Debates of Nov. 20th, 1995

Fisheries

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans is practising for a new job: minister of taxation. His new access fees will dramatically increase licence costs, in some cases from $30 a year to $9,000 a year.

Does the minister not understand that his new access fees pose a far greater threat to fishermen than Spanish trawlers? The Spanish will go away, but these taxes will be here forever.

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I would certainly hear the view of the hon. member on what he thinks the access fees should be because the Reform Party consistently tells the House that the government has to do more to responsibly control expenditures to get the deficit under control.

There are fishermen today-

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Cut the spending.

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Hon. members want to hear and I know the Reform Party is truly interested in a responsible exchange.

There are fishermen today who pay $10 for a licence and make upwards of $1 million in income. Is the hon. member suggesting that is reasonable? Others pay $30 for a licence fee, the case in point which the hon. member mentioned, and make incomes of $500,000, $600,000, $700,000 and $800,000.

We in this party believe that if a person's income is low, the access fee should be low, and if their income is high, they should pay fair rent on the privilege of the income.

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, any fishermen who are making the profits which the minister is talking about are paying income tax.

Every year the minister plans to suck another $50 million out of Canadian fishermen by these access fees. This intolerable tax increase will lead to the extermination of family owned businesses. Not just the little fish, but the little fisherman is hanging on by his fingernails. Will the "taxinator" trash the tax?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to hanging on to a shred of credibility, the hon. member has no fingernails.

When it comes to presenting a fair licensing regime to ensure that fishermen who are in difficult circumstances are not impacted, we brought that forward. We put in place a licence freeze for all of those affected by the groundfish crisis. We have already said to the fishermen in British Columbia who have been affected by the decline in salmon runs that there will be no dramatic increase in fees. We are saying to those who make very large incomes in a way which is progressive and fair that they ought to pay a little more for the privilege of those very large incomes.

If the hon. member is serious about speaking with authority for fishermen, he ought to do a little more homework on the wharf before he comes here to make a fool of himself in the House.

Communications Security Establishment

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Acting Prime Minister.

Last week, a former employee of the Communications Security Establishment shed some light on the centre's dubious spying activities. According to Jane Shorten, the CSE targets the communications of our trading partners, including, Mexico and South Korea, and in so doing, spies on Canadian citizens.

Would the government confirm Ms. Shorten's allegations to the effect that the CSE eavesdrops on the communications of friendly countries and the telephone conversations of Canadian citizens?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the government does not comment on allegations with respect to national security or intelligence.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is not the first time this has happened and the government has been questioned on the subject, but we always get the same answers.

How can we believe government statements on the subject when there is no mechanism for parliamentary oversight of CSE activities, as exists, to a minimal extent but at least it exists, in the case of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, a motion put forward by the member for Scarborough-Rouge River to create a parliamentary oversight mechanism for the CSE was passed by the House.

We have been holding consultations on that with interested parties and we hope to move very quickly to implement the contents of the motion.

Fisheries

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in addition to slapping the fishing industry with outrageous tax increases, the minister is planning to rake further millions into his department by taxing the users of Canada's ice free ports for ice-breaking services.

Will the minister today assure the people of Saint John and Halifax that he will not tax them for services they do not need?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that has the responsibility for coast guard is currently engaged in a broad consultative process to ensure that fees for service are imposed on a fair and reasonable basis.

For the member to stand to single out one or two harbours and to ask for a response today in advance of the end of the consultation is not only not useful but not a fair way to proceed.

The Canadian Coast Guard will go on doing an excellent job for Canadians who require the services and will do so in a manner in so far as fees are concerned that is a fair and reasonable, and the member knows that.

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is hardly being fair and reasonable with Atlantic Canadians. He says he wants Atlantic Canada to prosper yet he now proposes to tax away the critical commercial advantage of ice free ports.

Will the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans deep six any proposals to rob Atlantic Canadians of this important economic advantage and axe his tax?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, there is a Newfoundland expression that means you have a lot of nerve: you have to have the face of a robber's horse for a Reform Party member to stand and pretend to give a whit about Atlantic Canada.

This is the party that would be overly happy if we could give everybody in Atlantic Canada what it would call a national deficit fare. It wants to give everybody a one-way ticket to somewhere else.

We are bringing in policies that generate productivity in Atlantic Canada, create new wealth, treat people fairly and are designed to ensure the population is maintained and grows. The Reform Party has no lesson to give those of us on this side of the House about the reality of Atlantic Canada.

[Derek Wells, Liberal, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. The Reform Party appears to be protecting fishers making a huge income from paying their fair share. I am interested as well in smaller inshore fishermen.

In instances where the fee is shown to be inequitable, would the minister be prepared to make changes?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, unlike members opposite who bellow from several thousand miles away, I happen to know that this member had a round table in his constituency on the future of the fishery. He took the trouble to actually listen to fishermen before coming to the House of Commons to ask questions.

I understand fishermen are saying that they are prepared to pay a fair share and pay their own way, providing the system is fair and equitable.

If changes can be made that make the system more fair and more equitable, and if that means rewriting portions of what we proposed based on genuine consultation with genuine fishermen who genuinely want to pay their own way, we will do it, of course.

Social Assistance

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

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

The Quebec government has announced that it will have to cut its social assistance program by $86 million, given the major impact that the federal government's February 1994 UI reform has had on welfare rolls.

Does the minister recognize that his first UI reform has forced many unemployed people onto welfare and that he is responsible for the significant rise in the cost of social assistance programs?

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind the hon. member that we take very seriously the condition and state of people on social assistance.

That is one reason why in the province of Quebec we pay 50 per cent of the full cost of all social assistance recipients. If we look at the actual figures and not the made up figures, in the changeover from 1994-95 to this year there has been an increase of transfers from the federal level of $220 million to the province of Quebec under the EPF, CAP and equalization.

Therefore, when the minister from Quebec starts making the charges that somehow the federal government is responsible, I suggest the Quebec minister of social services go back and look at their own books.

We are trying to do our best to help those people. Delay and misinformation around the country do not help.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, is the minister trying to wash his hands of the whole thing? This Parliament has approved $2.4 billion in cuts to unemployment insurance for all of Canada this year, including $735 million in Quebec. Do you think this has no effect on the men, women and young people who end up on welfare?

Will the minister admit that the next UI reform, which he is getting ready to table in the coming weeks, will aggravate the Quebec government's financial problems by forcing even more unemployed people onto welfare?

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

Mr. Speaker, it sounds to me like the beginning of a leadership speech.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Putting that aside for the moment, I point out to the hon. member again a number of very important facts. It is important to get the facts out in this case.

Under the changes we made to the Unemployment Insurance Act there is the special provision of an additional $1,000 for those on low income drawing unemployment insurance benefits. In fact 130,000 low income UI claimants were able to draw upon that additional $1,000.

Furthermore, last summer we signed a special agreement with the Government of Quebec to provide $80 million to the APPORT program to help those on social assistance get training, get education and go back to work.

One of the primary objectives in terms of the new employment insurance program mentioned by the Prime Minister two weeks ago is to make sure there is a strong guarantee of protection of income for those who are at the lowest income level.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in Edmonton the CBC French station has an audience of 300 people. In Quebec City the English CBC station has 1,700 viewers and in Regina it has an entire station dedicated to 40 viewers. That works out to about $230,000 per viewer.

Given these outrageous spending figures, why is the CBC continuing to fund these stations? When will the government end this ridiculous waste of taxpayers' dollars?

[Sheila Finestone, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, I remind my hon. colleague that Canadians of both official languages have responsibilities to each other, to know each other, to see each other and to hear from each other. Whether it is in French in Alberta or English in Montreal or wherever it may be, the country has facilities for bilingual services. When one is travelling one should be able to hear one's own language and one's own culture wherever one is.

As the hon. member knows, there are more than just French speaking people who listen to Radio-Canada. There are also anglophones who listen to it. I am a very good example.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is an excellent example, I am sure.

The point being that there are already all kinds of services provided through cable and over satellite. We do not need dedicated stations in all these communities.

The CBC, Telefilm Canada and the NFB are undergoing a mandate review and will be reporting to the minister soon. The people who should be giving this mandate are the taxpayers of the country. They already understand that the level of funding in any public enterprise should be based on how many people in this case are viewing it.

Is the government prepared to cut spending for services that taxpayers do not support? If so, will it direct the CBC to make its cuts accordingly?