Debates of May 3rd, 1995

Canada Social Transfer

[An hon. member]

That is not very reassuring.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

No, indeed. It is not very reassuring.

[Lucien Bouchard, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

I am sure it comes as no surprise that we are not reassured. If the Prime Minister believes the provinces have nothing to fear from the new national standards, why then is he still refusing to call a federal-provincial conference to debate publicly, first, the distribution of the cuts to the transfer payments announced in the budget and, second, the new national standards he wants to put forward, particularly in health and social assistance?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in health matters, there will be no negotiation, because, as we said clearly during the election campaign, and as I repeat now, the five principles incorporated in the Canada Health Act must remain. We have no intention of changing national health standards for any reason.

As to holding a federal-provincial conference, the Minister of Finance regularly meets his provincial counterparts, and the Minister of Human Resources Development will be contacting and discussing matters with the provincial governments. I am surprised now to see that the Bloc Quebecois wants normal relations with the Government of Canada. Speaking for the Government of Quebec, I suggest they consult Ms. Beaudoin; this is another change in direction, Mr. Speaker.

Taxation

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at a conference on the economy held in Ottawa yesterday, the Deputy Minister of Finance, David Dodge, stated that Canadians earning between $75,000 and $200,000 a year pay too much tax. He suggested that the federal government reduce taxes for high income earners so that Canada can remain competitive on global markets.

Does the Minister of Finance agree with his deputy minister and should we expect a ministerial statement announcing a tax reduction for high income earners in the near future?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that the member opposite is so selective in his reading. I made it very clear myself yesterday that this government's ultimate goal is to reduce taxes in Canada. In fact, that is one of the reasons why we are determined to put our fiscal house in order.

At the same time, I indicated that, if taxes were lowered, they would be lowered for the middle class and the poorest in the country because they are the ones who are paying the most.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the deputy minister referred to the wealthy and suggested that the taxes of wealthy Canadians be reduced.

The idea would be to listen a little less to the Power Corporation head office and, with respect to tax reform, to start by imposing a minimum tax on corporations. That would make sense.

How does the Minister of Finance reconcile his deputy minister's statement with, on the one hand, his so-called commitment to ensure that all Canadian taxpayers make an effort to help reduce the deficit and, on the other hand, his decisions which have consisted thus far in demanding a much bigger effort from lower income households and attacking the unemployed at every chance?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know this is going to come as a great shock to the opposition finance critic but there is a minimum tax on great big corporations already.

It should not come as a great shock that we are going to reduce taxes, that ultimately we must reduce taxes. It is why we would like the co-operation of the Bloc Quebecois to help clean up the nation's balance sheet. It is why we would like the co-operation of the Bloc Quebecois when we want to build newer technologies and put Canadians back to work.

What I would really suggest is that we come together to work for the betterment of the country, rather than create strawmen so the opposition members can make fancy speeches in the House of Commons.

Bosnia And Croatia

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in the former Yugoslavia the Croatian army captures a rebel Serb enclave, Croatian Serbs then retaliate by bombing Zagreb, the Croatian capital, and Bosnian Serbs threaten to resume fighting and to ignore security council peacekeeping resolutions because they say the UN did not react strongly to the Croatian offensive.

Peace is nowhere on the horizon and there is growing danger that Canadian peacekeepers will become human shields in a full blown conflict.

My question is for the Prime Minister. What implications will this escalation of the conflict have on our peacekeepers' ability to fulfil their mandate and to deliver humanitarian aid in the former Yugoslavia?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we deplore the activities that have resumed in that part of the world. We hope that everybody will have the good sense to resume the ceasefire. I am informed that at two o'clock p.m. GMT today a ceasefire was accepted by all parties.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

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

I hope everyone realizes it is completely futile to try to resolve this problem by using arms and fighting. Also I hope that the propositions that have been made so far will be taken seriously.

In the meantime we are making sure that our soldiers are being exposed as little as possible. They know they are in extremely difficult circumstances at this time.

I met those who left Valcartier two weeks ago. I am always impressed with their courage and determination, and how willing they are to take chances with their own lives in order to make sure that people are protected from the misery of people who just prefer arms to negotiations.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in the Liberal red book they said they would not be camp followers with respect to foreign policy. That is certainly not the case in the former Yugoslavia.

Canada is contributing a disproportionate number of peacekeepers and yet we have little say in how they are deployed. We are not part of the UN contact group. Germany, which does not have one soldier involved in the peacekeeping mission, has more of a say than Canada.

How can the government justify being a major player in the peacekeeping effort while it remains a minor player in the decision making process?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, all major decisions are made by the UN. UNPROFOR is a UN group and final decisions are made by the military command of the United Nations. We are not a member of the group of five for various reasons, among them the fact that some of the neighbouring countries think they can play a better role than we can.

We are doing what we do best. We are on the ground, making sure we are not taking sides. That is why the Canadian position is always appreciated by everyone. I talked with the President of Croatia when I was in Budapest and I talked with the President of Bosnia. They both told me they appreciate the professionalism of our soldiers.

Our soldiers are not there for us to gain political points internationally. They are there because they are the best.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Reformers believe that Canadian peacekeepers are the best in the world and deserve to be supported where they are deployed. However the situation on the ground in Croatia and Bosnia has changed but the peacekeepers' mandate has not. There is no peace to keep.

Given that the Minister of National Defence vowed to withdraw our troops if their safety was threatened and if their ability to fulfil their mandate was in question, will the Prime Minister now order an immediate withdrawal of Canadian peacekeepers from the war zone in Bosnia and Croatia?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, that would be extremely irresponsible at this moment. For the last few years situations have arisen where fighting was renewed. The troops were there doing their job and brought about many ceasefires.

The situation today is no worse than it was six months or a year ago. It is always difficult. Canadians are not afraid to take on a difficult task. We are there to maintain the peace. We are not there to come and go. When we make a commitment we fulfil our commitment.

Taxation

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

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

After granting a research and development investment tax credit during four years, Revenue Canada has now changed its mind and is asking the 15,000 Quebecers who took advantage of that tax provision to repay amounts which are three to four times higher than their tax savings. This retroactive about face could force about half of those concerned to go bankrupt.

How can the Minister of National Revenue ask 15,000 middle income taxpayers from Quebec to repay deductions, with interest, allowed under a tax provision which they used in good faith?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, senior officials from the department are conducting a close review of all the files of taxpayers who invested in these research companies. The various representations made, as well as all the relevant information, will receive full consideration.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can such a retroactive repayment be sought, considering that the problem is the direct consequence of the negligence of the revenue department, which, after four years, has just changed the rules affecting thousands of taxpayers?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the issue is not as clear nor as simple as the hon. member is suggesting. Again, I stress the fact that every file will be closely reviewed by the department before a decision is made. In some cases, we even have to look at research conducted abroad, or with several companies that have formed a partnership for this purpose.

It is very difficult to solve this issue quickly, but we are doing our best.

Aboriginal Affairs

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister of Indian affairs raised the expectations of aboriginal people to the point where his departmental officials are now asking him "to bring high expectations of the aboriginal community to manageable levels".

What will the minister do in his statements and in his processes to reduce expectations upon which he cannot possibly deliver?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada]

Mr. Speaker, at present we are looking at how the process of inherent rights can be put into place in an efficient way.

We are working on it. We already have a number of very positive results. We will announce any new policy as soon as it is ready.

[John Duncan, Reform, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in B.C. the current treaty process has created expectations that are forecast to cost $8 billion to $20 billion. There is no way that governments can deliver on this. The public is clamouring for a new approach.

What will the minister do to create an affordable process and reduce aboriginal expectations so that B.C. can support modern treaties?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the views of all stakeholders in this question are being considered.

All stakeholders have to be consulted and discussions have to take place with them. We have to be able to assess their views and in the end to render a series of possible policies that will satisfy all stakeholders. This is exactly what we are doing.

Penitentiaries

[Bernard St-Laurent, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General.

In our penitentiaries we have 1,200 Rastafarians, members of a religious sect that includes smoking marijuana as a part of Sunday services. The chaplains, torn between their responsibility for spiritual well-being and the law, feel obliged to give them their weekly joint of marijuana.

Does the Solicitor General think it is normal that illegal substances like marijuana are freely available in federal penitentiaries and are distributed with the blessing of the penitentiary administration?