Debates of April 6th, 1995

Quebec Referendum

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Quebec officially announced, yesterday, that he was postponing the referendum until the fall. The leader of the Parti Quebecois is telling us that he has no use for the report by the National Commission on Quebec sovereignty which is to be tabled on April 13.

We all know that millions of dollars have been spent for this huge consultation operation which was to give the people of Quebec an opportunity to advise the government on the issue of Quebec sovereignty.

With yesterday's announcement by the PQ leader, one week before the tabling of the national commission's report, we have to conclude that for the PQ government and its friends in the Bloc, strategy is more important than the opinion of Quebecers.

Job Creation

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

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

In a report released yesterday, the National Council on Welfare reveals that, in 1993, poverty kept on increasing in Canada, especially in Quebec where 20.7 per cent of the population live below the poverty line.

In view of this worsening problem of poverty, how can the government explain that it has not implemented any job creating measure and that it has reduced its participation in the infrastructure program, its only initiative to create jobs since it came to office?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is very important for all members of the House to recognize the seriousness of the situation as underlined by the National Council of Welfare report.

The continuing incidence of poverty is something which requires all of us to make a very serious response. The most important is to ensure we can create the right climate, the right framework in which jobs can be created. That is still one of the most effective ways of alleviating poverty, to get people back to work.

In this past year we have created over 450,000 jobs. We have had the highest job growth rate of any industrial country. The figures used by the National Council of Welfare stop at 1993. We would certainly hope the very substantial job creation of this past year would tend to alleviate that problem. However that certainly is no cause for any kind of complacency.

We must redouble our efforts to get people back to work, to invest more in the kind of programs and initiatives that will give people some real opportunity to improve their status. I would welcome the co-operation of the hon. member and his party as we go about trying to reform our social system to enable that to happen.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on numerous occasions, we offered to co-operate with the government to create jobs. It brushed aside all our suggestions.

How can the government claim that it is working to create jobs when it refuses to implement a real defence conversion strategy, to come to the rescue of the MIL Davie shipyard, and decides to stick to a monetary policy obsessed by inflation control instead of job creation?

Will the minister dare say that the laissez-faire attitude of this government will contribute to job creation?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows very well that most of the jobs in the country must be created through the activities of the private sector.

If we are in a situation in which interest rates rise at an unacceptable rate or international capital flows become volatile and we are vulnerable to them, we pay the price by not being able to create incentives for job creation.

That is one of the reasons why in the budget we undertook to stabilize the fiscal situation in the country, to make ourselves less vulnerable to those international flows of capital, to be able to stabilize our interest rates and to provide a very effective framework within which the private sector can go about creating jobs.

At the same time, we also believe to parallel that we must invest very seriously in what we call the human deficit, the issue of making sure people have more choices about improving their skills and being able to get beyond simply benefit programs and into active employment programs.

That has been the whole indication and thrust of the reformed proposals the House of Commons committee considered and the recommendations we are now considering for action which we intend to bring in this year.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, could it be that the minister's passionate plea in favour of job creation by the private sector hides the government's inability to help the unemployed?

Will the minister recognize that the sad picture in Quebec, where 21 per cent of the population now live below the poverty line, the highest rate in Canada, might I add, is the result of federalism and irrefutable proof of the failure of a system totally unable to promote economic development in Quebec and powerless in the face of deepening poverty in Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate the hon. member has taken what I think we all see to be a very serious situation and tried to turn it into some kind of attack against federalism.

The issue of poverty, especially among our young children and our families, will require the collaboration and co-operation of all levels of government, not one party continually insisting on separation, on breaking the country apart and fragmenting our efforts at a time when what we need is collaboration, co-operation and a coming together.

The real issue of attacking poverty is having all Canadians, all provinces and all regions working ensemble.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

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

In the same report, the National Council of Welfare pointed out that poverty among young families, mostly among single parent families headed by a woman, is on the rise. The report says that children are poor because their parents are poor. And one of the main causes of this poverty is the shortage of good jobs.

Will the Minister of Human Resources Development admit that, far from reducing poverty, the unemployment insurance cuts for which his government is responsible will actually cause it to increase because they force tens of thousands of unemployed on to the welfare rolls each month?

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

Mr. Speaker, in the changes to the unemployment insurance bill introduced last year in Bill C-17 we introduced a special measure that provided a two tier benefit support so that we would provide a higher level of benefits for individuals of very low income who have dependent children so they would be able to receive 60 per cent of a replaceable income compared with 55 per cent, the national standard.

Since that time close to 200,000 Canadian families have been able to take benefit from that second tier of benefits, which means they have been able to add close to $1,000 of income to their family resources during the year.

That indicates we took into account, in making changes to the unemployment insurance program, that there is a special need, especially for those families which have children. I can assure the hon. member that as we begin to look at a broader reform of unemployment insurance the same principle of targeting our help to those most in need will continue to be our basic philosophy.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's own budgetary plan says that, as a result of legislative amendments contained in Bill C-17 which reduced the maximum number of weeks of entitlement, there has been a 16.2 per cent decrease in the number of recipients.

Will the Minister of Human Resources Development acknowledge that this situation will only continue to deteriorate in the next three years because of the cuts in transfer payments and the implementation of the Canada social transfer, which is nothing less than a veiled attempt to cut federal funding for social programs even more?

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

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I think that the new framework for transfers being hammered out between the federal and provincial governments will be an opportunity for the governments to develop a co-operative and effective approach to combatting family and child poverty. I think that it is an effort to develop a national strategy, a co-operative strategy which both levels of government will use to solve the problem, and I hope that the hon. member and her colleagues will join us in this national effort to fight poverty in Canada.

Direct To Home Satellites

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

Last November the cabinet decided to overrule a CRTC decision and create a blue ribbon panel to review Canada's direct to home satellite policy; I should say a red ribbon panel because it has strong links to the Prime Minister's office.

We understand from leaked reports to our office this back room, closed door review is now complete. To avoid public scrutiny the cabinet's decision will be announced after the House rises for the Easter break.

What decision has the government made with respect to direct to home satellites and why was it not announced before the break?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the statements in the member's preamble to her question are generally incorrect.

The questions referred to the panel were of great importance both to the information highway initiative and to the satellite broadcasting system. We announced the review would be completed in an open way and it was done so. The panellists were named and received written submissions from all Canadians interested in the matter. Those submissions were made public. The public was then given an opportunity to provide written responses to submissions. Those responses were made public.

This afternoon the panel will make its recommendation public. I suggest to the hon. member she might wish to read it and perhaps then she will have some suggestions of her own.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

The politics of this review has tainted its outcome. The review was ordered because the original decision went against Power Corp., a company headed by the Prime Minister's son-in-law. The review panel included Robert Rabinovitch, who has personal ties to Power Corp. and the Claridge Group, and Roger Tassé, a partner in Eddie Goldenberg's former law firm. If that was not bad enough, the government tried to slip the decision by the House to avoid public discussion.

Why was the DTH review not conducted as part of the industry department's information highway hearing or the CRTC convergence hearings?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, once again we have an example of a shamelessly irresponsible member of Parliament making unsubstantiated allegations.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

I appeal to members to be very judicious in your comments when referring to members of Parliament. I ask you to keep this in mind in your questions and in your answers.

[John Manley, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is a reason this process was followed. Very simply, as the hon. member knows, the satellite broadcasting system, the direct to home system, is one we are concerned about with regard to the very rapid growth of what is called the grey market.

It was important the government establish its policy in a very clear way as quickly as possible and yet attempt to make it as open as possible. We decided we would appoint a panel. It would hold the process as I described it in the previous question.

I want to make it clear to the hon. member that the Minister of Canadian Heritage and I received the report only this morning directly from the chairman of the panel. We will be reviewing it very carefully. I suggest to her perhaps she might like to. We have not taken a decision as to whether the recommendations will be followed.

I would like to hear whether the Reform Party has a position on this important issue. I would be happy to take it into account before recommendations are made to cabinet.

[The Speaker]

I appeal to members to make both the questions and answers more concise.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is again for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

The Reform Party has always favoured a review of Canada's direct to home satellite policy. We do favour competition but it should be done in a very public forum.

Instead, the government's review was a backroom, closed door deal to favour a bunch of Liberal bagmen. It is yet another example of the government's lack of cultural policy.

One day it is restricting competition in favour of Canadian industries, the next it is swinging the door-

[The Speaker]

The question please.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Does the government have a cultural policy or will decisions continue to be made in an ad hoc way to the benefit of Liberal insiders?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what part of the universe the hon. member comes from. I do not know whether she knows anything about satellites at all. She is clearly accustomed to flying in spacecrafts, though.

In endeavouring to deal with this policy in as rapid a way as possible we have conducted a process using people whose reputation is really beyond being impugned, certainly by the member.

We have appointed a panel of three former deputy ministers, all of whom served under other governments. These people's reputations have not been questioned by anyone else, certainly not by this member outside the House where she might be subject to legal action. She comes in here and tries to smear three people who are offering their services to the government.

Perhaps if the member would read the report she would find her allegations false.

Government Contracts

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. We have learned that, last November, the Minister of Justice awarded a $22,500 contract to Earnscliffe Strategy Group, a communication firm.

Under the terms of the contract, this firm had to advise the minister on the gun control strategy he should adopt in dealing with his caucus.

How can the minister justify spending $22,500 in public funds to develop a communication strategy aimed at convincing his Liberal colleagues to meet their electoral commitment?

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

Mr. Speaker, the contract referred to was entered into in the ordinary course of business in order to provide advice of practical assistance in discharging every day responsibilities. It is perfectly proper. It is money well spent.

I offer the events of yesterday as the most cogent proof of that investment.