Debates of Oct. 9th, 1996

The Canadian Armed Forces

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. By the way, we noticed that he said "the rest" of affairs were being managed well, so we understand that that particular one was not.

The Prime Minister said that the decision of his former defence minister was in no way linked to the Somalia affair, but rather to the code of ethics issue.

But yesterday, the new defence minister very clearly linked the departure of the former minister and that of General Boyle to the

Somalia affair, stating, and I quote: "In recent days, two people have taken some very difficult steps. First my colleague, theformer Minister of National Defence, resigned, and now today, General Boyle has done so as well".

Is the Prime Minister aware that in his desperation to save the face of his government, he is going so far that his new defence minister no longer dares to follow him?

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

Mr. Speaker, what is very interesting in the line of questions we are hearing this afternoon is that we know that it is thanks to the actions of this government in calling for an inquiry into what went on in Somalia. That is why we have some facts and expect many more to come out.

And as for the issue of my predecessor's resignation as Minister of National Defence, there again we have an action that was undoubtedly very difficult for the former Minister of National Defence. Why did he decide to hand in his resignation? Because of the guidelines established by the Prime Minister of Canada and his government to ensure that the government runs well.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

my supplementary is for the Prime Minister.

Can the Prime Minister tell us whether the fact that his new Minister of National Defence keeps coming back to the need to get to the bottom only of the events that took place in Somalia is a way for his government to divert attention and to bury once and for all the document altering and cover-up operation?

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

Not at all, Mr. Speaker. First of all, it was the hon. member and other members in this House who asked for a preliminary report from the investigators on the questions having to do with the whole situation concerning General Boyle. All I said was that, with General Boyle's resignation yesterday, this topic has obviously been dealt with to a certain extent.

I will accept the proposal of the hon. member and other members in this House and assure them that not only will we get to the bottom of what interests you today, but that we will get to the bottom of what interests Canadians: what went on in Somalia. It is for that reason that I am in agreement with those who want the Commission of Inquiry to deliver a report at the end of March, as scheduled, precisely so that when we go into an election there is no cover-up.

Employment

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government now has some very serious blots on its

performance record, its broken GST promise and the fiasco at national defence to mention two.

However, the biggest blot of all is still the government's failure to deliver on its election promise of jobs, jobs, jobs. There are 1.4 million unemployed, 2 million to 3 million underemployed and 4 million workers worried about losing their jobs; almost one-half of the entire Canadian labour force.

Where is the government's plan to create the millions, not the hundreds of thousands, of new and better jobs required to fulfil its election promise?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have a very definite plan concerning that. We have managed to create 665,000 new jobs in the Canadian economy over three years. We have also managed to run the economy with 1.5 per cent inflation.

The Minister of Finance, in addressing the problem of the government's deficit, has always managed to do better than the plan he had put forward. That is the way we do things. In two years time there will be no need for the government to borrow money, something that has not been done in the last 25 years.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is one glaring weakness in the Prime Minister's answer. The only way to have job creation in the numbers required to satisfy Canadians is through lower taxes and through leaving more dollars in the pockets of consumers and private sector job creators. However, this government cannot deliver lower taxes. In fact, it is doing the opposite. It is taking $25 billion more out of the pockets of taxpayers than it did in the year it was elected.

When is the government going to make major tax cuts to generate the millions of new and better jobs required by Canadians?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I remember campaigning, and the only problem the country faced at that time was the reduction of the deficit. That was the only speech the leader of the third party had. It is amazing that he has not found a new one.

Jobs have been created in Canada; more than in Italy, more than in Germany, more than in France and more than in Great Britain all together.

It is not a priority of this government to give a 10 per cent tax cut to those with a million dollar per year income. When we have room our priority will be to make sure that some of the benefits will go first to those in society who need them most. That is certainly not the preoccupation of the member from the third party.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the real reason the Prime Minister cannot talk about tax cuts is that his government has been one of the slowest in the country at deficit reduction.

He points to European countries and yet his government is behind Alberta on deficit reduction. He is behind Ontario on deficit reduction. He is behind Nova Scotia on deficit reduction. He is behind Newfoundland on deficit reduction.

Around the kitchen table, as distinct from the cabinet table, Canadians are worried about a drop in their disposable income. The after tax income of the average Canadian family has dropped $3,000 since the Liberals came to power.

What is the Prime Minister going to do to address the $3,000 pay cut which his government has delivered to Canadian families?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, to give one example, because of the good management of this government the interest rate went down by 3 per cent or 4 per cent in the last year and a few months.

Somebody with a mortgage of $50,000 will pay $1,500 less after tax. Somebody with a $100,000 mortgage will pay $3,000 less after tax. Somebody who has bought a car for $15,000 will pay $500 less in interest each year. This is because we have a good Minister of Finance and a good government.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

May I ask you, my colleagues, to please tighten up a little on the questions and on the answers.

The Somalia Inquiry

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

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

The Minister of National Defence said in the House that he wants a thorough investigation of what happened in Somalia. The official opposition agrees with him. But if he wants to find out what really happened in Somalia, he should first of all have a thorough investigation of the document tampering that went on afterwards.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

Mr. Speaker, I must say they are pretty touchy today!

If the minister refuses to order an interim report on the document tampering, could it be because the cover up occurred under the current Liberal government?

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

Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, we want a thorough investigation of everything that happened in connection with the situation in Somalia.

The mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on Somalia is quite clear. The commission is to consider all aspects, and we hope to have some answers as soon as possible and, especially, some recommendations.

I could not agree more with the hon. member. If the members of the commission of inquiry think they should produce an interim report, that is up to them. We are not going to give instructions to the commission. I am sure all members of this House realize that one should not interfere with the work of the commission of inquiry.

That being said, I hope the hon. member will join our efforts to ensure that there is a thorough investigation of what happened in Somalia and that the commission of inquiry will report as scheduled on March 31, 1997, so that everyone, all Canadians and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces and members of this House will have the information they need to make an informed decision if by any chance an election is called in 1997.

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

Mr. Speaker, will the minister admit that the government is trying to arrange things so there will be no release of any report on document tampering by the commission of inquiry before the next election, to save the face of the government and that of the Prime Minister?

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

Mr. Speaker, I will try and do some face saving for the benefit of the hon. member. This was my answer to this question: Yes, if the members of the Commission of Inquiry on Somalia believe it is in the best interests of all concerned and it is part of their mandate, and if they wish to publish an interim report, they can go ahead. I am not asking them to do so because I do not want to interfere with the work of the inquiry. But if they think it should be done, I have no objection.

In fact, and I say this to avoid any misunderstand, I hope to get to the bottom of all this, not only of the facts that are of interest to the hon. member but of who did what in Somalia, how this was possible, how it was covered up, if there was a cover up, who is responsible, and how we can make sure this will not happen again.

I would like to have, and I am sure all members of this House are with me on this, all the answers to everything connected with the Somalia affair before the next election. This does not mean I know the date. That is always at the discretion of the Prime Minister. It is after all his prerogative. I hope the commission of inquiry will

publish its report on March 31, as scheduled, then we will all know where we are.

Taxation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, many Canadian families would like to have the option to have one parent stay at home if they so choose, but under the current tax system the typical single earner family with an income of $60,000 a year pays $7,000 more in taxes than does a family with the same income and both parents in the workforce.

Can the finance minister tell the House why he and his government continue to promote discriminatory tax policies that deny families the freedom to make the parenting choices for their children?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the member cares to take a look at the Income Tax Act or at government policy he will find out that the situation is really quite different than the one which he has described.

As an example, within the existing system, to the benefit of married families, is the married credit which reduces income taxes by as much as $1,500 for a couple under the circumstances which the member has described.

At the same time there is a special supplement under the child tax benefit for parents who care for their preschool children at home. The child tax benefit is based on family income, so it automatically increases when a parent gives up a job to stay at home.

The fact is the tax system directly answers the member's question. He might do a bit of research before standing up so quickly.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, $7,000 may not be a lot of money to the millionaires of this world, but it is a lot of money to regular Canadians.

Can the finance minister explain to Canadians why one form of child care is worthy of a tax credit while the other is not? Can he explain why his government is yet again interfering with the private parenting choices of Canadian families? Why is there discrimination?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, again it is quite the opposite. We are not interfering with the question of choice. What we have is a system that provides considerable benefits where one of the two parents decides to stay at home for precisely the reasons which I think the member is trying to allude to.

If we immediately went to the kind of system that the member is talking about, the second spouse entering the workforce would immediately face crippling taxation. That makes no sense.

Another thing is a number of the European countries, in fact virtually all of the European countries on a family basis are now shifting to the same kind of taxation that we have in Canada, which is by far the best.

The Canadian Armed Forces

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister praised his former defence minister and said: "I hope some day I will have the opportunity to welcome him back in the cabinet".

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.