House of Commons Hansard #154 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was levy.
Preston Manning ReformLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the health minister attacks the commitment of the member for Macleod to health care, but let us make a comparison.
The member for Macleod spent seven years in medical school. He spent 25 years as a practising surgeon seeing 25 sick people per day. The lawyer turned health care minister, the closest he got to health issues was chasing ambulances in Toronto.
Preston Manning Reform Calgary Southwest, AB
I have a question, Mr. Speaker. If you were a sick person, to which of these two members would you go?
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the numbers are in: after six months, the federal budget surplus has reached $10.4 billion, with half of that amount coming from the employment insurance fund. Also, the auditor general has already stated that the minister does not have the right to take money out of the employment insurance fund. It is both illegal and immoral.
When will the Minister of Finance tell us whether he will comply with the auditor general's advice or amend the act to get his way?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, what the government is doing is implementing the recommendations of the auditor general who, in 1986, told the previous government that it should consolidate the employment insurance fund in the government's consolidated fund.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, if the government wants to follow the auditor general's advice, how about acting on his comments of the past two years to the effect that the minister has no right to take money out of the employment insurance fund, which is money contributed by workers? That is what the auditor general said.
Is the minister, a ship salesman, going to wait until the holiday season, when the House is not sitting, to tamper with the figures in an illegal and immoral fashion, so he can avoid our questions?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, since we took office, we have lowered employment insurance premiums every year. It is our intention to continue to do so in the future, and also to reduce taxes for Canada's middle class and invest in growth sectors.
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, there are always limits. Is the minister going to understand that the employment insurance surpluses belong to the unemployed who were denied benefits and to the contributors who overpaid?
I would like him to answer the following question: What does he want to do with the billions of dollars he has accumulated on the backs of the unemployed? Let him answer us today and not slip us a lump of coal on December 23 when the House is not sitting.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I have just answered. We intend to lower contributions, to lower taxes, to lower the debt and to invest in the sectors of the future, to build a growth economy—the economy that last month created over 51,000 new jobs.
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is working on a good one: miniscule drops in the EI contribution rates. Then he will take off with most of the surplus and reduce taxes for the rich.
Does the Minister of Finance know that the ministers, the members and certain professionals do not pay into the employment insurance plan? Does he not find it shameful that the unemployed are being made to pay for the ministers' reductions in taxes?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, last year, we reduced contributions by $1.5 billion. That may not be a lot of money to the Bloc, but it is a huge amount to Canadians.
As a result, over the first 10 months of 1998, 321,000 new jobs were created. Planned investments, housing starts and all Canadian economic indicators point to an upswing. Things are fine in Canada.
Svend Robinson NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
United States Vice-President Al Gore spoke out strongly at the APEC summit in support of Malaysians like Irene Fernandez fighting for democracy and fighting against the repressive internal security act and other gross human rights violations.
Why is Canada's Prime Minister silent on these issues and is instead defending Malaysia's great democratic elections? Does Canada support Gore's call for democracy, or will we let Bombardier and other corporate interests silence the prime minister in Malaysia just as they have done in China and in Asia?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, as usual the hon. member has provided a very selective and a very mistaken interpretation of what was there.
I was in Malaysia and met directly with Irene Fernandez, with Anwar's wife and with a whole series of people who have been detained in prison. We raised those issues with the ministers of the Malaysian government. The Prime Minister just said that he raised those issues with Mahathir himself. Unlike the hon. member who is full of bluster and rhetoric, we get down to business and raise the real issues.
Human RightsOral Question Period
The Speaker
I would ask members to be very judicious in their choice of words during question period, both in their questions and in their answers.
Svend Robinson NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Speaker, the minister knows the Prime Minister did not raise those issues with Mahathir.
My supplementary question is for the solicitor general. Today is the day of truth for this minister at the APEC inquiry. My colleague, the hon. member for Palliser, has sworn under oath an affidavit documenting the minister's prejudging of the outcome of the inquiry.
Will the minister swear his own affidavit and finally come clean with Canadians about exactly what he did say on that Air Canada flight?
Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the finance minister told the House that disposable incomes had increased between 1996 and 1997. He failed to tell the House that disposable incomes have actually decreased between 1997 and 1998.
Under his leadership taxes are higher, take home pay is down and consumer debt is at an all time high. Does the minister understand that by using high taxes to pad his books and by relying on a high tax policy, the future of Canadians' prosperity has been completely destroyed?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member knows that the net worth of Canadians has increased year after year under this government. The Canadian standard of living has also increased substantially under this government. We did bring taxes down, $7 billion over the next three years in the last budget, and we will continue to do that. What we are doing is coming down from the mountain of taxes created by the previous government.
Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS
Mr. Speaker, the minister is wrong.
The fact is under his leadership Canadians are paying higher taxes than they have ever paid before and the poorest Canadians are paying the highest tax burden under his leadership.
He used to call the GST a regressive tax. In fact, he has used the GST to help pay off his deficit. The same policies he criticized as an opposition critic he has used to pay off the deficit.
Will he reduce taxes now and give Canadians the future they deserve?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, if I understood the hon. member correctly, he just said the government is using the GST to help pay off the deficit.
When the Conservatives introduced the GST they said it was to reduce the deficit. They set up a deficit reduction plan.
What we are doing is what his government set up. He is now objecting to it and I can understand why he would object to what his government had set up. But the big difference is that they clucked about it and we eliminated it.
Keith Martin Reform Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, if the health minister had one of his loved ones on a waiting list suffering or dying, he would be singing a different tune today.
This government has been saying for five years that it wants to fix health care. Instead it has eviscerated it to the tune of $7 billion.
Let us see if it has proof behind those convictions. How much of this $10 billion surplus will the minister put back into health care?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, it is apparent that when all else fails they will resort to empty rhetoric. When all else fails and they cannot make their points on the merits, they resort to that kind of imagery.
We have made clear that health care will be the subject of the next major reinvestment of this government. We have shown even through the difficult last five years a continuous resolve in the area of health whether through increasing funding to health research, increasing the transfers by $1.5 billion—
Keith Martin Reform Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Speaker, as an emergency room physician, I can tell the minister that a person waiting two days to get into an intensive care unit is not good care.
I ask the minister once again. While Canadians dawdle, people die. People want hospital beds. They want surgery when they need it. They do not want more rhetoric from this government. They want action, not more words.
Again I ask the minister will he put money back in health care and if so, how much? Tell the Canadian people right now how much money will go back into health care after you have taken $7 billion out of it.
