Debates of March 27th, 1996

Fees For Marine Services

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, some Wednesday afternoons things get a bit topsy turvey. I understood from the Minister of Transport's second response that he would not be making a hasty decision. I am sorry to say that he will not be making one, since the coast guard now comes under the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

My question is therefore to the new Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. He can take note of what his cabinet colleague just said. Consultations are currently under way on the subject of the fees the coast guard will charge for marine services. I would remind the minister that these consultations are to conclude in the middle of the month of April. The deputy minister in question, the commissioner for the coast guard, announced last week that the minister would reach a decision within two weeks, even before the end of the consultations.

Here is my question, since those opposite seem to be in a hurry today. Is the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who is responsible for the coast guard, prepared to put off his decision to impose charges for navigational aid services until April 19 at the earliest, so the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans can complete its work?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows full well what is happening here. His question is one of total rhetoric. He serves on the committee, he sits on the committee, but for the benefit of the House here is what is happening.

The commissioner of the coast guard along with others has had many consultations, three months of consultations. We are now before the committee. The fisheries committee will hear witnesses and further consultation until I believe the second week in April. No decisions have been made and consultations will continue to take place.

If the hon. member is concerned about decision making, no decision has been made. It will not be made while the committee is doing the study and it will not be made until completion of the committee's work.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Gaspé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think we can assume the minister has said he has yet made a decision and will let the committee complete its work.

Since the minister is prepared to put off his decision until we have finished our work, is he, while we are on a roll, prepared to take into account the recommendations to be made by the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans and especially requests coming from people in the industry, from the St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes, because, until now, the coast guard commissioner has had four bosses, none of whom has taken the time to listen to the industry? So I ask him to wait.

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

Mr. Speaker, I assure the House that the commissioner of the coast guard has been more than patient in hearing the consultations and the intonations of all interested parties in all ports in Canada from one coast to the other.

In the navy we had a thing called obey the last order, but consultation does not mean that you obey the last order, that you listen to the last person. The consultation will take into consideration all the points that have been made from January until whenever the committee is finished its work.

In addition to the hearings of the committee there will be a staff of the commissioner of the coast guard attending these committee hearings. When the committee is finished its work we will not start from scratch all over again because we will take into consideration the ongoing consultations so that a decision can be made in time to collect these fees for the whole year.

Government Budgets

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this fiscal year eight provincial governments are expected to balance their budgets or post surpluses. This means they will be in a position to offer tax relief to consumers and businesses and therefore stimulate real job creation for the unemployed. The only government left dragging its feet on budget balancing and tax relief is the senior government in Canada, the federal government.

If eight provinces can balance their budgets and even the separatist premier of Quebec can commit to deficit elimination, why can the federal government not do likewise?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, we have a plan that is working very well.

Interest rates are down by 3 points since last year. This morning I was reading in a newspaper that all the agencies evaluating the rating of Canada in terms of quality investments said it is now one of the best places in the world to invest. It is working very well.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

The federal government has a plan, Mr. Speaker, but it happens to be the slowest plan in the country for reducing the federal deficit.

Why should the national government, the one that is supposed to provide leadership, be the last to commit itself to balancing its budget? It ought to be the first.

If the Prime Minister simply cannot put together a balanced budget plan, would he be willing to hold a Canadian economic summit, like the one in Quebec, and allow business, labour and provincial leaders to put together a balanced budget plan for him?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have a plan that is working very well. When we look at the OECD nations and at the group of seven, it is Canada that has the best performance at this time because of our steady decline in the deficit in relation to GDP. When we became the government it was 6.2 per cent; it went down to 5 per cent; it went down to 4 per cent; it went down to 3 per cent; and it is going to 2 per cent.

As everybody knows, if we move too fast we could create all sorts of problems, including a recession. When that happens less revenue comes in and the deficit increases.

To be balanced, like the Liberal Party tends to be, not to the extreme right, not to the extreme left, that is the way Canadians do things, and it is working very well.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister compares his government's financial performance to that of the OECD countries. He ought to compare it to the provinces in Canada. Eight provincial governments are on a faster track for deficit elimination and tax relief than the federal government.

On this countdown we are hearing, from a $40 billion deficit, to $30 billion, to $20 billion, to $10 billion, the other side that is never spoken of is the federal debt's going from $450 billion to $500 billion, from $550 billion to $600 billion.

I will ask one more time. What is wrong with the decision making and financial planning apparatus of the federal government that it cannot produce a budget balancing plan when eight other governments in Canada can?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we came to be the government only two years ago. If we had been the government before that we would not have the situation we have today.

I suggest the leader of the third party take 24 hours, sit down and read what I said to him in my first two answers and he will understand.

Statistics Canada

[Gilbert Fillion, Bloc, Chicoutimi, QC]

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

Yesterday the Minister of Industry attempted to play down Liberal patronage in Statistics Canada recruitment. Yet, patronage has reached such a point that Statistics Canada management found it necessary on March 25 to issue a memo, of which I have a copy, recommending that its commissioners act with intelligence and discretion in order to avoid, and I quote: "-having people in high places halt the process again".

I call upon the minister to inform this House. Who are the people in high places who halted the process? Are they from his department or his office, because quite obviously they are not from Statistics Canada?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we went through this fairly painfully and slowly yesterday. I will try not to take too much time today.

I would remind the hon. member that we did-

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Could you draw pictures, John, for him?

[John Manley, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

-in the past employ a political reference system in naming census commissioners in this case.

It has come to my attention that of the names that were referred from the province of Quebec the most successful patronage boss of them all, I am afraid to say, was the independent member for Beauce who had 19 per cent of his recommendations accepted. The Bloc had 18 per cent and my colleagues in the Liberal Party had 17 per cent.

He perhaps ought to ask his colleague, the hon. member for Laurier-Sainte-Marie, who somehow managed to get 61 per cent of his accepted.

[Gilbert Fillion, Bloc, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a painful answer. Can the minister explain to us why the census commissioners had to have their priority lists referred through a member of his office, in this instance Franco Iacomo?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, as I explained yesterday, there are priority lists for the recruitment of census representatives. Priority is given to the names referred through my office. If hon. members wish to ensure their names are referred they need only call my office.

However, they cannot both rely on a system of political referrals and then suggest it should not occur. The hon. member making that suggestion reminds me of the veterinarian who set up shop with a taxidermist under the sign: "Either Way You Get the Dog Back".

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand the CSIS employee suspected of being a Russian mole is no longer an employee of the service.

Can the minister explain why this individual was released only two months ago and not five years ago when the internal investigation was done?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, can the hon. member explain why in the House and outside the House she alleged that this individual was now an employee of CSIS? Perhaps the hon. member better withdraw her allegations and go back to the drawing board.

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister stated that although a CSIS employee had committed numerous breaches of the service's security policy he was confident in how CSIS had handled the issue.

Yet in 1988 when Kwan Lihuen, a CSIS translator in Vancouver, was found to have had unreported contact with targets of the service he was immediately suspended and then fired when his security clearance was pulled. Even when SIRC and the federal court ruled that Kwan's clearance should be reinstated, CSIS refused to rehire him.

Can the minister explain why CSIS was so rigid in that case and so lax in this one?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the hon. member's question, but I

will be happy to seek further information about the case she mentioned even though I think the record is clear I was not the minister in 1988.

Statistics Canada

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

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

A memo from Statistics Canada dated December 5 said, with regard to priority lists, and I quote: "A candidate who scored 60 per cent in the written exam and 56 per cent in the oral exam has priority of employment over a person from another source who scored, for example, 80 per cent and 75 per cent in the same exams".

Does the minister not find unacceptable the fact that some people who get better scores in the exams are not hired only because their name is not on the priority list?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, many of my colleagues have had the same experience. These people were chosen to fill the positions of census commissioner. There was no priority list.

In fact, that is why a priority list was established for the positions of census representatives.

The choice was made on the basis of a written test followed by an oral examination. Many people in all parts of Canada and from all parties passed the written test but did not pass the oral examination. That gave rise to the numbers I quoted earlier which, if anything, indicate this test was very stringent.

By far the bulk of the people retained to perform the work on the census will have come from no political list at all. About two-thirds will come from sources other than political referrals.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the minister has misunderstood what I said. It is not those who have the highest scores who are hired, but those who have lower scores. That is what the memo says.

The memo says that those who score 60 per cent and 56 per cent in the exams will be hired, but those who score 80 per cent and 75 per cent will not necessarily be offered a job. The department does not want to hire them. The memo says that those who score 60 per cent and 56 per cent will be hired and that those who score 80 per cent and 75 per cent will not be hired. That is what the memo says.

Can the minister explain to us why his department writes these kinds of memos and will not hire the most competent candidates?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, again the hon. member seems very confused by the process.

If the hon. member were saying we were hiring people who did not pass the test because of their political affiliation, I would agree with her that we would then have a problem. However, the reality is that nobody is being hired unless they prove their qualifications.

There is no priority list, save for the census representatives. We have asked that priority be given to the names referred from my office provided they pass the required test.

I am advised that the hon. member for Saint-Hubert has sent us names, and those names will be on the priority list. If she wishes us to remove them from the priority list we will endeavour to do so.