Debates of Dec. 7th, 1998

Taxation

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I understand the hon. member read Saturday's paper. If he had read today's paper he would have seen that the Minister of Industry made it very clear he is in favour of lower taxes. Having worked very closely with the industry minister over the course of the last five years, I can say that he is an ardent proponent of lowering the tax rate for Canadians.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think he was really speaking from the heart on Friday. He said that high taxes are good for productivity.

This government likes to talk about lower taxes but at every opportunity it implements tax hikes. Look at CPP. Look at EI. Look at bracket creep. A billion dollars higher every year. Is it not true that this government is doing exactly what the industry minister was saying? It is raising taxes. Is it not true that this is the way this government operates at every opportunity, by hiking taxes?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the industry minister was talking about ways in which one increases productivity. That is why he brought in the technology partnerships program. That is why he has been a very strong supporter of increased research and development across the wide range of science and technology. That is why he has supported regional economic development. He understands how important increased productivity is to Canadians.

Increased productivity will come from the kinds of things the industry minister has talked about, not better buggy whipped according to the Reform Party.

Prebudget Consultations

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government cut $6.3 billion in transfer payments to the provinces, primarily in the health sector.

Yet, on Friday, in its report on prebudget consultations, the Liberal majority found a way to criticize the provinces by saying, and I quote: “By reducing the health services they provided, the provinces challenged one of Canada's most cherished national symbols”.

Can the Minister of Finance explain how his fellow party members, who belong to a government that cut one third of its transfer payments to the provinces, can have the nerve to say that if the health care system is weakened, it is because of the provinces?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to congratulate the members of the Standing Committee on Finance, both opposition members and, most definitely, government members, for a very good report.

The emphasis put on productivity and the need to increase the wealth of all Canadians, including the poor and the middle class, resulted in a very good report. I intend to give it very serious consideration.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government has cut employment insurance and health, it wants to lower taxes for the rich, and it is prepared to grant special treatment to sports tycoons.

Given the actions and the direction taken by this government, is it not the one responsible for increased poverty, for the greater number of children living in poverty, in spite of the economic growth of the past five years?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if we look at the transfers made to the provinces by the Canadian government, we notice, for example, an increase in equalization payments. The last budget included a $7 billion increase in transfers, over a three year period.

It also included programs designed to improve access to knowledge, including the millennium scholarship fund and the $3,000 paid to single parents. However, if we look at all the areas in which the federal government invested to help Canadians secure a better future, we can see that, in each case, the Bloc Quebecois opposed the government's initiatives.

Taxation

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, family incomes are down. Economic growth is dropping. Brain drain is speeding up. The unemployment rate is nearly twice as high as it is in the United States.

What is the government's answer? According to the industry minister it is higher taxes. He said “high tax levels increase productivity”. Perhaps the finance minister could help me here. If higher taxes lead to higher productivity, why does Canada not have the most competitive economy in the world today?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I really want to congratulate my colleague, the Minister of Industry, and all my colleagues.

Perhaps the hon. member missed the announcement last Friday. Four hundred and twenty-five thousand new jobs were created this year alone. Last month the private sector, in the context of a climate established by this government, created 103,000 new jobs, 75,000 of which were permanent. The vast majority went to young Canadians.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister is boasting about his economic record while the unemployment rate is twice as high as our major economic competitor, family incomes have been dropping 15 years straight and brain drain is accelerating.

He congratulates the industry minister for contradicting the government's alleged fiscal policy, just like he congratulated the Prime Minister this summer for saying that a low dollar helped the Canadian economy.

Who really speaks for the government when it comes to economic policy, the finance minister, the Prime Minister or the industry minister? Does he agree that high taxes are good for productivity?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question, as did the industry minister this morning. He was talking about higher productivity and lower taxes.

Let us look a the results of that. Last month job gains came in eight of the ten provinces. This is the fifth straight month that the unemployment rate has gone down. The unemployment rate in Canada is now at its lowest level since 1990.

Professional Sport

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

Mr. Speaker, with reports showing that the number of poor children in Canada continues to rise, government members are pushing for sizable tax breaks for professional sports teams and their multimillionaire players.

With the House about to rise in a few days and recommendations soon to be made to cabinet for the next budget, is the Minister of Canadian Heritage ruling out tax breaks for professional sports, yes or no?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the government will carefully consider the 68 recommendations in the report on sport. Any decisions about tax investments will be announced with the budget.

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

Mr. Speaker, the House is about to rise. The minister must therefore give a clear answer.

She must make recommendations to cabinet. Her Liberal colleagues are lobbying hard for tax breaks for sports millionaires. Will she or will she not be going ahead with these indefensible recommendations that are to the advantage of sports professionals?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the member does not want to wait for the entire report to be examined. I respect the work done by both sides of the House and I want the report to be studied in depth, with no options excluded.

Agriculture

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have been calling on the agriculture minister for a long time now to get tough with the Americans and Europeans on their high unfair subsidies. But after what we saw this weekend, tough is not exactly the word that comes to mind.

Liberal toughness meant allowing U.S. pork, wheat and grain into Canada without inspection. What do we get in return? New and bigger roadblocks.

Why does the government's idea of really getting tough always mean caving in to American pressure?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows full well there will be no products coming into Canada from any country without inspection. We have the strongest and best food and agriculture commodity inspection system in the world.

The agreement we reached on a number of issues with the United States on Friday builds on that to increase, not deter, trade between our two countries.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, American farmers are far more heavily subsidized than we are. The U.S. produces far more wheat and pork than we do, but it is Canada that always bends over backwards.

Canadian farmers are always taking it right between the pockets. It is time the minister started getting really tough with high agricultural subsidies in the U.S. and Europe.

When will the government stop buckling and start battling for Canadian farmers?

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

Mr. Speaker, we in no way, shape or form buckled in the agreement we reached with the United Stated on close to 20 issues on Friday. Previous to that a long series of negotiations has the support of the government, the farm organizations in Canada and the United States. If the hon. member does not wish to believe me, speak to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture which congratulated the government on the moves we made last Friday to increase trade with the United States.

Business Development Bank Of Canada

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for Economic Development for the Regions of Quebec.

This government seems to have a dubious propensity for helping the rich stay in shape. In addition to the tax advantages proposed for the sports millionaires, we learn that the Business Development Bank of Canada spent over $221,000 on golf club memberships for its executives.

When there are 1.5 million poor children and the government continues to cut employment insurance and transfers to the provinces, how can the minister justify one of his crown corporations spending—

[The Speaker]

The hon. the parliamentary secretary.

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I want to make sure the member understands that the business development bank is an arm's length corporation. It operates on a fully commercial basis.

The business development bank brought in $1 billion in loans for small and medium size business and operates at a profit of some $50 million. In fact, it returned $6 million in dividends to the taxpayers.

Steel Industry

[Carmen Provenzano, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Revenue Canada announced last Thursday that it has commenced an investigation of the dumping of foreign steel into Canada.

Will the Minister of National Revenue now assure Algoma Steel, all Canadian steel producers and Canadians living in cities like Sault Ste. Marie which are dependent on the steel industry that his department will complete this investigation without delay?

[Herb Dhaliwal, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I want to confirm that my department initiated anti-dumping investigations last week involving hot roll steel sheet products from four countries.

The department will complete its investigation by early next year and will impose duties if dumping is confirmed. If there has been a large increase of harmful imports and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal decides that retroactive application of anti-dumping duties is justified, duties can be initiated on a retroactive basis back to December 3.

Agriculture

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of International Trade.

The continued blockade of our border by American farmers this weekend shows pretty clearly this government's so-called trade agreement was nothing more than a public relations exercise. It is full of nice words like consult, exchange of information and increased dialogue, but no action and no concrete agreement to protect Canadian farmers.

When will the minister stop finding nice words and get tough with the Americans with their subsidies?