Debates of May 29th, 1995

Infrastructure

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has been on a bumpy road with this line of questioning.

A meeting was held with the minister of transportation for Nova Scotia in January during which agreement in principle was achieved on the reallocation of the funds. In February the minister of public works on my behalf announced we had agreed to the funds being spent as was consented to by the province of Nova Scotia and the Government of Canada.

I reassure my hon. friend this situation has occurred over and over again in these agreements. The reason it occurs is that, unlike my hon. friend, most of us on this side of the House understand that the construction of highways and the choosing of routing for highways are within provincial jurisdiction.

[Randy White, Reform, Fraser Valley West, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is ironic the minister said that because in 1986 the Tory revenue minister diverted $20 million from a federal-provincial agreement to a road through his Nova Scotia riding and the Liberals here were incensed. Now the Liberal minister of public works has diverted $26 million from a federal-provincial agreement to his Nova Scotia riding and the Tories are incensed. It is déjà-vu.

Since the minister of public works refuses to answer anyone's question on this serious issue, we would like to borrow the words of the minister. Would the Prime Minister "put up or shut up?" Will he refer this issue to the ethics lap-person or is he content to go down in history as being just as big a hypocrite as Brian Mulroney?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, it is very unfortunate the hon. member does not understand that when the Government of Nova Scotia looked at the funding available for the highway to which the funds were originally dedicated it understood very little would be achieved in the spending of the very limited amount of money available.

It deemed it was in the best interest of Nova Scotians to allocate the funds to another highway. We consented to that, as is provided for under section 12.2 of the agreement where the agreement can be amended by consent. That is what occurred.

Unfortunately for the hon. member he will have to keep beating his dead horse because he does not seem to be able to find another one these days.

Monetary Policy

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to John McCallum, chief economist with the Royal Bank, the Bank of Canada's policy has been responsible for the steady drop in the standard of living of Canadians since 1990. And the new governor of the Bank of Canada has admitted that the bank is still implementing the policy introduced under the Conservatives by his predecessor, John Crow, a policy which the current Minister of Finance at one time denounced.

Does the Minister of Finance realize that the Bank of Canada's current monetary policy and the Conservatives' monetary policy are one and the same and that the policy is the direct cause of high unemployment rates and the drop in our standard of living, as he himself claimed during the last election campaign?

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

Mr. Speaker, I must say that I find it difficult to understand why the hon. member has chosen this time to raise this point, since over the past two months, interest rates have dropped a total of close to 100 basis points.

It is very clear that the Bank of Canada's policy, which is to anticipate inflation, has a big impact on job creation. We cannot compare today's monetary policy to the monetary policy of four or five years past. There is an enormous difference and that is why the hon. member's claims do not wash.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in my opinion what does not wash is that the Minister of Finance sang a different tune altogether when he was still a member of the opposition. That is what does not wash.

I would like to know whether the Minister of Finance realizes that since he took office-I am mot talking just about the past five months-interest rates have gone up by one third. This stopped the weak economic recovery dead in its tracks, for, over the past five months, there has been no net job creation in Canada-a figure supported by Statistics Canada.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, 100,000 jobs were created in the private sector in the last quarter. That is nothing to sneeze at.

We must compare the Bank of Canada's current policy to that of four or five years ago. As we all know, interest rates were at their peak in 1989. Therefore, there is no comparison.

The hon. member was right to quote me and the solicitor general, who was finance critic when we were both in the opposition. We were opposed to the monetary policy of the Bank of Canada then. The government of the time, in which the Leader of the Opposition was a cabinet member, and many erstwhile Conservative members who are now Bloc members, defended the policy.

So, instead of putting his question regarding the McCallum report and the Bank of Canada's policy to the government, I would suggest that the hon. member talk to members of his own caucus and maybe even have a private conversation on the issue with his leader.

Child Support Payments

[John O'Reilly, Liberal, Victoria—Haliburton, ON]

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

Can the minister please inform this House as to when he intends to introduce proposed changes to the child support payment system that would prevent parents from neglecting their responsibilities for their children?

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

Mr. Speaker, while the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada last week in the Thibaudeau case may have resolved the question with respect to the constitutionality of the present tax system in relation to child support, it remains for the government to determine whether that system is the fairest and most effective in providing for children.

I have been working with my colleagues, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Human Resources Development and the Minister of National Revenue and the Secretary of State for the Status of Women in reviewing not only the tax system but the importance of enforcement mechanisms as well, as the hon. member has pointed out.

We have also looked at and published proposals for the establishment of guidelines to assist in the determination of the amount of child support to be paid, depending on the income of the parties.

Before the House rises at the end of June, we hope to put before the House proposals for change in those areas.

Canadian Wheat Board

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in January the solicitor general was asked to initiate an investigation into allegations of criminal activity by the Canadian Wheat Board. The solicitor general wrote to me, saying that the RCMP concluded there was not sufficient evidence to support these allegations.

Could the solicitor general provide me with a copy of the RCMP report, as was promised by his office to be done by May 22?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and solicitor general of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I will check with the RCMP. I am not sure if it is customary for them to release details of their investigation beyond stating the conclusion of their work, but I will check into it further.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I met with the chief superintendent of the commercial crime division and two inspectors of the RCMP in Winnipeg and I was advised that there had never been a request for an investigation from the solicitor general. The information commissioner validated this by confirming that no RCMP report on this issue could be found.

Why did the solicitor general lie to me?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, sometimes in forming our questions we use words that are inappropriate. I would ask the hon. member for Lisgar-Marquette to reconsider and please withdraw the word "lie".

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Mr. Speaker, for four months I have tried to get to the bottom of this. The facts speak for themselves. I have two letters confirming-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, in the course of the question period, in order to facilitate matters and to keep the flow of the questions and answers, sometimes your Speaker has to inter-

vene. Usually when words that are unparliamentary are used hon. members will reflect and under the urging of the Speaker most of the time they withdraw.

I would put it to the hon. member for Lisgar-Marquette, would the hon. member please withdraw the word "lie", a simple yes or no.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I came to the House with standards and I will not lower them.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, I do not want to take the time of this question period. Therefore, I will ask the hon. member to please stay in his seat and I will deal with this matter after the question period.

Indian Affairs

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs.

The Quebec Minister of Public Security has criticized the federal government's inertia vis-à-vis the expansion of the Mohawk cemetery in Oka. According to the minister, the federal government, which is paying its negotiator a handsome salary, still refuses to buy the 60,000 square foot piece of land being offered by the Municipality of Oka for the Mohawks.

How does the Minister of Indian Affairs justify the fact that he and his department are dragging their feet and have yet to purchase the land made available by the municipality to expand the cemetery?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with the premise. On the houses north of 344, it was 100 per cent federal money, several million dollars. On the houses the Province of Quebec requested we purchase south of 344, there was not one cent of contribution from the Province of Quebec.

We went in there and set up the Mohawk negotiator, the facilitator and the mediator and we purchased those houses. All the money being spent north and south of 344 has been 100 per cent federal money.

It is okay for Mr. Ménard to sit there and give me a lecture, but if he is serious about doing it they should be at the table offering some kind of contribution, more than just tokenism.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, all I know is that the problem is not resolved. It has cost over $350,000 for a negotiator to do nothing and leave.

How does the minister explain the fact that the negotiations conducted by the federal government with the Mohawks, which have cost a fortune to date, have resulted in absolutely nothing tangible, when a matter such as the purchase of land, if settled by the federal government, would prevent another confrontation between the Mohawks, the City of Oka and the Government of Quebec?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member says there is nothing tangible. When we took over the government there were 70 or 80 illegally held houses north of 344. Now I believe we have it down to a dozen. We have a housing authority. South of 344 most of the houses are purchased; there are only three that are illegally held, and we are working on those. So there have been tangible results. There have been tangible results at the Mohawk round table and tangible results in individual negotiations with each of the three First Nations.

We are supposed to be honourable here. When the hon. member uses the death of two Mohawks and a funeral to further a political agenda, I think the hon. member falls below what is honourable in this House.

[The Speaker]

I wonder if the hon. minister would please reconsider his last words. They are, in my view, a personal attack and are not necessary in the course of the question period. Would the hon. minister please consider withdrawing that any other hon. member's conduct is less than honourable?

[Ron Irwin, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Reform, I unequivocally withdraw that remark.