Debates of Dec. 2nd, 1996

Child Poverty

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, very often low income families do not pay taxes which is the reason we are looking for a more sophisticated system.

We have done our share. I am very pleased to belong to a government that has doubled the working income supplement for low income families. This is what we have done and we are proud of our record, but we will do more.

Retired Singer Employees

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

On Thursday, the minister said, and I quote: "We have a lot of compassion for the Singer employees, and because these workers deserve more than pretty speeches, we will examine the substance of the case". However, we learned this morning that the minister's compassion does not extend beyond rhetoric. He refuses to follow up on the request made by retired Singer employees and leaves them no choice but to go to court.

Will the minister tell this House the true reasons for his department's refusal to give fair treatment to retired people?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the compassion we feel for retired Singer employees is very real. The issues they raised are extremely complex. These are legal issues which are complex and also very important.

As the minister, I have a duty to make sure the plan is administered in accordance with the law. It is for reasons of justice that we could not reach an out of court settlement, as Singer employees may have wished, given the very complex legal issues involved.

We could not do this, because depending on the agreement reached, as many as 70,000 other retired people could have been affected, based on the information I have. This is why we have to go to court.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the truth just came out. The minister alluded to the financial implications that a favourable settlement could have, given that it could affect 2,000 other groups. He referred to 70,000 people, but in fact there are 2,000 other groups that could also seek fair treatment from the federal government.

Will the minister admit that the government is trying to avoid its responsibilities, and showing contempt for Singer's retired employees who, on average, are 80 years old?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the way to ensure fairness is precisely to go before the courts. There are complex legal issues involved. It will be up to the courts to decide what constitutes fair treatment. It is because of the complexity of the case that we decided to go that route.

Had we reached an agreement based on humanitarian grounds, we might have been forced to reopen 2,000 other cases affecting an additional 70,000 people. It is precisely to make sure we respect the law that we decided to go before the courts, instead of reaching any kind of agreement.

Trade

[Sarkis Assadourian, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade.

As a Pacific nation and a founding member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, Canada has an important window on this dynamic part of the world. Further, Canada will be hosting the APEC conference in 1997.

Can the minister explain to the House the significance of the recent APEC conference in the Philippines and trade visits to Pacific rim nations?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the Asia-Pacific is the most dynamic economic region in the world. It is a great opportunity for Canada as one of the 18 members of APEC and the incoming chair of APEC to advance our opportunities in the Asia-Pacific.

Next year we will have the opportunity to host APEC. From coast to coast there will be a wide variety of activities which will fully engage the business community so that we can help to advance our export and investment opportunities. As I have said before, that means jobs and economic growth here in Canada.

Taxation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, no matter how the government tries to spin it, the government's record with respect to the poor is absolutely appalling: 10 per cent unemployment, record high levels of personal debt, record bankruptcies in this country, and record high taxes that amount to a $3,000 national pay cut since the government came to power. This has transformed many middle class families into the working poor. The working poor do not have the option of registering their assets offshore to lower their taxes.

Why is our millionaire finance minister so opposed to lowering taxes for the working poor?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it should be made very clear lest the Reform Party members are trying to convey another impression, that their budget would deal a devastating blow to the working poor.

The Reform Party would cut welfare. Reform members have said themselves that they would cut welfare substantially. They have said that they would cut equalization payments. Does that mean that the working poor in Atlantic Canada, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are not entitled to a fair shake? They would cut health care upon which the working poor are so dependent.

What we have essentially said is that we will provide directed programs to help the working poor. As the Minister of Human Resources Development has said, in the last budget we doubled the working income supplement from $500 to $1,000. That is money in their hands which is what the working poor require.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Reformers would put $4 billion back into health care after the Jack Kevorkian of health care almost pulled the plug on it in the last several budgets.

The finance minister is a great defender of welfare. His friends at Bombardier can hardly wait to get their welfare cheque every month.

Reformers believe that the best social program is a good, long term permanent job and a strong family.

Can our millionaire finance minister explain why he is in favour of corporate welfare but is against lowering the taxes for the working poor?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, could the members of the Reform Party explain why it is that in this House they voted against the doubling of the working income supplement? Can they explain why in this House they voted against broadening eligibility for the child care expense deduction, why they voted against extending the age limit for children? Can they explain why they voted against enriching the tax credit for infirm children? Can they explain why they voted against improving the child support amendments brought in by the Minister of Justice and by this government?

Can the Reform Party explain why it is since it has taken office it has voted against every single piece of progressive legislation brought forth in this House?

Asbestos Industry

[Jean-Guy Chrétien, Bloc, Frontenac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade.

With respect to France's ban on asbestos, French Prime Minister Alain Juppé recently announced his government's decision not to grant the exemptions Canada had asked for regarding asbestos cement in particular. Bear in mind that more than 2,000 jobs depend directly on this industry in Thetford and Asbestos, in Quebec.

In light of the fact that France's reaction is guided by emotional rather than rational, scientific reasons, what is the minister waiting for to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization to obtain the exemptions sought or $20 million in compensation for lost exports?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I was recently in Thetford Mines and engaged in a consultation with the people of that community with respect to this matter. I assured them that the federal government will be doing everything it possibly can to preserve the jobs and those communities that depend upon the asbestos industry.

The representations we have made to the French government are not stopping. Yes, they have made a political decision that they want to ban the product, but they also have a review mechanism. Every year they have to look at the question of substitute products. It is our hope and expectation that they will look at the safe uses of asbestos products, particularly in cement piping, as something that will be acceptable. We will continue to press that case.

Meanwhile, we will continue to press that this does not spread into other parts of the European Community or other parts of the world. We are fully committed as a government to working with the people of Thetford Mines and the people in the industry in Canada to preserve those jobs in Quebec and the rest of Canada.

[Jean-Guy Chrétien, Bloc, Frontenac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was asking the minister when he plans to file an official complaint with the World Trade Organization.

Given that the Netherlands, which is scheduled to assume the presidency of the European Union on January 1, is likely to try to impose a ban on asbestos across the EU, what positive steps, aside from visits to Thetford Mines, does the Canadian government intend to take to prevent this from happening?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, we are watching the WTO situation very carefully. As I indicated to the people who are employed in the industry, if there is a case that we can pursue with the WTO, we are quite prepared to do that.

However, we have to await the next moves that occur in terms of the French government as to substitute products. That will give us the kind of information we need in order to decide if we should proceed to the WTO.

With respect to the European Union, it recently held a vote and the efforts by those who wanted to ban it Europe wide failed. Our efforts are already paying off in that regard. Our expert team which went to France to speak with the European commission has been successful in holding off any attempt to ban this on a European basis.

We know it is still an uphill battle. We are going to continue to fight it as best we can. We want to do everything possible to preserve that industry and those jobs with respect to the safe uses of that product.

Health Care

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health claims that Canadians are getting access to health care services when they need it. The fact is that waiting lists are growing year by year.

Reform's solution is to increase spending by $4 billion to relieve the suffering. What will the health minister do to relieve the suffering of Canadians today?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be aware that the Government of Canada in co-operation with the provinces is working on a number of initiatives across the country in order to relieve the pressures which are on our health care system. Many individuals, including ministers of health from across the country, have indicated quite clearly that the problems in our health care system, which I have acknowledged and which they have acknowledged, are not as a result of lack of funding. They are due in large part to the inappropriate management of the various systems across the country.

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at what the minister has been doing.

In the last five years cardiac surgery waiting lists have increased 31 per cent. In order to get breast cancer treatment in Quebec, women have to wait six and a half weeks.

The plans of the minister and the government for health care are killing Canadians. Canadians are suffering. What is the government going to do to alleviate the suffering of Canadians?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised that the hon. member would make those kinds of statements. He refuses to acknowledge the fact that the problems in our health care system today in various provinces are not because of a lack of funding.

The hon. member makes reference to the fact that the Reform Party would provide an additional $4 billion. What he forgot to tell us is that the Reform Party wishes to have user fees and facility fees reintroduced into the system. We on this side of the House are against user fees and facility fees.

Agriculture

[Bernie Collins, Liberal, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food.

On Tuesday the auditor general gave his most recent report. Since then members of the Reform Party have charged that western grain transportation money is not going to the farmers who deserve it. I believe they are wrong. Is this money going to the farmers who are entitled to it or not?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, this program involved 242,000 applications. It covered 77.6 million acres of farm land, 720,000 different parcels which had to be adjusted for 924 distance factors and over a dozen different soil zones. This was the largest and most complicated program of its kind in Canadian history.

I am very pleased to note the auditor general's observations. He said in his report: "Nothing came to our attention in the course of our review to suggest that there were significant problems with these payments". Given the dour and taciturn nature of auditors, that is as close as we can come to high praise.

Regional Airports

[Maurice Bernier, Bloc, Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the secretary of state for regional development.

The Liberal government has set in motion its plan for pulling out of airport management with no regard for the consequences of such a decision on the development of a number of regions in Quebec. Last November 4, representatives of the Charlevoix, Forestville, Rivière-du-Loup, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Sherbrooke regional airports met with the secretary of state for regional

development to argue that these infrastructures were necessary to the economic survival of these regions.

Has the secretary of state looked into these demands and when does he intend to take follow-up action?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Secretary of State (Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, as members know, the government introduced the national transportation policy in order to give full responsibility for certain facilities back to communities. At issue are wharves and airports. The policy was introduced so that regions could manage airport facilities in a manner better suited to their particular situations and needs.

There are, in fact, a number of airports in Quebec that do not meet the national transportation policy criteria. I met with a good number of stakeholders. We are now at the analysis stage.

[Maurice Bernier, Bloc, Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am not asking the secretary of state for regional development to defend the transportation policy. Everyone knows that it is disastrous for regional development.

Does the secretary of state realize that his government now has an opportunity to take action on infrastructure issues that are not just useful but indispensable to the economic future of these regions?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Secretary of State (Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, so aware are we of the importance of these airport facilities that my colleague, the Minister of Transport, introduced the national transportation policy in order to give regions more responsibility for organizing, restructuring and managing airport facilities.

As I mentioned, because they do not have regular flights, certain airports do not meet the national transportation policy criteria.

I met with mayors and various stakeholders. We are in the process of looking at what can be done, always with an eye to our ultimate goal of transferring responsibility to the regions and paving the way for improved development of airport facilities.