Debates of April 11th, 1994

Unemployment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, by this time members of the Reform Party should learn not to trust everything that is printed because it comes from somewhat dubious sources.

In this case the story the hon. member is alluding to was a rumour that was apparently put forward by some bureaucrats from a couple of provincial governments. I do not think that is the most authentic source for proposals for changes in the federal UI program. I would suggest that once the hon. member gets his sources straight he may get his questions straight. Then I will be prepared to answer them.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it was a pretty straightforward question. I suggest the minister learn a little humility lest he end up unemployed as well.

Government reports over the last several years have recommended that the government move away from control of the UI program. Will the minister heed this advice and let employers and employees administer their own programs?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows we are presently engaged in a very major undertaking to look at a variety of the programs run by the government in order to achieve higher levels of employment.

We made some changes in the last budget which reduced UI premiums. That has been one of the contributing reasons there is a new sense of confidence in the economy, especially among small businesses.

I met with them and they told me that they feel this government is on the right track for job creation. We have consulted with business, labour and community interest groups, all of which have made various comments about the way in which we can apply a more effective unemployment insurance program.

I want to make one thing very clear. The unemployment insurance program does provide a very important service to millions of Canadians. We will protect the integrity of that program. What we want to do is improve the program and that is not the interest of the hon. member who wants to take the program apart.

Unemployment Insurance Reform

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

It is not some provincial bureaucrats who made a surprising statement last week but the Minister of Finance himself who suggested that unemployment insurance would be funded only by workers' contributions. Furthermore, the amount of contribution could be set according to each worker's own situation.

My question is this: Is the minister, given his previous answer, prepared to promise that unemployment insurance reform will not make workers the only ones to pay for unemployment insurance?

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

Mr. Speaker, we obviously are committed to major reform and improvement of the program.

I must confess to my great disappointment that when I looked at the House of Commons committee report and looked at the special report submitted by the Bloc Quebecois, I found absolutely no constructive proposals, no interesting suggestions, no ways of making the reform.

I would suggest if the hon. member wants to make recommendations on how to reform, we are prepared to listen. Certainly, they refused to do it in their committee report.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the mandate of the committee and of minority members on the committee was to consult Canadians and not to submit the opinion of the party.

Will the minister, since he is in charge and he is the one who prepares the action plan which will be known as soon as possible so that everyone can really be consulted, confirm that he is preparing to modify unemployment insurance in such a way that the premium rate will depend on each worker's risk of job loss, so that those who hold insecure jobs will be hit harder?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct one statement by the hon. member which I am sure she made inadvertently.

This proposal for reform is not something I initiate alone. I do it as part of a government, as part of a caucus. We are working with the provinces, business and labour. This will be a point of view expressed by all Canadians, except for a certain group in the House that does not want to participate in the process.

We have not been able to get this co-operative view as to how we can change the program. As to the specific point raised by the member, I have said to this Parliament many many times that we are engaged in a very open and honest program to ensure that all views are considered. If that is the point of view of the hon. member, I will take that representation. If the Bloc Quebecois wants to reduce the premium rate and wants to simply have the employees pay it, that it is not the point of view represented by the minister. It is not the point of view that I share personally. It is a point of view that I will bring to this House as soon as I can and will represent the point of view of all Canadians.

The Economy

[Randy White, Reform, Fraser Valley West, BC]

Mr. Speaker, here we are just seven weeks since the budget and today's Financial Post paints a vastly different economic climate from what was predicted in the Liberal budget.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Short term interest rates for 1994 are up a full percentage point from February and growth is down. For 1995 it is the same picture, interest rates up and growth down, according to 12 leading Canadian firms.

Using the government's own method of analysis, I wish to ask the following question. We all know the Prime Minister said that he has the people and he has the plan. What is the plan now that his people have been proven wrong?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, the forecasts mentioned are just some of the ones I would like to mention to the hon. member. The Conference Board's forecast has been revised downward but it is still well above the numbers we used in our very prudent forecast in our budget.

The Royal Bank of Canada last week came out with a brand new forecast. Those numbers show 3.5 per cent real growth this year and 4.3 per cent next year, well above the rates that were used in our budget numbers.

I remind the hon. member that there are some people out there with substantial confidence in the economy and our employment numbers in the last two months show that confidence. The rise in consumer confidence and business confidence is there as well and the private sector forecasts are still well above those used in our budget.

[Randy White, Reform, Fraser Valley West, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know who the hon. minister has been talking to, but if you look at the economic forecasts in the Financial Post or you ask

the private businessmen or investors in this country you will get a different scenario.

I would like to know if the Prime Minister still believes that further cuts are not necessary or should we wait until the Minister of Finance is back in this House to get a second opinion?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the hon. member has looked at our budget carefully enough.

If he had read the budget carefully and looked at the very prudent forecast numbers we used, he would see that our target of 3 per cent of GDP is well within grasp and well within those budget numbers.

If he would like to know to whom we were listening, I was listening to the Royal Bank of Canada's forecast last week and the Conference Board of Canada's forecast last week. I know most of those forecasters personally.

[The Speaker]

Perhaps it slipped our minds while we were away, but we would prefer that there not be any documents or books waved in the House. It takes a little bit away from the decorum and I would ask all hon. members to please adhere to this request.

Manpower Training

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

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

In an interview with the daily Le Devoir , the Quebec Premier reiterated his desire to patriate federal responsibilities for manpower training, saying: ``Quebec has always done a better job than the federal government with vocational training activities, and I will not settle for less''.

Will the Prime Minister agree to this renewed request made by the Quebec government and will he transfer to that province full federal responsibilities for manpower training, as well as the funds to go with it?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have had and we continue to have discussions with the province of Quebec regarding manpower training. So far, we have agreed on some points, including the single-window concept, which a number of provinces also approved at the recent meeting held in Toronto with the Minister of Human Resources Development, I believe.

Indeed, the Quebec Premier has indicated that he wants to keep negotiating on manpower training. We have taken his arguments into consideration and we will continue discussions with the province.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister, who seems to be participating in a lot of discussions, if he will keep discussing until the election campaign gets under way in Quebec and then propose to Quebecers an agreement such as the Bourassa-Campbell one, that is another smoke screen?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is not for me to say whether the Bourassa-Campbell agreement was a smoke screen. I imagine that the people have already rendered their verdict on that.

Generally speaking, we will first undertake the income security reform and future agreements with any province, including Quebec, will be based on arrangements reached on future reforms.

Job Creation

[Dianne Brushett, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

The government has said again and again that it attaches the highest priority to job creation. To that end the minister has lowered UI premium rates and will soon announce the government's strategy on youth.

What other results can the minister point to that really show Canadians particularly those in Nova Scotia that the government's job creation policies are working?

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

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most important demonstration of a new sense of confidence in the country are the figures we released last week that show there was a very substantial drop in the unemployment rate.

In particular, I would like to say there is .7 per cent, almost 10,000 new jobs created in the province of Nova Scotia alone. It demonstrates that three-quarters of the new jobs created were full-time permanent jobs and not the part time jobs of the past.

I agree with the hon. member it is very important that we take a special look at those who still have very strong needs in the labour market. Young people must be the priority of all members of Parliament because they are the ones who still need the greatest assistance from all of us to get back to work.

The Environment

[Bill Gilmour, Reform, Comox—Alberni, BC]

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

On January 24 the minister stated in the House that selection of the host city for the NAFTA commission of the environment would be "open, transparent, public and objective, a process free of politics. The selection will be made based on environmental performance of these cities. Montreal along with others will be considered in a non-partisan fashion". The end result was that Montreal, a city that dumps half of its sewage untreated into the St. Lawrence River, was chosen as the host city.

My question for the minister is this. Why did she mislead this House and 24 potential host cities-

[Some hon. members]

Order, order.

[Bill Gilmour, Reform, Comox—Alberni, BC]

I will rephrase that, Mr. Speaker.

Why did she advise the House and 24 potential host cities when she knew that the selection process was fixed in favour of Montreal?

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

Mr. Speaker, the selection process was never fixed in favour of any city.

I have brought with me today a copy of the report from KPMG. I would be very happy to provide the member and all other members with an opportunity to review every single proposal. I will say to the hon. member that environmental considerations were certainly one of the key considerations.

When he starts pointing the finger at cities that spew sewage, unfortunately there are a number of cities across the country that spew raw sewage into the ocean, including several in his own province. What the member should bear in mind is that Montreal has a plan in place right now to deal with the problem. It will be operational by the end of next year. I only wish that every one of the other 25 applicant cities had as significant a reputation when it came to actually dealing with the problems of raw sewage.

[Bill Gilmour, Reform, Comox—Alberni, BC]

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

Contrary to the environment minister's supposed criteria the Prime Minister now states that Montreal was awarded the environmental secretariat because it has the highest jobless rate.

Given these inconsistencies which hardly justify such patronage, has the government adopted the policies of the previous Conservative government of showing favouritism to the Prime Minister's home province?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to add to what the Minister of the Environment mentioned a minute ago. She did very objective work. Many cities qualified. One of the factors that attracted my attention and which she did not even use was the fact that of all these cities, Montreal was unfortunately the city with the highest unemployment.

All the other factors have been well balanced by the minister. She asked for applications and so on. But when you are the government you have to make a decision eventually. We made a decision and we will not apologize to anybody for exercising our responsibilities.

Hyundai Plant In Bromont

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on April 4 in Seoul, the Minister for International Trade stated that he had received assurances from Hyundai officials that the Bromont plant would be re-opened. Since then, the company has indicated that it has no business plan for this plant and that despite wanting to keep the facility in operation, Hyundai was still not certain if it would re-open it. The company has even requested that its employees sign waivers.

Can the Prime Minister shed some light on the nature of the guarantees that the Minister for International Trade may have received from Hyundai officials insofar as the reopening of the Bromont plant is concerned?