Debates of Sept. 24th, 1996

Churchill Falls Hydro Project

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to follow up on the Prime Minister's comments with respect to the Churchill Falls contract.

I wonder if the Prime Minister would give the federal government's view as to whether this deal as a whole is fair or unfair to Newfoundland. Forget for a moment that the contract was a

convoluted contract negotiated between the Liberal government in Newfoundland, the Liberal government in Quebec with the Liberal federal government looking over its shoulder.

Will the Prime Minister simply comment on whether the Churchill Falls deal is fair or unfair to Newfoundland?

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, I am trying to see the thread to the administrative responsibility of the government with these questions, which appear at least on the surface should be asked in another house. If the Prime Minister wishes to address himself to whatever question is posed, I would permit him to do so, but I cannot see the link to the administrative responsibility of the Prime Minister in the question.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if I am to comment on every proposition about that type of question, there will be no end. We are a government here and we are responsible for the actions of the government.

I replied to the question before: It is a debate between the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador and the premier of Quebec. They have already talked about the question and I hope that they will still talk about it because both have an interest in having a good relationship. There is a lot of potential at the border between the two and they have to make sure that the atmosphere is the best possible so it will be conducive to more progress.

It is not my role at this moment to say to one or the other to respect it or not to respect it. We have courts to settle the question of legality. I am happy that both said they intend to respect the law of the land.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the question because there is a way the federal government could rectify this deal if it is truly unfair outside of the contract.

The federal government can do two things. First, it could refer this issue to the National Energy Board and ask it to determine a fair and reasonable allocation of the profits to Newfoundland. Second, it could adjust the equalization formula to reduce the amount that goes to Quebec by the amount that should go to Newfoundland. Has the federal government considered that solution to this problem?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if one is issued payment that is the law of this House, of Parliament. I have no choice. It has been voted that there will be equalization payments and there is a formula that applies according to revenues of provinces. The leader of the third party is asking the Prime Minister of Canada not to respect the law. I am not that kind of Prime Minister.

Francophones Outside Quebec

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for decades now the government has been dealing out hard blows to francophones outside Quebec. Their lives are becoming increasingly difficult. They are losing ground. The rate of assimilation keeps on growing. And the government picks this moment to strike another hard blow to francophone and Acadian communities in Canada through the CBC cuts.

My question is for the heritage minister. How can she agree to be the one to add yet another blow to the history of francophones outside Quebec, one which will help to hasten their assimilation?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the number of francophones throughout the country is growing. Another fact is that, at the present time, after budgets cuts that are hard on everyone, what will happen to French language television across the country is that francophones in western Canada will see their programming doubled from a half an hour a day to one hour.

Of course, French language television in the West hurts the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc Quebecois, who would have people believe that francophones are to be found only in Quebec. But we are confident that with one hour of French television in western Canada, we will be able to improve the situation of western francophones and of French language television throughout the country.

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, everyone understands that French language radio programming will increase, if there are cuts of $20 million and 240 jobs. Everyone understands that.

How can the heritage minister show herself to be so insensitive today about the fate of the francophone and Acadian communities, while being so sensitive to their cause when there are referendums?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, what I find rather deplorable about the hon. members across the way is that they are here today claiming that no cuts should be made to the CBC. On the other hand, on March 16 last year, the hon. member for Rimouski said the following about CBC cuts: "If any cuts are needed, there are big ones to be made at CBC". In response to the question by Michel Lacombe of RDI: "Concerning CBC headquarters, you are surely not recommending that headquarters be totally cut"? The hon. member responded: "Yes."

The hon. members across the way are claiming both that the cuts are not necessary and that the CBC headquarters needs to be done away with. There is a contradiction here.

Cablevision Industry

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the cable monopoly and the Canadian heritage department think negative option billing is a good thing. The people of Canada on the other hand have a distinctly different opinion.

Could the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell us what is her stand on negative option billing?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, we oppose it.

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry the answer was so quick I did not catch it. I do know that yesterday she did say that she believed in the spirit of it. Clearly, by saying that she was only in favour of the spirit of it, she did not make a commitment to it.

My supplemental is very simple: Was her Canadian heritage department actively lobbying to support negative option billing last weekend, yes or no?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the position of the Government of Canada has been, continues to be and will be in the future that we oppose negative option billing.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

[Jesse Flis, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

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

Recently I met with the Council of Central and East European Communities in Canada regarding Canada's support for the enlargement of NATO to include countries of central and eastern Europe which have expressed a wish to join the military alliance. What has Canada done to ensure that these countries will be integrated into NATO as part of a broad and comprehensive process of building up a new European security arrangement?

[Francis Leblanc, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Parkdale-High Park for his question and for his strong representation of Canadians of central and eastern European descent.

Since the collapse of the Berlin wall, Canada has played an active role in urging the NATO alliance to reach out to countries in central and eastern Europe.

At the NATO summit of 1994 Canada enthusiastically joined the other allies in agreeing that NATO should enlarge. At the same time, Canada is working to ensure that NATO enlargement is done in a way that will increase the security of all countries in Europe and that the creation of new dividing lines is avoided. This means that we will work to enhance NATO's partnership for peace program and to strengthen the OSCE as a key element for the European security architecture.

Air Transportation

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there seem to be strange and troubling links between the Liberal Party and the carrier Canadian. Let us consider, for example, the appointment of the Liberal Party's bagman in the West, Ross Fitzpatrick, to Canadian's board of directors, and that of the former special advisor to the Minister of Transport, Jeff Angel, to the position of government affairs officer, again with Canadian.

Does the minister not feel that these troubling facts point to an incestuous relationship between Canadian and his government?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I indicated to the House yesterday that our policy with respect to the two airlines was one of even-handedness and equal treatment.

Airlines are free to hire whom they wish. If Air Canada chooses to hire a civil servant who was responsible for the negotiation of air bilaterals, that is all right. If Canadian International wishes to hire someone previously hired by one of my colleagues on either side of the House, that is all right as well. The fact is that we are treating the airlines on the basis of strict equality.

Having said that, I have to tell the House that we have a new policy in place, one which allows Air Canada for the first time to fly to Hong Kong, Korea and Japan. It is this government which made that change and allowed Air Canada to get that opportunity under our secondary airline policy.

If there is any indication of the importance that we attach to the competition between the two airlines and the importance of equal treatment, it is in the record of this government.

The Deficit

[Herb Grubel, Reform, Capilano—Howe Sound, BC]

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of this Parliament the Minister of Finance has used Canada's fiscal crisis as a club to suppress caucus and cabinet pressures for more spending, but now the dam has burst. The Minister of Canadian Heritage has increased spending by $160 million.

My question is for the Prime Minister: How many more such spending increases are in the works? Has the Liberal government returned to its old ways of buying the next election regardless of the size of the deficit and debt?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that we have a deficit reduction plan and we are ahead of the plan. In the last three years in every budget we had a figure of what would be the deficit and we have managed to operate the government in such a way that the deficit was always lower than predicted. This year we have predicted that it will be 3 per cent of GDP. We said at the beginning of our administration that it would go from 6 per cent of GDP to 3 per cent in three years. Not only will we achieve that, we will do better than that.

I thought the hon. member was going to get up to applaud us. I think that now he will.

Canadian Wheat Board

[Vic Althouse, NDP, Mackenzie, SK]

Mr. Speaker, prior to the government's election in 1993 the Prime Minister promised to keep the Crow benefit and after the election he killed it. Now before another election he is promising that the wheat board will stay.

Since this government has already placed the wheat board, the dairy commission and others on the table as identified state trading enterprises for the 1999 round of trade talks, and since the avowed purpose of those talks is to eliminate all identified state trading enterprises, why given its record, should any farmer trust the Liberal government to keep the board? How does it propose to do that?

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

Mr. Speaker, it was abundantly clear in the last round of the GATT negotiations together with trade discussions since that time that the Government of Canada intends to preserve valuable trading institutions such as the Canadian Wheat Board.

I had the opportunity to discuss the whole issue of state trading enterprises with representatives from 14 different countries in the context of the Cairns group meeting earlier this summer in Cartagena. It was the common consensus of all of the Cairns group countries, most particularly countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand, but all of the Cairns group, that we have every right to stand up for state trading agencies, and that we will do.

Asbestos

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, QC]

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

France's decision to ban the importation of asbestos products effective January 1, 1997 may reduce the essentially Quebec-based Canadian producers' market by another 6 per cent.

What is this decision's impact on Canadian trade and what will the government do to protect Canadian producers?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, this is an industry that exports in excess of $300 million a year and over 2,000 jobs depend on it.

There are unsafe uses of asbestos, but on the other side of the coin there are safe uses of asbestos which is what we are trying to promote. My colleague the Minister of Health has made representations to the French government with respect to its ban.

In terms of the safe uses, there could be exceptions. The Prime Minister announced last week that he would make representations to the French government. My colleague the Minister of Natural Resources has also been very active on this file. We are making representations to the French government. I have made them to my counterpart. I offered to send some experts over to show the French government what the safe uses are so it can put them into its legislative exceptions.

We will continue to work with other countries in the European Union and around the world to help preserve the safe use of asbestos in international markets.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

I wish to draw to members' attention the presence in the gallery of Dr. Faisal Zerra, member of the Shura Council of the State of Bahrain.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.