Debates of Feb. 20th, 1998

Health

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, there are more than 30,000 hepatitis C victims looking to the health minister for compensation. I have asked the minister in the past to act unilaterally and we know the minister is reluctant to act unilaterally.

These are innocent victims. How much longer do they and their families have to suffer this torturous wait? Will the minister exercise his constitutional and more importantly his moral responsibility to assist these innocent victims?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, no one would be happier than I with a compensation package for hepatitis C victims who are after all bearing notwithstanding their innocence, the consequences of this tragedy.

I also believe strongly that the interests of those victims are best served with a package of compensation that involves both levels of government. So I am prepared to wait a little longer to see if we can get an agreement with the provincial ministers.

I do tell the House in response to the member's question that this government will not walk away from its responsibilities and at the end of the day will discharge those responsibilities.

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, this is incredible. We have heard this story before. We have heard this line before.

I want to remind the House and the Canadian people that the minister did not seek provincial agreement when he chopped $6 billion out of health care, but now he is just simply waiting it out, ignoring the plight of these innocent victims. Again, will the minister show some leadership and act unilaterally and act now to help these people?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the hon. member, my interest is not in scoring cheap political points. My interest is in serving the victims' interests.

If this member would speak to his Tory cousins in Ontario, speak to his Tory cousins in Manitoba, if he would communicate with the Tories across this country, maybe we could get together and do something for the victims.

This is not a debate about fiscal federalism. This is about serving the interests of innocent victims. The member ought to be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

The Economy

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing we have learned over the past year it is that economic conditions can change. Interest rates, the dollar's value, foreign crises, many things can make an expected surplus disappear.

We need to attack our huge debt now. Canadians need that tax relief now. Job creators need some running room now. Instead the Prime Minister grabs our surplus to build a personal memorial and says debt pay down and tax relief will come later. Why is he setting us up for another broken Liberal promise?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if I can revert to the matter of the poll that was on the CBC last night, more than 70% of Canadians strongly support the concept of the millennium scholarship fund.

The hon. lady is right when she says that economic conditions can change. For example it was announced this morning that a strong performance in December pushed retail sales to their largest annual increase since 1988. This in my view is due to the restoration of the country's finances since this government took office. It has almost eliminated the $42 billion deficit.

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister should look at not just the facts he wants to look at but the real facts. Our debt is way too high, taxes are way too high, our unemployment is double that of the U.S. The responsible thing to do with the surplus would be to pay down our debt and give Canadian families tax relief now while the economy is still strong. Why does the Prime Minister not do that now?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if we can return to the facts, there is more to be done in unemployment, but it is down considerably from what it was when we took office. The interest rates are down. There is almost no inflation. We have just about eliminated the $42 billion deficit left us by the Conservative government. I do not know why the hon. member in her questions does not recognize those facts. If she did, she would have a lot more credibility.

Bill C-28

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Saint-Eustache—Sainte-Thérèse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister did not respond to the four opposition parties' request for a special committee to investigate the apparent conflict of interest in the case of Bill C-28. He referred us to the Standing Committee on Finance, claiming that is where our questions will be answered.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Does the Deputy Prime Minister recognize that the Liberal majority on the Standing Committee on Finance systematically refused to hear expert witnesses who could have shed light on this issue?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, will the hon. member admit that no specific objection was raised concerning these amendments and that the bill was simply carried on division in committee?

If there was something wrong with these amendments, why did the hon. member and his colleagues not oppose them? This goes to show that his allegations are unfounded and that the Minister of Finance is not in a real or apparent conflict of interest.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Saint-Eustache—Sainte-Thérèse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if indeed the Minister of Finance has nothing to hide, why is this government afraid to shed light on this matter with the help of a special committee?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the facts have already been disclosed in the evidence given by the ethics counsellor before the Standing Committee on Finance. Questions have been asked and answers given on this matter in the House. So, there is nothing to hide. The facts are clear: there is no conflict of interest, either real or apparent.

The Economy

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty obvious that we would have a surplus in the budget this year if it were not for the free spending ways of some of the Liberals across the way.

Zachary, one of my constituents, paid attention to the promise in the red book that 50% of the surplus would go to debt and tax reduction. I am asking the question for Zachary. Why are the Liberals breaking another one of their red book promises?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I direct my hon. friend to page 28 of the red book where it says in bold type “We will allocate our budget surpluses so that over the course of our mandate one-half will be spent to improve our programs and one-half will go to tax cuts and reduction of the debt”. Over the course of our mandate. That is our promise and I say we are going to keep it.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government tried to weasel out of the GST promise by finding fine print. The real reason the government is going in this direction is that the Prime Minister wants to build a monument to himself. He actually physically wants to spend the surplus before he leaves office.

This is not a question from me, this is a question from Zachary, that little tiny guy in my riding. Why is it that the Liberals are trying to break their promise by finding fine print again?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the hon. member to take back a message to Zachary. That is not to put his trust in the member who just spoke because he does not know what he is talking about.

Research Funding

[Hélène Alarie, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, granting councils are facing major cuts. They are having a hard time funding new researchers and maintaining current projects. To each of our questions on this issue, the Minister of Industry responds simply that $800 million is available for the innovation foundation.

Does the minister realize that these funds subsidize only the research infrastructure and not the researchers themselves, thus allowing the brain drain to continue unchecked?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member opposite realizes the investment in the CFI innovation fund. That is only the beginning.

I am sure the member realizes the budget is due next week. If she has some patience, hopefully in the budget there will be more items on research and the research council, which the government has supported in the past and will do so in the future for the good of Canadians.

[Hélène Alarie, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister say that research in Canada is in good shape, when he can see that the MRC, the Medical Research Council, could approve only 216 projects out of the 1,103 applications made and could renew only 41% of the current ones?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we have already shown we are fully aware of the importance of research here in Canada.

As my colleague has just said, please wait until next week when we bring down the budget. We will then have an opportunity to show what the government does. We are obviously very aware of the importance of research in Canada.

Bill C-28

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics commissioner has admitted that he was unaware of all the facts when he made his decision on the issue of the conflict of interest swirling around the finance minister and his Bill C-28.

Will the Prime Minister ensure that the ethics commissioner does a review now of his decision based upon all the facts?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics commissioner told me in a conversation I had with him on the telephone a few days ago that he found no conflict of interest and therefore no appearance of conflict of interest.

I would like to ask my hon. friend why his party has joined the NDP and the Conservatives in getting into bed with the Bloc on yet another issue.

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the admission by the ethics commissioner that he was unaware of all the facts at the time he made his decision invalidates that decision. That is a well known principle of law.

I ask the minister one more time whether he will ensure that the ethics commissioner conducts a review of his decision, this time based upon all the facts.

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, first I want to check to see whether the premise of the hon. member's question is factually correct.

Second, I repeat my question. Is what he has just asked a sign that the Reform Party is now going to get into some type of ménage à quatre in bed with the NDP and the Conservatives when it comes to the Bloc raising issues? If so, they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

International Aid

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie.

According to the UN, developed countries such as Canada should earmark at least 0.7% of their gross national product for development assistance. Yet, with additional cuts of $150 million, the Canadian government's budget for international assistance is a dismal 0.3% of GDP. This is a disgrace.

Since we will soon have a deficit-free federal budget, will the minister pledge to cancel the planned $150 million cut to international assistance?