Debates of Feb. 13th, 1995

Byelections

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, as I speak three byelections are happening in Canada. I would like to congratulate the three excellent Reform candidates and their teams for the quality campaigns they have undertaken for Reform and against higher taxes and Liberal government mismanagement.

In Brome-Missisquoi, Line Maheux showed Quebecers a better option than the status quo, do nothing approach of the Liberals or the pack up and quit proposal of the Bloc.

In St. Henri-Westmount, Gaétan Morency was the only candidate who correctly identified Montreal's depressed economy as being the result of high taxes which lead to fewer jobs. Morency proclaimed that red book economics are a disaster in Montreal.

Here in Ottawa-Vanier, Kevin Gaudet is catching the eyes of worried voters who know that the Liberals tax everybody for all their worth and make cuts only at the bottom to save their own hides.

Thank you, Maheux, Morency and Gaudet for taking Reform another step closer to sweeping out the Conservative-Liberal debris so that we can build a new and better Canada.

Quebec Sovereignty

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

Mr. Speaker, the spokespersons for the sovereignty commissions are increasingly confusing Quebecers.

Mrs. Monique Vézina, chair of the seniors' commission, stated in Hull last Thursday that the federal government would continue to pay pension benefits to federal public servants after Quebec's independence.

That statement contradicts what the question and answers manual for perfect sovereignists says. On page 23 of the separatist booklet it says that the Quebec government, not the federal government, will clearly promise to acknowledge the vested rights of federal employees from Quebec, including their accumulated rights to a pension.

Today, federal public servants from the Quebec side of the Outaouais region are left wondering whether the many contradictory promises they have been made will ultimately be worth anything.

It is the duty of the PQ and the Bloc to tell federal public servants from Quebec the truth.

Tourism

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, tourism is the world's fourth largest industry. To promote the growth of Canada's tourism, the Minister of Industry recently announced $50 million of federal funding for the National Tourism Commission, chaired by a former member for London West, the hon. Judd Buchanan.

A welcomed partnership between industry experts and federal, provincial and territorial governments, this commission will work to improve Canada's performance in this promising segment of our national economy.

Canadian tourism has the potential to be our richest resource. We have a beautiful country to enjoy and to share with our visitors. It is time to reverse the tourism deficit which amounted $7.9 billion in 1993. Tourism creates jobs for Canadians; more than 590,000 in over 60,000 businesses across the country.

I was grateful for my first employment which was in the tourism industry. Colleagues should assist tourism. Canadian tourism can be part of the good news.

The Economy

[Bob Ringma, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend I was happy to read the details of another Reform convert.

The premier of British Columbia is now talking like a responsible Reform member as he spells out $9.3 billion in federal spending reductions. Many of these ideas were borrowed from Reform, such as the elimination of regional development departments and transport subsidies.

While it is true the premier has not shown the same type of financial restraint in dealing with B.C.'s deficit problem, it is encouraging to note he appears to have had a change of heart.

Reformers and the premier of British Columbia are advocating a plan of sound spending cuts and zero tax increases to get the country back on the road to fiscal health. If we can now drag the government and other provincial players on to the Team Canada deficit reduction bandwagon, we will be sending a strong message of unity and commitment to international financial institutions.

National Defence

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, following the recent revelations concerning the existence of a third videotape involving the airborne regiment in Petawawa, the minister of defence gave one press conference after another and said that the situation was totally bizarre. Obviously overtaken by the events, the minister has lost control of his department.

Now that the minister has decided to dismantle the 2nd Airborne Regiment, are we to understand that the removal of Major-General Vernon, who was designated as scapegoat, constitutes phase II of the minister's strategy to bury the Petawawa powder keg without getting to the bottom of this matter?

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

Mr. Speaker, the chief of defence staff today relieved Major-General Vernon of all of his responsibilities as commander, land forces command which is in effect Ontario central command.

He did this because General Vernon was the author of a report to the chief of the army, Lieutenant-General Reay, to General de Chastelain and myself concerning the activities of the airborne regiment with respect to what has become known as the second video.

The three of us were misled. As a result the chief of defence staff, who is the one responsible for all disciplinary measures within the Canadian Armed Forces, has taken the appropriate action today.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, can the minister of defence tell us if the decision to relieve Major-General Vernon of his duties is based solely on the fact that he played down the contents of the third videotape or if, following his recent investigation, the minister has learned other, more serious facts of which he had not been informed?

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

Mr. Speaker, I answered that question. I quote from the chief of defence staff that the reason General Vernon was removed from his duties was because the report, which I have just mentioned, contains inaccurate and misleading information that caused the chief of defence staff to misinform the Minister of National Defence.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, can the minister of defence tell us if, in addition to removing Major-General Vernon, the minister intends to take disciplinary measures against other Petawawa officers, including those who attended or took part in the events recorded on the videotapes?

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

Mr. Speaker, all of the activities contained in the videotapes with respect to the airborne regiment are now being investigated by the military police.

Social Programs

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. In anticipation of the federal-provincial meeting of finance ministers scheduled for tomorrow, the provinces have cautioned Ottawa against the temptation to cut federal transfer payments to the provinces, thus irresponsibly shovelling its deficit into their back yards. The provinces clearly refuse to be left holding the bag as Ottawa withdraws its financial support for social programs.

Will the Minister of Finance undertake tomorrow to transfer to the provinces not only the responsibility for social programs, but also adequate fiscal resources to fund these programs?

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

Mr. Speaker, I discussed with the provincial finance ministers ages ago the fact that we would not do as the previous government did and cause surprises. And we certainly have no intention of causing any surprises tomorrow.

We have a deficit at the national level. The provinces certainly realize it and they have asked us to really start cutting from our end, which we intend to do. I think the system needs to be changed at the national level, at the provincial level. Everybody agrees on this and that is what we intend to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Finance recognize that, as the Saskatchewan finance minister suggested, it would be hard and appalling for Ottawa, following an eventual withdrawal, to ask the provinces to cut social program spending while at the same time imposing national or Canada-wide standards, whatever they are called?

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

Mr. Speaker, I must tell you that the vast majority of provinces certainly realize the situation this government is in. In fact, several of them are facing exactly the same situation. But at the same time I think there is a realization that we all have to work together.

Allow me to quote the Premier of Newfoundland, who said this morning that potential cuts in transfer payments worried him, but that he would support these cuts because what matters above all is that the national government put its fiscal house in order. I think that Mr. Wells is voicing an opinion that I have heard from the vast majority of the other provinces.

The Budget

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in an interview over the weekend, the finance minister said that any tax hikes in this month's budget will be taken from the top first. What Canadians want is for the government to start at the top with spending cuts, not tax increases.

For example, the government is going to spend $12 million to build an office tower in Sault Ste. Marie, a city that already has one of the highest vacancy rates in the country.

Why does the finance minister continue to propose tax increases when there is still so much visible waste and inefficiency in government spending? Why not wring that inefficiency and waste out of the government before they wring more dollars out of taxpayers' pockets?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is very conscious of the degree to which Canadians feel they bear too great a tax burden.

The government is also very much aware of the degree of waste that exists in any large institution and certainly within the institution of government. That is why over the course of the last budget we did not increase taxes. It is the first time in a long time that has happened.

It is also the reason the Minister responsible for Public Service Renewal has worked so hard along with the President of the Treasury Board to eliminate waste in the operations of government and why we have been able to make, over the course of the year, a series of announcements on the elimination of boards and commissions that have waste.

This is one case where action speaks louder than words. We have demonstrated very strong action.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this wringing of waste has a long way to go. Twelve million dollars for an office building in Sault Ste. Marie is just the tip of the iceberg. Many federal bureaucrats are trying to blow out their remaining budgets before the end of the fiscal year.

Both the department of furniture and oceans and the department of public works are spending $10 million on unnecessary computers-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

I am sure the hon. member inadvertently mentioned another department.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the department of public works are spending close to $10 million on unnecessary computer upgrades; over $15 million is earmarked for getting a fax machine on virtually every public servant's desk. That is $37 million in unnecessary expenditures right there.

My question is for finance minister. In the name of common sense and in the name of taxpayer relief, will the finance minister order an immediate freeze on such unnecessary capital expenditures until the budget is balanced?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon.

member, and this will become very clear in the budget, that both the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the minister of public works have gone at their departments very hard in terms of waste and the kind of unfortunate management practices they inherited from a previous government.

I hope the leader of the third party will support all members of cabinet who have gone at their departments tooth and comb, line by line, to eliminate the kind of waste that we inherited as a result of the activities of the previous government.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if the ministers are going after waste and inefficiency with the vigour that the finance minister suggests, why do we continually, day after day, see these illustrations such as the office building in Sault Ste. Marie and the unnecessary computer expenditures?

If there has been this huge, deep, passionate commitment to eliminating waste, why do these instances continue to show themselves day after day after day?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, to be an effective member of Parliament one must have all the facts.

The hon. member opposite has forgotten to share with the House the fact that the building which is to be constructed in Sault Ste. Marie will save the taxpayers of Canada $500,000 per year in operating costs.

It is becoming a common occurrence with the hon. member that he stands in his place and gives certain information which I would suggest is somewhat inaccurate. The software to which the hon. member refers will save the government $4.6 million.

Foreign Policy

[André Caron, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In its statement of policy last week, the government set human rights as a matter for priority action in its foreign policy. It is therefore not clear why Canada is not speaking out on the intensified intervention of the Mexican army in Chiapas.

How could the Canadian government close its eyes to what is happening in Mexico, one of its principal economic partners, as the army is bombarding civilian groups in an attempt to stop the Zapatista movement?

[André Ouellet, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the government's eyes are wide open and watching the events in Mexico very closely. Clearly, we do not want this situation to end in reprehensible acts of violence. We have always advocated moderation and particularly efforts at conciliation between the parties in order to bring about a peaceful solution to the crisis in Chiapas.

The Canadian government's position is well known, and I cannot accept the comments by the hon. member, who is well aware of the government's position and is trying to make political points over a very serious situation.