Debates of Nov. 27th, 1996

Government Expenditures

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

Yesterday, among the horror stories revealed by the auditor general, we learned that, in order to save $71 on a repair contract for a ship moored in Nova Scotia, the government spent $30,000 to move it to Newfoundland, $30,000 in taxpayers' money wasted to save $71. Unbelievable!

Is the Deputy Prime Minister in a position to explain to us how this could be, what twisted logic was used to justify the decision by someone, somewhere, that it was normal to spend $30,000 in order to save $71?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, the auditor general will surely find, among a total of $120 billion in expenditures, a few projects that have not been very successful.

We agree, and we take the findings of the auditor general to heart. We wish to provide far more efficient government, and we are, moreover, the first government in 50 years to have really reduced government expenditures in absolute terms. We want to see Canadians drawing the full benefit of their tax dollars. This is why we always give the utmost attention to the auditor general's recommendations and correct our mistakes.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I fail to understand how the minister can pass off these little failed projects as trifles, when the auditor general has identified $2.5 billion in waste in his report for 1996.

The minister tells us that he wants to tighten up controls. He makes it sound very simple, but what about the senior public servant who has made an error in judgement? What will happen to him? What will happen to the person responsible for making such an irresponsible decision?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, if someone had the authority to punish all of the errors committed by the opposition party, there would not be one of them left.

What is important is that we have markedly reduced expenditures that were not in the public interest. We have cut government expenditures by $15 billion. We have reformed the public service and the various departments.

I believe that, with the recommendations of the auditor general, we can continue to properly serve the Canadian public, including Quebecers, who want good value for their money.

Aviation Fuel Tax

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Government of Alberta took a very positive step toward assisting Canadian Airlines in the securing of the jobs of 16,000 people. Alberta cut its aviation fuel tax in half, a move that will save the airline over $8 million a year.

The transport minister said last week that he was open to a lowering of the federal aviation fuel tax and that he had discussed it with the finance minister.

However, the parliamentary secretary was unclear yesterday as to what the result was.

My question is for the parliamentary secretary. Will this government follow Alberta's lead and reduce the federal aviation fuel tax?

[Stan Keyes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we agree wholeheartedly with the hon. member's position that Canadian Airlines is a very important company for this country.

The Minister of Transport wants it to survive and succeed and so does this government. He is meeting with all the people necessary to meet with in order to make that happen.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, taxes kill jobs and this particular tax is capable of killing many jobs. The aviation fuel tax is an excellent example. It puts our airlines at a competitive disadvantage.

The old way of dealing with economic sectors that are in trouble has been grants and handouts. The new way of dealing with that is tax relief. If Canadian employees are willing to make sacrifices to save their jobs, surely the federal tax collector would make some sacrifice as well.

Again, we are asking the parliamentary secretary for an answer to this, not a general comment. Will the federal government offer to reduce the federal aviation tax as a means of saving these 16,000 jobs at Canadian?

[Stan Keyes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. leader of the third party is again right. There have been sacrifices, many of them made by the employees of Canadian Airlines. However, I remind the hon. member that there have been many sacrifices made by the Canadian taxpayer for Canadian Airlines as well. Therefore we have to act responsibly and act in their best interests.

The minister went out to British Columbia. He has been working hard at facilitating discussions. He has met with Mr. Kevin Benson, the president of Canadian Airlines. That meeting has been successful. He has met with six of the unions. Four of those unions have come on board, including the largest union, the machinists union, led by Mr. David Ritchie.

We can say that those discussions have been fruitful. There have been some serious proposals put on the table and they are now under active consideration.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we understand all that and have understood it for a long time. Our question is very simple. These workers are going to have to make a final decision this weekend as to whether to accept this restructuring package. It includes proposals for reducing the overhead and operating costs of the airlines. However, if they know there is going to be a reduction in the federal aviation tax that makes a difference with respect to the acceptability of the entire package.

I simply ask the parliamentary secretary, who seems to be moving in the right direction, can he go the whole way and just tell the House and tell those workers that the federal government is offering a reduction in the federal aviation fuel tax?

[Stan Keyes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, sometimes the answer cannot be as simple as the question. We have to do the appropriate thing in the best interests of Canadians. We have to meet with the appropriate individuals, the president of the company and the union officials. Four of the six unions have all come on board. They have been very active.

Yes, Canadian Airline employees have made their sacrifices but so have Canadian taxpayers. We have to ensure that the Canadian taxpayer is also protected.

As I said before, all those serious proposals have been made to the Minister of Transport. He has been there since last Sunday facilitating these discussions. All those proposals are under active consideration at this very moment.

Zaire

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Most regrettably, the negotiations of recent days to send a multinational force to the great lakes region of Africa are still stalled. The indecision of the international community angers us and makes us wonder about its effects on possible future conflicts in that region of Africa. Despite continued opposition in Kigali, the Minister of Foreign Affairs suggested yesterday that one possible intervention might involve dropping food by parachute for subsequent distribution by humanitarian organizations.

Has the minister obtained a consensus, and, if so, when would this operation begin and how would it work?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, following the meetings in Stuttgart, we looked very closely with our colleagues at actions we might take. We concluded it would be quite possible to establish headquarters in Uganda, to undertake certain reconnaissance operations in Zaire and especially to parachute in aid for the refugees.

We made this recommendation yesterday to the other partners, and I expect to receive a response tonight or tomorrow morning. Afterwards, things should go very quickly. We need the co-operation of the other partners to ensure all resources are mobilized for this vital operation in Zaire.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, nobody understands why the international community is becoming increasingly bogged down in this matter. Why is it so slow to react?

Would the minister explain to all Canadians why the international community seems totally incapable of acting? Is there any real political will here? If not, this should be made clear.

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, in case the hon. member did not notice, about 10 days ago over .5 million refugees returned to Rwanda, which was the original purpose of the mission. That part of it has been extraordinarily successful. The original mission was established to have the refugees return to Rwanda. Most of them have now returned.

It may stretch the imagination of the hon. member but frankly if that was the objective of the mission and most of it has now been achieved, the question is what do we do to ensure that it is completed. That has been the cause of some of the uncertainty by other members of the coalition.

There is no lack of political will. I will be glad to table my telephone bill in the House of Commons to show how much will we have been exercising in the last several days.

The reaction is, as I said, we must work in co-operation with the other potential partners so that we can have a full mobilization of this effort, so we can complete the task that was started by the initiative two weeks ago of Canada, where we have had enormous success with the refugees going back. But we want to make sure the job is fully and effectively completed.

Aviation Fuel Tax

[Jim Gouk, Reform, Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during question period yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Transport said that Canadian Airlines lost $1.2 billion over the last 10 years.

That is true, but it did not stop the government from taking $32 million a year in fuel taxes from the financially troubled airline. Maybe that is because the government is in worse financial shape than the airline is.

The government's insensitivity to Canadian's employees is deplorable but perhaps it is understandable given that the average Liberal pension is higher than the average working wage of Canadian's employees.

The employees are not looking for handouts. They are looking for fairness. When is this government going to do the fair thing and end its unfair aviation fuel tax, a tax that is destroying Canadian jobs and Canadian companies?

[Stan Keyes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little amazed at the question put by the hon. member only because we know that the hon. member is an active member of the transport committee who has always been very facilitating and very helpful in situations on bills and so on.

Today he chooses this very difficult time that is taking place between a company and its employees in trying to restructure an airline, the goodwill that is being demonstrated by three different levels of government in the facilitation, the team work being put forward by not only the federal government but the Government of Alberta, the Government of British Columbia. It is a team approach that will see this airline survive and be prosperous. The hon. member's intervention and political gainsmanship are not helping one bit.

[Jim Gouk, Reform, Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Alberta does not have any trouble figuring out what the right thing is. Why does this government?

Thus far the Canadian auto workers and CUPE have not agreed to the democratic process of allowing their members to vote on Canadian's restructuring process. The parliamentary secretary says four out of six. These were the other two.

Buzz Hargrove, the head of the CAW, is actually in a conflict position. He has members in Canadian facing a salary reduction while he is trying to negotiate a raise for those same members in Air Canada. Faced with this dilemma, there is no way he can act in the best interests of both parties simultaneously. Canadian's employees are rallying today, asking for the right to vote.

Parliament is the final court of appeal. Is it listening? Is it going to act?

[Stan Keyes, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, this government is in the process of doing its job and trying to help Canadian get back on its feet.

The hon. member speaks of the union between the leadership and its employees. It was three weeks ago that the Minister of Transport brought this issue to the floor of this House, on November 8, when he said that he completely agreed the employees of Canadian should have the right to vote on their future and on the restructuring program that has been proposed by Mr. Benson, CEO of Canadian Airlines.

We are on side with the company. We are trying to work with the company and its employees. We want to see Canadian Airlines survive.

Coast Guard

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

The Canadian Coast Guard was to release last Thursday the impact study on its new fee structure for commercial traffic, but the tabling of this study was cancelled at the last minute. Yet everyone knows that the study has been completed. The consultants' contract ended two weeks ago.

Will the minister admit that he is refusing to release his bogus study at this time because most of the findings are being strongly disputed by all stakeholders in the St. Lawrence shipping community, including almost every business analyzed in the study?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, the report the hon. member talks about is a report on the impact study of the marine service fees. I want to make sure the house understands the question.

The impact study, as I have promised time and time again to this member, uses seven initiatives to look at 1,400 traffic flows and 15 commodities. This is a very complex study that examines the impact of the $60 million marine service fees which represent a very small portion of what it costs this government to provide.

The hon. member knows it is user pay, user say. The report is in the final stages but despite what the hon. member may surmise and suggest, the truth is the report has not yet been completed. It is not put together. I have not seen the final report.

I am not in the habit of tabling in this House or to anybody else reports that have not been completed, and I will wait until the report is complete before I do so.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, from what I hear the industry saying, I would be inclined to believe that perhaps the minister is not tabling his study because he is embarrassed.

Does the minister recognize that he cannot go ahead with his plans to raise an additional $20 million in fees in 1997, since such action could obviously have serious consequences on the businesses and jobs affected by this fee hike?

[Fred Mifflin, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member has missed the whole point of the impact study. The point of the study was to find out what the impact would be at $60 million. But it also examines what the impact is in a general sense.

The hon. member is suggesting that I should go ahead with the impact study, release it and then go ahead with increased fees. I do not think I want to do that.

The purpose of the study is to find out what the future moves should be. Before I table any study, I have to look at what the impacts are, which is the purpose of the study, before we go ahead with the next move. And for the information of the hon. member, it is not another $20 million because in effect we are collecting $26 million now. We will move when we are ready and when we have studied the impacts on the overall industry to make sure that we are being fair, decent, balanced and reasonable.

Krever Inquiry

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, secret cabinet documents from 1984 that the Krever commission needs can be released with the former prime ministers' permission.

My question for the justice minister is: Has that permission been sought?

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

No, Mr. Speaker.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is no cabinet nor partisan consideration that would take precedence over the health and safety of Canadians.

Since Pierre Trudeau, John Turner and Brian Mulroney will want to get to the bottom of the tainted blood scandal, I ask very plainly, will the justice minister seek the permission of those prime ministers to release the documents? Will he table his letter in the House of Commons forthwith?