Debates of Feb. 2nd, 1998

Ice Storm

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, as a general rule we ask members to stand in their places when they are speaking. I am going to make an exception today as I call on one of our own members of Parliament to address us in statements. The hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas will remain seated while he gives his statement.

Member For Burnaby—Douglas

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on December 30, I was involved in a very serious hiking accident on Galiano Island in my home province of British Columbia. During the two weeks I was in Vancouver General hospital and in the days since then I have been deeply moved by the messages of support I have received from my constituents in Burnaby—Douglas and from people across the country.

The support I have received gave me a great deal of strength and hope for the future.

I want to take this opportunity to express my profound personal gratitude to my partner Max, to my dedicated staff and a special word of thanks to you, Mr. Speaker, and our staff on the Hill for your tremendous personal support.

I will be in a wheelchair for the next few months and my jaw is wired shut for some time to come. I understand that an all-party delegation led by the prime minister and my leader, the member for Halifax, has urged my gifted surgeon, Dr. Patti Clugston, to wire the jaw permanently shut.

I take this opportunity to briefly send a message of strength and hope to our colleague, the member for Labrador, who is fighting cancer in a St. John's hospital today.

I say to my colleagues on all sides of the House and in the other place, du Québec et partout au Canada, your words of solidarity and support have meant more to me than you will ever know.

The Economy

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I know today is the first day of Parliament but it is also Groundhog Day. Wiarton Willie, the official groundhog, apparently saw his shadow which means that we are faced with many more days of winter this year.

Many Canadians are wondering whether the prime minister saw his shadow. Will it be an early springtime of debt reduction and tax relief or must Canadians endure many more wintery days of Liberal overspending and misspending?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, spring has arrived for the Canadian economy because we have managed to control the deficit. We said that we would reduce the deficit to 3% of GDP in five years and we managed to reduce it to virtually zero in four years. There will be more sunshine coming into the Canadian economy when the Minister of Finance introduces his budget later this month.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister came out of the same hole he went into last December. Things have changed. Interest rates are rising which is bad news for Canadians paying mortgages. It is bad news for Canadian businesses paying bank loans and it is bad news for the worst debt organization in the country, the Government of Canada, with interest rate charges on the debt threatening to eat up the surplus in the minister's budget.

My question is for the prime minister. He has bragged in this House about having deficit reduction targets. Does he have debt reduction targets? If he does, what are they?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, last year, after a long time, probably more than 20 years, the government started to pay off some of the market debt. We will have a budget in which the Minister of Finance will say exactly where we are at this moment.

We made a commitment to the Canadian people during the election with regard to the surplus. We are all happy that will be the situation in Canada very soon. The Minister of Finance confirms what we said, that half of the surplus will go toward debt reduction and tax reduction and the other half will go toward solving some of the economic and social problems of the nation.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, it is not only that the debt is too high. The taxes are too high. A single mother with one child earning $15,000 a year is paying $1,300 in taxes to that finance minister. A family of four with an income of $32,000 a year is paying $3,000 a year in taxes to that finance minister. The government has saddled us with the highest personal income tax in the industrial world.

Will the prime minister listen to the groans, curses and protests of overtaxed Canadians and offer tax relief targets for 1998?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, 33 days ago there was a reduction in taxes to the Canadian people by $1.4 billion when we reduced unemployment insurance premiums.

We have also announced that in the fiscal year 1998-99 there will be $850 million in tax credits allocated to poor people in our society.

Helicopters

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have here a copy of the original EH-101 helicopter contract. It is clear from this document that the government has just spent $200 million more on the present contract than the deal was worth back in 1992.

My question is for the prime minister. Will he explain to Canadians how he managed to buy a Chevy helicopter and pay a Cadillac price?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, that is simply not the case. I noticed in one of the newspapers today a report about an unsigned, unattributable document that has a lot of nonsensical information. That is probably what the hon. member is having a look at.

The fact is we could not afford the helicopter deal at that time with a $42 billion deficit. We could not afford the extra equipment on that helicopter. Today we have one that is 40% cheaper.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that sounds like another chopper whopper from the Liberals. Only a Liberal can pay more and call it a bargain. I think Canadians deserve better.

The Liberal helicopter deal is costing taxpayers $200 million more than the 1992 deal. Look at the contract.

Will the prime minister explain to Canadians just how he managed to buy a Chevy helicopter and give it a new name for a Cadillac price?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should look at the contract. The contract has yet to be signed. It is in the final negotiation.

When he sees the contract and the price he will see that in fact we have bought the best operational helicopter to meet our needs. We have bought it at a price that is far less than what the Conservative government would have paid for it previously.

Ice Storm

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by paying tribute to victims of the ice storm for the courage they showed throughout the crisis, and indeed continue to show, as well as to all those in Quebec, Canada and the United States who demonstrated such marvellous solidarity with them.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

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

The crisis experienced by all ice storm victims is without precedent. Given the exceptional nature of the situation, swift and concrete action has to be taken to meet the needs of storm victims, who are being hit hard by unemployment.

Given the exceptional circumstances, would the Minister of Human Resources Development not agree that a good way of alleviating people's suffering would be to end the confusion surrounding the directives regarding the application of special EI measures by suspending the two-week waiting period, otherwise known as the qualifying period?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the leader of the Bloc Quebecois for his question.

Naturally, I share his sentiments about storm victims and I would like to tell him that the Government of Canada, including the Minister of National Defence and all my other colleagues, did everything it could to help resolve the problems.

I would like to be very clear, and I thank him for giving me an opportunity to do so today. There is confusion between qualifying period and waiting period. What we did as a government, and I used the powers accorded me by the legislation in these exceptional circumstances, was to eliminate the two-week waiting period so that people could receive EI payments much more quickly, but I maintained the qualifying period. The qualifying period remains, and I think it important that it remain.

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

Mr. Speaker, many storm victims called their MPs to tell them that, when they went to EI offices, they were often told that they first had to be unemployed for two weeks, to be without work for two weeks, before being entitled to EI benefits.

If I understand correctly, the minister has just told me that this is not the case, that these are not the directives issued by his department. The answer being given out by departmental officials is the opposite of what the minister has just told us in the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, what we eliminated was the two- week waiting period. In other words, I asked our officials to allow people who had been without work for five days to apply for EI and to receive within three, four or five days their first EI cheque, that they could therefore receive within the first two weeks, but for the following week.

That is why there may have been some confusion, but I think it important that this be known, because workers obtained assistance much more rapidly than they normally would have.

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

Mr. Speaker, during the ice storm the Minister of Human Resources Development publicly encouraged the unemployed to apply in advance for employment insurance benefits, adding that he would show a great deal of compassion toward them.

Everyone understood that, given the plight of thousands of families, the government would show flexibility and, more specifically, would waive the two-week penalty that applies.

Can the minister tell us whether or not the unemployed affected by the ice storm will have to pay back the extra money paid to them, given the two-week penalty?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois is always creating confusion, and I hope it is not doing so deliberately.

I will be very clear. The first two weeks are not covered, because I do not want to unload all of Montreal's downtown onto the system. Given that four or five days were not worked, it is important for businesses and workers to take measures to make up for the lost time, through overtime or by working on Saturdays. I believe this is the best solution.

As for the waiting period, the workers got cheques in advance, as in the case of the Saguenay and Manitoba disasters, regarding which the waiting period was never waived. We will act humanely in each and every case.

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

Mr. Speaker, on January 15, the minister said “when people are forced to live without heat and power, the one thing we want to make sure is that they do not have to worry about their income”. As things stand, these people are not paid for the first two weeks, while they are getting 55% for the other weeks, because the minister set up a new employment insurance program which is devoid of compassion toward the unemployed.

Where is the difference? Why such a contrast between the minister's words about being compassionate and flexible, and the drastic and heartless measures he is now imposing?

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

Mr. Speaker, we allowed people to receive a cheque within 14 or 15 days after the problem began, that is as soon as we realized that some people needed that help.

People received money two weeks sooner than they normally would have under the employment insurance program. It was very important for these people to get that cheque and this is why we were quick to act. It was important for people without heat and power to get their cheque two weeks earlier than normal. We managed to do that and we are very proud of our initiative.

Banking

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the big banks are trying to pull a fast one. They are trying to sell us a monster merger as if it is good for us.

The banks tell us there are not sufficient funds to keep their people working, not sufficient funds to maintain services and keep branches open, and not sufficient funds to reduce services charges which should not leave the finance minister with much to think about.

Will the minister kill the monster merger today? Will he send it back to the banks stamped NSF?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we received information that there is a desire for these two banks to merge.

The Minister of Finance rightly said that a committee is reviewing the situation. The committee will report in September. We are not in a rush to make any decision until we have received the report of the committee.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister and the minister of finance promised to protect the public interest. Those promises are as credible as the promise to scrap the GST and the promise to scrap excessive drug patent protection.

Let me give the minister another chance, the chance to stand up for bank consumers, for bank employees and for folks needing fair credit. Will the finance minister show some guts and bounce this monster merger today?