Debates of Sept. 30th, 1997

National Unity

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand from what the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs has said that, as far as he is concerned, Ottawa is home to the international standard of democracy and, therefore, every country in the world should consider that democracy in Ottawa is better than democracy in Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is getting annoying. One cannot have a special set of rules for Canada that do not apply to other countries.

Canada is an independent state, recognized as such by the United Nations, and it has the same rights as other countries. I can quote, for instance, the Helsinki declaration, which states that “Participating states shall respect the principle of the equality in law of peoples and their right to self-determination, by acting at any given time in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations”.

This means that the right to secede exists only in a colonial context. Secession is not a right within a democracy.

Post-Secondary Education

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

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

Tuition fees for students have skyrocketed and are now higher in Canada than in the U.S.A. The average debt load for graduating students is predicted to be $25,000. Students are graduating into poverty. The government's new fund will not help 90 percent of the students who need financial assistance.

When will the government sit down with students and others to find real solutions to lead us to an accessible post-secondary educational system?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member's question is very important. We as a government are very concerned with the situation of student tuition fees and debt.

We are working with the provinces, students and lenders. There were some measures in the finance minister's budget last year which provided for improvement to RRSPs and savings that parents could do for their children. In the Speech from the Throne we have again committed the government to continuing to reduce the barriers to post-secondary education.

We are doing it with the provinces and with the lenders as well as we can.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government clearly does not understand the depth of the problem. What is needed is a real solution to ensure that tuition fees no longer exclude students without deep pockets.

Will the government commit to working with the provinces to make accessibility a new national standard for higher education?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is not up to me to determine the tuition fees in the provinces. The government of Canada is already meeting about 60 percent to 65 percent of the cost of students in the universities and colleges through the transfer payments in this country. We are already going a long way to do what we can.

As far as the debt is concerned, we are working with the provinces and the lenders to find solutions that will be adequate as soon as possible to assist the students because we are very concerned about the debt situation right now.

Newfoundland

[Charlie Power, Progressive Conservative, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the throne speech set out the government's agenda for this session of Parliament. In it the government claims to be committed to “developing the brains and skills of our people to ensure that no Canadian is left behind as the country moves forward. Education and training are key to this new economy and job opportunities”.

My question is for the minister of human resources. How are Newfoundlanders expected to participate in this new economy when his department in Newfoundland is completely devoid of any funds for the rest of this fiscal year? Will the minister find the additional funds required to make sure that Newfoundlanders have equal and fair access to training and that they will not be left behind?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government is very committed to all Canadians' having a fair opportunity.

I do not accept the claim that Newfoundland will be left behind by this government which has been standing very well for all regions of the country. We are investing a lot more money in transitional job funds in Newfoundland than anything that was done before. We are doing a lot more in Newfoundland through the transfer payments as well. We are the ones who are fighting very hard to maintain an equilibrium in this country in favour of Newfoundland and the other maritime provinces.

[Charlie Power, Progressive Conservative, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answer is simply not good enough.

In Newfoundland we have the highest level of unemployment and therefore the highest requirement for training. If the minister cannot find additional funds in his department, which he refused to answer, will he then access the $12.8 billion in workers funds in the EI surplus account? Does the minister not find it embarrassing to have to tell so many citizens who have so much need that they cannot access training programs simply because of a shortage of money while he is sitting on $12.8 billion of their money.

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

Mr. Speaker, I know very well that the Tories cannot understand that the EI account can have a surplus. It is something they never had and can not understand.

We managed the situation in this country quite differently and we are fiscally responsible and we corrected the mess their administration had made. From the EI fund we are putting quite a lot of money into transitional job funding which is quite high in the regions where the levels of unemployment are higher. We invest more money in our youth programs as well.

Public Consultation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when Alberta moved into a surplus position the first thing it did was survey the public in Alberta to find out what it wanted to do. The people said pay down the debt. But not this government. It will consult people about what to put on the $2 coin but not on how to spend the 75 billion $2 coins that taxpayers have to send in every year.

If Alberta is not afraid of going to the people to find out what they want to do with the surplus, why is this government afraid to do that?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the hon. member that if he is a part of the finance committee then he will be going across the country consulting with the people on that very question.

Even more to the point, the government went to the people, who spoke in the last election.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Alberta consulted the people, got their message and then went to the people in an election and got a bigger mandate. This government actually had its mandate diminished. I think the minister could find a stronger point to hang his argument on.

One line in the throne speech on debt reduction and tax relief and 20 pages on spending increases and no consultation. Why will the minister not admit that the real reason he will not consult is that he is not sure he will get the answer he wants?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is we did consult during the election campaign. We actually think that an election campaign is when Canadians should be consulted.

The second thing is that there will be be extensive consultations by the finance committee and I hope the hon. member is part of it. The prime minister and the government have set out the rules of thumb on how it thinks the surplus should be dealt with.

What is important is that as a result of this government, for the first time in over 25 years there is going to be a surplus.

Mirabel Airport

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

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

The Quebec Provincial Police was supposed to take over security at Mirabel airport tomorrow, October 1. However, we learned this morning that its services are no longer required at Mirabel and that the RCMP will remain in charge of security at that airport.

What is behind this political decision by the minister—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

—given that, on April 16, the Solicitor General announced in a press release that—

[The Speaker]

The Minister of Transport has the floor.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I explained to the hon. member that, given the changes taking place at Montreal's airports, that is to say Dorval and Mirabel, and the major renovations under way at Dorval, the federal government had decided to leave the RCMP in charge.

I believe it is a decision that makes sense.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, all this is very suspicious. The minister has known since February 1996 that international flights would be transferred from Mirabel to Dorval. He knows that there have been two international airports in Montreal since 1975.

I ask again: What is behind this political decision?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand why the hon. member is so angry. What we are saying is there is an operational need to keep the RCMP at Mirabel and Dorval. I have given the reasons.

We on this side of the House are most concerned about security at Canada's airports. We feel this can be best served in this instance by keeping the RCMP at the two airports.

Health

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister is willing to ignore the privacy commissioner when he condones his officials' going after the private and protected file of a former employee.

Since privacy rules are not important to this minister could he let the House know what guidelines he gives his bureaucrats?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the privacy commissioner has not been involved in this matter except that a complaint has been made and an investigation will be carried out. We will find out in due course what the privacy commissioner thinks.

In the meantime, last Friday the officials involved made clear what their purpose was and that it was in accordance with a perfectly acceptable departmental purpose that the file was looked for. That explanation has been made in full.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the health minister seems willing to accept this feeble excuse that the file was accessed to go after federal court document information. It is interesting that kind of information is public, open and available to all. Guess where it is available? It is available from the justice department. Amazing.

Will the minister admit here in this House today that this protected file was accessed in an attempt to discredit the reputation of this scientist because she is an irritant to his department?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I could not do that because it would not be true. It is simply remarkable and it says a great deal about the health policy of the Reform Party that in this day and age, with the complexity of the issues we face and the challenges we face as a country in preserving and strengthening health care, the hon. member has to take his turn in the House of Commons to ask a question like that.

We know what is relevant on this side of the House and we are going to preserve medicare.