Debates of Oct. 18th, 1995

Referendum Campaign

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

In an effort to add weight to his apocalyptic speech, the Minister of Finance claimed that business in Quebec would no longer be able to export to the United States, as if a veritable great wall of China was going to be built around Quebec.

Will the minister not acknowledge that, the day after a yes vote, American and Canadian businesses will not want to lose their privileged access to Quebec markets and that this unavoidable reality makes the apocalyptic scenario of the Minister of Finance completely ridiculous?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that there is no guarantee at all of this in the event a yes vote.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister should know that the Americans will be looking for stability in their trading with Canada and Quebec the day after a yes vote.

Does the minister not agree that nothing will better ensure the stability that the United States, and Canada as well, will be looking for than Quebec's early entry into NAFTA, as a number of American experts have already pointed out.

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

Mr. Speaker, only a no vote will ensure Canada's economic and commercial stability.

Today, the figures are coming out. In the month of August, Canada had an all time record volume of foreign trade.

In the month of August there was the highest ever increase in real exports from Canada to countries around the world. The best

way to protect the interests of Quebecers and Canadians in selling our goods around the world is to keep Canada together.

Health Care

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the unavoidable reality of health care financing is that federal financial support of health care is declining in absolute terms. Under this government, federal funding has fallen to 22 per cent of the overall health care bill, with $7 billion in cuts in health care transfers projected.

The provinces are wondering, the Canadian people are wondering, how the minister expects the provinces to replace the health care transfers she is withdrawing. She says they cannot charge the patients. She is against facility fees and she does not want private capital involved.

Is the minister therefore proposing that the provinces impose additional health care taxes to replace the federal medicare funding she is withdrawing?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can explain to the hon. member what was contained in last February's budget. We will have a combined transfer called the Canada health and social transfer which, yes, will be cut. It includes not only health care, but many other services.

Let us look at this in the proper context. For instance, in education, social programs and health, expenditures amount to about $100 billion in one year. Next year the cut will be in the neighbourhood of 3 per cent or slightly less. While it will be a challenge to manage this, we do believe that a less than 3 per cent cut is manageable.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I know when the minister took this job they told her there would be no math, but there is.

There are only four sources of health care financing: federal transfers, patient contributions, private capital and provincial tax dollars. The minister is reducing the federal transfers. She is against the patient contributions. She is against the private capital. Therefore the only other source to replace the federal transfers is provincial tax increases.

If the minister is against all these things, in reducing the transfers will she not admit that she is in effect telling the provinces to get the additional revenue through provincial tax increases? Yes or no.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again what has been stated by all health economists across the country: It is not more money that is needed in the system; it is a different way of spending.

What the hon. member is suggesting is the easy way out: a U.S. two-tier style system, one where the rich get the best treatment and for the rest of Canadians thank you, it is too bad.

We are challenging all Canadians to work together to embrace those values which mean that we all get the same kind of access based on need. It is first class service that we want for everyone.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Constitution assigns responsibility for health care to the provinces. The federal government only gets involved through the exercise of its spending power which is now declining. The minister is the first federal Minister of Health to preside over annual reductions in federal transfers to the provinces for health care which is resulting in closing beds, waiting lines and friction with the provinces.

Will the minister acknowledge that there are now distinct limits to the federal power over health care policy? Will she tell the House how those limits will affect her dealings with the provinces of Canada?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to transfer considerable dollars to the provinces. As long as we transfer dollars to the provinces, we can ask that they respect certain principles. We say to them, yes, manage the system. We are giving them as much leeway as possible. We are very flexible but flexibility does not mean tearing up the Canada Health Act.

This government stands for something which is valuable and which all Canadians stand for. Reform Party members are the only ones who believe in tearing up the Canada Health Act.

Stabilization Program

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

After trying in vain for a reimbursement of $127 million for fiscal year 1991-92 under the stabilization program, Quebec is forced to appeal to the Federal Court in order to win its claim. Unperturbed, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs responded cynically and arrogantly that it was perfectly normal for Quebec to apply to the courts. Are we to understand that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs considers it normal for Quebec to have to apply to the courts to obtain what Ottawa has owed it for the past four years? Is this what they call flexible federalism?

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

Mr. Speaker, flexible federalism in recent years has worked very well through negotiations with the various provinces. Specifically, for example, thanks to our action plans with nine provinces in Canada, I have signed-and I will leave it to them to guess which province has not signed-we have reached 64 agreements with the provinces,

including a dozen with Quebec, before the election of the Parti Quebecois, but afterwards, zip.

So, in terms of negotiations, clearly we resolve most of our problems through negotiation. As for this particular problem, Ms. Beaudoin has already come and presented her problem. In our opinion, there is nothing owing, nothing to pay. The regulations are clear: the Province of Quebec, in this case, is not entitled to payment, and we have told Quebec that we were prepared to let it go to court, that we would provide whatever assistance it needed to go to court and that it should get a decision from a court of law. This is the normal process.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the fact there were a number of agreements before the arrival of the Parti Quebecois not mean that the principal supporters of a no vote, with Mr. Johnson as a fine representative in Quebec, accepted any old thing from the federal government? This is why there were agreements. We, however, stand firm-that is the difference.

How does the minister explain Quebec's receiving only 8 per cent to date of the funds from this federal stabilization program, when Ontario has received six times as much, that is, 44 per cent?

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

Mr. Speaker, I should point out that the Province of Quebec has done fairly well in dealings with the federal government, because, for example, according to the study by George Mathews, one of the Le Hir studies, Quebec pays only 21 per cent of federal and other taxes, but receives 26 per cent of spending.

So, when we look at the whole picture, we see clearly that Quebec receives a much larger share for valid reasons. Stabilization payments are made when there is a shortfall. The shortfall depends on all sorts of things that have to do with economic conditions and that are therefore subject to them and not to a system of sharing or of percentages between provinces.

Health Care

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister is fond of saying health care should not depend on the size of one's wallet. What about the size of the waiting list? For a hip replacement in Manitoba it is 61 weeks; 1,200 Ontarians waiting for heart bypasses; a 44-day delay in radiation for breast cancer treatment, three times longer than the medical college says is acceptable. People are dying on these waiting lists.

When will the minister even admit there is a serious problem with the health care system and that she is causing the violation of the principle of accessibility in the Canada Health Act?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I suggest the hon. member deal directly with the provinces when it comes to waiting lists. She used two examples in her question, one respecting heart bypass surgery.

There has been an announcement I believe from Ontario that it will be shortening that list. It will be transferring more money into that area. Recently there was another announcement in Ontario of a new centre for cancer treatment which will shorten the line for breast cancer treatment.

That is what happens in a system that has everyone in it. Public pressure asks governments to transfer funds to where they are most needed. We think that is the way it has to be. That is how we have been well served in the past and that is how we should continue to be served.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, so yes, she is admitting accessibility is being violated and that these lines are getting shorter because people are going to the States, not because the health care system is getting any better.

The health minister should open her eyes and take a good look at the health care system. If she did she would see these massive reductions in hospital closures and Canadians buying American waiting list insurance to stay alive. This is ridiculous.

What specific action does she plan to take to reduce the waiting lists to ensure Canadians are getting the most advanced, the most effective and the most timely medical attention available?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I answered that question in my previous answer. I remind the hon. member our medicare system has received applause from around the world because it is first class.

The idea that we should move to a U.S. style two-tier system is unacceptable to every member of my caucus. All the premiers say they support the Canada Health Act. Ministers of health from across the provinces support the Canada Health Act. Medical associations, nurses associations, hospital associations and the people of Canada support the Canada Health Act. The only exception is the Reform Party.

Child Care Services

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

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

It seems that it is the minister's intention to release a national child care strategy within a few weeks. Here again, this is a reform that is ready but will not be made public until after the referendum.

Are we to understand that the reason for the minister's refusal to make his strategy on child care services known before the referendum is to avoid having to confirm his intention of imposing national standards on Quebec in an area of provincial jurisdiction?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member for Mercier is in a bit of a time warp in a number of respects. We have already indicated to the provinces and to other partners that we are prepared to cost share child care. We had a major meeting of deputies almost a year ago at which we offered to pay 50 per cent of the cost of new spaces.

Fortunately a very important initiative was taken up by the First Nations people. We are almost ready to conclude an agreement with the First Nations Assembly for 6,000 new child care spaces sponsored by our First Nations people. We hope to have that concluded in a couple of weeks.

Because certain provinces are now engaging in restricting child care, I simply wrote to the Ontario minister to remind him the federal government is willing to be a partner in sharing the cost of child care so these spaces do not have to be closed.

I hope the hon. member will help carry that message because child care is very important to many Canadians.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is quick with his irony, but he has not answered the question.

Is he committed to not making Quebec's compliance with federal standards a condition for funding of child care services?

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

Mr. Speaker, we made it very clear that we are prepared to provide cost sharing over a five-year period and that it is the jurisdiction of the provinces to decide how that money would be allocated. I am simply waiting for a response. I am not trying to be quick witted but it takes effort when dealing with Bloc questions.

The provinces make these decisions. I want to ensure we can provide, as we do in many other areas, a national response so we can share and pool our resources to ensure areas with fewer resources are considered. That is why I took some interest today in the minister of employment in Quebec when she talked about totally fragmenting the national unemployment insurance service for Quebecers. It would put at risk thousands upon thousands of Quebec workers who would no longer have access to a national unemployment insurance program.

Health Care

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister does not want U.S. style health care and that is good; neither do we. However, we want what Canadians want, choice in health care as in Sweden, Denmark, England and many other countries. Those countries all respect choice.

Why will the health minister not offer Canadians choice beyond medicare?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have the best choice of any country in the world. They get the best services no matter who they are, no matter where they live, whether or not they have money.

It is determined by the degree or the severity of their needs. That is the way it should be. That is the way Canadians want it.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there are only three countries in the world that do not offer choice beyond medicare: North Korea, Cuba and now Canada, thanks to the health minister.

Will the minister listen to the appeal of Canadians for choices beyond cutbacks, for choices beyond waiting lists, for choices beyond line up, shut up and check out?