Debates of April 2nd, 1998

Hepatitis C

[Maurice Vellacott, Reform, Wanuskewin, SK]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House the minister compared the risk of infection with hepatitis C to the risks involved with many medical treatments. It is beside the point that heart problems and cancers cannot always be treated successfully because when people enter the hospital they already have those heart problems and cancers. They are not infected with them by the health system. How can the unsuccessful treatment of an already existing disease be equated with the infliction of a new disease on an unsuspecting patient?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member must know that for years there has been a very broad debate about where individual responsibility ends and when governments should pay compensation if someone is harmed in the system. In 1990 or 1991 Robert Prichard, now president of the University of Toronto, did a rather complete study on that subject for government. It has been the subject of public debate from time to time.

In this case it was up to governments to look at the history of this tragedy and decide where it was that governments should step up and say they would compensate because there was fault in the system.

To take another approach—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Wanuskewin.

[Maurice Vellacott, Reform, Wanuskewin, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would be very disappointed if I took my car into a shop to be fixed and it could not find the problem but I would be even more upset if it not only could not find the problem but banged up the doors, ripped the upholstery, cracked the windshield and blew the motor.

Will the minister admit that all those who were infected with hepatitis C were better off before they entered the Canadian health system than after they were injected with poison blood. Were they better off before?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member knows that the medical system, the health care system, medical procedures that are carried out in hospitals every day carry with them certain risks. There is a risk-benefit ratio in every medical procedure.

We are saying that we have not yet approached the point as a society where we are prepared to say that any time anything goes wrong for whatever reason there will be public compensation. We may get to that point in years ahead but at the moment the public policy choice is to compensate where governments had responsibility and should have acted.

Employment Insurance

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

In an interview with the editorial team at the Ottawa Citizen, the Minister of Finance is reported as having stated that employment insurance premiums did not really kill jobs in Canada.

How can the Minister of Finance say today the exact opposite of what he stated in his 1994 budget, where he claimed that reducing premiums would generate 40,000 jobs?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, according to all economic analyses, the main thing is not to raise employment insurance premiums. We saw what happened during the 1989-1992 recession.

When premiums are maintained at a stable level, businesses are free to hire people and they do.

What counts most is the reduction in interest rates, as that is what creates jobs. This requires healthy public finances, which unfortunately precludes reducing premiums any further.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, analyses must have changed very quickly, and the minister has certainly forgotten what he told us.

I think the minister cares about job creation and I wonder, as Quebec did, why he does not quickly and substantially reduce employment insurance premiums especially in light of the huge surplus in the employment insurance fund?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, again, the hon. member must be aware of the fact that our employment insurance premiums are lower than any similar premium in the United States and most European countries.

At the same time, the hon. member should know that, when we took office, premiums were scheduled to rise to $3.30 under the previous government. We reduced them to $2.70, the single largest drop ever in such a time frame.

Hepatitis C

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have another quote for the minister and it is from the Krever report again. Justice Krever writes: “Proving fault is a formidable task for an individual injured by blood transfusion or blood product. Court proceedings are especially hard on those who are seriously ill and dying”.

Why is the health minister so intent on putting these Canadians through that kind of ordeal?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the effect of the offer which was made last Friday by the territorial, provincial and federal governments was to spare that ordeal for 22,000 victims who contracted hepatitis C between 1986 and 1990. I want the member to bear that in mind.

The Krever report contains a complete and insightful discussion of the policy of a no fault system. It may be in the future that provinces and territories will accept his recommendation that in the future operation of the blood system there be a no fault compensation system. That is not what is in place at the moment. When we gathered as ministers of health, as governments, and looked back at the chronology of this—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to read another quote from hepatitis C victims: “I don't think that those claimants should have to spend their lifetime in litigation”. I will read it again: “I don't think that those claimants should have to spend their lifetime in litigation”. Who said that? It was not Premier Clark. It was not a Liberal backbencher. It was the Minister of Health in the Ottawa Citizen on November 23, 1997.

Why did this health minister abandon his own principles?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, what this government did, the first government since these events, the first government to act, was gather the provincial ministers together and produced the best possible result given good, responsible government public policy.

We chose the period during which people were injured because governments should have acted and did not and we offered compensation. By so doing we spared those 22,000 people the ordeal of continuous litigation.

Shipbuilding

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

In the 1993 election, the Liberals promised to formulate a shipbuilding policy. The premiers, in their meeting in St. Andrews last fall, also called for such a policy. Even Liberal Party members called for one at their recent convention.

Why is the government not taking action in the area of shipbuilding?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to answer the question. This government has always had a shipbuilding policy. There are five items involved in the shipbuilding policy and perhaps the member does not understand.

There is the accelerated capital cost allowance we have put in place, a 25% tariff on non-NAFTA ships that are imported, a domestic procurement by the federal government, Export Development Corporation financing, and a very favourable research and development program that is also available for the shipbuilding industry.

Immigration

[Carolyn Parrish, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Two American athletes presently employed by Toronto sports teams have criminal convictions in the United States for a variety of offences, including weapons, illegal drugs and spousal abuse.

On what grounds have foreign professional athletes been issued minister's permits when they have extensive criminal records?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, it would be inappropriate for me to speak about the details of any case in public.

However, I can assure members of the House that decisions to issue ministerial permits, especially for criminally inadmissible persons, are taken very seriously and very cautiously. Visa officers should be convinced that the needs of these persons to come to Canada are compelling and that there is no danger to Canadian security. The ministerial permits they issue are for short periods of time and can be cancelled at any time.

Hepatitis C

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is instructive that the Liberal backbenchers are not asking their ministers here about hepatitis C. We know they were doing it in caucus yesterday and afterwards.

When the government decided 10 years ago to compensate AIDS victims no one was more supportive than the Liberal opposition. The current heritage minister called it a national tragedy back then. That was when the Liberals were in opposition. That was when they had principles.

I have a question for the Prime Minister. Why does he do exactly the opposite when he is in government than he said he would do when he was in opposition?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the contamination of blood with HIV was a national tragedy, just like the contamination of blood with hepatitis C. But what the hon. member should understand is that compensation was offered to HIV victims in that day on the same principle we are offering compensation today for hepatitis C victims.

The government implicitly acknowledged 10 years ago that there was not enough done in terms of surveillance, research and taking steps to ensure that the risk was minimized to the greatest extent possible.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is not an answer. What we are getting is just more and more of this kind of stonewalling. The minister is in the middle of a political firestorm because Canadians want the government to show compassion, not more rhetoric.

Instead of repeating the lines he has been given by his health department lawyers, why does he not do what the victims want and give them justice and the kind of rewards they deserve after the incompetence of the government's management of the blood system?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the member may have heard me say all week, since Monday when this issue was first raised in the House, that what governments did, not just the federal government but provincial governments from one side of this country to the other, was to look at the history of this matter. We asked the tough question: Where is the point at which governments and the public, in essence, should accept responsibility?

We found that there was a four year period during which something could and should have been done. That is what all governments agreed upon as the appropriate place for government to act.

Pay Equity

[Bev Desjarlais, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in the students' manual published in 1988, which is still distributed today by the human rights directorate of Heritage Canada, there is a chapter on equal pay.

Canadian students learned that sometimes employers pay women less but it is against the law.

In its last annual report the human rights commission criticized the government's stall tactics on pay equity.

When will the Prime Minister make pay equity a reality for federal employees, or should teachers just skip that chapter on equal pay for equal work when teaching about basic human rights?

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

Mr. Speaker, the question of principle is clear. It has been endorsed by the government and it has been put into place by the government.

Two weeks ago a few questions were raised by two judgments of the federal court which indicated that at present the rules applied by Treasury Board to determine pay equity were put into place. However, we are still willing to offer a compensation package of $1.3 billion. Once again I would ask that the “syndicats” accept their responsibilities, help the employees and finally start negotiating in good faith.

Agriculture

[Dick Proctor, NDP, Palliser, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister will know that net cash income of prairie farmers is in free fall. According to Agriculture Canada's own projections, 1998 farm income will drop by 11% in Alberta, 15% in Saskatchewan and a whopping 35% in Manitoba. Yet in a most recent budget speech there was not one word about agriculture as the federal government continues to abandon and ignore rural Canada.

What are the finance minister and the government going to do to help stabilize the income of prairie farmers this year?