Debates of June 15th, 1994

Goods And Services Tax

[Jim Silye, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Prime Minister. We would get rid of the GST and we would balance the budget within three years. Just give us the chance.

This past weekend, the vice-chairman of the Standing Committee on Finance said that he favoured extending the GST to include both groceries and prescription drugs for certain tax benefits.

Can the Prime Minister tell Canadians if the vice-chairman was speaking on behalf of the government? Is his government planning to tax both groceries and prescription drugs under a new, broadened version of the GST?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are waiting for the report of the committee. We are very interested. We have made a commitment that the GST will be replaced within two years.

We were elected less than eight months ago and we have made a lot of progress. We said we would establish a committee on this subject very early in the process. It will report next week I understand. We will study the report and make a decision about the replacement. There will be no spectacular flip-flop like the one made by the leader of the Reform Party.

Marine Safety

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the trawler Rally 2 , which belongs to a company named Madelipêche, recently experienced serious mechanical problems which endangered the lives of its crew members. These problems seem similar to those which, in November 1990, resulted in the sinking of a sister trawler, Le Nadine , and in the death of eight crew members.

Will the Minister of Transport confirm that the federal office responsible for transport safety is conducting an investigation on the mechanical problems experienced last week by the Rally 2 in the Magdalen Islands? Otherwise, will the minister pledge to shed light on that incident?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the hon. member that since I also come from a region where fishing is a very important activity, and since I am aware of the importance of safety for those who make a living at sea, we will take every possible measure to ensure the protection and safety of fishermen.

I can understand the hon. member's concern; he is certainly aware that a coroner's report was prepared and that investigations were conducted. We will continue our efforts to ensure that a tragedy such as the one which occurred in 1990 does not happen again. We will conduct all the investigations necessary to find out what happened this time.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it may be the distance separating us, but I did not hear clearly whether the minister intends to hold an inquiry on the most recent mechanical problems.

In the marine sector, and the minister will surely agree since he also comes from a maritime region, a sister ship can help find the cause of an incident.

Here is my second question: Could the minister take this opportunity to reopen the investigation on Le Nadine , considering that its sister ship is involved and that allegations were made concerning the captain of that first ship? Since allegations were made to the effect that some information may have been withheld, I ask the Minister of Transport to reopen the inquiry on Le Nadine .

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that we will not rule out any inquiry or possible solution.

As regards the ship which is still in operation, studies or investigations will be conducted and it would certainly make sense to look back at the first incident. The Department of Transport has the responsibility to ensure the safety of those who work in such industries and sectors.

National Public Service Week

[Eugène Bellemare, Liberal, Carleton—Gloucester, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. The minister has been informing us about activities planned to celebrate National Public Service Week.

Does the minister feel comfortable holding such a celebration after the government's extension of the wage freeze, an action the head of the Public Service Alliance of Canada refers to as "hypocritical?"

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I think our employees fully understand the fiscal realities governments in Canada find themselves in.

The need to bring down the deficit and for better control of the debt is what we promised to do in our red book and what we promised to do as a result of the budget and bringing the deficit down to 3 per cent of GDP. This has become a necessary part of that kind of control, and I think it is understood by our employees.

I also think they understand the other part which is to help create and maintain jobs. That is certainly what we wanted to do in the case of the public service.

Having said that, National Public Service Week gives us the opportunity to recognize the valuable contribution our employees are making through the provision of services to the people of the country. The member for Ottawa West initiated it through Parliament some two years ago so that we could recognize the dedication and commitment of our public servants

and at the same time tell Canadians about the valuable services they are providing in a more cost effective fashion.

The Family

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, an Angus Reid poll published in this week's Maclean's affirms that the well-being of the family is important to all Canadians.

Yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance stated that he was satisfied with the way the tax system treats families. Yet in some cases families where one parent stays at home to look after their children can be penalized by as much as $3,000 to $6,000 a year. It may not seem like a lot to him or his cabinet colleagues, but there are many parents who think that $3,000 to $6,000 is a lot of money.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Does he agree that the current tax system discriminates against families that choose to care for their children at home?

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

Mr. Speaker, I answered the question yesterday when it was put to me. I remind the hon. gentleman that the treatment of families is a very difficult aspect of taxation.

If he were to design a tax system I would ask him, and I am sure there is a supplementary question coming, to please state in his supplementary question exactly what he means by family. Maybe he would like to give us a definition.

[The Speaker]

If I understand, I think we have the sides crossed here. I hope the hon. member for Kootenay East will pose a question.

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to pose a question. I recognize that is why this is called question period.

The Angus Reid poll pointed out that many Canadians are concerned about the future of the family. Canadians know that the tax system is discriminating against families that choose to have one parent stay at home.

My question is again for the Prime Minister. Will he instruct his Minister of Finance and human resources department to extend the same tax treatment currently given to those who send their children to day care to those who care for their families at home?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again we have the spectre of a party that has a problem with tax policy. Its members have been saying that they want a tax policy that treats families in a certain way. Yet they will not tell us what they mean by the word or what their position is on it.

They are criticizing the present system, which is an individual taxation system. Since the institution of income tax in Canada taxes have not been family based but individually based. If they are going to take a position that we should have a family based tax system or a family return, they had better think about it very carefully because its costs would be very large.

Gun Control

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice.

During the election campaign last fall, Liberal candidates said they would strengthen gun control laws in Canada and stop the illegal importation of all types of firearms. Last year, nearly 4,000 guns were either stolen or lost in this country, and the smuggling of military and para-military weapons remains a flourishing industry in Quebec and Ontario.

When does the Minister of Justice intend to act on his party's commitment to, as it says in the red book, strengthen gun control and counter the illegal importation of banned and restricted guns? When will the minister decide to act?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, we have started already. First, I have met with colleagues in cabinet to discuss measures that can be taken to deal with the smuggling of illegal weapons into the country.

Second, I have written to my provincial and territorial counterparts to ask them to see to the enforcement of subsection 85(1) of the Criminal Code which deals with minimum penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of offences.

I can tell the hon. member as well that we are considering changes to that section to make the consequences for the criminal misuse of firearms more severe. At the same time, through consultations with caucus and in taking into account all perspectives on the issue, we are going to come forward in the fall of this year with proposals to strengthen the regulation of firearms in the country, balancing always the need for safety in our community with the interests of those who have legitimate uses for rifles in hunting and on the farms.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is directed to the Solicitor General.

In more than 80 per cent of crimes involving the use of guns in Canada, the weapons were smuggled into the country. What concrete measures has the Solicitor General put in place to deal effectively with the illegal importation of guns into Canada?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the national action plan against smuggling, announced and implemented in February, included action not just against cigarettes but also against drugs and firearms.

The additional efforts of the mounted police and other police forces are targeted against the importation of illegal firearms. This effort is continuing and increasing.

Lighthouses

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. The commissioner of the coast guard has stated the annual savings associated with destaffing lighthouse stations on the west coast is $7 million.

On June 2, in an appearance before the Senate transport committee hearings, officials stated the total costs of servicing B.C. light stations at $3.4 million for salaries, operating, maintenance and direct costs.

How can the minister achieve $7 million in savings by cutting a portion of a $3.4 million program that would need major capital spending to implement?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the question of destaffing lighthouses should only be dealt with on the basis of exact and specific savings. It goes far beyond that.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

The question is coming from a party that is always looking for savings but does not want to listen to how we can achieve it.

We are saying that the technology available in Canada and around the world has resulted in the automation of this kind of facility in many countries. In the United States there is one lighthouse left; it is a historic one at Boston. In Australia and in the United Kingdom there has been destaffing of lighthouses. In the maritime provinces of Canada we have destaffed lighthouses.

We understand the impact of that action on the people, the men and women who have worked in this traditional activity for many years.

The Department of Transport has a fiduciary responsibility for the safety and security of those who use the sea as a means of navigation. We will are going to that obligation. We are going to make sure that the Canadian sea navigation system is as good as any in the world. Unfortunately, as we move into the 21st century, some of the practices of the past will have to be changed.

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question.

The local population knows the value of these lighthouse keepers to public safety. Lighthouse keepers are designated as an essential service. In making this designation the federal government has explicitly recognized the crucial role lighthouse keepers play in marine safety.

Could the minister explain how the government on one hand declares lighthouse keepers an essential service and on the other hand announces an intention to eliminate them?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians understand that the lighthouse system, the navigational aid systems that have existed in Canada were based on systems that came in from Europe.

For example, the United Kingdom by 1997 will have completely destaffed its lighthouses. Australia and other seafaring nations around the world have understood the need for change. We recognize how important it is to the people who are directly affected.

If the hon. member is asking whether we are concerned about the impact on the human beings who are going to have their lives disrupted, lose their jobs or be shifted into other occupations, the answer is yes. Our responsibility is to deliver modern technological navigational aids to Canadians and those who use the sea. That is what we are going to do.

It would be far more useful if hon. members opposite, who are always looking at ways to try to improve the efficiency of services provided by Transport Canada at a reasonable price, would support us rather than play petty politics.

Astral

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week the hon. member for Rimouski-Témiscouata mentioned the CRTC's decision to issue two licences for special channels to Astral and said that this company was, and I quote: "-from Toronto".

On behalf of the employees of this important company in the cultural sector, would the Minister of Canadian Heritage clarify

this statement and tell us whether the company is from Toronto or is, as I am inclined to think, a national company with headquarters in Montreal?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the Astral headquarters have always been in Montreal. The company's top management, including the president, are all from Quebec and live in Montreal. Astral employs more than 800 Quebecers and, thanks to federal assistance, it is investing $17 million in a technical centre on Sainte-Catherine street. That is the type of company that the hon. member from Rimouski-Témiscouata judges not to be concerned with Quebec's interests.

I will not hold that against her. I am sure that she is much more familiar with Saint-Germain Street in Rimouski than with Sainte-Catherine Street in Montreal.