Debates of Oct. 11th, 1996

Pipelines

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Deputy Prime Minister.

Here we go again. The last time the Liberal government told Canadians that oil and gas should be to their benefit the natural resources of the west were pillaged and plundered. Now the Prime Minister is trying to sell this same story to the people of Nova Scotia.

My question for the Deputy Prime Minister is very succinct. Why is the government caving in to the demands of a separatist government in Quebec instead of defending the rights of loyal people and a loyal government in Nova Scotia?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the allegations made by the hon. member are a disgrace.

The Prime Minister has stated clearly throughout this process that he intends to respect the commercial viability of any agreement that might be signed. Frankly, I think the intention of the Reform Party to try to create another incident to cut Quebec away from Canada is disgraceful.

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think that if this Deputy Prime Minister and this government were to pay attention they would realize that the people at the extreme ends of this country are dissatisfied with the way Ottawa is mismanaging our affairs. That is the message.

There is a very basic principle at stake here and that is the independence of the National Energy Board. Twice the Prime Minister has publicly made statements using his position as Prime Minister to pressure this board. I would think his own invisible guidelines would have rules against that.

Why is the government meddling in the affairs of the independent National Energy Board?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, if the member will go back to the response of the Prime Minister to a question of a student at an open meeting in Nova Scotia, he said that what is in the best interest of Canada is obviously to have linkages in Canada when it is commercially viable. That is exactly the position that he took in the House of Commons and exactly the position that he took in response to questions from the Reform Party.

Frankly the attempt of the extremists which the member speaks about, the extremists in the Reform Party who want to create a fight with Quebec on every single issue, do not care about building a nation. What they care about is building obstacles to try and tear this country apart. That is not what this Prime Minister and this Liberal government is all about.

Job Creation For Young People

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

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

Youth unemployment has reached unacceptable levels. The statistics confirmed once again this morning that young people are among those most severely affected by job losses. Their official unemployment rate has increased again and is now at 16.6 per cent. More than 400,000 young people are out of work, and we know that out there the situation is actually even worse. However, we know that the Department of Human Resources Development still has $45 million left of the $105 million announced this spring to help develop jobs for youth.

I would appreciate a clear answer to the following question: Can the minister guarantee that the as yet unused amount of $45 million will be spent by the end of the year, in a serious effort to help young people return to the labour market?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to confirm to the hon. member that I will give him a clear reply. The amounts announced in the last budget for youth employment totalled $315 million, to be spent in the next few years.

The unemployment situation among young people is unacceptable, and we are keenly aware of this. This fall we intend to announce a youth initiative. But we are trying to be a responsible government; just because the money is there does not mean we are going to waste it. We will have a youth initiative, to be announced this fall.

I intend to discuss this in cabinet during the next few weeks. I can inform you that this initiative will be used to create durable jobs for young people. We want to give them the kind of experience that will help them become better integrated in the labour market. Young people need experience, and we need their enthusiasm, and we intend to do something about this in the weeks to come.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when will the minister have some concrete announcements for young people, and when will young people be able to report to their local employment centres to get the practical help they need to re-enter the labour market? That is my question.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, last summer we doubled the amount of money available for youth employment, and we were delighted with the results.

I will go to cabinet with a comprehensive youth initiative, which will include funding not only from the Department of Human Resources Development, but more, because I know that the Minister responsible for CIDA and the Minister of Foreign Affairs are ready to do their share. Young people will have a better hope of entering our labour market in a variety of areas. The Minister of Industry, who is a great fan of our young people, will urge them to join the technology sector.

Employment

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the unemployment news is out today and it is bad: 86,000 full time jobs disappeared last month. Let there be no doubt the Liberal policy of jobs, jobs, jobs is in the tank.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. How can this minister say on Wednesday that the future of Canada is fine, but on Friday it is clear that the future of working families is on the line?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member had been there, he would have noticed a very heavy emphasis being placed on the absolute necessity of focusing on job creation and on the re-establishment of a whole series of programs which the government has brought in on trade and youth employment, as the minister of human resources has just set out.

The basic difference that occurred at that meeting on Wednesday was that we said the deficit reduction was not as the Reform Party would postulate as an end in itself but it was simply a means to greater job creation and that the reduction in interest rates has led to more investment and will lead to more job creation.

The hon. member knows there is a lag time. A year ago interest rates were at 8.5 per cent and are now at 3.5 per cent. There is not an economist across the country who does not say that is the single most important foundation for future jobs.

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, rosy predictions and forecasts do not put a turkey on the table this weekend and that is what Canadians want. Canadians have mortgages to pay. They have rent to pay. They have car loans to pay. They have student loans to pay. They have families to feed.

On Wednesday the Minister of Finance said that if you are sinking below a mountain of debt you will feel better because the

rates are lower. When people lose their jobs they are devastated and this government does not seem to care.

Will the Minister of Finance give Canadians the tax cut they need now so they can save their jobs now and create more jobs now? That requires no bureaucracy, no administration, and that can be in place this weekend.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, had the hon. member been there and had he listened, he would know what was said. When somebody buys a new car today it costs $500 less in interest. That puts money in his pocket. When he has to renew his mortgage it puts $3,000 more in his pocket. That helps the economy.

We keep going back to this new found interest of the Reform Party in job creation. On September 18, 1993 in Penticton, British Columbia the Reform Party leader said that it would take up to three years before any job creation would occur under his party's economic plan. He went on to say that his zero in three plan would actually cost more jobs in the interim.

If his plan had been followed there would be negative job creation in Canada. Under the Liberals there have been over 600,000 new jobs created. We are ahead of them by a lot.

Rail Transportation

[René Canuel, Bloc, Matapédia—Matane, QC]

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

Since CN has announced it plans to sell or abandon the line between Chandler and Gaspé, no buyer has been found, and this line may disappear altogether. On October 4, the minister told this House that his department was looking into the matter and that the government had not made a decision yet.

Can the minister tell us today whether this decision has now been made and what the government's involvement, if any, will be?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that when we have information to report I will give it to him.

Many of the decisions that are involved in transport issues are complex because we are not dealing with a single mode of transportation but with the impact of one mode against another. When I have the information I will provide it to him.

[René Canuel, Bloc, Matapédia—Matane, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we always get partial answers. We are told that no decision has been made, and that it will come eventually. In the meantime, people in the Gaspé peninsula are still waiting.

Last summer, when she visited the eastern part of Quebec, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration suggested on behalf of her government that a transition fund be provided, the same way it has been for ports and wharfs, in order to maintain the Chandler-Gaspé line.

When is the minister going to follow up on his colleague's suggestion?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should correct the impression given in the House that somehow or another these transportation links have been abandoned. They have not.

Naturally we are working to create the type of future system which is competitive, which allows the people of the area a better chance to improve their economy. With the assistance of my friend the hon. minister of immigration and others in this government, we will make sure we have a transportation system that is viable for people in the future, which is not a drain on the economy, which allows them to take advantage of every opportunity they may have for job creation and economic development.

Road Safety

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Halton—Peel, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport.

Canada ranks fifth among developed countries in road safety. There are some rather troubling statistics. In 1995, 3,300 people died. Another 250,000 suffered injuries. Forty-five per cent of those who died were driving while drunk.

How will the minister's recently announced road safety strategy achieve the goal of making Canada's roads the safest in the world?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for his interest in this extremely important subject. I note the task he has set for us, of being the best in the world in this regard.

I am pleased to report that I met with my provincial colleagues in Charlottetown over the last three days and we now have a new program, Road Safety Vision 2001, which we will implement. The key to the success of the initiative is that we will crack down on impaired driving and high risk drivers. We will work to increase seatbelt use which is now just above 90 per cent. We wish to increase that to over 95 per cent by the year 2001.

I should add that this is an extremely serious matter. If we think back 30 years and use the figures the hon. member has given us, we will realize that the deaths on Canadian roads in the past 30 years are equivalent to the whole population of one of our provinces, the province I was in yesterday, Prince Edward Island. We have to do something about that type of number.

Goods And Services Tax

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is Family Week and this government is still taxing reading, learning and the future of Canadians, in spite of the Prime Minister's promise to remove the GST on books and in spite of the government's own statistics which state literacy is important. Society rewards individuals who are proficient and penalize those who are not in terms of employment opportunities and job success.

Given this government's own findings and the promise by the Prime Minister, how can the Minister of Finance continue to rationalize the GST on reading materials?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will have noticed that in the discussions we are having with Atlantic Canada, the government has made it very clear that there need not be any increase in the tax on books.

What remains to be determined is what is the best way to promote literacy, what is the best way to promote greater education. If the hon. member will look at what we did in the last budget, the increase in the education credits, the increase in the credits available to allow single mothers to go back to school and take care of their children at the same time, she will notice that this government puts great store in increased education and literacy. What the government is really seeking is the best method to accomplish it with very scarce financial resources.

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I must remind the minister that the GST is still going to be on the books. The provinces may bite the bullet themselves and take the 8 per cent rebate, but the GST will still be on books and this government promised to remove it. If mothers have to buy a science or medical book which may cost $100 and they are paying an additional 15 per cent, that is just too much money.

I say again the statistics find that an unemployed person is three times more likely to be at the lowest reading level than someone who is employed. I again ask the Minister of Finance to please address this question: When will the government help families, help those mothers at home, keep its election promise and remove the GST on books?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows full well, there are books and there are books. As the Minister of Industry has just said, is the member recommending that we basically take the tax off smut? Is it not worthwhile in this particular society to make sure that in fact we focus that money on learning materials? Is it not worthwhile that we enable the mothers the hon. member referred to, to be able to have decent care at home for their children so that they can go out and increase their capacity to learn?

This government essentially has a restricted budget as indeed the Reform Party I think understands. What we really want to do is to target those moneys where we are going to get the maximum impact. That is what we are in the process of doing.

Air Transportation

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

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

We read in this morning's Le Devoir that the Minister of Transport is using a new diversionary tactic in an attempt to reassure his Liberal colleagues about his favouritism for Canadian Airlines. As the article says, the minister's arguments do not bear close scrutiny. The minister does not mention that he is limiting Air Canada's access to Canadian's traditional market, while he is throwing Air Canada's traditional markets wide open to Canadian.

Rather than referring to the policy of the former government, can the minister explain his own double standard policy to us, one which has Air Canada losing Prague after 365 days, while Canadian has nearly two years to provide service to India, the Philippines and Malaysia?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for this opportunity to speak on the government's policy on Canadian air carriers. We want travellers to be able to choose between the two carriers, and others in Canada, and we want the Canadian airline industry itself to be strong.

Our policy will support that objective. Our policy on air transportation is focussed on how to make the pie bigger, not just on dividing it up. That is what differentiates us from the Bloc. They just want to divide it up into smaller portions, while we want to make the whole pie bigger.

For example, in the past 14 to 16 months, Air Canada has created a thousand other jobs for its transborder services. Canadian has done the same thing, with 700 new jobs. Bombardier has just got a

billion dollar jet order. What we are trying to do then, is to make the pie bigger, not divide it into smaller portions.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the minister's actions speak louder than his words. If the 365 day policy is as rigid as the minister claims it is, how can he justify waiting more than 412 days before imposing his rule and withdrawing the Prague route from Air Canada, on the very day Air Canada was setting the date for service to Prague?