House of Commons Hansard #84 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was flag.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the hon. member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell should not applaud. He might be shown the door if the other one comes back.
Will the Prime Minister pledge in this House that the former defence minister will not be back in cabinet so long as a report shedding light on the whole issue of the falsification of the documents and his responsibility regarding this operation will not be made public?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is the prerogative of the Prime Minister to appoint someone to the cabinet when he decides to do so. The minister handed me his resignation for very honourable reasons and I accepted it with much regret. I maintain that he has done an extraordinary job as Minister of National Defence, under extremely difficult circumstances.
The previous government had seven defence ministers in nine years. The minister who resigned last Friday succeeded in making huge cuts and in reducing military personnel, including the number of generals, which went down from 125 to 70. The former minister has earned the thanks of this House for a job well done.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, how can the Prime Minister refuse to wait until the release of an interim report on the falsification of documents, before thinking about bringing back in the cabinet his friend, the former defence minister? After all, the Prime Minister said in this House, on October 2, and I quote: "It is exactly because I want the commission to finish its work that I will not prejudge the conclusions of the commissioners".
Perhaps it would be wiser to wait. Who knows what the conclusions of the commission might be? It might be better for the Prime Minister to not second guess these findings.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as the defence minister said on several occasions two days ago, yesterday and today, the government hopes that the commission will fulfil its mandate to shed light on what occurred in Somalia.
This is the commission's mandate and we hope to get the report as soon as possible, so that, if changes must be made within the armed forces structure because of these incidents, the defence minister will be in a position to make them as quickly as possible. If the commission wants to report before March, this will be fine with us.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, this is family week and Canadians want to know what the Liberals are doing for families who continue to support their children who cannot find jobs.
Recently the finance minister admitted that employment insurance works as a deterrent to new hiring. With the huge surplus built up in the EI fund, when will the new Minister of Human Resources Development announce a cut in the premiums so that Canadian youth can find the jobs they are so desperately seeking?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt about the importance of reducing payroll taxes.
In the first year that we took office the UI premiums at that time were supposed to go to $3.30 but we did not allow that to happen. In fact under this administration they have gone down to $3.07, to $2.95 and to $2.90 last year. At the same time we have introduced a whole series of measures such that since we have taken office we have reduced the unemployment insurance burden on salaries by $1.8 billion, precisely to put people back to work.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister talks about the first year in office. The first year in office the debt was at $490 billion. It is approaching $600 billion and we still have 18 per cent unemployment among our youth.
The employment insurance system discriminates against young people, even those with jobs. Full time students are forced to pay premiums even though by law they are never able to collect those benefits. Premiums are monies they badly need for texts and tuition. Will the new Minister of Human Resources Development act immediately to exempt full time students from paying premiums for insurance they cannot collect?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talks about helping young people. Let us look at the record.
The fact is when the previous Minister of Human Resources Development increased the amount of money to be made available for summer students, the Reform Party opposed it. When this government increased the tuition credits for students going to school, the Reform Party opposed it. When this government made more money available to caregivers so that they could go to school while their children were taken care of, the Reform Party opposed it.
The Reform Party has opposed every single measure brought before this House to help students, to help young Canadians. The fact is members of the Reform Party are disconnected from the reality of the Canadian public.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.
We learned today that the government has decided not to appeal the Alberta Court of Appeal's decision last June to strike down the provisions of the federal law prohibiting third parties from spending more than $1,000 on advertising during election campaigns.
Does the minister not believe that his decision not to appeal this ruling could create a situation similar to that in the U.S., where rich lobby groups can finance the candidates they want and therefore unfairly influence election results?
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Labour and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the hon. member that my colleague, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada, intends to review the whole issue and propose measures to correct the situation.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government has an opportunity to make these changes and appeal this ruling.
Is the minister's inaction not an admission that he is quietly getting ready to support the Libman case to be heard by the Supreme Court, which challenges the provisions of Quebec's referendum legislation on expenditure limits, in order to defend his own Liberal colleagues and friends and fine tune the government's strategy in Quebec's next referendum campaign?
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Labour and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the hon. member that this case
deals only with the Canada Elections Act, and not with the Referendum Act.
So, as far as the Canada Elections Act is concerned, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada is reviewing the situation and will soon be in a position to come back with proposals.
Denis Paradis Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Mr. Speaker, since the French government announced plans to ban the use of asbestos, government officials from Quebec have been bustling about and repeating that they are actively looking into the matter. The federal government is dealing with the matter, but the thousands of asbestos workers involved are starting to lose patience.
Could the Minister of Natural Resources tell us whether the government is actively pursuing the asbestos matter and, if so, what progress has been made so far?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I reassure the hon. member that the federal government has an aggressive strategy in relation to the asbestos issue which we are pursuing in partnership with a number of other key stakeholders, including the province of Quebec.
A few weeks ago I took the opportunity to meet with my Quebec counterpart. She and I determined that the best approach was a co-operative partnership. We are now in the process of developing that partnership.
My colleague the Minister for International Trade has made representations to many foreign governments, including France. My colleague the Minister of Health has intervened with his colleague the French Minister of Health to ensure that the record is clear in relation to the accurate and true medical and health facts surrounding the use of asbestos.
Yesterday it was with great pleasure that I announced that my department will be providing $500,000 to the Asbestos Institute to continue a research program in relation to the controlled and safe use of substances.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister gave the House an unbelievable excuse for not releasing his secret ethics guidelines for cabinet ministers. He said that it was British parliamentary tradition that prevented him from making the guidelines public. The Prime Minister must know that the British government released its guidelines in this connection in 1992.
I ask the Prime Minister again, will he now make the ethics guidelines for cabinet ministers public?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, these guidelines are instructions from the Prime Minister to his ministers and they are obliged to follow them. There is an officer who advises them and when ministers feel they have a problem, they receive guidance.
These are instructions that the Prime Minister gives to his ministers. As I said, at the end of the day, in the British tradition, it is the Prime Minister who is responsible for the conduct and I have always accepted full responsibility in those matters. The guidelines are instructions for my ministers. Communications between the Prime Minister and the ministers by the nature of our system are confidential.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister apparently feels that ethics are a private matter between himself and the ministers. He will not release the guidelines and he only uses them when it is to his political advantage, as in sacking the Minister of National Defence.
Ethics are a public matter. For the public to judge whether the conduct of the Prime Minister's ministers is ethical, they need to know what the guidelines are. How are Canadians supposed to know whether the ethics guidelines followed by cabinet ministers are ethical if the Prime Minister will not make them public?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the leader of the third party is arguing that the minister should not have resigned. He gave me his letter of resignation and I accepted it. I presume from the line of questioning by the hon. member that it was not a sufficient reason to resign, but with the standards that we have, it was enough.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
Yesterday, the new Minister of Human Resources Development, and I take this opportunity to congratulate him-
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
I repeat, to pity him to some extent.
Yesterday, the new minister expressed pride in the reform undertaken by his predecessors to modernize our unemployment insurance system and adapt it to what he called the new economy.
Does the minister realize that, under his so-called modern system, many people who have to rely on unemployment insurance, too many people really, will receive lower benefits for a shorter period because of tighter eligibility requirements?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her first question to me in this House. I am delighted.
I can assure all Canadians that our goal in introducing this new employment insurance system is to move away from passive measures and toward active measures that make work more attractive, thereby helping workers go from unemployment to employment.
This is a much more positive approach. And I would like to draw the hon. member's attention to the fact that a larger number of Canadians are covered under this system than the old one and that a larger number of women are benefiting in particular.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister will have to make a quick review of the issue, because I am asking him whether he realizes that these active measures planned for the next five years represent only a $200 million increase, while at the same time more than $65 billion will be paid out in UI benefits. The shift toward active measures is a smoke screen.