Debates of May 18th, 1995

Canadian National

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's premise is completely wrong. It is not the government's intention to pay anything for the real estate assets of CN that will not be transferred at the time of the issue. We have said that with the Department of Finance we will negotiate an arrangement to give CN a credit for the market value of any residual real estate assets.

The hon. member will know that the objective of the government is to try to put Canadian National railways out into the private sector in a condition that will allow it to operate in the same environment as Canadian Pacific. There will have to be some work done to reduce the $2.5 billion debt. I want to reassure my hon. friend that whatever the government does with respect to the sale of CN will be done in the very best interests of the Canadian taxpayers, both now and in the future.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Transport confirm his government's intention not only to use public funds to buy assets already paid for by taxpayers, but also to buy these assets for more than their current market value?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the hon. member, but I understand he had his supplementary written down before he listened to the answer, there is no intention on the part of the government of giving any credit to CN that is in addition to any prior market value that would be identified.

The sale of CN is a major undertaking. We understand the opposition has agreed to it in principle. We hope we can demonstrate that on a business basis this will be done in the best interests of the Canadian taxpayer. Any evaluation of assets, real estate or otherwise, will be done on the very best basis of business and ordinary commercial practice.

Infrastructure Program

[Ed Harper, Reform, Simcoe Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, like many other Canadians, I am a fan of our national sport, hockey, but I am not a fan of taxpayer subsidies for professional sports.

The problems in Winnipeg and Quebec could be and should be solved by the NHL, not the Canadian taxpayers. Private luxury boxes and million dollar hockey players should not be subsidized by overtaxed Canadians.

How can the Prime Minister justify reallocating infrastructure dollars when hospitals are closing and Canadians are risking their lives on unsafe roads?

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

Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure program, as I think the Prime Minister has pointed out, is based on local needs and local priorities to create jobs, strengthen the infrastructure of our communities so that we can attract additional investment dollars and provide more jobs.

The hon. member has an arena in his own constituency which also provides facilities for hockey players. He has supported infrastructure projects in his province.

[Ed Harper, Reform, Simcoe Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the arena in Barrie was never supported by this member of Parliament at any time. The minister knows that. Arenas in Barrie, Edmonton or Winnipeg never were infrastructure, in any way.

The Minister of Industry has stated in this House that this level of government will no longer continue to subsidize business. Yet his western counterpart, the Minister of Human Resources Development, is attempting to bail out another local industry, the Winnipeg Jets.

Will the Prime Minister indicate what the policy of this government is? Is it the status quo pork barrelling of the western minister, or is it the let business thrive on its own policy of the industry minister? They cannot have it both ways. Which way is it?

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

Mr. Speaker, talking about having it both ways, who said: "I am writing to further offer my strong support for the project because of significant job creation?"

The project in Winnipeg will create thousands of jobs for the people of that city. It will create a great amount of economic activity. It is a priority of the city, a priority of the provincial government. Those are the rules under which we have been operating the infrastructure program.

Cn Rail

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

Mr. Speaker, looking at the Liberals across the floor, one would think we were at the Winnipeg arena.

My question is for the Minister of Transport. The minister is about to privatize one of the most important federal crown corporations, without restricting foreign ownership. CN, which was established at a cost of billions of dollars in public moneys, is an invaluable asset for Canada and Quebec. Should it come under foreign control, it might not fully serve the interests of Canadians.

Will the minister admit that, by overrating CN's assets, so as to increase the market value of the corporation, he is in fact using Canadian taxpayers' money to give foreign buyers an indirect subsidy?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am truly moved by the hon. member, who is concerned about CN's future as a Canada-wide venture, from Halifax to Vancouver. At one point, I thought the member felt our government had decided not to restrict foreign investments, precisely to allow people like him, who want to achieve independence, to have an interest in that company.

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind the Minister of Transport that Quebecers contributed 25 per cent of CN's assets. The minister is not giving us anything.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[An hon. member]

That is true. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

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

On another topic, and I hope to get an intelligent answer, will the minister agree that it is possible for a group of foreign businesses controlled by the same shareholder to buy a majority of CN's shares, thus making it impossible for the minister to ensure that CN remains under Canadian control?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the experience of Canadian Pacific which has been operating as a private shareholder driven company since the last century is such that there is no indication of any interest to the extent that we should be concerned about foreign ownership.

What I am far more worried about and what the government is concerned about is in order to have a successful issue of this size, we are of a mind and of the advice we have received both domestically and internationally that the issue is just too big for Canadian investors to take up. We feel that protection for the future of CN is really far more important in the context of our restriction on 15 per cent ownership for any individual or corporation.

The important thing here that everyone should keep in mind is this is going to be the single largest transaction of its kind in Canadian history. We are trading on a global basis. This railroad has to be competitive in the global economy. We think that restricting foreign ownership would not give the kind of signal that we believe is important, that is, that Canadians want to do business with everybody around the world. We are confident that as is the case with CP, CN will be retained in a majority way in Canadian hands.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, CBC and Cadillac Fairview have broken a deal over their lease arrangements, perhaps costing the CBC and the Canadian taxpayer up to $250 million. The actual cost remains unknown because both the CBC and the minister's office refuse to make public any of the deals of the arrangement.

My question for the Minister of Canadian Heritage is: If there is nothing to hide, will he commit to making public all of the details of this secretive deal?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, there was of course an intervention by the courts. I will have to look carefully at what was decided. Eventually the transaction will have to be confirmed by an order of the governor in council. When we come to that point, I shall be pleased to answer the question.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let me continue. The CBC broadcast centre came in $138 million over budget. It was supposed to get revenues from Bramalea and Cadillac Fairview but now both companies are bankrupt. The total lease cost for the building amounts to over $1.7 billion. Now the government is poised to bail out of this $250 million fiasco.

The broadcast centre has been a financial disaster from the get go. Will the minister direct the auditor general to investigate the financing of this broadcast centre boondoggle and table the report in this Parliament?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I take note of the allegations of our colleague and will give her the same answer I gave earlier. I will look into it and answer her questions.

Infrastructure Program

[Jean-Paul Marchand, Bloc, Québec-Est, QC]

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

The Prime Minister has just told us that $15 million of the $20 million promised for the Winnipeg Jets will come from the infrastructure program in Manitoba. Information in official Treasury Board documents, however, reveals something quite different.

How can the Prime Minister say, on January 24, that in book 3 of the Treasury Board Estimates, only $6 million remained for the infrastructure program in Manitoba and talk today about $15 million? Where did the extra $9 million come from?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as regards the allocations for Manitoba, certain projects were left undeveloped, and $12 million is available at the moment.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

So now it is $12 million. The figure is changing.

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

Twelve million dollars is currently available, according to the President of Treasury Board. The Government of Manitoba decided to reallocate certain approved projects, cancel them and replace them to create an additional $3 million, bringing the total to $15 million.

As I said earlier, the remaining $5 million will come from the money allocated for the preparation of the infrastructures needed for the Pan American Games. This adds up to the $20 million approved by the government. It has nothing to do with the hockey team. It is a matter of giving the City of Winnipeg and the Government of Manitoba their choice of priorities.

It is as if Calgary, Edmonton or the hon. member's city chose to have arenas. This was the choice of the City of Winnipeg. The mayor of Quebec City decided clearly, with the first project approved, to put all the money available to Quebec City and the region around it into a convention centre, which was already well under way. This was the local officials' priority, and we accepted it with pleasure.

[Jean-Paul Marchand, Bloc, Québec-Est, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the light of these latest rapid changes, how can the Prime Minister agree to reallocating $5 million earmarked for the Pan American Games to finance the Winnipeg Jets?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, clearly when you are holding the Pan American Games, you have to have the necessary equipment. The City of Winnipeg and the government of the province decided to use this opportunity to build themselves a facility to meet both requirements. This will be a good thing if it means saving some money.

Canadian Armed Forces

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.

It will be remembered that, when the Saint-Jean military college was closed, certain people claimed that the closure would decrease the representation of francophones in the Canadian Forces. We all know about the budget and the white paper on national defence.

I would ask the Minister of National Defence to report to the House on the situation of francophones in the Canadian armed forces, and on their recruitment in particular.