House of Commons Hansard #31 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was minority.

Topics

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Sherbrooke.

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Jean Charest Progressive Conservative Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the minister for his answer today. However, I am sorry to say that it is as bad today as it was a month ago.

I would like to follow up with another question about the way this board will operate and ask him why the Auditor General of Canada is not going to examine the board's operation and make a value judgment. Why is it that the auditor general will not report on this board's operations to the House of Commons?

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:25 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, this is a board which is set up by the federal and provincial governments. In fact, there is joint stewardship. It is going to be independently operated in the same way that any other pension plan would be. It will invest in order to earn the highest returns, but it will be totally transparent. All its operations will be available for public scrutiny.

I really think that what the hon. member ought to do is join with the vast majority of Canadians and congratulate the government on what is a very innovative position.

AirbusOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Reform

Jim Hart Reform Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC

Mr. Speaker, let us get this straight. When it comes to Airbus Canadians are suppose to believe from the government that Brian Mulroney was lying and that a lowly sergeant in the RCMP is responsible for this entire Airbus fiasco.

Will the government please clarify its position once again on this matter? Is it a lowly sergeant who is responsible or is this government responsible for the Airbus fiasco?

AirbusOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Windsor West Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the hon. member's question. The use of the word lying is not one with which we associate ourselves in the context of the question. There is no cover-up.

Brian Mulroney himself in the minutes of settlement ending the litigation said that the subject of the litigation was not Sergeant Fiegenwald but the request for assistance that was sent to the Swiss. He further said that the parties have always acknowledged that the RCMP must continue investigating any allegations of illegality or wrongdoing brought to its attention. These are the words—

AirbusOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Okanagan—Coquihalla.

AirbusOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Reform

Jim Hart Reform Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the minister will be happy to table those documents in the House.

Again, let us get this straight. The government has spent about a million dollars on Brian Mulroney's legal costs. There is another $2 million for the lawsuit. Now there has been another $35 million lawsuit launched by Karlheinz Schreibner.

How much more are Canadian taxpayers going to have to pay for this Liberal cover-up?

AirbusOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Windsor West Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise of the hon. member's question. There is no cover-up. If the hon. member had his way the Canadian taxpayer would have paid Brian Mulroney $50 million. Because of our negotiations that claim was dropped and that money saved to the Canadian taxpayer.

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont, QC

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

Ever since the Canadian position on greenhouse gases has been raised, the government has repeatedly accused the Reform Party of disregarding environmental matters and of lacking the courage to take a stand on such matters.

After the meeting in Regina, does the federal government realize that it has assumed the Reform Party's position, based on the lowest common denominator?

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Northumberland Ontario

Liberal

Christine Stewart LiberalMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, we had a very successful meeting in Regina last week, as I said, with environment and energy ministers in which we recognized that climate change is a real and serious issue that all of us in Canada must confront. We had a significant agreement about this and the fact that we will define implementation strategy post-Kyoto. They gave us the flexibility as an international negotiator to work with the international community for success in Kyoto.

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont, QC

Mr. Speaker, considering the weakness of the federal government's position, did the minister at least obtain assurances from the provinces that they will accept to ratify the agreement that will be reached in Kyoto?

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Northumberland Ontario

Liberal

Christine Stewart LiberalMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, I have to repeat that what came out of our meeting Regina last week was not a definitive position of the federal government with regard to the meeting in Kyoto. We did agree with our provincial environment and energy counterparts to flexible ideas of what targets we might put in place. However, the provinces recognize the important and significant role that the Government of Canada plays in negotiating international agreements.

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Reform

Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Association of Canadian Pension Management released a report today on Canada's retirement income system. Its report states that the current system is fundamentally unfair to future generations.

Why is the finance minister so willing to sacrifice the best interests of our children to paper over the cracks of his CPP pyramid scheme?

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, over 75% of Canadians support the Canada pension plan.

The basic difference of opinion that has existed between ourselves and the Reformers has to do with the unfunded liability.

The hon. member in a statement on the weekend that I would like to quote for the first time has announced what Reform would do in terms of the unfunded liability. She said “we need to look at paying this unfunded liability out of general tax revenues”.

I would like to simply tell her that it would require a 25% increase in personal income tax to pay for that unfunded liability.

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Reform

Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is probably because of the finance minister's continued bogus numbers that the Association of Canadian Pension Management recommended today that education about pensions should start in high school. Of course, this means that our kids would be sure to find out that their return on a lifetime CPP investment will be less than 2%.

Is not the finance minister in such a hurry to push through this CPP tax grab just so Canadians—

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. Minister of Finance.

Canada Pension PlanOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, if you want to know the definition of a tax grab it is the 25% personal income tax increase recommended by the Reform Party or it is the doubling of the GST recommended by the Reform Party as a means of paying the unfunded liability.

That is the basic difference between the Reform Party and us, and we are not prepared to engage in a smash and grab tax program like the Reform Party.

Calgary DeclarationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC

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

It is becoming obvious that the increasing dislike the Reformers are showing for the Calgary declaration makes its acceptance very unlikely.

What is the government's reaction to the fact that overall support for the Calgary declaration seems to be dissolving into thin air, especially since the Prime Minister had promoted the leader of the official opposition as a key player in this issue?

Calgary DeclarationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, I believe this is wishful thinking on the part of the member.

Basically, the Calgary declaration reflects great Canadian values, a profound respect for diversity and support for equality. Except for the separatist party, all parties in this House have agreed to it. It has support from across the country, and what the member has just said about wishing there were none is even more reason for supporting it.

Calgary DeclarationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, if I were him I would not be so quick to rejoice at Reform's support.

Does he not realize that the statement made in Calgary by the provincial premiers is déjà vu, in other words what is definitely not enough for Quebec is quickly becoming too much for the rest of Canada?

Calgary DeclarationOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Mr. Speaker, what is definitely not enough for Quebec is this narrow minded plan to split Quebec from Canada. Quebeckers want to stay in Canada and they are quite right.

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Reform

Dave Chatters Reform Athabasca, AB

Mr. Speaker, for weeks now we have been asking this government for details on its position going into Kyoto and for weeks now the ministers have refused to discuss either how we achieve those targets or the cost to Canadians of that achievement. Over and over all we hear, and we heard it again today, is “we take this very seriously and it is a serious matter”.

If the government takes it seriously why are we the only country in the G-7 that has yet to announce a position going into Kyoto?

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Northumberland Ontario

Liberal

Christine Stewart LiberalMinister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, this government would love the Reform Party to announce its position about whether or not it considers this to be a serious issue.

So far we hear nothing but scaremongering, fear, denial. What does this party represent?

We had a successful meeting in Regina with environment and energy ministers from all provinces and all territories who agreed that this is a serious issue and wanted the federal government to negotiate an international success for Kyoto.

We are working with all partners in this country toward implementing a strategy that will reduce emissions.

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:40 p.m.

Reform

Dave Chatters Reform Athabasca, AB

Mr. Speaker, our position is not important. You are the government. It is your position.

The EnvironmentOral Question Period

2:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.