Debates of April 4th, 1995

Social Program Funding

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Saint-Maurice, QC]

Now listen, they persuaded me to invite them, and then the opposition asked me to invite them. I was very nice about it, so I did. Once they were invited, they decided not to come. Do not blame me, I listened to you. Blame them.

As for the remainder of the hon. member's question, if we want to have national standards across the country, which is normal, it is because of manpower mobility in Canada and also because we have a minimum of respect for all members of the Canadian community. We must establish a satisfactory minimum for all Canadians across the country in the areas of health care, social assistance and similar services.

[The Speaker]

My dear colleagues, may I remind you to address the Chair in your questions and answers?

[Lucien Bouchard, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the provinces are told: «We do not want you around». It was their understanding that they were not wanted.

How can the Prime Minister talk about flexible federalism when he threatens to cut federal contributions even more if the provinces do not respect national standards for the Canada Social Transfer? In other words, will he have the courage to put his cards on the table at a federal-provincial conference?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we had occasion to discuss that at the different federal-provincial meetings I had with the provinces, along with the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Generally speaking, provinces recognize we have to reduce the cost of these programs. The best way to do that is by collaboration between the provinces and the federal government. We have to reduce our spending.

As I explained earlier, when some provinces including Quebec cut $500 million in health services in December they were not returning any of that money to us even if we had made a strong contribution to that level of payment.

Fisheries

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has confirmed that Canada and the European Union reached agreement in principle yesterday in the turbot dispute, subject to approval by cabinet and the officials of the European Union. With Spain and Portugal's rejection of it, the European Union has called for the reopening of the agreement in order to wring even more concessions from Canada and thus bring the negotiations to a standstill.

Could the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans confirm that the European Union, under pressure from Spain, in particular, has rejected the agreement in principle, thus bringing us back to the starting point?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question.

I can confirm that what has just been proposed is not correct. Negotiations as we speak are ongoing in Brussels. Good progress is being made. I understand there has been a report, which no doubt the member has seen, which in effect states that the EU has rejected the draft agreement. This is not correct. Good progress is being made and Canada hopes that in due course these negotiations will conclude successfully.

As we have always said, our first and primary interest is and remains an effective conservation regime and the means to bring about proper enforcement to protect these straddling stocks.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans appear so optimistic about the outcome of the negotiations, when the Spanish prime minister, Felipe Gonzalez, said that Spain was definitely rejecting the terms of the agreement in principle?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is because Canada is negotiating with the European Union. It is a bilateral negotiation involving Canada and the European Union. Negotiations continued non-stop through the weekend. Progress was made each and every day through the weekend and continues even today. It is a matter for the European Union to deal with the views whether they be unanimous or not of each of the member states.

With respect to the negotiating table, Canada and the European Union sit at that table and progress to this point is being made.

Health Care

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there seems to be growing confusion throughout the country concerning the federal government's intentions with respect to health care funding.

The health minister and the Prime Minister have both hinted that funding could be reduced by up to $16 billion or 2 per cent of GDP and that Canadians in future will not receive the same degree of coverage that they have in the past. At the same time, the government has also suggested that health care funding should be simply frozen or flat lined.

My question is for the health minister. What precisely is the government's agenda for reforming health care, in particular reforming the scope of health care services and health care financing?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, while the direct responsibility for health care remains with the provinces, we intend to continue to enforce the principles of the Canada Health Act. That act has given us one of the finest medicare systems in the world.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the minister to reduce the confusion caused, not to add to it.

Last month the Prime Minister spoke in favourable terms about bringing Canada's health care spending more in line with that of European countries. The Prime Minister must realize however that almost all of those European countries to which he refers have a private health care backup to the public system which is how they get more bang for their health care buck.

Does the health care minister support the Prime Minister's recommendation that Canada's health care funding should become more like that of Europe? Does she have a concrete plan for bringing that reform about?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, of course I support the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has repeatedly said that this country will continue to have a universal medicare system.

Thirty-two years ago today our Prime Minister was first elected as a member of Parliament to the House of Commons.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, during those 32 years our Prime Minister was present for the creation and the building of the best medicare system in the world. Our Prime Minister has nothing to learn from the Reform Party which advocates two-tier medicine.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge, AB]

The hon. member for Calgary Southwest.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that sounded more like a job security speech to me than a health care issue.

In a March 15 speech the Prime Minister promised to uphold the five pillars of medicare but he could not tell his audience how he would do it. In a March 4 speech the health minister encouraged the provinces to experiment broadly with health care delivery and yet refused to say what powers the provinces would be given to do that job.

My last question is for the finance minister. How long will Canadians have to wait before the government presents a concrete blueprint for health care reform? How long?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the Reform Party would listen instead of preaching all the time.

From the very beginning we have been very clear. Yes, there is flexibility providing we maintain the principles and we keep a system which serves all Canadians regardless of whether they have money or not. Our system has to be based on need. What the Reform Party is advocating is a U.S. style of medicare, a system for the fit and fortunate.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. In a speech yesterday at the Canadian Club in Toronto, the ex-president of the CBC, Tony Manera, showed that cutting the CBC's budget by more than one third will seriously jeopardize the current mandate of the Crown corporation. At the same time, the new president of the CBC, former Conservative minister Perrin Beatty, said in reference to the cancelling of entire programs at the CBC that we are running out of time to make difficult decisions.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that his new appointee to the helm of the CBC is ready and willing to cut as much as one third from the CBC's current budget and to lay off between 3,000 and 4,000 employees?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, cuts of four per cent for this year were announced in the Minister of Finance's budget. In fact this is not out of proportion, compared to cuts we were forced to make in other sectors.

We also decided then that we had to review the CBC's mandate and that of other related organizations in order to determine how to adjust to today's realities with today's financial means, and in order to determine the kind of television network we need in order to be competitive in the 21st century.

When the CBC was created, Canadians only had access to two television channels; now they can access between 100 and 200 channels. In the near future, we will be setting up a committee to align the CBC's mandate with today's and tomorrow's realities, and working from the revised mandate, we will determine a budget enabling the CBC and other similar organizations to reach their new objectives.

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

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister realize that the CBC has already been hit by previous budget cuts, is being hit by those contained in the current budget and that it will also be hit by future budgets?

Has the Prime Minister considered whether the deep cuts that he is planning to impose on the CBC, which will apply indiscriminately to the English and French networks despite the fact that the French network outperforms the English one by a long shot, will seriously jeopardize the mandate and future of Radio-Canada?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have always recognized in the past the necessity of having a French radio and television network in Canada. Might I add that the CBC's budget is divided. The French radio and television network receives a proportionally higher share of funding than the francophone population would have warranted. We want to continue giving good French language service to Canadians from coast to coast. But this budget must be adjusted to take into consideration today's realities and the new mandate we need to give, given that competition is no longer limited to just one network but now involves hundreds of networks. We must give an appropriate vocation to both the English and French networks of the CBC.

Health Care

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my physician colleagues tell me that the Canada Health Act is outdated.

For example, the Canada Health Act is supposed to provide reasonable access to health services yet in Manitoba people are waiting 60 weeks for hip replacement. In Saskatchewan people are waiting 30 weeks for cataract surgery. Quebecers have to line up behind 1,460 patients for hernia surgery.

Will the minister responsible for these waiting lists define reasonable access so that Canadians will be protected by the Canada Health Act?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that Canadians have been protected by the Canada Health Act.

Yes, there are pressures from time to time in different areas. However, the Canada Health Act ensures that these pressures are addressed by the individual provinces. When we see long waiting lists, provinces move in very quickly and public opinion forces them into doing what is right, ensuring that the needs of their citizens are met in a good manner without people having to pay to get to the head of the line.