Debates of Feb. 16th, 1995

Regional Development

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. If it is clear, given that Quebec has adopted a general strategy for regional development, including assistance to businesses, would the minister not agree that, in the interest of avoiding all duplication and overlap, as the Prime Minister has said, he must recognize Quebec as the sole authority in terms of regional development, including assistance to businesses?

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

Mr. Speaker, not only do I disagree with the hon. member's hypothesis, but I say that, having discussed the matter with the current Government of Quebec, the current government does not agree with the hon. member's hypothesis.

Railway Safety

[Georgette Sheridan, Liberal, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

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

Yesterday, he tabled a report entitled "On Track" from the committee reviewing the Railway Safety Act. Can the minister tell us when he will be in a position to respond to the report's recommendations?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has mentioned a very major report

that is quite long. First off, I would like to thank those who wrote it. The government is currently preparing its response to the many recommendations, a good number of which are very broad in scope, and we should be able to publish that response within 90 days.

Immigration

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on September 24 of last year in my constituency, Catherine Evenson, a beautiful young lady who was confined to a wheelchair, was raped in her home. The man facing rape charges is a refugee and is now trying to cement his stay in Canada by applying for permanent resident status.

Will the minister of immigration intervene in this case and ensure that no permanent status in Canada is considered until the case is heard and the verdict is handed down?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I have no specific details of the case. I appreciate the hon. member raising it. I will give her my word that certainly I will have officials look into the case.

It is also a good reason, rather than simply dealing with individual cases, to have had Bill C-44 approved at third reading. It attempts to make the system better so that we minimize any such horrible cases we hear about.

I was somewhat distraught that the Reform Party, which relishes bringing case after case to the floor of the House of Commons, did not see fit to support Bill C-44.

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I assure the minister that I have been in constant contact with his office on the matter as well as with the Solicitor General's office. I also stress that I am assured Bill C-44 will do nothing to help this case at all.

I thank the minister for his response. I assure him that today this young woman and her family are listening to and watching these proceedings. Would the minister please notify me as soon as a decision is made?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my first answer, I would be happy to look into the file. I can appreciate that the hon. member has been in touch with officials of my department, but as any member can appreciate no minister can be on top of the thousands of cases across the country.

The hon. member, with all due respect, is absolutely wrong if she and her colleagues believe that Bill C-44 will not improve the system's capacity to keep those individuals from getting protection and allowing those legitimate cases to be accepted in our system. I ask her and her colleagues to change their minds about Bill C-44 because it would help Canadians and the system.

Official Languages

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. The Official Languages Commissioner published a study this morning on services in the minority official language offered to the public in designated federal offices. Among other things, the study found that in Quebec, service in English is available 98.8 per cent of the time, while in the rest of Canada, 28 per cent of all designated offices still do not provide service in French.

How can the President of the Treasury Board justify that, more than two years after a regulation was passed on the issue, over one in four francophones outside of Quebec are unable to obtain federal services in their language?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, even while the official languages commissioner was undertaking his survey the Treasury Board was consulting with managers in offices across the country to help ensure that they were carrying out their obligations under the Official Languages Act.

Furthermore, we have assembled information that we have provided to Canadians through minority language newspapers across the country so that they know where to find the offices and who to contact to be able to get services in the language of their choice.

Finally, let me say that this government is solidly committed to quality services in the official language of choice by Canadians and in meeting its obligations under the Official Languages Act.

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given the alarming increase in the assimilation rate of francophone and Acadian communities in Canada, how can the minister justify the slow pace with which the government has made its services available to francophones in the language of their choice? Is bilingualism a sham?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the official languages commissioner said that in 79 per cent of cases across the country the service was available and that 92 per cent of the time it was good quality service that was being provided.

We are not satisfied with those numbers. We are not satisfied with anything short of 100 per cent in meeting our targets under the Official Languages Act.

Gun Control

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice could not or would not answer how a national gun registry program would reduce crime. If the minister could show this evidence to support registration, most Canadians would probably support it.

Will the minister provide this House with evidence that shows how a national gun registry will save lives and reduce the criminal use of firearms in our communities?

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

Mr. Speaker, if anyone has questions to answer about their position on gun registration surely it is the Reform Party of Canada. The very party that styles itself as the party of law and order opposes a measure that the police want in this country. The very party that styles itself as the party of the people is against a measure that poll after poll shows is supported by the vast majority of Canadians.

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, for Canadians who are concerned about the cost of firearms registration and for Canadians who are concerned about crime on the streets using firearms, would the minister give them the statistics that confirm a national firearms registration program will save lives and will reduce the criminal use of firearms?

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

Mr. Speaker, time and again the police chiefs of this country tell us that a registry system will help us stop the traffic in illegal arms at the border. It will help us ensure that the number of firearms lost and stolen every year and end up in the hands of criminals is reduced. Time and again they tell us they need registration to enforce court orders that prohibit people convicted of crimes of violence from possessing firearms. I will take the word of the chiefs of police on that question.

Order In Council Appointments

[Ian Murray, Liberal, Lanark—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Public Service Renewal.

The minister announced today that hundreds of governor in council and ministerial appointments will be eliminated as a result of the agency review. I agree that this overhaul of boards and commissions is long overdue, but is it all just window dressing or will this initiative bring real savings for Canadian taxpayers and help put an end to political patronage?

[John English, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I must thank the hon. member for his question. It allows me to comment on the agency review report which was released today. The report looked at 400 commissions, boards and agencies and 120 were affected, 73 were wound up, 47 were restructured and no less than 665 governor in council positions were abolished.

To give members an idea of the scope of this review, since this government was elected, it has appointed approximately 700 persons to governor in council positions, 100 of which were reappointments. In short, the government has abolished more governor in council positions than it has appointed new persons to such positions.

We are bringing efficiency and fairness to government.

National Ports

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. Forty maritime organizations and businesses have asked the Minister of Transport to dismiss the chairman of Ports Canada's board of directors, Arnold Masters, from his duties. Just a few minutes ago, the minister said that he had to wait for a report from the transport committee before he could take action.

How can the minister wait for the report from the transport committee before taking action in this matter, since the committee has no mandate to review Mr. Masters' case?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, what a revelation: the hon. member will now wait for a mandate before raising such issues. When I appeared before the transport committee, the hon. member, instead of dealing with the problems affecting the transportation system across the country and proposing solutions, went on and on about Mr. Masters. With or without a mandate, the hon. member always knows where to dig.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since Mr. Masters is completely discredited in the eyes of the Canadian maritime industry, why does the minister not suspend him immediately now that the allegations are out in the open?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I indeed received a letter signed by several stakeholders in the industry asking me to replace the gentleman in question. However, as far as I know, the allegations are based on

comments which so far are not supported by any evidence of criminal or fraudulent activities.

I wish to emphasize that we are, of course, reviewing the situation because it is important. Unless the hon. member has specific evidence to submit to us which would point to unacceptable behaviour on the part of Mr. Masters involving criminal or fraudulent activities, I would appreciate it if the hon. member exercised his right to make these accusations outside this Chamber instead of staying here where he is protected.

Taxation

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

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

The minister is well aware that virtually all of the OECD countries now have an inheritance tax for people who inherit, say, sums of money over $1 million. This would generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue at a time when revenue is much in need.

Can the minister tell us, is there some reason Canada does not have an inheritance tax like virtually every other OECD country?

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

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question as asked concerning the reasons for not having one. I interpret this question to be not related to the budget, but simply seeking information.

The reason is that we in Canada, unlike other countries, have deemed capital gains disposition on death, which roughly equates to an inheritance tax. Another reason is that we have much higher property taxes than do many other countries. It is felt that does the case. Also, the principal interest most Canadians have is their main residence, which as the hon. member knows, is not subject to capital gains tax and would not be subject to any kind of a wealth tax.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is why I suggested a ceiling of $1 million would be a useful guideline. It would get around the matter of one's principal residence.

The minister has said that not many poor people use tax loopholes. I suggest that not many poor families use family trusts. Can the minister explain to the House of Commons and the people of Canada why a country like Canada would continue to have in its tax system a provision that caters virtually exclusively to the wealthiest families in Canada?