Debates of Oct. 24th, 1995

The Economy

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the separatists have been trying to downplay the economic consequences of the instability of the past few days. They have been trying to chalk it up to federalist fearmongering but money markets are not easily swayed by emotion or scare tactics. As the minister says, they react negatively to instability while they react positively to stability, certainty and positive initiatives.

My supplementary question is for the Minister of Finance. Will the minister tell the House what positive steps can be taken to restore the faith of investors and lenders in the future of Canadian federalism?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, fearmongering is the result of those who espouse an option and who are afraid to tell their people the consequences of the option they are espousing.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

However, there is a very clear way. It is the only way to reduce this uncertainty. There is only one way to reassure the markets and that is to unequivocally vote no on October 30.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me there is one other thing that disillusioned Quebecers and sceptical money markets are both missing, which is the good news that Canadian federalism is going to change for the better. Canadians want it to change, the provinces want it to change, reformers in all political parties want Canadian federalism to change for the better.

Quebecers can develop their language, their culture, their resources, their destiny within that federation. They do not need a yes vote and they do not need constitutional lawyers to guarantee that federal security.

Will the finance minister make it clear the federal government is open to substantial positive changes within the federation, changes that do not require constitutional change, so that a no vote can mean both no to separation and no to the status quo?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, I have been attending federal and provincial finance minister meetings over the course of two years. I can say that without any exception at every single one of those meetings,

every finance minister representing his or her province or territory has expressed fundamentally the need for change in the way in which governments relate to each other, the way in which our economy works and the way in which we approach the next century.

Right across the country, in Quebec most certainly but also in western Canada, Ontario and Atlantic Canada, there is a deep desire for change, progress and improvement. We have seen that in the way the government has acted. Every single government department has begun to change the way in which it operates focusing only on the most essential.

We are seeing it in our new trading relationships and in fact the minister is rarely here. Canada is in the process of opening new trading relationships right across the country. I take that back; the minister is always here in spirit.

It is seen in the way the government is working with small business and the great degree of flexibility.

One thing is very clear: we have a choice on October 30 between progress and change for our country or a backward step, as represented by the Yes side.

Canadian Dollar

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The Premier of Quebec and leader of the Yes side clearly expressed his intention to continue to use the Canadian dollar once Quebec achieves sovereignty. He also committed a sovereign Quebec to assuming its share of the enormous Canadian debt.

Does the Minister of Finance not believe that he too should be clear and, rather than allow uncertainty to pervade the financial community, he should indicate that he has in fact prepared a plan "B", should the yes side win on October 30, as it likely will, which he has stubbornly refused to confirm up to now?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing that is clear in what the separatists say about the use of the Canadian dollar is their ambiguity.

A week ago, the Leader of the Opposition said, at the Ahuntsic CEGEP, that he wanted a separate Quebec to use its own money. A year ago, in Portneuf, he asked what point there was in separating if Quebecers were not going to have their own money. In L'Actualité , where it appears in black and white, the Premier of Quebec said that keeping the Canadian dollar was simply a ruse, that he wanted a Quebec dollar. So who is speaking the truth? The Leader of the Opposition today or the Leader of the Opposition last week?

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

Mr. Speaker, that is totally false. The Leader of the Opposition did not say that.

Will the Minister of Finance admit he has a responsibility to make a commitment that, the day after a yes vote, he will argue in favour of negotiations beginning quickly with Quebec to reach a partnership agreement, as the interests of both parties dictate?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, we have said repeatedly that Canada's interest would be to protect its rights within NAFTA. And, in order to protect its rights within NAFTA, Canada could not sign a special agreement with an independent, that is, separated, country. It is not that Canada would not, it is that Canada could not.

Second, is the member saying that the Leader of the Opposition was incorrectly quoted on Canada AM , was incorrectly quoted in Portneuf and that the leader, the Premier, was incorrectly quoted in L'Actualité when, in each instance, they said clearly that they wanted to give up the certainty of the Canadian dollar for the uncertainty of the Quebec dollar?

Justice

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, convicted murderer John Lee received an out of court settlement of $12,000 after suing Correctional Service Canada because he was beaten up in jail. Lee's victims, Mrs. Tutin and the rest of the family, received no compensation and are demanding an explanation from the justice minister why he received this out of court settlement.

Why is the justice minister giving money to murderers?

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

Mr. Speaker, the individual in question sued Correctional Service Canada for negligence after being seized as a hostage by other prisoners and beaten with an iron bar.

He sued for $60,000. When the case came to court, there was a pretrial conference and the presiding judge strongly urged that the case be settled. The case was then settled for $12,000 of which about $8,000 went to the inmate's lawyer.

This was a step that was taken in light of the advice from the presiding judge. The court indicated that a settlement was in order and this is what happened.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, by this action the minister tells an outraged public that crime pays.

There is no justification for rewarding John Lee, a murderer. It is disgusting. A victim's rights must be paramount, yet again the victim's family is forgotten. Justice is when the criminal pays for his crime.

Why does the minister make crime such a profitable business for lawyers and criminals, yet ignores the pain and isolation of the victims?

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

Mr. Speaker, Correctional Service Canada is mandated by the law to carry out the sentence imposed by the court. The courts have held on many occasions that if there is negligence in the way that it is done, then there is a cause of action for negligence.

That is what happened in this case. The inmate was taken as a hostage. He was beaten with an iron bar. He sued for $60,000. The settlement that was advised as a result of a pretrial conference by the presiding judge was not $60,000; it was $12,000.

There is no reward for murder or for acting illegally. It is simply a matter of following the precedents in previous cases.

Canadian Dollar

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The Canadian dollar and the stock market are now on a roller-coaster ride as a result of various national and international factors.

Will the Minister of Finance admit that the financial markets' first source of uncertainty and concern about Canada is the enormous size of its deficit and its growing debt, which will exceed $600 billion next year?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, the last budget was very well received by the international markets. Interest rates have fallen since then. The question we must ask is this: What will occur in four or five days? It is very clear that the referendum debate has had an enormous impact on savings, on our way of life, on job creation in this country.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has a short memory. Two weeks after he tabled his budget, the Bank of Canada rate reached a high of 8.6 per cent, which was higher than the current 7.65 per cent rate, because that budget was poorly received and because government finances were in bad shape. That is the main factor, as Moody's recognized in January.

How can the Minister of Finance give such answers when the Governor of the Bank of Canada himself declared on October 12, 1994: "It is only because of the high debt and deficit levels that political uncertainty has become another concern"?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, if one listens to currency traders and the other parties involved, the cause of the problem becomes very clear. The hon. member and his separatist colleagues are only doing this in order to dodge the real issues, as their option will create political uncertainty, which will lead to economic uncertainty. The hon. member should say that he is in fact endangering Quebecers' and Canadians' savings, jobs and economic development.

If this has nothing to do with recent events, why has the gap between Quebec and Canada savings bonds increased so much in the past few weeks? It is because the Quebec government refuses to accept its responsibilities, which involve managing for its own people?

Gun Control

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the justice minister.

The justice minister recently accused the Ontario solicitor general of pandering to the gun lobby. I have evidence which strongly suggests that the minister is pandering to the Canadian Gun Coalition.

Did the minister provide the Canadian Gun Coalition with copies of letters addressed to him supporting Bill C-68 without the consent of the authors?

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

Mr. Speaker, if anyone is pandering it is members of the third party who see, for some reason which escapes the rest of us, some purpose in pursuing this subject at a time when the majority of Canadians and the House of Commons have spoken. We have already enacted legislation to act on the public will.

As to the question which the hon. member puts, I will take the matter under advisement and investigate the facts. I do not have a factual answer at this moment. I will find one and I will furnish it to the hon. member.

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have in my office a package containing a number of letters addressed to the minister from the city of Gloucester, the city of Nepean and so on.

These letters were sent along with a covering letter signed by Wendy Cuckier of the gun coalition to all Ontario MPPs.

Would the minister explain as soon as possible how the Canadian Gun Coalition obtained these letters which were addressed to the minister?

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

Mr. Speaker, so desperate is the hon. member for anything to argue in his cause, so profoundly devoid of merit is his position on this issue, that he is now pretending to find in the commonplace events which he described some reason to become righteous and indignant.

The fact is that people, organizations, cities and governments across the country have written to me in support of the gun proposals. My office is flooded with faxes and letters in support of Bill C-68. Those people who write in support of the legislation either expressly or implicitly authorize and urge me to spread around their position so that everyone might know the extent to which these proposals are supported.

Canada Social Transfer

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Yesterday, in reference to Canada's future, the minister said that the No side was the one promoting change, as evidenced by the new Canada social transfer.

With this surprising statement, is the Minister of Finance telling Quebecers that, following a No vote on October 30, Canada's proposed change would be the implementation of the social transfer through which Ottawa will, over a two year period, deprive the provinces of 7 billion dollars, including 2.5 billion in the case of Quebec?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance and Minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, first, the figures used by the member are not valid.

Second, the Canada social transfer will provide the provinces with a great deal of flexibility to innovate and find their own solutions to problems.

This initiative truly shows the flexibility of the federal government regarding the involvement of the provinces in social programs. Indeed, what we see here is a fundamental change of attitude for the federal government and for the country, and the member opposite should congratulate us.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand that the Minister of Finance believes that tomorrow's Canada is simply a matter of Ottawa deciding and the provinces paying, as confirmed by the establishment of the new Canada social transfer?