Debates of Sept. 29th, 1997

Calgary Declaration

[An hon. member]

That's a cheap remark.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

It is not. One wonders whether he still lives in Quebec, because he misinterprets what is going on there. He badly misinterprets it.

Last weekend the federalists in the Liberal Party of Quebec—they are federalists in Quebec's Liberal Party, not sovereigntists—found the Calgary declaration wanting, given Quebec's traditional expectations.

My question for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is this: Does he realize that even the most modest demands from Quebec's federalists place the bar so high that the premiers of the other provinces cannot make it over?

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

No, Mr. Speaker, the member has it all wrong.

Mr. Johnson explained that it was a step in the right direction, that it was a good start and that he also had other demands. I know of no other province that does not have other demands. They all have demands for improvement. The Government of Canada also has demands, and we are working together, in partnership. This country offers the best standard of living in the world. And we will continue to do so, regardless of the member.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs realize that the only Quebec federalists who still hold any hope for the Calgary declaration are those who think that “unique character” means the same thing as “distinct society” and that it will be in the Constitution, exactly the opposite of the message delivered by the Leader of the Opposition on the weekend to the rest of Canada? Does the minister realize this?

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

Mr. Speaker, what I do realize is that the very great majority of Quebecers want to stay in Canada. And I realize that the Bloc Quebec finds this continued and inescapable state of affairs annoying.

That is why they are always trying to disguise their option. They know that if they put the question clearly their support would disappear. We are going to go on improving Canada in various ways, particularly by strengthening the recognition of Quebec in the Canadian Constitution.

Environment

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

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

In 1992 at the Rio earth summit Canada agreed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. In 1994 the deputy prime minister and former environment minister committed to further cut CO2 emissions by 20 per cent. Yet in today Canada it is almost 10 percent above those levels.

When will the government finally show leadership and live up to its promise to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is very concerned about meeting realistic, legally binding targets at the meeting we are to have in Kyoto, Japan, in December.

We made commitments at Rio in 1992 to try to achieve reductions by the year 2000. We have admitted that we are not able to achieve those targets, but we are trying to work with all our partners in Canada and abroad to make sure that we achieve realistic targets for the future.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are getting very concerned that all we hear from the government is concern but nothing in the way of solid, detailed plans. Even the prime minister has said that he supports legally binding targets, but where is the plan?

My question is for the Minister of the Environment. Could she assure us that she will take to Kyoto in two months time a specific detailed plan that lives up to Canada's promise to reduce emissions by 20 per cent from 1988 levels by the year 2005? Will the environment minister commit to this today?

[Christine Stewart, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

No, Mr. Speaker, I will not be committing to that today in the House.

The government has a commitment to work with our partners in Canada and with the international community to meet realistic targets.

Government Expenditures

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the health minister.

In 1993 the prime minister described the decision to purchase much needed maritime helicopters as a colossal waste of taxpayers' money. On national television he told Canadians “I will take my pen and I will write zero helicopters”.

Canadians know the government has wasted an obscene amount of their money to delay the purchase of helicopters that Canada needs.

Will the Minister of Health agree that the colossal waste of money cancelling the helicopter contract would have been better spent on health and education transfers to provinces?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, it is a health question in terms of making sure that the people who operate our search and rescue helicopters have the best possible equipment because they do save lives.

For someone from the Conservative ranks to be raising an issue like this one after they were prepared, when they were in government, to spend an exorbitant amount of taxpayers' money to buy helicopters that were far in excess of our needs, is a little bit of gall.

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is now for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

The Liberal government has spent close to a million dollars cancelling a helicopter purchase, which it now admits it will have to go through with anyway. It argues that spending $90 million to create 3,000 jobs will reduce the excessively high youth unemployment rate.

When will this Liberal government stop wasting the taxpayers' money for petty politics and start assuming its responsibility to deal with the crisis of youth unemployment?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, and I can tell him in reply that, of necessity, governing implies assuming responsibilities in a great many areas.

Of course we have responsibility for defence, since we are a large country with defence responsibilities. We also have a foreign policy, and social responsibilities.

As for the youth situation, I believe that the youth employment strategy announced by 12 of my colleagues and myself this past February is beginning to show some very promising results. I am extremely pleased to see the Prime Minister of Canada and the premiers have specifically addressed the situation of our young people—

[The Speaker]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. minister. The member for Athabasca has the floor.

Voisey's Bay

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Voisey's Bay nickel project has already produced $4.3 billion worth of investment and promises thousands of highly paid permanent jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of resource royalty revenue for Newfoundland and Labrador.

I spent four years in this place listening to this government make commitments to maintain existing regulations once a mining company has invested substantially in a mining project.

My question for the natural resources minister is why is the government threatening the viability of this project by constantly changing the regulation.

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

Mr. Speaker, the objective of the Government of Canada, as with all the other players in the potential Voisey's Bay development, is the development of an environmentally sound project whose benefits are shared in a responsible manner by all the key stakeholders. The Government of Canada has been working with all the other partners to facilitate the necessary agreements among all the players to allow the project to go forward in a proper manner.

The hon. gentleman will know that there are a number of players. The Government of Canada is only one of several that are participating.

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, all that warm fuzzy talk has simply served to delay this project two and a half years and place it in jeopardy. All of the industry knows that the precedent set in a Newfoundland court last week will put in jeopardy resource mining development all over Canada.

Again I ask the minister will his government fast track the needed changes to legislation and regulation or will he simply admit that mining in Canada really is not important to this government?

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

Mr. Speaker, mining in Canada is important not only to the government but to all Canadians. It is a major engine of economic growth, one we intend to promote.

Over the course of the last several years we have moved on at least 60 different cases of eliminating overlap and duplication in mining regulations. I am working with my provincial colleagues to continue that momentum.

Pay Equity

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.

Certain information has it that the President of the Treasury Board plans to introduce a bill whose objective would be to side step Canadian human rights legislation on pay equity in order to impose his position in this matter.

Would the minister confirm that he is preparing, through legislation, to impose his settlement in the matter of pay equity without awaiting the decision of the human rights tribunal, which may go against him?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the government clearly supports pay equity, since it passed legislation on the matter in 1978.

What remains to be decided is the amount of the adjustments to be made to ensure pay equity exists in practice. The government has already paid out $1 billion for pay equity and it has proposed nearly $1.3 billion in its current negotiations, which it intends to continue.

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

Mr. Speaker, you will understand that I did not really get a response to my question, and so I will put it again a little more clearly.

Does the President of the Treasury Board intend to comply with the upcoming decision of the human rights tribunal in the matter of pay equity?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, clearly it would be better to reach a negotiated settlement with the unions.

This is why we are continuing our negotiations. However, the government will look at all the options necessary so that our employees may have their money in their pockets without delay.

Taxation

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.

Last summer the Tax Court of Canada struck down a cruel effort by the minister's department to impose back payroll taxes on Mrs. Janice Collingridge, a severely disabled, low income, non-verbal quadriplegic. The minister's lawyers said that by contracting care givers to help her live at home she was running a business in her home and was therefore assessed nearly $5,000 in back payroll and CPP taxes and penalties.

Is it the policy of this minister and government that severely disabled Canadians who contract home care services are in fact running businesses and will be dragged through the courts and encounter personal financial hardship to satisfy this government's insatiable desire for tax dollars?

[Herb Dhaliwal, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his question. I would also like to inform the member that I could not comment on any specific cases. I have had representations from the member which I will look at.

I also want to ensure the member that we have a fairness code in Revenue Canada and we are committed to the fairness code. We abide by that code as well.

I can assure the member that this minister will take those representations and look at the matter. I can also assure him there is an Income Tax Act and we are supposed to follow that. I as minister will ensure we do that for all Canadians so that we have fairness—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Calgary Southeast