House of Commons Hansard #104 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was children.
Jean-Paul Marchand Bloc Québec-Est, QC
Mr. Speaker, is the attitude of the Minister of Canadian Heritage not an embarrassment to the government? She, despite being the person responsible for the application of the Official Languages Act, is just about the only one left refusing to see that the assimilation of francophones outside Quebec continues to progress in leaps and bounds.
Why does the minister persist in denying such evidence?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member really wants to combat the problem of anglicization across Canada, he ought to talk to his Quebec colleague, the Minister of Education, who has just raised by 70 per cent tuition fees for francophones from the rest of Canada wishing to study in Quebec. If the hon. member really wants to ensure the survival of the French language in Canada, he should talk to his friend, Mrs. Marois, and tell her to drop this anti-French policy.
Herb Grubel Reform Capilano—Howe Sound, BC
Mr. Speaker, a study shows that the inclusion of the new federal sales tax in all prices will cost millions of dollars. Computer systems have to be changed and there are the large annual costs of advertising,
ticketing, warehousing and distribution. All these costs will be passed on to already overtaxed consumers.
Will the minister stop this new burden on consumers in Atlantic Canada by withdrawing the required tax in pricing until the federal sales tax is implemented nationwide? It is a request made by Canadian retailers and strongly supported by the Reform Party.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the vast majority of retailers have already incurred the costs of transition. That occurred some time ago when the previous government brought in the GST. Therefore, the costs of transition are quite within the bounds of acceptability.
The ministers of finance of the three Atlantic provinces have agreed to meet with all of the retailers-in fact, that is happening at this very moment-to work out any difficulties which any retailer may have. The provincial governments and the federal government have said to those retailers that we would be quite flexible in making sure that the transition costs are manageable.
Now that those retailers can take the input tax credits there has been a substantial reduction in their costs which we expect will be passed on to the consumer.
Herb Grubel Reform Capilano—Howe Sound, BC
Mr. Speaker, different information is coming from the retailers of Canada to us and to the minister.
The tax-in pricing policy was recommended by the Reform Party in its minority report on GST reform, but only in the context of a nationwide introduction of a federal sales tax. Reform, as well as national retailers, oppose tax in-pricing when it is applied only in Atlantic Canada because it costs too much and has already caused the closing of some retail outlets.
Will the minister stop trying to download on consumers in Atlantic Canada the costs of his party's indefensible, irresponsible and politically opportunistic election promise to eliminate the GST? Do the right thing and scrap the federal sales tax for Atlantic Canada.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that my friend is in the process of engaging in a little historic revisionism of what the Reform Party's position has been on this issue.
The Reform Party has supported harmonization publicly, not necessarily in the House, and it has also supported tax inclusive pricing. I congratulate the Reform Party for that. It is unfortunate that it now, for political purposes, chooses to forget its original position.
The hon. member knows full well that this will lead to a substantial reduction in costs for retailers. There will be a substantial reduction in costs for consumers.
For the sake of discussion, take a look at Newfoundland, where the reduction is between 4 per cent and 5 per cent. In Nova Scotia and New Brunswick it is between a 3 per cent and a 4 per cent reduction on the vast majority of goods, all of those which were previously covered by the GST. In fact, this is very good for the consumer.
Paul Martin Liberal LaSalle—Émard, QC
Mr. Speaker, I will sit down, but it really is a tremendous deal for Atlantic Canada.
Denis Paradis Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.
A lot of questions have been raised about Canadian corporations failing to pay their fair share of taxes. Furthermore, a lot of year end advertising encourages ordinary Canadians to take advantage of tax shelters.
Could the Minister of Finance tell the House what he is doing to ensure everyone pays their fair share?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his work on the public accounts committee in this area. He is well aware that, since forming the government, we have worked with the Minister of National Revenue to eliminate abuse of the tax system.
We have made changes to the system that are very effective in eliminating loopholes. This week, for example, we announced, among other things, that tax shelters related to corporate funding would be limited.
Should you be interested, I can provide you with a list of tax benefits that were eliminated, such as the elimination of the $100,000 capital gains exemption and the imposition of a minimum tax on all deductions used as tax shelters. It goes on for three pages.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for the Canada Post Corporation.
The few measures the minister has taken in response to the report on the future of Canada Post are totally contradictory. On the one hand, she denies it the lucrative activity of delivering advertising. On the other hand, she says the corporation must make its activities cost effective.
Could the minister tell us clearly whether her intention is not really to dismantle the Canada Post Corporation, because she is cutting its revenues and yet asking it to be cost effective?
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC
Mr. Speaker, we are not talking only about dismantling Canada Post, which the minister does not seem to consider seriously, but rather the whole issue of jobs.
Is the minister aware that her decision to force Canada Post to stop delivering advertising mail will mean a loss of 10,000 jobs? Ten thousand jobs means ten thousand more unemployed.
Diane Marleau LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Radwanski travelled across the country and everywhere he went Canadians unanimously told him that they did not wish to have their post office delivering junk mail. As a result of that we asked Canada Post to cease delivering unaddressed economy ad mail or junk mail.
One thing that will happen as a result is that many community newspapers will be able to stay in business and many other small businesses will be able to increase the numbers of people they hire. The work will be transferred to the private sector and Canada Post will continue to do very well what Canadians expect of it, which is deliver first class mail.
Mike Scott Reform Skeena, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
The Atlantic groundfish strategy, otherwise known as TAGS, is off the rails and now we know why. This week we learned that the qualifying rules for TAGS had been ignored and each regional HRD office was making its own eligibility requirements. According to an internal department audit, and I quote from that audit: "The ignoring of these rules was one of the reasons for excessive cost over-runs".
How could the minister allow the gross incompetence which will deny benefits to legitimate fishermen who really need them?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, we are fully aware that the new system, starting with employment insurance, is causing some disruptions because of the change in the number of weeks of required employment. I take note of the question and I will look into it again.
Mike Scott Reform Skeena, BC
Mr. Speaker, it is a little late. The TAGS program was announced in 1994 and it has already almost spent its entire $1.9 billion.
The minister of fisheries is also culpable in this Atlantic Canadian tragedy. The audit revealed that one-third of the licence buyouts by his department, some of which could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars, are unsupported by documentation. Only Quebec files were found to be in order.
This grotesque display of incompetence cost millions of dollars in over-runs and legitimate fishermen are being denied benefits as a result.
How can the minister even pretend to care about Atlantic Canadian fishermen now that we know his political tricks have backfired in his face?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, the insinuations of the member are totally wrong. When the TAGS program was set up the number of candidates who would actually require it were underestimated. That was done by the previous government, as the member knows very well.
The fact that the number of people who actually need it had been underestimated caused a funding problem that we are addressing. It is an important one at this time.
Audrey McLaughlin NDP Yukon, YT
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for Indian affairs.
There is a great concern that the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples' recommendations will be shelved and not taken seriously or acted upon.
I would like to ask the minister if he, along with his government, would consider the immediate establishment of a special committee made up of representatives from aboriginal groups and parliamentarians to discuss and develop an implementation plan of the recommendations and, second, to encourage the Prime Minister to call a first minister's meeting in April 1997 to discuss implementation at that time and also to have the committee report before then.
Ron Irwin LiberalMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question. As a matter of fact, these are two of the recommendations in the report.
As of now, I do not think any of the provinces have seen the report. It will take them about four weeks to read it because it is very extensive. However, I believe these are the two issues that they are going to have to deal with fairly quickly at a first ministers conference, whether they will hold it, whether it needs additional work, the committee that the report is suggesting.
I am prepared to support anything that enhances the lives of the aboriginal people in this country.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
Mr. Speaker, during question period the minister of defence was making some kind of remarks about alley cats and marriages. It seems to me that taking advice on principles from a Liberal cabinet minister is like listening to a pyromaniac talk about firefighting.
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
I would judge that a point of clarification, not a point of order.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask today's most important question: What is the government's legislative agenda for the coming days?
Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to deliver to the House the weekly business statement.
We continue this afternoon with the business of supply, that is to say the opposition day motion we are currently debating. Tomorrow the House shall commence report stage and second reading of Bill C-63, the elections bill. We shall make this bill our priority until it has been passed.
We shall follow this with Bill C-42, the Judges Act amendments; Bill C-62, the fisheries legislation; Bill C-59 regarding passengers by water; Bill C-29, the MMT bill; and then other bills reported from committee.
The House resumed consideration of the motion and the amendment.