Debates of March 9th, 1994

Publishing Industry

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Témiscouata, QC]

This government forgets one of our promises. We said that as long as we are within Canada we will take care of the interests of Canada as well as the interests of Quebec.

Will the minister unlike his colleague the Minister of Canadian Heritage, make a commitment to this Chamber to protect Canadian heritage by restoring Canadian control over Ginn Publishing when the Viacom-Paramount transaction is reviewed by Investment Canada?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

The commitment we make is quite clear, Mr. Speaker. We are committed to ensuring that any transaction reviewable by Investment Canada is of net benefit to Canada.

Government Expenditures

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

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

Dr. Donald Savoie, an economist who has studied the politics of public spending in Canada over the past 20 years, has reached this conclusion: that major efforts at government cost cutting are almost never successful unless they are fully and vigorously backed by the leader of that government.

In light of that conclusion, would the Prime Minister care to retract or to modify his comments made in Alberta last week to the effect that there will be no further spending cuts in the next three years other than those announced in the 1994 budget?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I said in Edmonton that we want to make some cuts. When travelling in Canada today, we find that a lot of people think that we have put forward some very deep cuts and we have to handle that.

At the same time I said that we had a plan. The plan is clear, that over the period of three years we want to reduce the deficit to 3 per cent of GNP. I said that with the cuts that have been put forward in the budget and having 3 per cent growth the first year and 3.8 per cent the second year, we will achieve our goal. At the same time I have asked the minister of federal-provincial relations to look at all other aspects of government on top of that to see if we can do better.

That is why, for example, yesterday we made an agreement with the Auditor General to review the matter of government planes in a reasonable way.

I want to find as many cuts as possible but at the same time be responsible. If you go too deep with cuts, you create unemployment and more misery in Canada.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that the deficit is in the vicinity of $40 billion to $45 billion. The government is carrying half a trillion dollars worth of debt. The weakness and the uncertainty in the Prime Minister's answer does not inspire confidence, particularly among investors and lenders.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that his failure to speak and act vigorously on the deficit and debt problem is now contributing to the weakness of the dollar and to the rise in interest rates?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I think that we have delivered exactly what we said we would. We did what was promised in the red book. We are on track. If anybody wants to look at that they will see that we are determined to provide a good government. We will achieve our goal.

We know that at the same time there are a lot of people who need help from the government. We will not do what has been done in Alberta, put people on the unemployment list. It is very nice for the premier to cut there, but when he puts someone on the unemployment list, he transfers the problem from Edmonton to Ottawa. It is just shifting the problem from one jurisdiction to another.

We are doing what we can, but we cannot achieve our goals overnight. If we have 3 per cent of the deficit in relation to the GNP in three years, it will be what we said we want to do. It is achievable and I am very confident that we will achieve it.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the Prime Minister that the net difference between what the federal government has taken from the province of Alberta over the last 25 years and what it has spent is in the vicinity of $100 billion, so his implications are a little bit off.

I have a further supplementary. The government's budget projects spending cuts of almost $4 billion by 1996-97 through the reform of social programs. Many Canadians do not believe the government will follow through on these social spending reductions during the same time period that it will be making a special effort to sell the benefits of federalism in Quebec.

Will the Prime Minister unequivocally tell the House that the federal government will follow through on these proposed spending reductions no matter what?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is very easy for the hon. leader of the Reform Party to realize what this government is up to. Look at what we have done so far.

Every cut that we put in writing in the red book has been made. Everything is in this book. During the campaign I said to look at page 111. By the end of the term it will have been fulfilled. If you look at the budget presented by the Minister of Finance, every one of these commitments have been met, not over a period of four years but over a period of four months.

Old Age Security

[Maurice Dumas, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in a surprising declaration, the Minister of Human Resources Development clearly stated for the first time his desire for an in-depth reform of the old age security system. He even had the nerve and arrogance to confront Canadians with an odious choice: to either finance the pension system or provide training programs for young people.

Could the minister, remembering what he and his colleagues said when they were in opposition, stop stirring up people's emotions by giving Canadians an indecent choice between old age security and youth training programs?

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

Mr. Speaker, we in the government are very proud of the success achieved by seniors' programs initiated by Liberal governments over the last 30 or 40 years but, at the same time, we must face the new realities. Next year, the number of people eligible for old age security programs will double. As a result, we must review the system with Canadians to develop a stable and strong program for seniors in the future.

As mentioned in the budget speech, a review will be undertaken in consultation with all Canadians and with all senior citizens to look at ideas, issues and concerns and to develop a program for the future. My comments were meant to underline the need for serious dialogue.

[Maurice Dumas, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask a supplementary question. By making alarming statements on the old age security system, is the minister preparing to hit seniors with a considerable cut in their old age security pensions?

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

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the hon. member is saying, the reason we think it is time to have an open, honest, full examination of these issues as announced in the budget is to ensure that there will be a stable, effective, fair, honest system for seniors in the future and to make sure that this country can pay for it. That means that we must examine pension plans, public service contributions, the entire range.

It is only the members opposite who want to hide their heads in the sand and stick with the status quo. We want to make sure there is a future that Canadians are prepared for.

National Debt

[Jim Silye, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. The minister's budgetary forecasts were based on two assumptions, that revenue would increase by 8 per cent and that interest rates would remain at their current low levels for the next three years. Less than three weeks after this budget was delivered we are already beginning to see signs that these assumptions were overly optimistic.

What alternative provisions does the finance minister have to meet his deficit reduction targets if interest rates continue to climb?

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

Mr. Speaker, the assumptions upon which the member based his question are incorrect. We did not assume an 8 per cent increase in revenues on a normal basis. As has been described there were a number of one shot or unique items which in fact depressed this year's revenues which will not be present. Our revenues are projected to be approximately 17 per cent of GDP which is of course the historical norm in this country.

As well, the interest rate assumptions in our budget are interest rates which at the present time are higher than those in existence or those which are projected.

[Jim Silye, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I might have to check some of those facts.

The minister has seen interest rates in the United States begin to climb. In fact he recently mused that interest rates in Canada could soon be lower than in the United States. If the minister believes that Canadian interest rates can remain stable in the face of increasing rates in the United States, would he be so kind as to tell us when he thinks the American interest rates will actually exceed those of Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the first question, I can understand the confusion over the numbers. The member opposite is not the first person to have that difficulty. It is a perfectly understandable problem.

In the second question the hon. member is asking me to muse again on the issue of interest rates. The Prime Minister pointed out to me that it was not really a very good idea for finance ministers to muse on interest rates. The only thing I can say to him is that I wish he had given me this advice before I did it last time.

[The Speaker]

I know the Minister of Finance is speaking to me but he is pointing the other way.

Collège Militaire Royal De Saint-Jean

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

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

The government officially justifies closing the military college in Saint-Jean by invoking the need to save money. However, the total cost of teaching per student is much higher in Kingston than in Saint-Jean: over $71,000 in Kingston compared to $58,000 in Saint-Jean.

Since the minister is so sure that he made the right decision, can he tell us precisely how much will be saved by closing the military college in Saint-Jean, considering the costs of relocation and the need for new facilities in Kingston?

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

Mr. Speaker, I told the member's colleague yesterday that there will be ample opportunity to answer all of these questions next Tuesday when I appear before the standing committee dealing with the estimates. I will have all the information available at that time.

Therefore, we do not have to take the time of question period to get into an argument with numbers. The member will have everything. Our case will be substantiated. If members want the report that was commissioned by the previous minister which was the subject of discussions a few weeks ago, I will make that available. They can read it over the weekend. I am sure on Wednesday they will not be asking any more questions on collège militaire Saint-Jean.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, can the minister at least be honest enough to admit that the decision, made at the very last minute-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. No member may impute motives to another member or a minister by using such expressions. The hon. member could perhaps rephrase his question.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Would the minister be so kind as to admit that the decision, made at the last minute, to close the military college in Saint-Jean is purely political, to help the closing of bases elsewhere in Canada go down better?

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

Mr. Speaker, this was not a decision that was made at the last minute. It was a decision that was part of the original proposal for the defence cuts. It is one that I opposed, the Prime Minister opposed and many people opposed. We would have liked to have done it another way rather than close this college. However, from the point of view of financial sense in meeting our red book commitments, it seemed to us that the best business case was to to concentrate the college in Kingston.

We tried to avoid this but in the final analysis we felt that it was the only wise decision to make in saving the taxpayers money, not just the taxpayers of other provinces but the taxpayers of Quebec as well.

Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister who likes to compare members of Parliament with NHL hockey players.

Former players like Gordie Howe and Bernie "Boom Boom" Geoffrion, who are among the best players the league has ever seen, receive pensions less than half that received by the worst MPs, including many Tory and NDP members who were removed from the last Parliament.

When will the Prime Minister stop high-sticking Canadian taxpayers and change the MP pension plan?