Debates of March 11th, 1996

National Defence

[Jack Frazer, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Union of National Defence Employees at 5 Wing Goose Bay are concerned about government plans to privatize or contract out some base functions. They accept the need to increase cost effectiveness but are not being told what is going on and thus cannot prepare for their future. The union's president was this morning again denied details of the proposal and it would seem they will not be released until after the Labrador byelection.

Will the Minister of National defence stop playing politics with these worried employees and sit down and tell them which base areas and personnel are to be affected by privatization?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, alternative service delivery is one means by which we are cutting costs at

national defence. In the budget last week we mentioned a number of locations that would be eligible candidates for such alternative service delivery.

Alternative service delivery does not necessarily mean privatizing in its pure sense. It could also mean an arrangement whereby the current employees are involved. All these matters are to be discussed with our employees and the unions.

As for the specific question, there is no proposal on the table. We have just announced that this particular base may be a candidate and we have to look at it over the coming months.

[Jack Frazer, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the employees have been informed that the plan has already left the base. These employees are not only being kept in the dark about their future, they are even being denied the right to bid on these contracted out functions. They are also worried that a local Liberal supporter has an inside track in seeking this contract.

Will the minister assure this House that all legitimate bids for contracting out will be considered and that we will not see yet another example of political payoff and patronage at 5 Wing Goose Bay?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member accused me of playing politics. It seems that this particular member who has never uttered one question on anything pertaining to defence arrangements in Newfoundland before, now rises at this point in time with this specific question. The reason he is so concerned about undue Liberal influence in that riding is that just about everybody votes Liberal in the elections and they will do so on March 25.

Health Care System

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The minister proposes to establish a health services research fund, on which he will spend $65 million over five years, and whose mandate is to identify, and I quote: "what works best in our medical system" and "what does not".

How can the minister, on the one hand, threaten the quality of health care by cutting transfer payments to the provinces and, on the other hand, spend $65 million on a committee to find out what does not work in the system?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I have to take issue with the thesis of the hon. member's question.

The Minister of Finance has given exactly what provincial ministers of health have wanted for quite some time. He has given them consistency. He has given them a cash floor as it relates to the CHST and he has given longevity in terms of the amount of money that will be provided in terms of the transfers.

With regard to the second part of her question in terms of the health services research fund, this is a very creative tool which the Minister of Finance has agreed to. It will help to lever money from other provincial governments, the private sector and non-profit organizations in order to look at research which will have an immediate impact on cutting the cost in terms of the health care system. It is not a form of duplication anywhere in the country. We want to work co-operatively and consult with the provinces on the best way in which to utilize the fund, provided of course that they wish to be a part of it.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government has already spent $12 million on the national forum on health. And it is now setting aside $65 million for a research fund.

Does the minister realize that he could have used this $77 million in public funds in a different way, if only the federal government agreed to withdraw from this area, which comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces and in which it is interfering through its spending powers?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, maybe at some other time we will have an opportunity to debate the hon. member's assertion that this is exclusively a provincial matter.

The research fund which is being put in place by the Minister of Finance is a very creative tool. Provincial governments that deliver health care in this country would then have the ability to utilize that kind of money on research which is needed. It will be conducted by the Medical Research Council. It will be done at arm's length to the minister involved. It will provide paybacks to the health care system not only for the first year but indeed in the years to come.

Krever Commission

[Jean Augustine, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Krever commission submitted an interim report with a number of recommendations. The government's response to this

report indicates that Health Canada is prepared to take a leadership role to make sure that the Krever recommendations are implemented.

Could the Minister of Health tell the House what is being done now to reassure Canadians of the safety of their blood system?

[David Dingwall, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, Justice Krever has a made a significant positive contribution to the country's blood system. His interim report of 43 different recommendations and the seven which apply to Health Canada have all been acted upon.

As a result of Justice Krever's recommendations where he talked about the lack of governance in the blood system in this country, today I have embarked upon a consultation process not only with provincial governments but with all of the major stakeholders and consumers across the country to try to put in place a system of governance for the blood system.

It is our obligation to work co-operatively and effectively with all of the players to ensure that the blood system in this country which is presently safe is the safest system in the entire world.

Highways

[Lee Morrison, Reform, Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assiniboia, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

Two hundred and eighty-seven kilometres of the Trans-Canada Highway in Saskatchewan have not yet been twinned in spite of the provincial government's readiness to proceed under a federal-provincial cost sharing agreement.

The government here seems to have a bottomless purse to finance hockey rinks, swimming pools and useless projects like gun control but no real infrastructure. When will the government honour its cost sharing obligations, complete this important project and end the carnage on this death trap?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, with the leader of the Reform Party promising hundreds of millions of dollars of highways in Labrador, I am surprised the hon. member did not follow up his leader's approach.

We have number of agreements in place with the provinces but of course we have limited funds. At the present time Transport Canada is putting out some hundreds of millions of dollars on joint programs that have been agreed to with the provinces to improve the road systems. We will obviously be looking at Saskatchewan along with the other requests that come in.

I must point out again to the hon. member and his party that funds are limited. The Minister of Finance is a hard taskmaster and we do not have the opportunity of spending money on roads right, left and centre as that party seems to believe we should.

[Lee Morrison, Reform, Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assiniboia, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I think the only time the hon. minister looks at Saskatchewan is when he flies over it.

I am glad the minister mentioned Labrador because the section of the Trans-Labrador Highway from Churchill Falls to Goose Bay is a national disgrace. It is very strange that when there is a 90-10 sharing agreement available for the Trans-Canada Highway, the best the government has been able to come up with for Labrador is 50-50. Our annual foreign aid to China would pay for that section of highway many times over. Where are the government's priorities?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, before this government took office the previous government did a study of the Trans-Labrador Highway. There were two aspects involved. The cost to bring it up to a paved two lane highway with .8 meter paved shoulders and a design speed of 100 kilometres was $625 million. It went up from there to the second phase to between $700 million and $1.125 billion.

That is the type of approach of the party opposite: endorsing for short term byelection purposes extravagant road building projects in Labrador. I would like to think that party would adopt a more responsible approach, particularly in light of the responsible budget we heard in the House only a week ago.

Summer Employment

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. In its budget, the federal government claims that it will increase by $60 million the moneys allocated for summer employment. However, since 1994, the government has cut $26 million from these programs. Moreover, cuts affecting transfer payments will deprive Quebec students of $150 million this year and $300 million next year.

How can the government pretend to help young people when, in fact, it reduces funding for education by hundreds of millions, in return for a few temporary jobs?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, young people in CEGEPs, community colleges and universities certainly do not have the same understanding of the program as does the hon. member. They know full well that the only jobs that make sense for people who are still studying at a post-secondary level are temporary ones. This is what

happens when one attends university; these students do not expect permanent jobs this summer.

I can tell you that the young people whom we met were really appreciative of the fact that, in our budget, and in spite of all the restrictions imposed by every province as well as by the federal government, we still managed to double the moneys available to create jobs for Canadian students this summer.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we obviously do not meet the same people. The students I know are not very pleased by the fact that they are being deprived of $500 million in return for $60 million. They do not see this as a helpful measure.

Does the minister realize that, by making cuts in social transfers and, consequently, in the funding of post-secondary education, he deprives young people of a decent education, accessible to all, and of true access to the job market?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, one of the problems with Bloc Quebecois members is that they are totally disconnected from reality.

If anybody in the Bloc Quebecois has a list of students they do not want to have helped by the summer student job creation program, send it over. Across the country and in Quebec young men and women are looking for work and they are extremely pleased that the government in these circumstances has found the way to double the amount of money available for summer student employment.

It is an indication of the lack of concern the hon. member has that again he plays politics on the backs of young people while pretending to support them.

Research And Development

[Philip Mayfield, Reform, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal broken promises are starting to sound like a broken record and the record shows this government has failed to support science and technology.

The red book promised a $900 million increase in research and development yet these are the facts: Last year the Liberals cut heavily into basic research and eliminated capital gains exemptions. Why did the government break its promise to increase R and D funding by $900 million? Better yet, why did the government not create tax incentives for research and development rather than subsidies?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I was interested to hear the Reform Party advocating increased tax breaks and increased spending, but we will take that under advisement.

I am very happy the member raised the question of research and development. Today not only was the government able to release its science and technology strategy "Science and Technology for the 21st Century" but it also introduced the new program Technology Partnerships Canada. It will provide funding of $150 million next year, $200 million the following year and $250 million the year after, not in subsidies but in assistance to research and development. It is money for projects including environmental technologies and defence conversion. Again, these are red book check offs: defence conversion, environmental technologies, new funding for research and development. We are fulfilling our promises.

[Philip Mayfield, Reform, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry is giving us the next chapter in the Liberal program of do as we say, not as we do.

Canadians were hoping for a forward looking science and technology strategy to create good long term jobs. Indeed they were hoping for some form of tax relief to spur investment growth in the emerging technologies. Instead, last year the Liberals killed the Tory defence industry productivity program, DIPP, and now they present a $250 million business subsidy dressed up as a non-subsidy. Call it son of DIPP.

Can the minister tell us how giving people back their own money and calling it not a subsidy is better than lowering taxes?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, if the member has read the science and technology review he has a remarkable ability to read quickly because it is quite a thick document and was just made available to him this morning. I commend it to his reading. He may be surprised at what he finds there.

I ask myself who it is he has been talking to. Who is it out there who wants more tax loopholes when the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Advanced Technology Association, the Business Council on National Issues and the business organizations have all recognized that the kind of program we have designed is not a subsidy program. It is an investment program with repayable contributions to give Canadian firms the ability to compete on a level playing field with firms from across the world. This is where we are going to create jobs for the next century. This is where we are going to give Canadians the advantage they need.

Foreign Affairs

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

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

Following the minister's statements in the House last week, China, which is a permanent member of the security council, fired three M-9 guided missiles which struck within 30 to 40 kilometres of the island of Taiwan. In light of these actions by China with whom we normally have good relations, can the minister assure the House that Canada condemns this unprovoked act of intimidation against Taiwan and that the peace and security in this region, an important one for Canada, will not be allowed to deteriorate further?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member's question represents is the deep concern many Canadians and we in the government feel about the escalating conditions between China and Taiwan. We are deeply concerned that these matters not be allowed to escalate.

To underline that fact, I met again this morning with the Chinese ambassador. We had a very long discussion where on behalf of the Government of Canada and the people of Canada I reiterated that we should ensure that nothing is done to provoke or escalate the matter, that any differences should be decided by a peaceful negotiation and that we offer whatever good services we can in Canada to help provide a peaceful solution in that area.

Immigration

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Immigration.

The minister denied last week that bribes were being given by her department's officials. But the minister knows perfectly well that former deputy minister Roger Tassé, in spite of a restricted mandate, said more in his public statement than he did in his report, and that his allegations were confirmed by Mr. Pascucci, president of the Canada Employment and Immigration Union.

Under the circumstances, why does the minister not call a new inquiry?