Debates of May 6th, 1996

Liberal Party

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is clearly being very selective in her examples. The reality of the examples she used is that the major reforms and changes being made to the GST will provide enormous savings to small business. They will provide a harmonized tax which will save administration costs.

The cancellation of the Pearson airport contract has meant untold millions of dollars for the Canadian consumer and taxpayer who would have been hosed by the previous government. On the cancellation of the Cadillac style helicopters, we were able to get Canadians a much better deal.

It seems getting a good deal for taxpayers is the hallmark of a good government.

Immigration

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of immigration.

Saturday's La Presse confirmed that the federal government mounted an exceptionally huge operation to award as many immigrants as possible their certificate of citizenship before October 20. However, on October 16, in response to a question by the Bloc Quebecois, the minister of immigration said, and I quote: ``What is being done with respect to citizenship processing in the province of Quebec is nothing different from any lead up to any provincial campaign''.

Given that the fears of the opposition are now confirmed, how does the immigration minister explain it as routine business? Was the government trying to hide this information?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Acting Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, let us get the facts straight. Was it a dirty trick, as a major Quebec daily called it, a dirty trick in the usual sense of the word? Generally, the expression is used to describe something underhanded or illegal. Was citizenship granted to people illegally? The answer is no.

Everyone who received a certificate of citizenship was entitled to one and was entitled to vote. Did my predecessor, now the Minister of the Environment, deny that the department was making a special effort to issue citizenship certificates? No.

He said in this House, on October 16, that we were issuing citizenship certificates in this case as in any other government campaign. Those are the facts.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we know that in this case an unprecedented operation was mounted. They went into overdrive and worked every moment, including holidays.

Could the minister confirm today, from her seat, that the operation run on the eve of the Quebec referendum was exactly the same as the one run in Ontario last year and the one currently underway in British Columbia?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Acting Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, you will permit me to disagree with the member for Frontenac, who sees something underhanded here.

I repeat yet again that these people were citizens entitled to their Canadian citizenship. In November 1995, in British Columbia, there was a backlog of 20,000 people awaiting their citizenship certificate. Today, 16,500 people have received them.

Was a particular effort made in Quebec? Yes, and my predecessor said so clearly.

[One hon. member]

Why?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Saint-Henri—Westmount, QC]

Especially since the new electoral act in Quebec required proof of Canadian citizenship. People put a huge amount of pressure on the minister to have their citizenship certificate.

Once again, these people voted perfectly legally and they are Canadian citizens.

Agriculture

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

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

On June 9, 1993, as opposition leader during a meeting with farm leaders, he stated: "A Liberal government would call a producer plebiscite on barley marketing issues". Would the Prime Minister still honour that result and call that question?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman knows that he is not reflecting accurately the meeting on the date to which he refers.

What the Prime Minister did say on that occasion, if I remember it correctly, are words to the effect that: "no fundamental change in the Canadian Wheat Board would be undertaken or contemplated without the benefit of some kind of producer consultation.

If the hon. gentleman recalls correctly, at that time the previous government was very much in the process of fundamentally altering the Canadian Wheat Board without the necessary legal authority to do it.

We have put in place a consultative process through the western grain marketing panel, which is now completing its work. I expect to have its report before the end of June. Once that report is available for all to review and scrutinize, we will all have a more thorough, thoughtful and factual basis on which to make any future decisions that are required.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Mr. Speaker, politics sure is a strange animal.

Immediately after the election, on November 13, the agriculture minister said at an annual meeting with Manitoba pool elevators with regard to plebiscites: "They are the most appropriate vehicle by which to determine what farmer preferences are". Does the minister still believe this or was that just a shot from the lip?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman knows from other questions in the House which I have answered, I have not ruled out

the possibility of a plebiscite in appropriate circumstances in the future.

I have also pointed out to the hon. gentleman, both in the House and outside, that plebiscites of the kind that he is proposing can be divisive and can make the problem worse rather than helping to solve it.

Liberia

[Maud Debien, Bloc, Laval East, QC]

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

Yesterday, thousands of Liberians were cramming on board a ship to flee chaos in Monrovia while rival factions kept on fighting. Civil war in Liberia has reached unsurpassed levels of violence, claiming many more victims. The number of casualties since 1989 is estimated at more than 150,000.

Can the minister give us an update on the situation in Liberia and tell us whether the peace talks planned for tomorrow and Wednesday in Accra, Ghana, will go ahead as scheduled?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member properly points out, the serious situation in Liberia has become even more extreme. The hoped for settlement was shattered this weekend by a major disruption and the emergence of a new conflict.

The United Nations is seized with the matter. UN peacekeepers are still in the area and are attempting to restore order. All we can offer at this time is the strongest encouragement and support for the negotiations to take place.

Because it is such a troubled situation and there are so many factions now in conflict, one cannot be overly optimistic other than to say that we support every initiative in Liberia by the United Nations at the present time. We certainly hope for and support the efforts being made to bring about negotiations in the next two or three days.

[Maud Debien, Bloc, Laval East, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister mentioned that he would support any effort by the United States to bring an end to the serious crisis in Liberia.

I have a supplementary for the minister. What is the exact role the Canadian government intends to play to facilitate the ongoing peace initiatives and diplomatic negotiations aimed at reaching a lasting ceasefire agreement?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, it is not a circumstance in which the Canadian government takes a direct role. That matter has been undertaken by other parties, particularly through the United Nations.

I could comment that through the efforts of my colleague, the Minister for International Co-operation, we have been offering funds for democratic development to help in west African countries that are prepared to start developing support for democratic institutions for better government. We are prepared to continue to offer that support so there can be a ceasefire or an agreement to end the conflict.

My colleague would be prepared to take a look at how we might extend that kind of democratic aid and assistance to that country to help rebuild its institutions.

Banking Ombudsman

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, for the last 30 months the government has been reviewing the banks in their dealings with small business and Canadians.

Could the Minister of Finance update the House on the appointment of a bank ombudsman to ensure that Canadians are being treated fairly?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, individual banks have, over the course of the last year, appointed ombudsmen, one per bank.

However, this morning Mr. Michael Lauber was named as the first Canadian banking ombudsman overseeing the entire system. The specific goal of the first Canadian banking ombudsman is to ensure that the banks live up to their responsibilities to the small business community.

Mr. Lauber, who is not a banker, will report to the government and to the Canadian public on the results of his activities every three months. We certainly welcome this initiative by the bank.

Perhaps I could take this occasion to congratulate all members of the industry committee. This appointment in no small way is due to their concerns and the constant attention they have paid to this issue.

Canada Pension Plan

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the theme of the red book was jobs, jobs, jobs. The Liberals have also promised that they would stand behind seniors and protect their benefits. However, a report from the finance minister's department reveals that their proposal to fix the Canada pension plan will kill thousands of jobs.

Is the Minister of Finance going to maintain benefits for seniors or is he going to increase payroll taxes, thereby killing thousands of jobs?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the reason the government set up, along with the provinces, the commission which is currently going across the country to examine the CPP is precisely to deal with the question of the survival of the CPP. How will the CPP be maintained? The government stands four square behind it, as in fact do the provinces.

At the same time, we are dealing with very real problems which have resulted from the inattention paid to them over the course of the last decade. It may well be that premiums will have to rise. It may well be that there will be changes in the benefits.

The government has said very clearly that it will not accept the recommendations of the Reform Party which would eventually lead to the evisceration of the Canada pension plan.

[John Williams, Reform, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we are getting somewhere. We have an acknowledgement that benefits are going down and premiums are going up.

This month, 150,000 young Canadians will be graduating from our universities. Hard working, educated and motivated young Canadians are going to find that their jobs are in serious jeopardy because the government will be raising payroll taxes.

I want to know which promise the government is going to break. Is it going to break the jobs, jobs, jobs promise to young Canadians or is it going to back off on its commitment to seniors because that basically is what it is going to come down to?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may think that he has torn some incredible admission from the government.

This government, many months ago at a finance minister's meeting with the provinces, set out very clearly that premiums may have to go up, that there may have to be a change in the benefits.

It may well be that the member is only now coming to this conclusion, but it is one that most Canadians realized after the chief actuary issued his report some time ago on the CPP.

On the question of jobs, if members take a look at what is happening at the present time, over the course of the last three months nearly 135,000 new jobs have been created. Since this government was elected, well over 500,000 jobs have been created.

We are providing jobs in the new economy. We are providing jobs for young people. We are providing the kind of jobs that are permanent. That is what the statistics demonstrate.

Canada-U.S. Tax Treaty

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

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

On March 29, the Minister of Finance admitted in this House that the new Canada-U.S. tax treaty was unfair to Canadians and Quebecers receiving U.S. pensions and that he did not agree with the Americans' way of doing things. However, he is not doing anything to help his fellow citizens.

Could the Minister of Finance tell the House about the discussions he has had on this matter with his American counterpart, Mr. Rubin, by disclosing among other things the various options put forward by this government to resolve the issue of U.S. pensions?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question is quite relevant. I should mention that the problem lies in a new interpretation of the American legislation.

As the hon. member has just pointed out, I met with Mr. Rubin in Washington about two weeks ago. We discussed this matter at length. We have still not found a solution, but the Americans are working on it, as the matter is in their hands.

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how will the Minister of Finance compensate pensioners in Canada and Quebec who are paying for the unfair tax treaties signed by their own government?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the problem lies in the American legislation. The Canadian government is certainly very concerned about this problem. There is no doubt that great injustices have been created for Canadians. We will continue to work on this, but it must be said that the Canadian government is in no position to compensate all Canadians affected by changes in foreign legislation.

Having said that, I think, as I said right at the beginning, that the question is quite relevant, and we continue to work on this problem.