House of Commons Hansard #47 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was process.
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, the working paper from which sections were produced in this morning's media is a paper being used as a basis for discussion at the deputy minister level.
It is quite possible that the ministers will continue to negotiate on the basis of a document that may be amended. So far, we have had a number of friendly and useful negotiations with Quebec. We believe that we can continue those negotiations on the same basis.
Lucien Bouchard BlocLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, this document which appears today on the first page of Montreal's biggest newspaper was prepared by the Minister of Human Resources Development and reflects the minister's position.
The document, and therefore the minister's position, indicates that bilateral agreements on joint use of buildings will be signed immediately with the provinces. However, yesterday the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs informed the House that there would be no administrative agreements with the provinces on manpower training for the next two years.
I want to ask the Prime Minister who is right in this case?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, once again, this document was used as a basis for discussion at the last meeting. Documents that are used as a basis for discussion basically contain matters that have yet to be negotiated.
Furthermore, yesterday I did not say there would be no single window, certainly not. I said that we suggested to the Province of Quebec, as we did to the other provinces, that we could have a single window for providing manpower training programs, and that is our position. Consequently, the position the Minister of Human Resources Development is exactly the same as mine.
Lucien Bouchard BlocLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, I think it is easy to interpret the minister's remarks. In any case, the document is correct in that there will be no transfer of officials, authority or resources.
Finally, the bottom line for both ministers is that the same 25 provincial and 27 federal programs will now be administered in the same building, so the client does not have far to go to be utterly confused.
I want to ask the Prime Minister, who must be aware of the contradictions here, whether he realizes that by refusing to transfer federal responsibility for manpower training to Quebec, he is perpetuating an annual waste of $300 million, at the expense of Quebec's unemployed, of whom 20,000 are still
waiting to register for training courses that could help them improve their chances of getting back to work?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that my position is that we are pursuing negotiations with the Province of Quebec and that we have an agreement with the Province of Quebec on eliminating existing overlap.
As I said yesterday, and I say it again today, we are about to negotiate an agreement on income security with the provinces, and meanwhile, we are prepared to negotiate agreements which, at the very least, will include the single-window concept and which may include other aspects of manpower training. Once the reform project has been finalized, we are prepared to conclude more extensive agreements with the provinces, including Quebec.
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
During the campaign, the Liberal Party, in its red book, promised to assist military industries in their conversion to civilian production. Once in power, the government started by cancelling the helicopter contract and then reduced the Defence budget without introducing a defence conversion program. As we can witness today, this government's decisions have had a disastrous impact on companies such as Paramax and Oerlikon.
Is the Prime Minister ready to recognize how important it is to implement, as soon as possible, a defence conversion strategy, as he promised, in order to alleviate the impact of military budget cuts on employment?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, we are quite aware of the situation at Oerlikon, but as the member knows perfectly well, it will be several years before this company closes its doors. We already have assistance programs in place and military industries in Quebec such as Pratt & Whitney and Canadair are already receiving a lot of support from the federal government. I would suggest that the member take the time to review the situation at Oerlikon.
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC
Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that because of his pussyfooting and in the absence of a short-term strategy, high-tech industries such as Paramax and Oerlikon will soon have to resort to massive lay-offs? We do not feel like waiting. Action is needed right now. Why abandon all thought of putting in place civilian research and development programs to help the defence industries?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the member seems to be quite mistaken about what programs actually do exist.
The government's program is set out not just in the red book which he referred to but also in the speech from the throne, the budget, and in many discussions we have had in which the member has participated. We have reinforced the importance of the conversion to a knowledge based, scientific innovation economy. That is the plan of the government. That is the direction we are going.
I hope he will get on board and help us to go in that direction.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
Yesterday the Minister of Finance told investment dealers that further deep spending reductions are coming. He said: "There are no sacred cows. There are a whole series of government programs that we simply did not have time to get at in the government's first budget".
In March, however, the Prime Minister told an Edmonton audience that all spending reductions for the next three years were on the table.
Will the Prime Minister end this stream of mixed signals coming from the government and tell the House whether the government will be announcing additional spending reductions in the months ahead?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I said that the cuts that we had provided for in the budget were needed to achieve our goal of 3 per cent of GNP for the deficit. But we said that there was other work being done.
We are looking at this time at other opportunities for cuts. The minister of federal-provincial relations, who is responsible for renewal of the government, is looking at all the boards and commissions that are reporting to Parliament or to the Prime Minister or to ministers in order to cut more. More cuts are coming and we are working on them.
I repeat that the program we put forward in the budget is the program that will lead us to the goal that we stated clearly in the campaign and in the budget. We will do everything necessary to reduce the deficit in relation to GNP at 3 per cent.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Let us get this absolutely clear.
If I understand the Prime Minister, he is saying that there will be additional spending cuts in addition to those outlined in the recent budget.
Is that the correct understanding of the government's position?
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, just so that we have this absolutely clear, we all know that the finance minister is talking about further spending reductions to try to boost investor confidence in the Canadian economy. However, investors realize that the Minister of Finance will not prevail unless he is fully supported by the Prime Minister.
Will the Prime Minister assure us that he supports the finance minister when that minister calls for additional spending reductions not contained in this year's budget?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, yes, mais oui ça veut dire yes.
The Minister of Finance has my full confidence, my full support. He has the full support of all members of cabinet and all members of the caucus.
Yves Rocheleau Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Industry.
The daily newspaper Le Soleil reported that a ministerial briefing note addressed to a federal Cabinet minister expressed concern about the demise of Oerlikon Aerospace's operations in Saint-Jean. The note warned the government that the firm had very few orders on the books and that without a true diversification and conversion program, it was in danger of folding.
Now that the minister knows about Oerlikon's very uncertain future, does he intend to move quickly to support the diversification of the company's operations and thus ensure the survival of this high-tech firm which has seen its workforce shrink from 750 to 300?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, I understand full well that the hon. member, like the member who earlier raised questions on the same subject, is very concerned about this company's problems. Oerlikon is working on a number of contracts. In fact, it recently received a contract worth $15 million.
Our goal is to find ways to help companies grow, not just in the field of military equipment, but in others areas of research and development, in keeping with the new economic climate.
We are prepared to work with Oerlikon, just as we are prepared to work with other firms.
Yves Rocheleau Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question.
Will the minister not recognize the need to take urgent action instead of waiting for the company to shut its doors, as we saw happen with Hyundai?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, I think that Oerlikon shareholders also want to take action rather quickly. First, the company needs to address this issue. Secondly, governments may also help Oerlikon, but not necessarily by granting subsidies. Oerlikon needs to have a commercially-sound business plan. This will be the key to its success and to the success of other firms.
Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
Ministers of this government continue to send out mixed signals on important economic issues. Yesterday the Prime Minister suggested that the drop in last month's official unemployment rate was the result of successful Liberal economic policies. On the same issue the Minister of Finance admitted that much of the drop was due to 28,000 young Canadians giving up their job search.
Does the Minister of Human Resources Development regard driving young Canadians out of the job market as successful economic policy?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification
Mr. Speaker, the figures released last Friday show that over the past two months 115,000 new jobs were created in Canada. Most important and what we can take some confidence in is that 75 per cent of those jobs were full-time jobs.
I share the hon. member's concern about the real problem this country's young people face. One of the reasons we have started a major recasting of many of the programs is so that we can specifically target the needs of young people.
In this case the Prime Minister was certainly correct when he said that generally the economy is improving as a result of the new sense of confidence Canadians have as a consequence of this government's actions.
At the same time we are also aware of the need to begin to deal adequately with youth unemployment. If the hon. member can show some patience for a day or two I think he will see the
beginning of a very serious attack on that problem by this government.
Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, my supplemental is also for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
The Prime Minister suggested yesterday that the infrastructure program should receive some credit for the drop in unemployment in March. The fact is that not one dollar of infrastructure spending has yet been spent. It should be no surprise that financial markets are confused by the contradictory statements made by the ministers of this government.
At this time when credit rating agencies are reconsidering Canadian issues and no level of government has any spare cash, will the minister cancel the infrastructure program and save$6 billion in borrowed money for Canadians?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification
Mr. Speaker, the only confusion is that of the hon. member.
The Prime Minister said very clearly what we have all said. The investments under the infrastructure program are an added bonus that will create further confidence and activity and will help get the engine of this economy going.
I can tell the hon. member that last week, in the company of the President of the Treasury Board in my own province of Manitoba, a neighbouring province to his, we announced133 projects for over $130 million creating close to 3,000 jobs in that one province alone. Manitobans are very happy about that.
Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC
Mr. Speaker, the future of MIL Davie Shipbuilding in the Quebec City region remains very much in doubt. To survive, the only shipyard in Quebec needs a quick decision from the federal government on two specific issues. However, the government is still deferring its decision on the proposal to build a ferry for the Magdalen Islands and refuses to disclose its intentions regarding the multi-functional "smart ship" project.
My question is for the Minister of Industry. If the government still believes in employment, why is it putting off its decision on these two projects, when they are part of a real defence industry conversion strategy and would ensure the future of this shipyard?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, it is clear with respect to both of the projects the hon. member mentioned that it is important for the government as the steward of the taxpayers' money to make decisions that are fundamentally in the best interests of the taxpayers ultimately.
With respect to the project of replacing the Lucy Maud Montgomery I know my colleague the Minister of Transport is giving active consideration to what his department's needs are with respect to that ferry. The decision will be taken in due course. As to where the contract will be let, that will need to be done on a commercial basis.