Debates of Oct. 20th, 1997

Rcmp Investigations

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Yes, I will, Mr. Speaker, and I will be judicious by asking a simple question.

Why, who, when, what? They can answer any question they like. Who was the cabinet insider giving Corbeil the inside track?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is again abusing the process and privileges of the House by making assertions that are totally unwarranted in light of the investigation that was completed with charges against one individual who is not an employee of the government or a member of a minister's staff or connected in that capacity with ministers or MPs.

Once again the hon. member has not said anything that justifies having confidence in any of her remarks or any of her questions. Her remarks are not only Reform rubbish. They descend into Reform rot.

The Deficit

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Finance said he was off by over $10 billion in his forecasts concerning the deficit. It is not peanuts.

With the additional $10 billion that he suddenly found last week, will the minister, who made savage cuts to unemployment insurance, give back some of the money to the unemployed who are hard hit by the massive cuts imposed by the government?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should look at what the government did. In June, we decided to give back to the provinces, over a five-year period, an amount of $6 billion for health, education and welfare.

At the same time, my colleague promised another $850 million to help poor families with children. In addition, the Minister of Industry put money into technology partnerships, in order to create jobs.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is rather extraordinary to hear that the government gave $6 billion. The fact is that, instead of cutting $48 billion, it is cutting $42 billion. It is easy to give money that way.

I ask the minister, who exceeded his budget forecasts by $10 billion at the expense of the unemployed, whether he is prepared to perform a humanitarian act and give some of the money to the unemployed, by reducing contributions and increasing benefits, which currently stand at 37%, compared to 62% when the Liberals took office?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, again the hon. member should look at what we did. When we came to office we reduced employment insurance contributions. We prevented them from rising to $3.30 from $3.07, before reducing them to $3.00 and later to $2.90. The Minister of Human Resources Development and myself have announced that, in November, we will lower contributions to $2.80. We are in the process of doing so. Therefore, we reduced employment insurance contributions by $4 billion over a two-year period.

Education

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when they announced their cuts, they ought to have said that the biggest drop is in the number of people entitled to draw unemployment insurance. That is the drop the Liberals are responsible for.

Last week, the Minister of Finance was nailed by educators in British Columbia, who spoke out against his plan to interfere in this area.

How can the Minister of Finance justify another intrusion by the federal government into education, when this is a provincial jurisdiction, when the one responsible for the problems in this sector is, in fact, himself?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, how can the hon. member be accusing us of interference when, a year ago, it was the Bloc Quebecois that was calling upon us to help students finance their debts, which we are now in the process of doing?

Is the hon. member telling us that research and development is not a federal jurisdiction? Is the hon. member telling us that helping parents to save for their children's education is federal interference? I believe it is the duty of a government to help its young people finance their education.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is where the federal government's problem lies. When it is asked to lower income taxes to make things easier for the parents of students, it understands that it is being asked to intervene and to grant scholarships. It understands everything backwards, that is its problem.

How many more provinces will it take, on top of Quebec and British Columbia, to get the federal government to understand that we want it to mind its own business in the area of education? How many provinces will it take, before it gets the message?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member ought to listen to the provincial ministers of education. It is the provinces that have asked us to sit down with them to help students finance their loans. We are in the process of doing so, in partnership with the provinces, including Quebec.

The Deficit

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance could have reduced the deficit without making massive cuts in the health and education sectors.

According to an independent study, economic growth and low interest rates alone could have eliminate the deficit within the time frame set by the minister.

In this context, why did the minister make useless cuts that hurt Canadians for no reason?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the researcher who conducted the study says it is because of economic growth and lower interest rates.

All economists agree that we would not have had these lower interest rates and this economic growth had the government not acted quickly in 1995 and 1996. We did so, and the results are there.

[The Speaker]

Forgive me. The hon. member for Halifax.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Finance. The government is so busy congratulating itself that its members will not admit they have screwed up. The fact is that Canadians are worse off today than they were at the beginning of the decade. There is more unemployment. There is more poverty. There are more personal bankruptcies. There are more families losing income.

Why does the government persist in its inflation obsession when its higher interest rate policy will cost $70 billion in lost economic growth over the next five years, condemning close to 1.5 million Canadians to continuing unemployment?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP ought to look at the facts. There are over one million more Canadians at work today than there were when we took office.

She talked about interest rates. Interest rates are down five percentage points for the first time in 20 years. Our interest rates are lower than those in the United States. Not only are our short term rates lower, but for the first time since our longer term bonds came out, our 30 year rate is lower than in the United States, our 10 year rate is lower than in the United States.

The NDP ought to get better researchers.

Rcmp Investigations

[André Bachand, Progressive Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thanks to the efforts of the Conservative opposition, a public statement was made on October 1, confirming that an investigation into allegations of influence peddling was indeed under way.

Last week, charges were laid by the RCMP—a very serious business. Unfortunately, there is a missing link in all this: Who gave the information to the person who was charged? The missing link could be sitting across the way.

In order to preserve the integrity of this government and this House, I would ask the President of the Treasury Board whether he can confirm before this House that no employee of his Montreal office was interrogated by the RCMP or directly linked to the investigation.

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP has concluded its investigation. Only one person was charged, and it was clearly indicated that no more charges would be laid.

Responding to the same question in a press conference, the RCMP Inspector said: “This is covered in the report we have forwarded to the crown counsel”.

Since this will be addressed in a case —going to court, I think it is sub judice. We should not—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Pictou “Antigonish” Guysborough.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, a lot of questions remain unanswered about this matter. The government may have hoped that the RCMP investigation and its completion would put this matter to rest. I would suggest that today is an opportunity for the government to explain itself by answering a few straightforward questions.

I would direct my question to the President of the Treasury Board. Can he tell the House how did someone who was organizing riding associations, building up membership lists and helping fundraising know which companies applied for government grants, the stage of the applications and on which ministers' desks these applications were sitting?

[The Speaker]

I always hesitate to intervene in any questions that are posed or any answers that are given. However, we must remember that we do have a general convention in the House—it is not a rule—that we should be very precise in our questions and also in our answers so that in no way would there be any prejudice on any person who might have business before a court of law.

With that in mind, I am going to permit the question. If the President of the Treasury Board wishes to answer it, he may do so.

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the RCMP has stated that it has fully investigated the matter.

After a full investigation, including that aspect, it has come up with only one charge. That was against Mr. Corbeil. The RCMP has indicated that that was part of the whole case that will come out to be judged before the courts. I am sure that my hon. friend does not want to prejudice the rights of the accused or the right to a fair trial.

Political Contributions

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in 1993 the Montreal accounting firm of Raymond, Chabot, Martin and Paré gave $6,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada. In 1994 it gave $5,000, in 1995 it gave $4,000 and then in 1996 it gave $86,000 to the Liberal Party. In that same year it received $20 million in contracts from CIDA.

My question for the government is this. Is it just a happy coincidence that the firm that donated $87,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada also got $20 million in CIDA contracts?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, as minister responsible for the elections act or at least its passage through the House, we all know that anyone can make contributions to political parties providing they satisfy the criteria that they are Canadian citizens or taxpayers in Canada. People donate to the Reform Party, the Liberal Party and all other parties, including people in the corporate sector who give now and then to people on all sides of the House.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, apparently Liberals believe in that old adage that membership does have its privileges.

I will put the question again. A Liberal accounting firm gave over $87,000 to the Liberal Party at the exact same time that the minister was personally involved in awarding $20 million in contracts. The minister at the time hand picked a short list of contractors.

Why is it that huge donations given to the Liberal Party of Canada seem to go hand in hand with huge government contracts?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat the answer that I gave before. People can give money to political parties and they are encouraged to do so to all members of the House and to all candidates.

As for the allegation of a short list to which the member refers, that system has been abolished and he knows it.