House of Commons Hansard #46 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was referendum.
Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Mr. Speaker, speaking of confusion, let us look at the process set up by Mr. Parizeau. Barely a few weeks before the last referendum, 53% of Quebeckers believed that sovereignty could be achieved only after reaching an agreement with Canada.
Yet, Mr. Parizeau's objective was to achieve sovereignty as quickly as possible, with or without an agreement with Canada, a partnership proposal which Mr. Bouchard called sketchy.
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, now that the minister admits there will not be an immediate breakup following a referendum, will he also agree that the best attitude for everyone during this period will be one based on common sense, openness and mutual respect?
Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Absolutely, Mr. Speaker, and common sense, openness and mutual respect mean that we should undertake negotiations on secession only if we have the assurance that it is clearly what people want, that they want to stop being Canadians and become part of an independent Quebec, through a clear and legal process, free of confusion and tricks.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, the NDP believes that the future of Canada and the future of Canadian unity is as bound up with how Canadians feel about their country and whether they feel we are continuing to be a caring community as it is with any other constitutional matter.
In that respect, I want to ask the Deputy Prime Minister or perhaps the Minister of Finance will the Prime Minister be going to the first ministers meeting this week with a plan for the reinvestment in and revitalization of medicare and other social programs so that we have meaningful social standards and Canadians can feel they belong to a community and not just a marketplace?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the NDP spokesman has stated very well the approach of the prime minister. We want to strengthen our medical and health care systems. We want to strengthen our social programs. We want to do this working together with the provinces and all Canadians. This very much will be on the mind of the prime minister as he sits down with the premiers at the first ministers conference.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, it is not often you get three ministers rising to answer your question.
The question remains unanswered. Will the prime minister be going to the first ministers meeting with a plan for the revitalization of and reinvestment in medicare and for bringing back national standards for social programs?
Do not give us this bit about what they are going to do this afternoon, announcing something that they have already announced and making a big deal out of it. We want to know when they are going to restore the cuts that have damaged Canadians' confidence in themselves as a caring community.
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member wants to know that we are prepared to reinvest more money but does not want to hear that we are reinvesting more money, if I understand his position.
We have a plan. This is the party that introduced medicare. We have no lessons to learn from the New Democratic Party. Rather than engaging in flights of rhetoric and self-righteous allegations, what we are doing is acting. We are reinvesting over $4 billion over the next four years in medicare. Canadians know that is a strong signal that we are committed to maintaining the strength of medicare.
Jean Charest Progressive Conservative Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, we heard all the fine rhetoric from the Liberal Party of Canada in 1993, when it guaranteed Canadians funding for health care and education. Instead, it has unilaterally cut transfers by $6 billion.
I would like to know today if this government will, first, give provincial governments the assurance that it will not make unilateral cuts and, second, agree to the principles of joint management and decision making in areas of shared jurisdiction.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, what the hon. leader of the Conservative Party should consider is that not only will we be announcing that $1.5 billion will be reinvested every year following a successful deficit reduction program, but the Minister of Human Resources Development has already announced not only a first phase of $850 million but a further $850 million in support will be provided for children. We have lowered employment insurance premiums and reinvested funds in research and development.
Thanks to this government's efforts to clean up the nation's finances, Canada is now in a position to invest in the future.
Jean Charest Progressive Conservative Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Speaker, this effort to clean up the nation's finances was made at the expense of the sick and the unemployed.
I would like to know whether this government is going to do like it did in 1993 when it guaranteed Canadians funding for health care and education then cut unilaterally $6 billion. I would like to know whether at the FMC it will propose principles of shared management in the areas of shared jurisdiction so that never again will we have a government that cuts transfers unilaterally as was the case in the last Parliament.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it is personally indecent that this is coming from the leader of the Conservative Party who during the election campaign said that his party was going to cut environmental spending. It was going to cut spending in agriculture. It was going to cut spending in every one of our social programs.
Having stood up all through that election campaign saying that it was going to gut our social programs, along with the Reform Party, now the leader of the Conservative Party has the gall to stand up here and complain when we are in the process of reinvesting in the future of Canadians. He ought to get his facts straight.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, today the B.C. government released yet another devastating warning about the Liberal 73% CPP payroll tax hike. This latest study says the increase will cost the B.C. economy 9,100 jobs by 2001.
Why would this government bulldoze ahead with its new CPP tax grab when in British Columbia alone it will put over 9,000 people out of work?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the lack of coherence of the opposition manifests itself in this case not only with the Reform Party but with the NDP. Again the member for Calgary—Nose Hill refuses to acknowledge the fact that there is a $600 billion liability.
Why the NDP did what it did, I am not quite sure, given the fact that it was the position of the NDP government that the premiums should go higher and that there should not be any reductions in benefits.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, this government is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It is cutting transfers to the provinces net by $6 billion and now it wants credit for returning a little bit, a fraction of what it has stolen from Canadians.
The EconomyOral Question Period
The Speaker
I would prefer that the hon. member not use the word “stolen”, and please get to the question.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, why is the government ignoring Canadians, provincial finance ministers and common sense? When is the government going to start to reduce the debt and when is it going to start to lower taxes and give Canadians tax relief? What does it have against the working poor anyway?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the difference between ourselves and the Reform Party does not lie in our desire versus its desire to cut taxes. It is that we are not prepared to do what Reformers are prepared to do to cut taxes. They would gut health care. They would cut it by $3.5 billion to pay for their tax cuts. They would gut equalization by $3 billion. They would gut old age pensions.
We will not do that. We will not cut taxes on the backs of the poor and seniors and those who are being hospitalized.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government has made the addition of another $850 million for poor children conditional on the submission by the provinces of a reinvestment plan, for their own money, that must be approved by the federal government.
How can the federal government require the provinces to justify expenses in their own jurisdiction, and also when these $850 million are only a small part of the $11 billion that the federal government has cut since 1994 from the Canada social transfer?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that our colleagues from the Bloc are not very familiar with what is going on on the social issue.
There are absolutely no conditions related to the Canadian child benefit. This is a system designed to help children in this country and it is precisely a partnership between the provinces and the Government of Canada, in which we are investing, through the Canadian tax credit, $850 million. The provinces have chosen to reallocate this money, according to the flexibility they have in implementing programs and services, to targeting children in low income families.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister is not very familiar with what his boss is saying, because he has said over the weekend that the additional $850 million would be available on the condition that the provinces submit a plan.
Is this not just the old habit of the federal government to move into areas under provincial jurisdiction as soon as there is money available and is the government not using poor children as hostages to impose its will on the provinces?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, people really have to be paranoid not to understand what we are trying to do in this country, because with the ministerial council of the provinces and of the Government of Canada, it is a partnership, a partnership approved by Quebeckers and by the other provinces in support of children in low income families.
The Conservative leader was asking a bit earlier when there would be mechanisms allowing for joint decision making and joint management in this country. So I invite the opposition to show some interest in what is happening at the ministerial council, which is a large collaborative forum between the provinces, and we have done this in support of poor children and the disabled in this country.
Grant Hill Reform Macleod, AB
Mr. Speaker, let me correct a statement that the finance minister made. Reform's position during the election was $4 billion back into medicare, not the nonsense he is feeding us.
On a different issue, the tobacco companies have just taken away the sponsorship from racing and cultural groups in Canada. They want those cultural groups to do their dirty work for them.
Will the Minister of Health stand up for the health of our youth rather than caving into the blackmail of the tobacco companies?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, that is precisely what we are doing. We want the tobacco companies to know that we are not the least impressed by their pressure tactics of last week, their blackmail of withdrawing sponsorship from these groups.
We committed some time ago to an amendment to the tobacco act in relation to sponsorship and that commitment remains.
We are preparing that amendment with respect to the complexity from which it arises and we shall act when we are ready. We shall not be influenced nor shall we be intimidated by the pressure tactics of the tobacco companies.
Grant Hill Reform Macleod, AB
Mr. Speaker, I take it from that response that the health minister is not going to give any exemptions to anyone else other than Formula 1.
The Minister of Health has a choice. On the one hand he can have a strong, powerful bill which will protect our youth from advertising. Let the adults have their advertising, if they will. Or he can have a weak bill and cave in to the big interests of the tobacco companies. Which will it be?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a little behind the times. This government introduced and this House adopted some months ago the toughest tobacco legislation in the western world. We are miles ahead of other countries. We have done things which the Europeans are planning to do in several years.
In so far as sponsorship is concerned, the amendment we will make will fulfil our commitment. We will do it when we are ready, not when the tobacco companies say.