House of Commons Hansard #86 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was agreement.
Douglas Young LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, lobbyists' involvement in the Pearson deal was the subject of a thorough investigation. The Nixon Report findings are well known, and I hope the Leader of the Opposition agrees with the government's decision to cancel this contract.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Today, the provincial social services ministers gathered in Halifax will issue a joint statement to warn the Minister of Human Resources Development not to make his action plan on programs reform public without first consulting them and more importantly, without having addressed their concerns. So, the deadlock between Ottawa and the provinces persists because, as the Nova Scotia Minister of Community Services put it: "I do not think that we have backed down. We will stand very firm. We are not wimps."
My question is as follows: Will the Prime Minister recognize that this stern warning from the provinces is an indication that social programs reform, the only major project initiated by this government since coming to power, is stalled because of his government's obstinacy in imposing its views on the provinces?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the lead minister has consulted on several occasions with the ministers in question. In the joint statement released earlier today, all the provincial ministers agreed that a Canada-wide reform of social programs was required and they invited the minister to discuss the process with them. He has done that in the past and intends to do so again in the weeks to come. The deadlock exists only in the hon. member's mind, because consultations are ongoing and these consultations are the reason why things are taking longer. Last week, we were criticized for not imposing immediately our choice of a solution and the
reason for that was simple: we were not through consulting with the provinces.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
What the provinces want, Mr. Speaker, is to be consulted all together, not individually and one pitted against the other.
Does the Prime Minister not realize that the provinces have taken the legitimate stand that they have because they refuse to bear the brunt of a reform that would result in lower federal transfer payments and enable Ottawa to off-load once again part of its deficit onto them?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Finance tabled his budget, he made it quite clear that we were not going to reduce transfer payments. This was clearly indicated. The provinces were also said to want some idea of what the spending would be like over the next two or three years, and the Minister of Finance provided them with just that, a precise account of the expenditures for this year, next year and the year after that. The provinces know exactly what funds are currently available, pursuant to the commitment made to include in transfer payment arrangements procedures allowing for the necessary planning by the provinces. The budget is perfectly clear on this issue. I do not understand the provincial ministers' concern. In fact, that is what the minister will reiterate in the meetings, bilateral or multilateral meetings as the case may be, he will be having with the provincial ministers.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
On numerous occasions spokespersons for the government have referred to the small business sector as the major engine of the economy and a major job creator. Yet a recent survey of small business conducted by the Financial Post reveals that only 14 per cent believe that the government's small business initiatives will create jobs and 87 per cent believe that the government is not representing their interests particularly with respect to the deficit.
When will the government formally recognize that the only thing most small business people want from the federal government is for it to get off their backs and out of their pockets?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, I certainly noticed the survey that the leader of the Reform Party mentioned. It did indicate, although clearly according to the polls that were included in the survey this was not, you might say, our natural constituency, we were gaining in support even among that constituency in every part of the country, save for one province. That indicates that the program the government has put in place is winning support among the small business community.
It might be helpful to the Reform Party to understand that we do understand exactly the point that removing burdens from small business will help them succeed. That is why in the February budget the Minister of Finance announced that we will be reducing the payroll tax on unemployment insurance premiums. That is a key way to help small business create jobs.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, speaking of burdens then, 70 per cent of the entrepreneurs surveyed by Arthur Andersen said that the biggest single obstacle they faced was high taxes. The next largest group said that their biggest problem was intrusive government legislation and regulations. These are the obstacles that small business people themselves say prevent them from expanding and creating more jobs.
I ask the Prime Minister what new measures the government is prepared to take to remove the two greatest government created obstacles to job creation in this country which are high taxes and red tape.
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, over the last few months in the ongoing work in the industry committee, which in fact I appeared before yesterday to discuss small business issues, we have seen a very co-operative effort among members from all three parties with respect to focusing on the issues which concern small business.
With respect to the level of taxes and the regulatory burden together with issues such as access to capital and the ability to apply new technologies, there is a co-operative effort under way to particularly address the issues that concern small business.
It is clear from the studies with respect to the impact of small business on the Canadian economy that is where the job creation will be. If we can continue to work co-operatively with our friends across the floor looking for solutions that address particular problems, then we can put together a package building on the initiatives the government has already announced, building on the promises we made in the red book and which we are fulfilling to help that sector create jobs.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, I have a further supplementary to the Prime Minister and to the minister.
Canadian entrepreneurs say the best thing the government could do to promote job creation would be to reduce government spending and provide tax relief. According to the Arthur Andersen survey 97 per cent of the entrepreneurs surveyed said that the government should have cut more deeply in the federal
budget and 86 per cent of them did not believe that the government is serious about deficit reduction.
If the government is serious about reducing the deficit, if it wants to send a strong, clear message to these job-creating entrepreneurs over the summer, will the Prime Minister commit to bringing in a minibudget in the fall which redoubles the government's deficit cutting efforts?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development -Quebec
Mr. Speaker, having spent a reasonable amount of time in that particular sphere to which the leader of the Reform Party addresses, I happen to know that the one thing entrepreneurs want from their government is a firm commitment to their objectives and credibility.
They want us to hit our targets. They do not want a panic reaction. They do not want minibudgets. They wanted us to bring forward a budget that would attain its target. We did that.
Next September, as we promised in the House, we will be setting our new economic scenarios as a prelude to the consultations for the February budget. Again at that time we will give an indication of where we are going. We are on target. We are going to hit our target.
The only thing I really have to say I will say to the Prime Minister. I do not want to wash any dirty linen in public but I would disagree with the Minister of Industry. He said that according to the survey we are leading in nine out of the 10 provinces. It is my understanding, Mr. Prime Minister, that we are leading in all 10.
Maud Debien Bloc Laval East, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We have learned that in connection with the thirtieth summit of the Organization of African Unity in Tunis, an immediate cease-fire agreement was reportedly concluded between the forces of the provisional government in Rwanda and the Rwandan Patriotic Front.
This cease-fire would end the massacres in which more than half a million people may have been killed, including 60 Tutsi children slain yesterday after they were taken from a church where they had sought refuge.
Does the minister confirm that a cease-fire agreement was reached between the belligerents and can he tell us where matters stand on this subject?
André Ouellet LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, of course we hope that a cease-fire between the parties will be respected. Like the hon. member, we already had word that a cease-fire had been declared. Unfortunately, subsequent information told us that it had already been violated, in fact.
So at this time I cannot give more specific information than the latest reports that the parties had concluded an agreement which would allow a United Nations contingent to come soon to help the parties in question observe a cease-fire and restore order in that country, which has been particularly affected in recent weeks.
Maud Debien Bloc Laval East, QC
Mr. Speaker, in view of the information which the minister has just given us and which does not seem to be complete, I nevertheless ask him if, in case a cease-fire is declared, he can tell us if he intends Canada to play a role in a United Nations mission in Rwanda and can he also tell us if the Canadian government intends to increase its humanitarian aid efforts in that country?
André Ouellet LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's first question, I must inform her that the government is now considering a request that the United Nations made not only to Canada but also to some other countries. A decision on this will be made in the next ten or fifteen days.
As for the hon. member's second question, I can assure her that the Canadian government is ready to step up its aid program for the Rwandan people who have been greatly affected by this conflict.
Herb Grubel Reform Capilano—Howe Sound, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.
Yesterday the Fraser Institute announced that tax freedom day, the day when Canadians stop working for the government and begin working for themselves, will not come until June 23 of this year. This is four days later than last year and represents a total tax load of 48 per cent compared with 44 per cent last year.
Instead of fiddling with the method of taxation, as the minister is preparing to do with the GST, when will the government eliminate the deficit so that the level of taxation can be reduced?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development -Quebec
Mr. Speaker, we fully appreciate the terrible burden of taxation that Canadians have had to bear as a result of the 39 separate tax increases introduced by the previous government. It is one of the reasons why in the last budget we did not seek to increase taxes but rather sought greater tax equity.
I am sure the member opposite understands the absolute necessity of building fairness into the tax system. In fact, in the last budget we announced certain potential tax decreases. I
would never disagree with the Minister of Industry and in his previous answer he talked about the reduction in unemployment insurance premiums. That is a tax decrease.
Herb Grubel Reform Capilano—Howe Sound, BC
Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his answer. I address my supplementary question to him as well.
Recently the International Monetary Fund pointed out the connection between persistent deficits, deeper recessions and unemployment.
Does the minister agree with the IMF when it says that deficits cause unemployment and recessions and therefore the deficit must be the number one priority if Canada is to experience lower unemployment and economic growth?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development -Quebec
Mr. Speaker, the relationship between high deficits, low productivity and consequent high unemployment is one with which no one would disagree.
However the reduction of the deficit must come in many ways, certainly a reduction of government spending, but at the same time an increase in employment. By far the best way is by putting Canadians back to work, in addition to cutting spending.
I would also say that I agree with the IMF, so ably cited by my colleague, when the IMF said that Canada next year would lead the industrialized world in job creation, economic growth and productivity.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC
Mr. Speaker, the composition of the extraordinary challenge committee in the Canada-U.S. lumber dispute is the subject of lively debate between Ottawa and Washington. The Americans are casting doubt on the representativeness of Canadian experts sitting on this committee, and some are even calling for Canadian panelists to be investigated by the FBI from now on to determine how unbiased they are.
Will the Minister for International Trade undertake to indicate forcefully to the United States that its position and claims in this matter are quite simply unacceptable and that its attitude threatens the very existence of the panel system for settling trade disputes between our two countries?
Roy MacLaren LiberalMinister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, we reject the statements that were made with regard to possible FBI investigations of panellists under the NAFTA and the FTA. I would only add that it is a matter that the Solicitor General would be able to address if the member wishes to delve further into it.
Certainly under the FTA and NAFTA there is no provision whatever for the type of activity that the hon. member has cited and we reject any such practice.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC
Mr. Speaker, does the minister agree that the American attitude constitutes a new delaying tactic by the United States to allow it to maintain countervailing duties, the brunt of which is being borne by Quebec lumber producers who, it has been proven, receive no subsidies?
Roy MacLaren LiberalMinister for International Trade
Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I have no idea why the United States representative would have said such a thing. Perhaps she offered it as a comment in the heat of the legal discussion, but it certainly has no substance in practice. We would not accept any such practice as described by the hon. member.
Jim Silye Reform Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
I found this quote in the October 29, 1990 edition of the Toronto Star . It reads:
I am opposed to the GST, I have always been opposed to it and I will be opposed to it always.
The Prime Minister should recognize these words, they are his own.
Will the Prime Minister finally admit that his promise to eliminate the GST in his first year of office was foolhardy and that Canadians had better get ready for a modified GST from this Liberal government with a brand new name?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, not only did I say that in 1990, it was in the red book. It stated clearly in the red book the conditions for a replacement of the GST. We have always said that because it is the policy of the government.
We have a committee on the GST and the member sits on it. I remember it was some time ago when the leader of the Reform Party made a promise, a solemn commitment, that he would get rid of the GST. He changed his mind.