House of Commons Hansard #101 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.
Royal Canadian MintOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member should address all questions through the Chair. If the hon. minister heard the question, he may answer.
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the bill that I tabled this morning in the House has nothing to do with the new plating plant the mint is building in Winnipeg. It is to streamline the corporation and to make sure the decision to issue new coins, not necessarily the way it is doing it now, and to produce them faster.
In terms of the issue between Westaim and the mint, I remind the hon. member that it is before the courts. I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on the issue.
Jim Jones Progressive Conservative Markham, ON
Mr. Speaker, if Westaim were located in a Liberal riding we would not be having this debate right now.
In some countries when governments decide to take over certain industries it is referred to as nationalization. Others might refer to it as expropriation. The fair minded could legitimately call this political pork barrelling.
Will the minister agree to table a full listing of other industries his government has in its cross hairs so that these businesses can prepare for the onslaught?
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the mint is celebrating 90 years of existence. It has produced coins, it has produced collector items and all Canadians are proud of it.
There is an international market. It is a crown corporation that operates with a profitable base and is working with the private sector. I believe it has been doing a good job but unfortunately I cannot go into the details because this case is before the courts. When this is all over I am sure the hon. member and all Canadians will realize the Canadian royal—
Royal Canadian MintOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Medicine Hat.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, surely the government is not so addled that it is going into negotiations with the provinces without having any kind of position at all. That does not make any sense.
We have heard government members talk about excuses, about processes and have seen them pointing fingers at the provinces. All that is irrelevant. This is about people's lives.
What position is the government taking into negotiations with the provinces? Is the hep C file open or closed?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may have heard me say the other day that in view of the position now taken by Ontario, indeed Quebec, those are significant developments and we are prepared to sit with provincial ministers.
I can assure the hon. member and his leader that by the time we sit with colleagues next week to see if a new consensus can be developed we will indeed have a position to bring to the table.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, while the health minister is being coy I should remind him that people's lives are hanging in the balance. I do not see how he thinks he can get away with that.
The fact is people have been waiting for months for a decision on this. The government says the file is open, it is closed, it is open. When is it going to make its mind up and tell Canadians whether people with hepatitis C are going to get full compensation?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, one of the great differences between this side of the House and that is that people on this side put their faith in the good judgment of the Canadian people.
The Canadian people know when they listen to the member talk about people's lives being on the line where that comes from. They know that last summer when we began speaking about compensating victims, last fall when we were working on it persuading provinces, these members were nowhere to be seen. They were not heard from at all.
It is this government that has acted on behalf of victims.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, in the matter of the millennium scholarships, the spokesperson for Quebec's education minister said that “negotiations are stalled because federal officials do not have a mandate to negotiate”.
How can the Prime Minister explain that federal government negotiators are without a mandate, when he said in March that there would be negotiations with Quebec?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, our friends most certainly do have a mandate, which they received from the office of the Prime Minister in the presence of Mr. Bouchard, Mrs. Marois and myself. We held a meeting for the very purpose of determining if we would hold such negotiations and we undertook to do so.
I can say one thing. I know from my experience in negotiating, and this was the key to our success in the manpower issue, that negotiations cannot be held in public. That was the reason for our success in the manpower issue. I therefore have no intention of launching into public negotiations today.
The Government of Canada promised to negotiate in good faith. We want to reach an agreement with the Government of Quebec in order to assist young people wishing to pursue their education and in order to celebrate the millennium by promoting skills and knowledge.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister admit that the only obstacle to a negotiated settlement with Quebec in the matter of the millennium scholarships is his stubbornness and arrogance, the same stubbornness and arrogance that we have seen in the hepatitis C affair?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I do not think that shouting out names in the House is going to accomplish anything. The government has given its word in good faith. We have already held four negotiation meetings and another meeting is scheduled for May 15.
I can assure members that we are setting out with the intention of doing well by the young people of this country. I am confident that the present framework gives us the room in which to arrive at a solution that will meet the needs of all stakeholders.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are guaranteed freedom of association both through our long democratic traditions and also in the charter of rights and freedoms.
The use of the secret ballot in selecting those we wish to represent us is essential to this fundamental right of association. In its new changes to the Canada Labour Code, why is this government not giving workers the right to a secret ballot when they choose a union to represent them in collective bargaining?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleague is well aware, the issue has to be taken before the labour board. If it can be proven that management has acted inappropriately, then the labour board has the authority to sanction the union.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, we in this House are chosen by secret ballot. Therefore in its new labour bill, why does this government deny Canadian workers this fundamental right of a secret ballot?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, quite simply, we are not denying Canadian workers any right. We are protecting their rights.
We are making sure that if a vote is held and it can be proven to the labour board that management has acted inappropriately, then the board has the right to certify that union.
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.
Government officials have estimated the cost of managing millennium scholarships at 5% of the total cost, or $16 million annually, which represents some 5,000 fewer scholarships for students.
In the face of such damning facts and figures, how will the Minister of Human Resources Development be able to live up to his commitment not to duplicate existing programs with the scholarships?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I said just a moment ago that the best way to ensure negotiations are successful is to not conduct them in public.
Our legislation and the budget itself are very clear in this respect. The foundation is actually mandated to avoid any duplication and ensure close co-operation with the provincial authorities concerned.
That is precisely the goal we have set for the foundation and for our negotiators. I trust that the goals we have set for ourselves will be achieved.
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, even University of Ottawa Professor John Trent, who can hardly be called a staunch separatist, stated that “The fund will inevitably lead to federal-provincial duplication. —It is in direct competition with the Quebec loans and bursaries program, which is considered by many to be superior”.
My question is quite simple: What does the minister have to say to that?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to see how open-minded the hon. member for Quebec is in recognizing that federalists too can have valid points of view. We thank her for being open-minded. This is great, and what a change, because this is rather unusual.
Pierre Pettigrew Liberal Papineau—Saint-Denis, QC
What I can say
Millennium ScholarshipsOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. Minister for Human Resources Development has the floor for a few more seconds.