Debates of Sept. 25th, 1997

Fisheries

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time for the hon. leader of the New Democratic Party to speak with the leader of the New Democratic Party in British Columbia.

We have consistently had from the New Democratic Party of British Columbia rejection of the contacts with Americans that I have made, with every senator from Alaska, Washington state and Oregon, with representatives of the White House, representatives of the state department and the governors of Oregon, Washington and Alaska. They have said no to such contacts.

However, there is one committee in the United States which we believe to be a domestic affair of the congressmen in the United States and she then says that of course we have not done enough. Is she following the policies of the New Democratic premier or is she announcing a different policy here?

Trade

[Jean Charest, Progressive Conservative, Sherbrooke, QC]

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

He is preparing another team Canada trip for January. The Prime Minister will know that notwithstanding these trips, trade with Brazil has gone down 10 p. cent, with Mexico 19 p. cent, Indonesia 11 p. cent, China 24 p. cent. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce in the meantime continues to repeat and argue that these trade barriers within Canada cost Canadian families on average $1,000 per year and cost us jobs.

When will the Prime Minister show the same enthusiasm of breaking down trade barriers within Canada as he shows for charting up air miles outside Canada?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, when I travel abroad I travel with all the premiers of Canada who are always very delighted to travel on team Canada. The business community of Canada is lining up to be on the trip.

In terms of trade barriers within Canada, the Minister of Industry has worked very hard with the provinces and the provinces have worked very hard among themselves to come close to an agreement. If the hon. member is telling us not to respect the provincial governments and just impose a regime, we will look into that.

[Jean Charest, Progressive Conservative, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister has his priorities wrong. My question was not for the premiers accompanying him. It was not for the business community that is going to be accompanying him. It is for the taxpayers who will be paying the bill for the people on the trip; the people who pay $1,000 a year on average because of trade barriers in Canada.

An internal memo of the Department of Industry established that only 13 percent of the trade barriers had been struck down in the last agreement. When is the federal government going to assert its powers and leadership and deal with internal trade?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the leader of the fifth party that when we travel on these trips all the business people pay for their trips. There is no big cost to the government.

Wherever we go everyone says it is the biggest trade mission they have ever received. There is nothing better than having all the premiers and the Prime Minister of Canada working together to create jobs for Canadians. However, I know the leader of the fifth party is not in favour of the provinces and the federal government working together.

Canada Post

[Jim Gouk, Reform, West Kootenay—Okanagan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Reform has just learned that the conciliator in the Canada Post labour dispute filed his report with the minister last Monday. When was this government planning to get around to telling the Canadian people that they are now on a 21-day countdown for a national postal strike?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, the conciliation officer has reported to me. I will evaluate the report and make a statement before October 7.

[Jim Gouk, Reform, West Kootenay—Okanagan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a postal strike is extremely devastating for Canadian business and non-business alike. A strike shuts down Canada's entire mail delivery system.

The minister has already interfered in the bargaining process and he has failed to notify the Canadian public of the imminence of this strike. What is he going to do to protect Canadians from the impact of this national postal strike?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly disappointed that my hon. colleague feels that there is going to be a strike. The collective bargaining process can work and will work. I certainly encourage both parties to work together to have a collective agreement that will be beneficial to both the union and the post office.

Calgary Declaration

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we learned through the newspapers that the premiers, including the premier of Newfoundland, have decided to consult their fellow citizens regarding the Calgary declaration. To this end, they will use fax machines, 1-800 lines and the Internet. These are all modern tools, as the Prime Minister said, but they are ill-chosen for a serious consultation on what should be a serious issue.

Does the Prime Minister realize that the fact that the premiers have chosen such inadequate tools for a consultation of this nature says a lot about how little importance they attach to their own Calgary declaration?

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

Mr. Speaker, the premiers will use the means they deem appropriate to consult the public about the seven principles set out in the Calgary declaration, which the government of Canada fully supports.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given the openness displayed by the government, I have a supplementary for the minister.

When will we be told that a premier representing an English speaking province has decided to retain the services of Jojo the fortune teller to find out what the public in his province thinks?

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

Mr. Speaker, premiers will choose the appropriate means to consult the public.

Canada Pension Plan

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today this government is proposing to introduce the single largest tax increase in history. Working Canadians will be forced to pay up to $3,300 each year in the form of CPP payroll taxes for a maximum pension of only $8,800 a year when they retire.

How can the Minister of Human Resources Development support such a bad so-called investment for Canadians?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, some time ago the chief actuary projected that unless the federal government and the provinces did not come together to deal with escalating premiums, he projected that they would have to go to over 14 percent in order to preserve the Canada pension plan, that in fact financial chaos would ensue. As a result of that, together with the provinces—let me be very clear—the federal government put in place a plan for more funding. Yes, it will take the premiums to 9.9 p. cent. That is substantially lower than the 13 percent recommended by the Reform Party.

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when the CPP was introduced, the government claimed that Canadians would never have to pay more than 5.5 percent of their earnings to finance the plan, but now we see 9.9 p. cent, nearly double its prediction.

How can the minister justify making Canadians pay more in CPP taxes when he has actually admitted that his chief actuary of the fund has said that there is no guarantee that increase will give the return that Canadians have been promised?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Quite the opposite, Mr. Speaker. The chief actuary has said that as a result of the actions taken by ourselves and the provinces, as a result of the fuller funding, as a result of some of the changes to the benefits, in fact we have now preserved the Canada pension plan for future generations of Canadians, for those who will receive disability pensions which they would not receive from the Reform Party, for those who would receive maternity benefits which they would not receive from the Reform Party.

In fact we have put in place along with the provinces one of the most modern and one of the most progressive retirement systems in the world. Canadians are very proud of it and the Reform Party should be too.

Calgary Declaration

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Mitis, QC]

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

André Tremblay, the former constitutional adviser to several of Quebec's premiers, including Robert Bourassa, said that the Calgary declaration was an empty shell, that it amounted to next to nothing.

Since even Quebec federalists are calling the Calgary declaration an empty shell, how can the Prime Minister see it as a huge step forward on which we can pin all our hopes?

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

Mr. Speaker, if we are to have quality debates in this House, members would do well not to distort what has been said. The Prime Minister never said that it was a huge step forward on which we could pin all our hopes.

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

He said so yesterday.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Yesterday, that's right.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

We can pin our hopes on the fact that Canada is a country Quebecers want to keep. And that is why the Bloc Quebecois finds the Calgary declaration so annoying. It is annoying because Quebecers want to remain in Canada.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

And that is why they far prefer anything advancing Canadian unity to anything calculated to destroy the country, as one of the Bloc Quebecois members put it, and I am not distorting his words.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Mitis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the minister was listening to something else yesterday when the Prime Minister gave his own speech in reply to the Speech from the Throne.

I have another question for the minister. Daniel Johnson, who is recognized as a staunch federalist, is one of the few individuals in Quebec right now who can go around and defend, in any event, he is one of those defending the Calgary declaration. In order to sell the idea in Quebec, he tells Quebecers that the unique character recognized in Calgary is the same thing as distinct society.

Mr. Minister, do you support—