Debates of April 15th, 1994

Action Plan For Young People

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Madam Speaker, normally the Minister of Human Resources Development should have taken a lesson in humility from the National Assembly, yesterday, but that does not seem to have been the case. Is the minister prepared to postpone the implementation of his apprenticeship plan until such time as he has secured the co-operation of the provinces and of Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again he is asking us to stop a program that will put young people back to work.

I am not in the business of stopping programs to put young people back to work. I am in the business of helping them get to work. As a result I will never listen to that kind of advice.

Youth Employment

[Dale Johnston, Reform, Wetaskiwin, AB]

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

He referred to the 400,000 young Canadians actively seeking work in the country. Leaked information implies that the program would help about 1 per cent of those 400,000 young Canadians.

Why is the minister playing politics with such a serious problem as this one? Why is he cruelly creating false hope for so many young Canadians?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again the Reform Party is working on the basis of leaks.

I would suggest that Reform members get themselves a proper research department so that they can start basing their questions on facts rather than on rumour and speculation. The only thing I take great comfort from in the hon. member's question is that for the first time in the history of the Reform Party's presence in the House we now have Reform members saying to the Liberal government: "Spend more money".

[Dale Johnston, Reform, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I did not say to spend more money. As a matter of fact these programs have an effect of costing taxpayers more money.

I have a supplementary question. Recently the government has begun the very difficult job of trying to reduce the dependency cycle of thousands of east coast fishermen. The history of these make-work projects in Canada has been a series of failures. I had hoped that the 1970 tactics had gone out with the last election.

Why is the minister now planning to introduce thousands more young Canadians to a dependency cycle with yet another make-work program?

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

Mr. Speaker, that is a very cruel statement.

There are over 40,000 people on the east coast of Canada who have been deprived of a way of life and a way of making a living through no fault of their own. Their families for generations have fished honestly. The fish have disappeared.

It is the responsibility of the Government of Canada, along with others, to give every support and assistance to enable those people to find new hope, to find new choices and to find new careers. We will be basing a program on giving people who have had their way of life and their livelihood disappear a new way of

finding the chance to make a good living for themselves and their families.

The cruel and insensitive remarks by the hon. member are not acceptable because we will be giving, as the hon. member will see next week, a real chance or a real platform for those people to find once again real hope that the country cares about their plight.

Immigration

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Yesterday, the ultrafederalist Quebec Minister of International Affairs, Cultural Communities and Immigration, Mr. John Ciaccia, made the following statement: "COFIs teach immigrants to cope with problems of daily life. They are told how schools and institutions work in Quebec. They are given tips on food and housing."

Is the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, whom the Quebec government has called to order along with his colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, prepared to mind his own business from now on and to apologize to the Quebec government?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, no Government of Quebec official has called me to order. Quite the contrary. I spoke to the Quebec minister responsible for immigration and he said very clearly what I told the member yesterday on the floor of the House of Commons.

First, he says that Quebec has nurtured a settlement process that clearly is at the top of the list after a 20-25 year agreement with the federal government.

Second, he has no problem that the committee overseeing the Canada-Quebec accord regularly meets with federal and provincial officials to discuss what there is for public debate.

Third, he confirms to me that there is no incompatibility with promoting strong, exciting patriotism and love of Canada and one's fierce loyalty to one's province or region. One either lives in a province in a country or one lives in a country and in a province.

Quebec has jurisdiction over independent immigration that comes to Quebec, but as far as I know Quebec is still in Canada.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, now the minister is backpedalling. Does he not realize that his clumsy action calls into question Quebec's jurisdiction for integrating its immigrants into the French community?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I think clumsiness is in the eye of the beholder. Quite frankly the hon. member is trying to make an issue of a non-issue. No one is calling the Quebec government or the province of Quebec into question on its resettlement and settlement programs.

I told the hon. member in committee two days ago. I told the hon. member yesterday. I repeat for him again that my government and I believe Quebec has done a yeoman's job and service on settlement.

Second, the hon. member intentionally confuses what I said on the settlement issue with citizenship materials to try to standardize citizenship materials from one coast to the other. That is citizenship, settlement is immigration, and the member knows it.

Old Age Security

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

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

The government recently announced the preparation of a broad discussion paper on Canada's programs for seniors. The minister clearly stated that the objective was to define a set of efficient and compassionate programs to meet our future needs.

Could the minister clarify whether this means that the review of seniors' programs is part of social security reform? Could the minister give his assurance that old age security pensions will be protected?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can certainly give the hon. member that assurance.

Nobody in the government has ever said in any way, shape or form that we would be making changes to the fundamental protection of seniors through the OAS. The social review that we presently have under way is primarily designed to deal with questions of employability and with questions of security for families and children. That is our real commitment.

The Minister of Finance indicated in the budget that we would be preparing a paper on the long term issues and implications of what happens to a society that is aging and what that means for some of the long term security benefits 20 to 30 years ahead. We

must address those matters because of the changing age of the population and what that would do in terms of premiums and so on.

That is a discussion paper looking at the long term. We have no intention of making any changes whatsoever at this time in existing security programs for seniors.

Immigration

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Yesterday, while the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration was busy briefing the press, some real news was revealed by his deputy minister. Apparently no HIV test is required as a part of the routine medical testing for immigration to Canada. This is despite the fact the Immigration Act reads that:

No person who is a danger to public health or who would create excessive demands on health services should be allowed into the country.

That is the law. Why is the minister's department not testing each and every immigration applicant for HIV and why are we letting these people into Canada?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, that is only news to the hon. member because as my colleague mentioned earlier, they clearly have a vacuum in their research capacity.

The fact is there is not mandatory HIV testing. However, if in their routine checks they find traces of HIV, our doctors throughout the world are allowed to ask applicants to have that test. In the majority of cases they have been refused.

There is not mandatory testing yet for HIV. Many applicants are tested and many are not permitted to come not only with the perspective of problems for other Canadians but also with respect to the effect and impact it would have on our health care system in Canada.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the Canadian people are going to be satisfied with that kind of an answer.

The minister has been aware for some time that HIV testing is not done. Not only that, but if an applicant admits being positive to HIV he or she still can be admitted to Canada. This is outrageous. Surely the minister cannot deny that HIV infected immigrants are a threat to our already overburdened health care system.

Does the minister have statistics on how many AIDS infected immigrants or refugees have been admitted to Canada to date?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I caution the member to try to curtail the kind of fishing expedition he wants to engage in.

I would point out that that mandatory testing has not taken place. Second, where those individuals exhibit traces of HIV they are asked to be tested. Third, most of those individuals are not permitted into the country. Fourth, the whole question of medical inadmissibility is now being reviewed as a result of some of the charter cases that have happened in the last number of months.

I will be happy to provide the hon. member with some answers to questions that he asked with respect to specific statistics, which I do not have at my fingertips today.

Purchase Of Influenza Vaccine

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Public Works.

On Wednesday, the minister announced to the Government Operations Committee that a memorandum of agreement had been signed with BioVac of Laval and Connaught in Ontario for the purchase of influenza vaccine by the federal government for the provinces. This agreement is the direct result of an intervention by the Minister of Public Works.

Can the minister confirm that his intervention resulted in the division of the contract in two equal parts between BioVac and Connaught, whereas before BioVac held an exclusive contract?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising the question which is indeed important to all Canadians.

The member may not be aware, but the Government of Canada purchases approximately 1 per cent of the vaccine in question. Ninety-nine per cent is purchased by the provinces. We act as a facilitator for the provinces. The member is quite correct that yesterday I did announce at committee that there was an agreement in principle between the participants and that the details of that particular agreement will be announced very shortly.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am not very patient. Could the minister tell us today what reasons led him to intervene personally so that the government would circumvent the normal contracting process?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises a question which is quite contradictory to a previous question one of her colleagues raised on the floor of the House.

The primary concern of the Government of Canada, as I am sure it is of all hon. members despite political differences, is obviously to protect the health of Canadians.

There are Canadian companies which wanted a Canadian solution to a particular problem. I think we have arrived at that. We have an agreement in principle which I think will satisfy all of the participants. At the same time the primary concern is to provide a quality product for those individuals across the country who have to use it, namely the children.

Environmental Secretariat

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question based on fact is for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for the Environment.

On January 24 the minister told the House that the decision to locate the NAFTA environmental secretariat would be public and transparent throughout and that the decision would be made free of politics based on an independent consultant's report of the competing bids.

The minister said that for the first time in the history of government the decision would be based on the environmental record of the competing cities. When the minister announced that Montreal was to be the site of the secretariat, the minister admitted the decision was political.

When the government made the political decision to locate the environmental secretariat in Montreal, was the minister aware that of the competing cities Montreal has about the worst environmental record? Therefore, based on the minister's own words will the minister reconsider her decision?

[The Speaker]

I know that hon. members will want to make their questions quite succinct and specific. I would invite the hon. Minister of the Environment to answer the question.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all the statement by the member is absolutely false.

I invited him last Monday along with any other colleague in the House to come to my office and personally review every single one of the applicant cities. There were 25 cities that applied, 25 cities that had applications based on five criteria which were public criteria, which I released with all relevant documents.

I invited the member last Monday to come and review the applications from his city and from the other cities. Unfortunately, he and his colleagues have not shown any interest in actually seeing the documents.

I have released in this House, publicly, every single document on that issue that was reviewed by me. I have invited the member and his colleagues to come and personally review the approximately 15,000 pages of documents that came from the cities. I would ask him to come over and review the facts and I think when he sees the facts he will agree with me that among 25 very good applicant cities, Montreal was the best choice.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the decision to place the environmental secretariat in Montreal appears to have been made before the phoney competition began, will the minister tell the House if it is the intention of the government to buy the affection of the separatists in Quebec at the expense of federalists in the rest of the country?

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

Mr. Speaker, I think the tone of the hon. member's question is a very good indication of how he and his party do not understand that this party believes that Canadians belong in every part of this country. My brother living in the city of Montreal is every bit as Canadian as anybody living in his city. One thing that is going to be very important for the future of this country is if Canadians from Edmonton, Montreal, Vancouver, Dartmouth, St. John's and Hamilton begin to understand that we are all in this together.

If the member is really interested in moving the environmental agenda forward, I would ask him to participate in the conference on environmental technologies. I would ask him to put his mind to new and innovative ideas for future technology.

The reality is that environmental technologies are the cutting edge of jobs for-