House of Commons Hansard #65 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was board.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has just decided where the issue should be discussed, even though the provinces have asked that it be considered at the first ministers' conference. The minister has decided that it would not be discussed there.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Yes, perhaps he is the boss.
How can the Prime Minister state that economic issues are at the top of the agenda when he refuses to discuss the GST, which is nothing if not an economic issue, as it enriched federal coffers by close to $17 billion in 1995? How can they set aside such an important question and try to convince people that economic issues are at the top of the agenda?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the GST was put on the agenda of the finance ministers' meeting, not because I asked for it, but at the provinces' explicit request. The finance ministers from Alberta and Quebec asked that it be discussed at the finance ministers' meeting, and that is what we did.
John Williams Reform St. Albert, AB
Mr. Speaker, we have heard that Canada pension plan premiums are to double over the next few years, which means the government will increase payroll taxes by another 5 per cent. The Minister of Finance has said payroll taxes kill jobs. Nevertheless, he is going ahead with this tax increase.
Will the Minister of Finance explain to those people who cannot find a job why he intends to destroy their careers in order for him to achieve his Canada pension plan objectives?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate but it is a reality that in order to ensure the Canada pension plan will be there for succeeding generations, premiums will have to be increased. That is the view of not only the federal government but of the chief actuary, the vast majority of knowledgeable commentators and the view of each and every one of the provincial governments at the meeting yesterday.
There is something else. The Reform Party has put forth its alternative plan. It ought to be very clearly understood that not only would that alternative plan of the Reform Party destroy the Canada pension plan as it is now, it would increase the premiums substantially above that which the ministers are talking about.
John Williams Reform St. Albert, AB
Mr. Speaker, it may be a reality that Canada pension plan premiums have to go up but it is also a reality that the government taxes every Canadian at every opportunity it can. The GST has been harmonized and it is costing us billions. We have seen gasoline taxes go up and so on.
When will the Minister of Finance get off the backs of the job creators, the small business people, cut spending, lower taxes and allow some tax room for the higher CPP premiums he is talking about?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the real question is when will the Reform Party stop talking out of both sides of its mouth?
The Reform Party has proposed the decimation of all those initiatives which help small business. It has brought forth a budget which would make it impossible for small business to develop new technologies. It has brought forth a budget which would make it impossible for small business to export. It has come up with a retirement savings plans which would impose a burden on small
business that would be absolutely crippling. That is what the Reform Party's policies are. Why will its members not admit it?
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.
Speaking before an audience of business people yesterday, the Prime Minister announced his firm intention to invade the area of securities, an exclusive provincial jurisdiction, in spite of the fact that Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia object to such an invasion.
Did the Prime Minister mean to tell us yesterday that he intends to pursue promoting the creation of a Canadian securities commission, even if, according to Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia, this will have the effect of concentrating Canada's financial community on Bay Street, in Toronto, at the expense of other parts of the country?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. First of all, we are acting at the provinces' request. This was discussed yesterday and what the federal government said is that, if this is the wish of a significant number of provinces, we would be prepared to accommodate such an approach, but this is at the request of the provinces.
In fact, I have to tell the hon. member that the Government of Alberta supports the project. There is a difference of opinion with Ontario, but Alberta is on board. He is mistaken.
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, since this debate on the federal government's encroachment on the area of securities started, the Minister of Finance has told us one thing and another. He said there is very strong support for his project across the country. I would like him to name a few associations that support his project, because I have a whole list here of people who are opposed to it.
My question is for the Prime Minister. Does he not realize that, no matter who is making the request or why, creating a national securities commission would constitute a glaring and unacceptable violation of the Canadian Constitution that he so fiercely defends?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, first, it does not violate the Constitution. Second, there is no invasion of provincial jurisdiction, as it will only be a delegation of provincial responsibilities to a national institution. Third, in our discussions yesterday, it was very clear that we are acting at the provinces' request.
I cannot understand why the hon. member wants to deny the other provinces the chance to compete with foreign countries. If the hon. member has a list of brokerage firms, I would appreciate it if he would give it to me. I would like the hon. member to give me his list of Montreal brokerage firms that are refusing to participate. Let him give it to me.
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Mr. Speaker, in March of last year the House unanimously voted to recommend the establishment of an independent mechanism to review the operations of the Communications Security Establishment, a Canadian intelligence agency that has no statutory mandate or control.
My question is for the Minister of National Defence. Further to his recent statements on the issue, can he tell the House now what action the government will take to provide greater public scrutiny of the CSE and its operations?
David Collenette LiberalMinister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Scarborough-Rouge River for his tireless work on this subject and the motion that was passed unanimously in the House a year ago.
The government today has appointed Mr. Claude Bisson, former chief justice of Quebec, under part II of the Inquiries Act, as the first commissioner for the Communications Security Establishment. He will have full access to all materials, records and documentation. He will make an annual report to me as minister which I in turn will make to Parliament.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, a little over a week ago a group of small businessmen from the used goods sector sat down with the finance officials to discuss the minister's new tax grabbing, business gutting, job killing changes to the GST.
At that meeting the finance department's taxation tsar informed them that if they wanted to save their own hides from these changes "all you really have to do is get your provinces to harmonize with the GST".
Can the minister say extortion? Why is the finance minister now resorting to strong arm tactics and job killing taxation policies to coerce the provinces into this bogus harmonization plan?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, that is absolute nonsense. I am glad to see the hon. member finally admits that tax harmonization would lead to far greater job creation, and there is no doubt that it would.
What the Department of Finance is saying is that if the provinces harmonize consumer prices will go down and the cost to small and medium size businesses will go down, which means our exports go up and more jobs are created.
I am delighted to see the hon. member for Medicine Hat has finally seen the light of day. Harmonization creates jobs. Good for him, he finally recognizes it.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, by forcing these people to go along with his plan to get him off the hook for the GST promise he and his government broke, all he is doing is delivering the tax equivalent of a horse head into their collective beds.
Is the finance minister so desperate now to force a harmonization agreement that he is prepared to make these small businesses an offer they cannot refuse if they want to save their industries from job killing taxation measures? Is that real Liberal leadership?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it is not the horse's head that the Reform Party has to worry about.
The Department of Finance is certainly prepared to sit down and work with small and medium size business on this. There would be no attempt to coerce anybody. We want to work out problems. There are problems and members on this side of the House have raised a number. The department is working on the problems. It would be very helpful if the hon. member would try to be as constructive as Liberal members.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
Last week, the minister wanted details about certain flaws in the national blood supply system. Well, here are some. Luc Simon, from Montreal, and other hemophiliacs recently had to send back blood products to the manufacturer, Bayer. These products could not be used, because factor VIII was turbid for reasons which remain obscure, since no report was published to explain this incident, which the minister claimed to ignore.
Considering that Health Canada has a responsibility to do its utmost to ensure that blood products are perfectly safe, from the time blood is collected from a donor until it is administered to a patient, why did hemophiliacs have to use their own initiative to force Bayer to withdraw faulty products?
David Dingwall LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, any responsible company that receives complaints from consumers with regard to its products must do investigations. Bayer is investigating those complaints. Health Canada is working with the company and the consumers to examine the nature of the complaints and the extent of them. When the investigations are complete the information will be readily available.
Pauline Picard Bloc Drummond, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary. In order to prevent such incidents from occurring again and reduce the risks for users, will the minister pledge to define a set of rules to be followed in such cases, and will he delegate all safety issues to a single agency to which hemophiliacs could report any problem related to the safety of supplies?
David Dingwall LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, I know the question from the hon. member is a serious one, but I wish to inform her there is already in place a regulatory agency, Health Canada, which monitors these kinds of concerns. There are from time to time complaints which consumers will make, and those complaints have to be investigated thoroughly.
If the hon. member is suggesting there are some real substantive shortfalls relating to this product, if she has that evidence I would be happy to receive it and to make certain the investigation is underway and is very thorough.
Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, prior to the Sawatzky decision, Canada Customs under the direction of the Canadian Wheat Board seized a number of trucks and property belonging to farmers from the Yorkton-Melville constituency.
Since Mr. Sawatzky was found innocent, it would seem the government no longer has any authority to hold the trucks seized before the government quickly closed the loophole.
My question is for the minister of agriculture. When will these farmers have their private property returned to them?
Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, the issue we are talking about here is a very important one. It is about farmers who, quite frankly, did not obey the law.
The customs officers at the border points have had a difficult time but are handling it in a very professional manner.
Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the revenue minister is covering the ag minister's behind here. I think the revenue minister knows the courts found these people innocent. The revenue minister has publicly stated she has no sympathy for farmers who have had their trucks seized. Now she has no respect for court decisions or property rights.
These farmers are being denied the use of their property and the right to due process of law.
When will the minister show some respect for property rights guaranteed these farmers under the Canadian Bill of Rights when it guarantees every Canadian the right to the enjoyment of property and the right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law?