Debates of Oct. 30th, 1996

Quebec

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have been hearing the same thing for 30 years. Except that when we are in Quebec, Quebecers tell us they want us to work on improving the economy of Quebec and of Canada in order to create jobs for Quebecers.

Today, while these people are talking about independence, separation, and the Constitution, Quebec is foundering. We in the government have put Canada's financial house in order. That is why, for example, Quebecers are enjoying interest rates that are 3.25 per cent lower than in the United States. That is what Canada is doing to help Quebecers.

But the Bloc Quebecois is still harping on the Constitution. While we are working to create jobs for Quebecers, they are making jobs disappear.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister realize some day that Canada cannot be changed, because there are two visions of this country, one that is shared by a majority of Canadians who, rightly so, want to have a country that meets their needs, and the other that is shared by a minority, namely Quebecers, who also want a country that meets their needs?

Will the Prime Minister realize that nothing will change as long as he refuses to recognize this reality?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the minority vision is the vision of separation, which is rejected by the vast majority of Quebecers when the question is put to them clearly. The vast majority of Quebecers want to keep on being Canadian. They want to celebrate their Quebec and Canadian identities as a strength, as a formidable complementarity that they will never give up if the question is put to them in a clear and honest manner.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister can make all the nice speeches he wants, here or elsewhere.

But will the Prime Minister admit, one year later, that the promises he made just before the referendum, which were light years away from what Quebecers want in any case, have not even been fulfilled? Is this not the best proof that he has nothing left to offer, except futile comments on the Constitution?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, those who have nothing left to offer and who, in fact, never had anything to offer are the members of the secessionist bloc who sit across the floor.

Theirs is a party which, day after day in this House, cultivates jealousy, behaves like it is besieged and thinks it is a victim of discrimination. And who are the tormentors? I imagine it is the bad anglos, but the Bloc cannot support its contentions.

Quebecers have had enough of this narrow vision. More and more of them are distancing themselves from it and are preparing to enter the new century along with the other Canadians.

The Economy

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister said that he wanted to debate the issues in the House. Let us debate the issues in the House.

The reality is that 1.5 million Canadians are still unemployed, consumer confidence has plummeted even though we have such low interest rates, and Canadian families have suffered a $3,000 pay cut since 1993. Those are the facts. He knows them, I know them. Canadians are worse off now than when the Liberals took power in 1993.

Since these three years of Liberal economic mismanagement have failed to make a dent in unemployment, consumer confidence or the tax burden, why will the Prime Minister not do this: balance the budget, cut taxes and create real jobs?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the facts of the matter are, since we have taken office, over 700,000 new jobs have been created by the private sector. Since we have taken office, the unemployment rate has dropped by a point and a half. Since we have taken office, Canada's current account surplus has been the highest that it has been since 1984. We have become one of the major exporting nations of the world. We have turned the economy around and it is felt from coast to coast to coast.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, only by tax relief are we going to see true job creation and people feeling better about themselves.

The reality Canadians are facing is this. People are working too hard to pay taxes that are too high. Paycheques are shrinking, job security is disappearing and family time is taking a back seat to overtime and tax time.

Reform will give Canadians $15 billion in tax relief, $2,000 for the average Canadian family by the year 2000, because leaving

more money in the taxpayer's pocket as the minister knows is more valuable than leaving it in the hands of a politician.

Why will the Prime Minister not give Canadians tax relief and create real, long term, sustainable jobs for Canadians?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what the Reform Party is offering to do is to cut the Canadian health and social transfer by $3.5 billion. What the Reform Party is offering to do is to cut equalization payments for the seven provinces which require them without having the courage and the guts to stand up in the House and tell us what provinces they are going to do it to.

Will the Reform Party members from Saskatchewan stand up here and say that people in Saskatchewan are not entitled to the same level of public services as other Canadians? No, they will not do it. They are going to hide.

What the Reform Party has offered us is a massive attack on the middle class. What Reformers are offering to do is to pit region against region, Canadian against Canadian. They would destroy the Canadian dream. That is what they are offering us.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Beaver River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would hate to take us down the same road that we went yesterday. I will not say what I said, but the minister must have some pretty serious concerns about that.

He says that we will cut health care. Maybe now it is becoming clear to me why this minister is the finance minister and why there are some serious problems. We are talking about putting $4 billion back into health care. He has cut $3 billion. That may be why we are having such serious problems within the finance department.

The Prime Minister last weekend told delegates that once the budget was balanced his government would return to its free spending Liberal ways. The Prime Minister could lower taxes if he was willing to kick his spending habit. That is the problem.

Why does the Prime Minister think that $15 billion in the hands of government bureaucrats or politicians will do more good than those $15 billion in the hands of Canadian taxpayers?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. What the Reform Party members are saying is that they will take $3.5 billion out of the Canadian health and social transfer and then they ask Canadians to trust them to put it back four years later. Four years, after how many hospitals would have been closed? Four years, after how many low income Canadians would have suffered? That is what the Reform Party has offered.

If we want to know what they really think, we could take a look at their first budget. Their first budget was a massive attack on health care. Their first budget said that we should have two-tier health care. Their first budget said that the principles of the Canada Health Act did not apply. Their first budget really gave what they really believe and that is an idealism that is not Canadian.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in an interview at last week's Liberal convention, the Minister of Heritage stated that she was not responsible-an opinion we share-for the fact that the CBC budget had been reduced by $127 million in 1996-97. According to her, the responsibility lay with the Minister of Finance.

How can the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Heritage explain to us today her flagrant lack of ministerial solidarity in dumping onto her colleague, the Minister of Finance, her own responsibilities and commitments toward the CBC?

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

Mr. Speaker, I was not interviewed at the Liberal convention.

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on several occasions in this House she has fobbed off responsibility for the cuts onto the Minister of Finance. Her response indicates how little importance she attached to the reality of a recommendation, and of Liberal commitments, to find stable multi year funding for the CBC.

On the weekend, Pierre Juneau, the author of the Juneau report, was quoted in the Toronto Star as being concerned about the future of Radio Canada International, as was the Conseil de presse du Québec. So we are just where we were a year ago.

Will the Deputy Minister and Minister of Heritage commit now, before this House, to take all of the steps necessary to save Radio Canada International, instead of once again dumping it onto her colleague in finance?

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

Mr. Speaker, I can assure my honourable colleague, as I assured those attending the meeting of national media women, that I am working in close collaboration with the Minister of Finance on our promise of a long-term stabilization fund. I am also doing the same with respect to the future of Radio Canada International.

The Economy

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are not fooled by the Liberals' spin on their pathetic record.

Canadian families have suffered a $3,000 national pay cut per year, and since the Liberals came to office 1.5 million real people are still looking for jobs. The Conference Board of Canada is saying that the government's low interest rate policy has failed to inspire consumer confidence. According to Statistics Canada, this "reflects the ongoing dead weight of weak income and labour markets".

When will the finance minister admit that because his policies are not working Canadians are not working?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is not quoting the conference board correctly. What the conference board has said is that there is a lag time between interest rate cuts and job creation. It pointed to the tremendous interest rate cuts as having been one of the main reasons that there has been stronger job creation in Canada than in any other G-7 country outside of the United States.

What the hon. member ought to do is to look at the fundamental measures the government has taken in terms of job creation; our external trade and the fact that we have become one of the major exporting nations of the world; the Team Canada missions led by the Prime Minister which have led to contract after contract; the summer jobs from the Minister of Human Resources Development; the amount of money we have put into research and development; the amount of money we have put into trade financing; the support of small and medium size businesses. All of this is leading to a very, very healthy economy.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I say to the finance minister, tell that to 1.5 million unemployed Canadians.

Canada Trust's chief economist has said: "Unless we have a real strong sense of job security, interest rates just are not going to entice people into spending".

The finance minister's job creation strategy is in the tank. When will he admit that what Canadians really need is smaller government and more job creating, confidence creating tax relief?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I think one really ought to give the lie to the bogus myth that the Reform Party is putting forward.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Give the lie to is not saying it is a lie. Try a little bit of English instruction.

What the Reform Party members are suggesting in their tax cuts is to simply shift the tax burden on to the provinces. They would cut federal taxes on the one hand and then they would cut equalization. When they cut equalization in Saskatchewan, do they not think that the Government of Saskatchewan is going to have to look at its own revenues? When they cut the Canada health and social transfer and they cut the revenues of the provinces by $3.5 billion, do they not think the provinces are going to have to look to their revenues? When they cut federal taxes, they are as well cutting the revenues that go to the provinces. Do they not think the provinces will have to increase taxes?

The Canadian Armed Forces

[Jean H. Leroux, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of National Defence. The fact that francophones are consistently under-represented within the armed forces is common knowledge. We have known that for quite some time. What we did not know is that the army's chief historian concluded recently in a book of over 700 pages on the subject, and I quote: "If there is a problem, it is perhaps due to the fact that there is no motivation".

Does the new Minister of National Defence endorse the conclusions of his chief historian as to the cause of consistent under-representation of francophones with the forces, and if so, what does he intend to do about this problem?

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

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that in a number of sectors, it has always been a challenge to ensure adequate representation of francophones, and that is the case in the armed forces. The historian in question mentioned a situation which, as the hon. member pointed out, is common knowledge.

We are trying to remedy the situation, and I can inform the hon. member that it has certainly improved. If we look at all the reports made over a certain period of time, there has been an improvement but, as in many other sectors, much remains to be done, and we will try to do it to the best of our ability.

[Jean H. Leroux, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, francophones in Canada and Quebec are sick and tired of hearing people say it is always a challenge to give us our fair share. The minister's chief historian also concluded that francophone officers always have to take most of their training in English. I may remind the minister that it was his government, the Liberal government, that

closed the Saint-Jean military college. That is certainly not going to reverse the trend.

What explanation does the minister have for a comment by his historian that the army never wanted to have francophones in the intelligence sector, for instance? Is it or is it not true that francophones are systematically kept out of certain strategic positions in the Canadian army?

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

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I should start naming all the outstanding individuals who have ever held senior positions in the Canadian forces, in order to refute the allegations made by the hon. member.

I can tell him that today about 27 per cent of the people in the Canadian forces are francophones. I acknowledge the hon. member's concerns, and I want to give him the assurance that we are making progress with our recruitment both for the regular forces and for the officers corps, even after the closing of the military college in the province of Quebec.

Young Canadians who want to be part of the Canadian forces are very conscious of the challenge they are facing if they come from a francophone region in Canada. This has been going on for a long time, but it is improving. I am delighted to see that the hon. member is still interested in the future of the Canadian forces.