleague, that the Minister of Finance did not have the right to act in certain areas or to set policy because he was formerly in business. This is a disgrace.

When you talk to Ghislain Dufour, he asks that more businesspersons come to Parliament. This is the second time that the hon. member tries in one way or another to suggest that things are not right because the Minister of Finance was previously in business. This is unfair.

Let me just add that the Minister of Transport already made some commitments in this House regarding the smart ship.

Agriculture

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Wellington—Grey—Dufferin—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of agriculture.

U.S. agriculture secretary Espy is quoted as saying he will take unilateral action if an agreement cannot be reached the next time he meets with his Canadian counterpart. Secretary Espy wants a cap on wheat exports to the U.S. and zero tariffs on poultry, dairy products and eggs.

What assurances do we have that the minister of agriculture will stand up for the rights of Canadian farmers in dealing with the United States?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his question. It is on subject matter about which I know he cares very deeply.

I spoke by telephone this morning with the United States Secretary of Agriculture, the Hon. Mike Espy. We explored in that conversation whether we were close enough in our respective positions on Canada-U.S. agriculture trade to make a face-to-face meeting between us sometime next week a productive undertaking. Obviously we are dealing with some very difficult issues.

We may well have further communications later today and there may be the possibility of a useful meeting between the secretary and myself at some point next week.

The member asks what assurances can be offered of our intent to stand up in defence of Canadian farmers. Such assurances have already been offered in the House and elsewhere by me as minister of agriculture, by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, by the Minister for International Trade and by the Prime Minister and that will be very much the approach we take into any further meetings with the United States.

Government Expenditures

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

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

The budget calls for spending $163 billion in the upcoming fiscal year, some $40 billion of which will have to be borrowed. Spread out across the population of Canada this works out to spending about $1,500 per family per month of money that is collected in taxes and other revenue and spending an additional $500 per family per month of borrowed money.

My question for the minister is this. In view of the fact that there are thousands of families who do not even make $2,000 per month and many more for whom that is away too much, will the minister acknowledge that this level of spending is away higher than we can sustain in the long run?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the borrowing bill C-14 is in front of the House today and the figures quoted in his question are substantially off. If he refers to the debate that is taking place, and to his members who are participating in the debate, he will get his figures correct.

The government is, as is every Canadian, very worried that there is such a fiscal demand on the government. We have a very clear plan over the next couple of years. The member will be happy to see the plan succeed so our deficit will be under control.

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I was using the number $39.7 billion as the deficit. I was aware that $35 billion is the amount that is in the current request for borrowing.

Will the government undertake to formulate some achievable goals for deficit and debt reduction and state them, and to challenge the people to work together? In other words, I would like to know whether we can expect, sometime in the foreseeable future, that we can stop adding to the debt.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat surprised by the question because the government has answered it several times. The budget documents state quite clearly what our plan is. We are on target. The figures show that the deficit is under control.

We will continue to monitor the situation very carefully on behalf of all Canadians and within the coming years we will see the light at the end of the tunnel and have a balanced budget.

Federal Deficit

[Maurice Bernier, Bloc, Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister and is along the same line as the one asked by the hon. member who spoke before me. I hope that she will not mind if I ask her a question that would normally be for the Minister of Finance.

We are told this morning that the federal deficit for 1993-94 will reach a new record level. As a result of upward pressures on the deficit at the end of the fiscal year, it could top $45.7 billion at some point during the last two months of the current fiscal year.

Would the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that the federal deficit could exceed the record level of $45.7 billion forecast in the budget?

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

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

I think that we are all encouraged by the recent figures Stats Canada released showing that the deficit for the current fiscal year seems to be somewhat improving as the year goes on. However, we feel it is more appropriate to discuss the total picture at the end of this year and not on a month-to-month basis.

[Maurice Bernier, Bloc, Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question has nothing to do with month-to-month accounting, but I would still like the government spokesman to tell me if he can make a commitment, on behalf of his

government, that specific expenditure reduction measures will keep the deficit from exceeding the record level of $45.7 billion forecast for the current fiscal year?

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

Mr. Speaker, every minister is very conscious of the limits within his or her department. Every effort is being made to monitor the situation not only on an annual basis but on a month-to-month basis.

We are confident that the figures presented in the budget will be followed and monitored throughout the current fiscal year and that we will be on target next March.

Immigration

[Herb Grubel, Reform, Capilano—Howe Sound, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

During the last three months my constituents sent me only letters critical of the current rate of immigration, none suggesting that the current rate is acceptable or that it should be increased.

Could the minister please give a simple and short answer to the following simple and short question? How many Canadians have contacted him in his capacity as minister in recent months with comments critical and supportive of the number of immigrants he is planning to admit next year?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, if the member's experience is anything like mine then each day and each passing week brings a wide variety of representations by letter or by telephone on issues that face us. Of course it is no way in which to fashion public policy. What is important in fashioning public policy is meaningful consultation.

In response to the hon. member's question, may I point out that the 1 per cent of population immigration figure, which is used for this year, arose from broad consultations which took place by the last government during 1993 when eight public meetings were held across the country involving hundreds of Canadians from all segments of society.

May I point out as well that the 1 per cent reflects a platform on which this party sought and won election last fall. May I lastly point out that the minister is committed to a process which he announced on February 2 for a review of the 10-year framework for immigration policy in which all Canadians will have an opportunity to participate, including those who may have written and phoned the hon. member's office.

[Herb Grubel, Reform, Capilano—Howe Sound, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I gave three days' notice to get a numerical answer that I believe and legal counsel told me is an appropriate question to ask of the minister.

I would like to know how many people have contacted the minister-

[The Speaker]

Order. I think the hon. member would be able to get that information by putting a question on the Order Paper. You will permit me to note that a direct answer cannot be given for obvious reasons.

Perhaps if the question were put on the Order Paper, we could get an answer for the hon. member.