Debates of Dec. 6th, 1995

Underground Economy

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Typically, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talks about off the record information.

We in Revenue Canada have a number of situations which can be difficult. One example is the transport of grains across the border to the United States where our customs officers are told not to stand in the way of a speeding truck. No, they take the licence number and we arrest the truck later. That is the type of situation we have there which of course the Reform Party, which approves of running the border, thinks is a good thing.

With respect to other situations in which there could be risk to our officials, we instruct them not to take unnecessary risks. We

instruct them to proceed with their work. We certainly do not instruct them, as the hon. member has claimed, to avoid any visible minorities.

Unemployment Insurance Reform

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. By lowering the maximum insurable earnings, the government is making its most significant tax reduction, that is $900 million, to the benefit of high income earners. At the same time, it is reducing the benefits paid to seasonal workers while collecting premiums from workers who hold precarious jobs.

Will the minister admit that, contrary to his claim that this reform is fair, the new proposed system is regressive and unfair, in that it gives some of the benefits taken away from the poor to those who have stable and well paid jobs?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a habit of being able to understand only half the equation.

The other half of the equation is that higher income earners will therefore have fewer benefits because they pay less of a premium. The reason is the maximum insurable earning has gone up to 40 per cent higher than the average industrial wage. The recommendation of both the seasonal task force and the House of Commons is that it should be frozen or brought down because it far exceeded what was required and therefore much higher payments were going out to those at higher income levels. That is the reason we brought in the reform. It was to be fair.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the other half of the equation is that the minister is taking money from people who were not contributing before. Will the minister recognize that it is unfair to have high income earners pay lower UI premiums, while part time workers who put in less than ten hours per week will now have to pay premiums, even though they will not be eligible to collect UI benefits?

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

Mr. Speaker, this poor member has it so totally wrong. It is incredible how mistaken he really is. The reality is we have extended coverage to part time workers.

More workers at part time levels will now have the opportunity to be extended. If they are not eligible we offer a full rebate of their premiums up to $2,000. Obviously this member cannot read.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday the minister of human resources announced two mega training programs, one for $800 million and the other for $300 million.

Federal training programs have proven a colossal failure. The auditor general says regional development programs do not create jobs, except of course for federal bureaucrats.

Why is the minister throwing over a billion dollars into more wasteful training programs when the auditor general says the programs will not create jobs?

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

Mr. Speaker, first let me make a correction in the statement of the hon. member. The employment measures are not just for training. They are directed specifically at a number of tools to help people get back into the workforce.

Self-employment is a good example. Over the past two years in a number of test projects across the country we have been able to take people on the unemployment insurance system and help them start their own business, thereby creating a job for themselves and a job for another person. Sixty thousand jobs have been created by one of the tools we included in that package.

Another tool is the use of a wage supplement which again helps small business people to create tools. We have evaluated specifically that in these measures we can add up to 15 additional weeks of work and, more important, up to $5,000 additional income for the people who use these proposals under our measures. That seems to me an awfully good investment.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about test projects. I am talking about creating sustainable long term jobs, and not with these billion dollar boondoggle projects.

In his last report the auditor general said there is absolutely no evidence that training is accompanied by new jobs. The $1.1 billion needed for these wasteful programs will come at the expense of part time workers.

When the auditor general has said these training programs will fail, why is the government hammering part timers to the tune of a billion dollars to pour into its bottomless pit of so-called job creation, mega training programs?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote an authority whom the hon. member might accept as even more valid than the auditor general: the member for Calgary Southeast herself.

She wrote to me on April 10 saying the community of Calgary Southeast has a proposed training centre. It is well known that this area is Calgary's home to many who are unemployed, struggling and lacking in ability.

I encourage her to consider supporting this training project and help in the revitalization of Calgary Southeast. It seems to me the member for Calgary Southeast wanted training programs for members of her riding. Why does she not want them for the rest of Canadians?

Standing Committee On Canadian Heritage

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Témiscouata, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Yesterday, on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, government members were saying that there was no Quebec culture, that there was only a single and broad Canadian culture. At the same time, they were sharply criticizing Telefilm Canada for funding sovereignist Quebec artists.

Does the Prime Minister agree with the members of his caucus, who say that there is only one culture in Canada and that Telefilm Canada must now fund artists according to their political opinion?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there is a French culture in Canada, which is Canadian. It is in Quebec primarily, but I think the culture of the Acadians and Antonine Maillet forms part of the French culture, and this culture is not necessarily Quebec culture.

So, when we talk about a Canadian culture, it may be of French or English expression. This morning I spent time with Canadian natives, who were having ceremonies. They too have a culture, which is entirely their own, but which is Canadian too, because it covers all of Canada. There are people of this culture in British Columbia, in Quebec and in the maritimes.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Témiscouata, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the cat is finally out of the bag. The Prime Minister, a Quebecer, has just denied his own culture. Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that his fine speeches in recent weeks on the distinct nature of Quebec society were nothing more than pure hypocrisy, since he did not manage even to convince-

[The Speaker]

My dear colleagues, I would ask you once again not to use words that incite on both sides. I would again ask the hon. member to carefully choose and use her words, as I have

before. I would ask you not to use the word "hypocrite". Now, if the hon. member would put her question.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Témiscouata, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will phrase my question using the same word the Prime Minister used. Will he acknowledge, since he has not even managed to convince the members of his own caucus that Quebecers are a people, that there is a distinct culture and that the federal government must not lose sight of this in implementing its programs?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I return to my argument. French culture is not found only in Quebec. English culture is also found in Quebec. Gabrielle Roy came from St. Boniface, Manitoba, and she is considered one of French Canadian literature's finest. Her works continue to be used today in schools in Quebec. That is just to show the quality. I think that the member for Québec-Est, who was born in Penetanguishene, learned French culture and the French language in Ontario, and he is not any less French, because he is with the Bloc today.

What I am saying, and I have a number of examples, is that French culture may be found throughout Canada, and that English culture may be found in Quebec. We cannot say that Quebec is strictly French, because all sorts of people live in Quebec. There are a lot of proud francophones living outside Quebec.

Gun Control

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Saint-Denis, QC]

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

The passage of Bill C-68 marked an historical moment for Canada and for the families of the 14 École Polytechnique victims.

Bill C-68 is the greatest memorial this government could have erected to the young women and their families. In the spirit of this national day of remembrance and action on violence against women, what specifically does the minister feel Bill C-68 will accomplish?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by pointing out the important contribution made by those who lost family members in the Montreal tragedy six years ago today.

The fact is that if it were not for the commitment and the hard work and perseverance of the families of those victims, this important matter would not have found its way to the top of the national agenda. We are in their debt for the work they did to ensure the passage of the bill.

In specific response to the question put by the hon. member, whose own work was so important in this regard, may I emphasize that every year in Canada some 13,000 orders are made in the courts of the country prohibiting people from having firearms because they have shown a propensity for violence. Too often that violence occurs in the context of the home. By a margin of two to one, when men kill women in the home the weapon of choice is a firearm, and 80 per cent of the time it is a rifle or a shotgun. It is almost always legally owned.

The registration system that is provided for in this bill will permit police to enforce those orders to remove firearms and save lives. That is only one of the ways this bill will help in the effort we must make continuously to deal with violence by men against women.

Canadian Wheat Board

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today the results of the Alberta plebiscite on producer exports for wheat and barley were released. Sixty-six per cent of barley producers and 62 per cent of wheat producers, a good strong majority, voted for choice and options to export these grains outside Canadian Wheat Board jurisdiction.

Will the agriculture minister respect farmers' choice and options to export their own wheat and barley?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the members opposite in the industry to keep the results of the plebiscite that was announced today in perspective.

As far as the results, that plebiscite gives us the opinions of a number of producers on an issue in one province. It is a wide-ranging issue that affects all of western Canada. The number of producers who expressed their view are just a little over 10 per cent of all the grain producers with permit books in western Canada.

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the agriculture minister and the Prime Minister seem to forget that a promise made is a debt unpaid.

Two years ago both the minister and the Prime Minister promised prairie farmers a producer plebiscite on grain marketing. It only took a few weeks for the Prime Minister to make good on

commitments to the separatists in Quebec and now this government is ramrodding Quebec appeasement legislation through the House. Are prairie farmers second class citizens to the separatists in Quebec?

I ask the Prime Minister: Will he fulfil his own promise today and commit his agriculture minister to hold a prairie-wide binding referendum on grain marketing?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that before he makes a statement on what the Prime Minister said, he should have his facts straight. I do not recall the hon. member being present when the Prime Minister made that statement. I was.

The Prime Minister at that time said the minister is following through on that. The minister has put in place a process called the western grain marketing panel to consult with members, participants, and all stakeholders in the western grain industry before the consideration of any changes, if there were ever to be changes, to the western grain marketing system.

Unemployment Insurance Reform

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the secretary of state for the status of women.

In the speech she gave at the 4th world conference on women, the hon. secretary of state demanded equal rights for all women. At the same time, she presented to the whole world the famous plan for equality between the sexes concocted by her government to achieve this noble objective.

Since it is acknowledged that the campaign against violence can only succeed if women achieve economic equality, can the secretary of state tell us if her government has taken its famous plan for equality between the sexes into account in its UI reform?

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

Mr. Speaker, yes, we have certainly conducted an in depth analysis of all the data affecting the lives of women and men to determine the impact of all the actions taken by the Minister of Human Resources Development in this regard.

I must also tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we considered the fact that, in the end, taking every hour worked into account is a winning proposition for women. I am proud of what we have done.

Furthermore, our government's decisions affecting poor families and children are an important part of our initiatives. We should all be proud and give the right information on what our party has done in this regard.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question.

Since we know that 70 per cent of part time workers are women and that the UI reform will have a very negative impact on them, will the secretary of state admit that her famous plan for equality between the sexes simply does not work and is a total failure?

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

No, Mr. Speaker, I do not acknowledge these facts, which are neither current nor true. Our minister has responded to this line of inquiry several times by showing how women in part time and seasonal jobs will fare better in relation to the number of hours worked both for the well-being of their society and for their own families.

I think my colleague would be well-advised to look at the data more closely; she would be very happy with the results.