Debates of Oct. 8th, 1997

Canada Pension Plan

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

This closure “displays the utter disdain with which the government treats the Canadian people”. That was said by the Minister of Foreign Affairs in 1993 when the Tories did the same thing. “I am shocked—This is just terrible. Shame on the government”. That is what the House leader said in 1991.

My question is for the Prime Minister. When the Mulroney Tories tried to invoke closure on the GST, the Liberals cried bloody murder. Why is he doing the same thing? Why is acting like a hypocrite? Why is he—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is sheer bunk. There will be debate in committee. There will be debate at report stage. There will be debate in the House at third reading. There will be plenty of opportunity for debate.

The Reform Party is afraid to state that its plan does not hold water. Reformers are afraid that Canadians are going to understand the degree to which they are going to let the Canadian citizenry fall.

Rcmp Investigations

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Public Works and Government Services.

I would like to know from this minister whether, in awarding contracts, project by project, file by file, his procedure is as his colleague at human resources development has indicated, to transmit the lists to the President of Treasury Board, to the minister responsible for the Quebec region?

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, once contracts have been awarded, we have a policy of issuing a press release on the contracts awarded. Therefore, they are available to everyone.

Consumer Affairs

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know, inquiring Canadians across this country would like to know, what the minister responsible for consumer affairs plans to do to protect Canadian consumers from the kind of unscrupulous business practices in long term vehicle leasing that was reported in today's and yesterday's media.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I can maintain the level of excitement at this point.

Regulating leasing is the responsibility of the provincial governments. However, the Automobile Protection Association study which was funded in part by my ministry and which was reported in the media over the last two days we had hoped would reveal a widespread use by automobile dealers of the new plain language, full disclosure lease agreement that we introduced with much fanfare with my colleague from Ontario a few months ago.

Unfortunately—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Fraser Valley.

House Of Commons

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the foreign affairs minister said in 1993 that limiting debate brings this House into disgrace. Then the Deputy Speaker, the member for Kingston and the Islands, said “What we have here is an absolute scandal in terms of the government's unwillingness to listen to the representatives of the people in the House. Never before has the government been so reluctant to engage in public debate”.

What is the matter over there? Why do you not want to have public debate on the floor of the House of Commons?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we wanted to have a debate. It is the opposition that moved a motion to make sure that there would be no debate.

They said “Let's postpone the debate”. They do not want to debate for six months so the government cannot respect the agreement that we made with the provinces. We want a debate. They do not want a debate so we are going to send it to committee and there will be a debate there.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have been waiting to debate the CPP thing all summer. We were elected by the people of this country to come to the floor of the House of Commons and debate the issues of the day.

This government is restricting our privileges as members of Parliament to debate the most important tax issue of this Parliament.

Why does the government restrict the debate for ordinary members of the House of Commons when it is the most important tax issue in this entire Parliament?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

I will be very calm, Mr. Speaker. It is very difficult to be more ridiculous than that because they moved a motion that says “This House declines to give second reading to Bill C-2”. They declined to have a debate. They are afraid to debate. They want to postpone it for six months.

We want a debate. We want to hear witnesses. We will have a debate and witnesses will come. We will have a CPP that will protect Canadian pensioners in the 21st century.

Canada Pension Plan

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

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

In his previous answers the Prime Minister, I am sure, made an honest mistake when he implied that all the provinces had agreed to the CPP changes. The fact is that the NDP governments of B.C., Saskatchewan and the Yukon did not agree, precisely because they shared our concerns about the effects of the changes on women, the disabled, survivors, etc. It is precisely because of those concerns that we moved an amendment to make debate on this possible.

Surely the Prime Minister has not forgotten when he was in opposition these motions are inclined to provoke debate?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear what has happened. I mentioned this in the House the other day.

There are two ways to destroy the Canada pension plan. One is to confront it like the Reform. The other way is to do what the NDP is doing, which is to refuse to recognize the absolute need for change.

The only issue before the House now is why is the NDP walking arm and arm toward the sunset and out of the CPP?

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister knows that it is intellectually dishonest in the extreme to suggest that we want to destroy the Canada pension plan. It is precisely because we want to strengthen it that we want a debate.

My question is for the Prime Minister. He said it was the amendments that caused him to move closure. Is he saying or will he say now that in the absence of such amendments on future legislation there will be no closure, there will be no time allocation and we will be able to debate legislation until such time as the matter is confirmed or dismissed?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the NDP members want to preserve the Canada pension plan then why will they not let it go to committee where there can be debate?

Why will they not let the Canada pension plan pass so that we can get on to track two where we can deal with mandatory credit splitting, where we can deal with a number of issues that were raised by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance? Why will the NDP not attempt for once to be constructive as we head into the 21st century?

Grain Transportation

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. It is on an issue close and dear to the hearts of western Canadian farmers.

The CTA inquiry into the grain transportation delays that occurred last winter were supposed to start in August. It was then delayed to November and now it is delayed until April. Agricultural stakeholders have said repeatedly that they want immediate action taken on this issue and will no longer accept political juggling acts. Producers want to hear solutions now before more problems arise.

My question: Is your department prepared to immediately conduct—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member should always address his question to the Chair. I will permit the hon. Minister of Transport to reply the preamble.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, in terms of grain transportation we have been preoccupied with the fast movement of grain since we came into office. We have had a number of meetings with stakeholders across the country attended by my colleagues in agriculture and the minister responsible for the wheat board.

The CTA appeal does cause us some problem but it is not stopping us from doing the preparatory work, such as the terms of reference, going over lists of individuals who could conduct the review. Even though recruitment has not started we are working toward an early start.

[Rick Borotsik, Progressive Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board.

Producers are sick and tired of hearing who is to blame for the grain delays of last winter. What producers want is a government that is not going to hide behind the CTA hearing in an effort to prolong the initiative. Producers want answers now.

The minister has the authority but will he have the political will? Will he walk out of the House, call the chief commissioner of the CWB, cancel the CTA hearing and get a review under way right now?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the legal delay is certainly frustrating for everyone. The hon. member knows that what he is asking the government to do is to intervene in a quasi-judicial process and that would be improper.

He is also asking me to exercise a directive power under the existing Canadian Wheat Board Act to which the opposition is unalterably opposed.

Maybe the most advisable thing to modernize procedures is to pass Bill C-4 at the earliest possible moment and put farmers in charge.

Presence In The Gallery

[The Speaker]

Today is a rather special day for us in the House for a reason other than question period.

We have with us today a large group of very distinguished Canadians. Canadians will not soon forget the Saguenay floods or those of the Red River Valley. They have become part of our history because of the extent of the disaster but mostly because in a time of crisis a remarkable spirit of co-operation emerged that left no one indifferent and brought all Canadians together in Quebec and in Manitoba.

Canadian military personnel led rescue and relief efforts working alongside civilian volunteers in difficult and dangerous conditions.

Humanitarian agencies, municipal, provincial and federal officials together came to the aid of families and communities. Canadians from every part of the country responded generously to appeals for assistance.

It was a remarkable show of Canadian solidarity. It was the finest possible example of team Canada at work.

Sometimes, it is the most difficult of times that show what it is that unites a community. In the Saguenay, and in Manitoba, thousands of Canadians battled together to save homes and lives, to help their neighbours and to rebuild communities.

There are so many of them, these volunteers, these heroes and heroines, that it would be impossible to receive them all here in the House of Commons. But what an honour it is for us to receive 30 Canadian military personnel and 40 civilians who brought assistance to the disaster victims.

Those of you who are here before me today represent all of the men and women who took part in that effort of Canadian solidarity. Through you, we salute their extraordinary work, their courage, their spirit of co-operation, and their readiness to lend a helping hand.

We, the collective members of the House of Commons and the representatives of us, the 30 million Canadians, thank you and all those you represent for showing us that there is a powerful sense of community in Canada and for reminding us that when it really counts we are there for each other.

To the heroes and heroines du Saguenay et de la riviére Rouge, please stand.