Debates of Dec. 8th, 1997

Leader Of The Bloc Quebecois

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois was touring western Canada to talk about the Quebec people to Canadians and explain our sovereignist option.

Always respectful and concerned with advancing our cause, he proudly represented the Quebec people in the rest of Canada. The Bloc Quebecois' mission is to represent the interests of the Quebec people, which necessarily entails achieving sovereignty while offering to form a partnership with the rest of Canada. We want the Canadian people to understand where we are coming from.

Contrary to what Guy Bertrand and other radicals may say, Quebeckers need hope and achieving sovereignty is the hope that brings our people together.

Our party will continue to defend the option that is at the heart of our action in Quebec, in Canada and around the world, namely sovereignty for Quebec.

Human Resources Development

[Inky Mark, Reform, Dauphin—Swan River, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party of Canada is taking “extraordinary measures” according to their political boss Senator Dan Hayes.

The Minister of Human Resources Development is planning a staged announcement of six transitional job fund projects in Manitoba totalling $1.7 million.

An HRD faxed memorandum addressed to an official at foreign affairs asks whether the member for Provencher or the member for Winnipeg Centre should make roll up announcements and site visits, but all six project locations are in Churchill and Selkirk—Interlake ridings.

To include the local MP irrespective of party in announcements would be extraordinary. What is not extraordinary is for the foreign affairs minister to use public moneys for purely political purposes.

A History Of The Vote In Canada

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, universal suffrage, or rather the right to vote, is an essential element of democracy. Indeed some would say it is democracy itself.

A new book entitled A History of the Vote in Canada tells the story of the vote from the time of the first elected legislatures in what is now Canada up to the most recent federal election. It traces changes in vote eligibility, electioneering, voting practices and voter turnout since Confederation.

Full of rich illustrations, period photographs, drawings and cartoons, this fascinating book recounts how the right to vote has evolved over the past 250 years.

The book is not only an excellent educational resource but a durable reminder for Canadians of the significance of the right to vote and of the leadership roles that Canada has played in election practices. A History of the Vote in Canada is available at bookstores across the country.

Poverty

[Wendy Lill, NDP, Dartmouth, NS]

Mr. Speaker, food bank organizers have called on the federal government to reassert national standards for social programs at this week's first ministers conference. They are asking the first ministers to repair the damage they have done to the poor.

The federal transfer cuts to the provinces have been devastating. At the same time the Minister of Finance has created a general atmosphere of cynicism and doubt in the minds of people toward the legitimacy of the poor. That has led to reduced food bank donations. First the people are devalued and then others do not feel as guilty about turning their backs on them. Even at this holiday time of giving and sharing we feel hardening of attitudes toward the poor.

The prime minister must recommit to all Canadians, most important the vulnerable; give back some of the surplus money he has been bragging about; and make sure the poor have food, shelter, a job and basic needs to live with decency and dignity, unless like the Grinch the prime minister looks inside himself and finds his heart is two sizes too small.

Tobacco Industry

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, bye bye Imperial Tobacco. That was my reaction when I read that the tobacco company was withdrawing its sponsorship from the major events it used to support, the Formula One Grand Prix and the International Tennis Championships. I call on Imperial Tobacco to take the money it now puts into sponsorship and make it available to the public for improved health services and a cleaner environment in front of Canada's public buildings.

I also congratulate our Prime Minister, who said: “For us, the health question is fundamental. We have decided to loosen the law in certain areas, but we have no intention of abolishing the law.”

Since these tobacco companies have not done too badly to date, even going so far as to deny repeatedly that tobacco was a health hazard until major studies forced them to sing a different tune, I am not sorry to see the last of Imperial Tobacco. Let us get to work to help the organizers of major cultural and sports events find alternative funding that will put them on a more solid footing in Quebec.

I think it is time we said bye bye to smoking and hello to good health.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac.

Helicopters

[Gilles Bernier, Progressive Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, since the Liberal government took office in 1993 there have been 770 emergency landings by Sea King and Labrador helicopters, including two deaths in 1994.

It costs $66 million a year and takes up to 30 hours of maintenance for each hour of flying to keep these aging helicopters in the air.

Last month six Labrador choppers were grounded for two weeks and we learned that the Sea Kings have cracks in their airframes.

This weekend the navy's entire fleet of Sea Kings was grounded because of a problem with the hinge assembly on the main rotor head. The Minister of National Defence described the situation as being not very much of a problem at all.

In case the minister has not noticed, the main rotor is the device that keeps the helicopters in the air. It is not good enough to patch and bandage these old machines at great expense to the taxpayers. It is time the government showed some leadership by announcing a replacement helicopter contract.

Business Service Centres

[Claude Drouin, Liberal, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the brief time available to me to tell members of the House some good news for the greater Quebec City area.

On December 5, the Secretary of State responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development for Quebec announced that Ressources entreprises de Québec will be joining the Canada business service centre network. This means that businesses in the Quebec City region, as well as those in eastern Quebec, will have direct access to information on programs and services available from the Government of Canada.

Our government is proud to be associated with this initiative, to which it has contributed almost $1.2 million in funding.

Our objective is to take action to help Canadian businesses develop and to simplify their operations. The arrival in the Quebec City region of a business service centre is eloquent testimony to the approach we are taking to ensure the growth of businesses in this wonderful country called Canada.

Social Programs

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, this week the prime minister will be meeting with the premiers to talk about social programs.

When these social programs like medicare were introduced years ago Ottawa paid a large portion of the bills, and that was how Ottawa was able to spend its way into areas of responsibility that belonged to the provinces like health care and education. Today Ottawa still wants to control the programs but it has cut the transfers to pay for them.

Why does the federal government think that the premiers will allow it to micro manage social programs after having gutted the transfers to the provinces?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have said, if we look at press reports, that they want a national medicare program, they want national standards and they want the federal government to work in partnership with the provinces. This is exactly what we are doing and what we will continue to do.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, but partnership used to mean 50:50. When medicare started out the federal government agreed to pay 50% of the approved costs. This year the federal government is down to paying 10% of the cash required to run hospitals.

The premiers want to talk about one of the key areas in this Calgary declaration, the seventh point, about genuinely respecting provincial jurisdiction.

Why does the federal government insist on running social programs while slashing and cutting their funding? Is this really the way to improve federal-provincial relations?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, it is odd that the hon. Leader of the Opposition would raise this issue on the very day on which we are introducing the amendment to increase the transfers to provinces next year.

As of next year, indeed as of this fiscal year, we will be transferring the cash portion of $12.5 billion to provinces, an increase over what had been intended because this government puts a priority on health care. It puts a priority on preserving and strengthening medicare in this country.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the cut in transfers was over $7.5 billion.

There is one answer to this federal-provincial relations problem in social programs and that is rebalancing the federal and provincial powers. This is a unifying concept that has support in Quebec, more support than the symbolic recognition of distinct society and uniqueness.

The rebalancing of powers is something that both helps social programs and unites the country.

Why does the federal government not simply accept rebalancing as a concept and put it on the agenda at this meeting with the premiers?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has just announced the irony in the Reform Party's talking about these cuts to transfers on the very day when he and I will be rising in this House to announce that in fact we are increasing them by $1.5 billion a year.

What is particularly obscene about the Reform suggestion on the day we are about to increase those transfers is that the Reform party says, and I am quoting from the taxpayers budget, a Reform government contributes—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Edmonton North.

Kyoto

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, talk about balance. It is only a Liberal who could cut $7.5 billion and then say they are adding $1.5 billion and it is a really good deal for the Canadian economy.

Likewise, the Minister of the Environment said in Kyoto that she might just sort of change the targets. She has hinted that she would impose even more drastic regulations on Canadian industry.

Since the finance minister surely has some idea of the economic impact costs of this Kyoto deal and what might happen if the environment minister changes again, is there an economic study? If not, why not? If so, where is it?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the ministerial portion of the Kyoto meetings is under way. There is active negotiation.

It is very interesting that Steve West, energy minister of Alberta, is quoted in the press as saying: “I have assurances from the top of our delegation that Alberta's best interests in industry would be protected”. If Mr. West is willing to accept that, I do not see why the Reform Party cannot do it as well.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, those same representatives who had assurances in Regina found out pretty quickly, within eight days, that the federal minister changed her mind just like that.

There is a serious problem here. The provinces have done some economic impact studies on what this Kyoto deal will cost. B.C. and Alberta have backed off and the Saskatchewan delegation was so disgusted that it cancelled its plane ticket to Kyoto.

I want to ask the finance minister this question, not the man for all seasons. How can the finance minister think he can force this deal on the provinces economically, especially when he stands up in this House and brags about this new spirit of—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr Speaker, the Reform Party has so far failed to put forward its position. The basic question is whether the Reform Party has calculated the cost of not doing it. Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of global warming? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of this country's not going along with the United States? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of not upgrading our technology? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of isolating ourselves from the rest of the world?

Quebec's Sovereignty

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

Mr. Speaker, last weekend, the Prime Minister said that the federal government would negotiate with the Quebec government should the yes side win. Through this statement, the Prime Minister finally recognized the right of Quebeckers to determine their future democratically.

Will the Acting Prime Minister acknowledge that the negotiations alluded to by the Prime Minister last weekend would not only deal with issues of common interest, but also with future relations between the two sovereign states?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the results of a poll published in today's Globe and Mail confirm what we already know, namely that two out of three Quebeckers are deeply attached to Quebec and to Canada.

We want to assure our fellow Quebeckers that they will never lose their country through tricks and confusion.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is not much of an answer.

I remember one poll that was not very favourable, when the Prime Minister spoke just before the referendum. We saw what happened. The government must recognize that sovereignty is a possibility.

Therefore, does the government not agree that a commission such as the Bélanger-Campeau commission—in which the Prime Minister took part—should be set up to look at two scenarios: Canada with Quebec, and Canada alongside a sovereign Quebec? It would be the responsible thing to do.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers have already expressed in various ways what they feel would be a clear question. According to a poll conducted in February 1995, 73% of Quebeckers felt that the referendum question should be “Are you for or against Quebec separating from the rest of Canada”?

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

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

Last weekend, the minister said that the federal government would not immediately leave Quebec following a referendum victory for the yes side.

Are we to understand that the minister finally realized that the sovereignist project does not provide for an immediate breakup following a winning referendum, but for a year of negotiations between Quebec and Ottawa, before sovereignty is proclaimed?