Debates of Oct. 22nd, 1996

Employment

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the debate on jobs in this House and in the country is going to come down to this. Reformers are going to offer Canadians a $94 billion a year federal government. The finance minister is going to offer Canadians a $109 billion a year federal government.

We will take the $15 billion difference and give it to taxpayers and entrepreneurs to create jobs. The finance minister will put $15 billion in the hands of the tax man.

Why does the government believe that $15 billion in the hands of the tax man will create more jobs than that $15 billion in the hands of Canadian investors and consumers?

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

Mr. Speaker, if the leader of the Reform Party does not want to listen to the advice of the government, perhaps he should listen to the advice of a friend of his in Alberta who said: "Before federal politicians talk about tax cuts they should get the budget balanced and start paying down the debt". That was said by the premier of the province of Alberta.

The Canadian Armed Forces

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

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

The new Minister of National Defence promised to clean things up in the armed forces, but his first move after his appointment was to hide from the public the amount of the compensation granted to General Boyle to get him to resign.

Since taxpayers' money was used, could the minister of defence tell us the terms of the settlement reached with General Boyle when he handed in his resignation? In other words, how much money was General Boyle given to resign?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure my hon. colleague would agree that some rules apply, whatever the circumstances.

General Boyle did resign. People who reach an agreement at the end of their careers, just like General Boyle did, are entitled to have their settlements respected and kept confidential. If the hon. member believes that all the settlements agreed upon with every employee leaving the civil service or the army should be divulged, he should tell the House that this is the policy of his party.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since the minister uses the taxpayers' money, the taxpayers have the right to know. This type of information is available elsewhere, in Quebec for instance.

When General Boyle resigned, the Prime Minister stated that the general's departure was handled according to the rules that normally apply in such situations. In other words, when the Prime Minister and the minister talk about normal rules, could it mean a golden handshake of over half a million dollars?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, it is very unfortunate that the hon. member does not wish to respond to the suggestion that I made to him.

If he is suggesting that in every case where taxpayers' money is used to arrive at settlements with people who are leaving the public service or leaving the military, that it should be made public, then let us not zero in just on General Boyle, let us make sure that it is a rule across the board. In that case I would be prepared to entertain the suggestion of the hon. member.

He said in his second question that this was the rule in Quebec. For the Quebec army?

Taxes

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Reformers think it is immoral for Canadians to work seven months out of the year before they get to keep their own money. We think it is immoral to raise taxes 35 times over three years and see the after tax income on nurses, truck drivers, steelworkers and teachers fall by $3,000. We think it is immoral for the government to allow some wealthy families to income split when most cannot.

Why does the Minister of Finance not acknowledge that his taxation policies have punished all Canadian families and that all Canadian families deserve to see the government balance the budget and give all Canadians lower taxes?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party is giving lessons on taxes when its proposals or its so-called fresh start would tax the poor to pay the rich. Tens of thousands of Canadians, according to the press, who make over $150,000 a year would be paying no taxes under its scheme.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, actually the smallest percentage cut is for the wealthy and that is probably what is really bothering the finance minister and his friend, the minister for financial institutions.

Under our plan families earning under $20,000 would see a minimum 32 per cent drop in their taxes. Are those the wealthy people the minister is referring to? For single parent families that figure will be a 95 per cent drop in taxes. Are those the people the member is referring to? I do not think so.

Why is the minister so determined to pummel ordinary Canadians? When will he offer tax relief to real Canadians who work too hard to pay taxes that are just too high?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, there is a difference of opinion here on the effect of the so-called fiscal plan of the Reform Party. The fiscal plan of the Reform Party was designed to tax the poor to the benefit of the rich. It is mean spirited.

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

You have not read it.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Have you read it?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Scarborough East, ON]

We in this government are not going to follow the advice to do that.

Almost every group has said a broad based tax cut is not the way to go and we are not going to go with that.

Copyright

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Richelieu, QC]

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

Today, groups of performing artists and record producers have said in no uncertain terms that the government's proposal on neighbouring rights is unacceptable. According to this proposal, 72 per cent of advertising revenues of broadcasters will not be subject to neighbouring rights.

Since in this case two-thirds of Canadian radio stations, the government's proposal means paying 13 cents per day in neighbouring rights for performing artists, does the Minister of Canadian Heritage admit that this is clearly insufficient and should be changed along the lines of the ADISQ proposal, for instance?

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

Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member opposite was a member of the Conservative Party, for years ministers promised to go ahead with a bill on copyright. None were able to come up with this kind of proposal.

We promised to do so, and we did it. We are now before the committee, which, for the first time, is examining recognition of composers' rights. This is a step in the right direction, a step that

unfortunately was not taken when the hon. member opposite was with the government.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Richelieu, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if I understood the minister correctly, 13 cents per day is enough. I assume she will give them a flag as a consolation prize.

All creators agree that the exceptions this bill makes for museums, libraries, archives and schools change the nature of copyright by in fact denying them that right.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage support the cause of the artists or will she cave in to pressure from users?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear the hon. member mention the flag campaign, because one of his own sovereignist colleagues sent a request for a flag. Even separatists want to fly the Canadian flag.

My second point, and it is an important one, is that several ministers, including Marcel Masse, a former Tory minister and now a separatist, had promised to go ahead with the copyright bill, but they were unable to do so.

Finally, by working together with ADISQ and those who broadcast Canadian music on the radio, we have managed a compromise. It is not perfect. It is being examined in committee, but for the first time, it endorses the principle of copyright for composers, something the Conservatives were unable to do.

Fisheries

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, look who is robbing the poor to pay the rich. Devastated fishermen in Atlantic Canada were appalled to learn that the government has siphoned $1.7 million of TAGS money to give to its friends at Bombardier Incorporated.

Can the Minister for Human Resources Development explain to the House and these fishermen how giving $1.7 million of their TAGS money to Bombardier Incorporated, a manufacturing company located in central Canada, is going to help the devastated Atlantic cod fishery?

[Morris Bodnar, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the technology partnerships program, under which money was loaned to Bombardier, is a program in which the Government of Canada is committed to increasing awareness in the high tech industries, and improving and expanding employment in this country. This is a program which we intend to pursue.

There have been other announcements, of which the hon. member should be well aware. Last week the minister announced a $9 million program loan to PetroCan in Vancouver. These are matters which improve employment and the high tech industry. It is good for those industries and for all Canadians.

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this was not a loan. The government has disclosed that it made $1.7 million in non-repayable TAGS contributions to Bombardier in 1988 and 1993. There was not a TAGS program in these years. In fact, this Liberal program only came into existence in 1994.

Can the minister explain why $1.7 million in retroactive TAGS payments were made to Bombardier many years before there was actually even a TAGS program?

[Morris Bodnar, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member refers to a program between 1988 and 1993. Perhaps he should talk to his friends who were defeated in the last election for an answer to that.

Broadcasting

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade.

Yesterday, the Minister of Canadian Heritage told us she had granted a broadcasting license to DMX, an audio programming company, although Canadian and francophone content will represent only 20 per cent and 13 per cent respectively of its programming, well below Canadian content broadcasting requirements.

Since the heritage minister's decision was made in response to pressure exerted by the U.S. Secretary of State for Trade on her Canadian counterpart, will the Minister for International Trade release all the correspondence between them?

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

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member opposite said is totally false.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

In that case, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage will have no problem tabling the letters in this House. We have one from DMX referring to this. Will the minister agree to table the letters?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I said last week, the letters are available and they show that Canadian content was raised from 30 to 40 per cent, which represents a 25 per cent

increase. This increase was negotiated through the policies we have put forward because we believe in Canadian culture, unlike the sovereignist members, unfortunately.