Debates of Oct. 30th, 1998

Northern Communities

[Rick Laliberte, NDP, Churchill River, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight a major concern about this country's northern regions.

In Cree we call it kêwêtinôhk and in Saskatchewan we further define it as where the people of the bush and the rock live: Sakâw-iniwâk asinêwaskiywiniwâk.

The federal government has been comfortable in accepting the definition of the north as the region north of 60°, but the northern half of all of our provinces is very unique.

There are huge tracts of land with extreme living costs. These regions are sparsely populated, but the communities are among the oldest in this country.

The north has contributed to the economic wealth of our southern communities and it is only by empowering and investing in our communities that we can proudly develop our own needs.

Our growing populations need highways, housing, health and education facilities that could be built by northerners. The federal government, in partnership with the provinces, must create northern specific initiatives such as the Northlands agreements of the 1970s.

Election Campaign In Quebec

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as the election campaign gets in gear in Quebec, the issues are becoming clearer.

And the leader of the Bloc Quebecois has been a great help in clarifying that a vote for the Parti Quebecois is a vote for a referendum. This probably explains why Parti Quebecois leader Lucien Bouchard raised the sovereignty issue again before a university audience yesterday.

But we think he should know that there are definite benefits to Canadian unity, as compared to the scenarios or tricks to achieve Quebec's independence.

We are also asking him to tell Quebeckers what they should expect the day after Quebec separates from the rest of Canada.

We want him to speak the truth to the people of Quebec. The leader of the Bloc Quebecois recently told us that a vote for the Parti Quebecois is a vote for a referendum.

Either Lucien Bouchard repudiates the Bloc leader and sets the record straight or he tells us the truth about what to expect if Quebec ever separates from the rest of Canada.

Fortunately, Quebec can count on a dynamic Liberal team—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Shefford.

Anselme Lapointe

[Diane St-Jacques, Progressive Conservative, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today I wish to pay special tribute to a brilliant designer, Anselme Lapointe.

At the recent culture days in Valcourt in my riding, I joined the local committee and an impressive number of representatives from political, academic and professional circles, as well as Mr. Lapointe's family, in paying warm tribute to this talented individual for the quality of his work and for his humanitarian and social commitment to his region and to his province.

After graduating from the École des beaux-arts du Québec, Mr. Lapointe joined Bombardier in the early 1960s. Joseph-Armand Bombardier invented the snowmobile, but it was Mr. Lapointe's designs that changed winters forever for the millions of enthusiastic users of this sports and utility vehicle.

His vision, his courage, and his perseverance are an example to us all. Through his work, he has helped gain recognition for the importance of design and the related notions of economic and social cost-effectiveness for industry and for all Canadians.

In conclusion—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Québec has the floor.

Quebec School System

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the results of the third international mathematics and sciences survey, conducted by the International Association for Educational Assessment, show Quebec's primary and secondary school students right up there with the best internationally in mathematics and sciences.

On average, students from Quebec ranked considerably higher in mathematics than students from the rest of Canada. What is more, Quebec stood fifth among the 45 countries taking part. This is proof indeed that the curriculums now being used in Quebec are adapted to the modern academic world.

With results like these, we can only imagine what will be within our reach when we have all the tools of a sovereign nation and no longer have to beg the federal government to stop interfering in provincial jurisdictions.

Let's hear it for the students and their teachers, and above all for Quebec's public school system.

Aircraft

[Ivan Grose, Liberal, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, our Labrador search and rescue helicopters came into service between 1963 and 1967, and the Sea Kings between 1963 and 1969. Old aircraft to be sure, but what the opposition does not seem to understand is that this is not that unusual a situation in aviation.

For example, the venerable DC-3 which was built over 60 years ago is still in passenger service around the world. As a member of the Canadian Warplane Heritage, my colleagues and I routinely flew in aircraft over twice the age of our helicopter fleet.

It is a sad fact of life that aircraft, whether new or old, sometimes fall out of the sky. The age of the aircraft is seldom a major contributing factor. It all comes down to maintenance. Properly maintained aircraft can last virtually indefinitely.

These aircraft are becoming too expensive to maintain and must be replaced. In the meantime, I am confident that they remain safe because they are properly maintained by the best air maintenance people on the planet, the members of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, a week after it was reported that Canada tops the UN list for the highest quality of life in the world the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development released a report that proves how wide a gap there is between the average Canadian and our aboriginal population.

The minister for this portfolio said this study was needed to measure the progress. What progress? The quality of life of Canadians living on reserves is a national shame.

This government has legislated a system that condemns these people to a life of poverty, sickness and squalor. The government says it is trying to make things fair, equal and anti-racist. Instead the Prime Minister has thrown hundreds of millions of dollars at aboriginals as compensation while blindly clinging to the hope that native poverty will simply resolve itself.

The government believes that money can create the ideal atmosphere for natives to succeed and become self-sufficient. Mark my words. This will never happen as long as the money is paid to band administrators. The process is plagued with financial mismanagement. Until this is resolved, the quality of life will never improve.

Employment Insurance

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the employment insurance fund belongs to millions of Canadians, but because of this Prime Minister, every worker is paying $350 too much and every small business is paying $500 per worker too much.

Rather than changing the law to take this overpayment from workers and employers, will the government commit today to ensuring that every worker will see a $350 reduction and every small business a $500 per worker reduction in their EI premiums for 1999? Not $100, not $200, but the full reduction guaranteed by law. Yes or no?

[Tony Valeri, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, since coming to office, the EI premium has been reduced by this government by $5 billion or more. Our payroll taxes are the lowest, lower than those in the United States. We will continue.

What I really want to point out is the incredible fact that the Reform Party changes its mind on what to do with the EI surplus more than the Conservatives actually change leaders or have leadership votes. First the Reform Party wants to apply it to the deficit. Now the Reform Party wants to give it all back. Watching the Reform Party is like getting policy whiplash.

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is the law requires that the EI fund be kept focused on providing for the needs of unemployed people.

The Prime Minister has promised us a public debate on employment insurance. He has broken that promise. We have had no hearings. There has been no vote in parliament. Yet this government is acting as if the law has been changed. It has not. Will the Prime Minister today commit to a full and open debate in this House to change the law?

[Tony Valeri, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is certainly participating in the prebudget consultation debate. He was with the committee when we were in parts of western Canada. The member has been here in Ottawa participating in the debate. Who do we hear from in that debate? We hear from Canadians who come forward and talk about Canadian priorities. Canadians talk about the employment insurance program, about investment in health care and reduction in personal income taxes.

The debate is ongoing. I encourage the hon. member to continue to participate.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I guess the Prime Minister thinks he is above the law.

If there was an honest public debate on what to do with the employment insurance overpayment, it would be in parliament. It would be a formal debate and at the end of it there would be a vote. Every MP would have to go on record saying who they thought the money belonged to. The Prime Minister thinks it belongs to him. Everyone else in the country knows the money is theirs.

Why will the Prime Minister not allow for a vote on the EI overpayment, or has he already made up his mind to steal it?

[The Deputy Speaker]

I think the hon. member knows that that remark is unparliamentary. The member should withdraw the word steal and I would ask him to do so.

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the word is withdrawn but the question still stands.

[Tony Valeri, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member has recently come to this place, in 1997 I believe.

I do want to inform the hon. member that unless the rules have been changed, a House committee is an extension of parliament. Another Reform member is attending the committee. Perhaps I could encourage the member to attend. Instead of being the hired heckler that he was in the United States, perhaps he could contribute to the debate.

National Defence

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House heard that the Canadian forces are expecting a $1 billion shortfall next year. This is after a Liberal policy of thousands of cuts on the duty roster, the troops, pay freezes for years, dilapidated housing and old equipment. Now we hear there is going to be another 76 military personnel cut from CFB Comox. We need more troops, not fewer.

The government has a choice. When is the minister going to choose between mothballing more equipment and cutting troops and giving Canada—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. Minister of National Defence.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as usual the hon. member's research is faulty. He is basing his comments about a $1 billion deficit on an article that is completely wrong. There is no deficit. There is no overspending. There are no plans to reduce the number of staff or to reduce in fact the equipment that is provided for them.

Generic Drugs

[Rahim Jaffer, Reform, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, seniors and low income Canadians rely on low cost generic pharmaceuticals for their health. Yet the Minister of Industry has created a regulatory environment for generic drug manufacturers that is so cumbersome and unfair that the supreme court called it a draconian regime.

When will the minister take his regulatory thumb off these drug manufacturers and scratch these unfair rules?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is not here today, but I will pass on the concern. I do know that the minister is reviewing that and we will do what is right for Canadians.

Election Campaign In Quebec

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

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of the week, everybody has noticed there is a battle going on between the Prime Minister and Jean Charest. Discontent is setting in among the federal Liberals.

The Minister of Immigration has even gone so far as to admit her leader's blunders and said that he would not take the blame for Jean Charest's defeat.

When she goes door to door, how will the minister justify the blunders of her leader, the Prime Minister of Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the conditions for Mr. Charest to win the next provincial election is that the leader of the Bloc Quebecois continue to make mistakes. He just has to continue telling Quebeckers the truth: that the only important thing for the Bloc Quebecois is another referendum and that their only goal is sovereignty.

Mr. Charest is the only one who promotes change and who promotes what is good for Quebeckers, namely growth and employment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I talked about a referendum which we would win. The President of the Treasury Board should read the article instead of reading only the headline or the cartoons.

Does the minister not realize that—

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh.