Debates of Sept. 21st, 1998

Budget Surpluses

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

Mr. Speaker, with $20 billion going towards the debt, the Prime Minister is telling us that he accords greater importance to the millionaires of Bay Street and Wall Street than to those who are ill.

Does the Prime Minister not think that the economic slowdown and the effects of the sharp decline in the value of the Canadian dollar are sufficient reasons to bring down an emergency budget regarding the use of budget surpluses and management of the federal debt, not for millionaires but for those in this country who are ill?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is up on the business of the House and knows very well that we are now looking at a bill that sets payments to the provinces at $12.5 billion, a $1.5 billion increase over last year's forecast. This $1.5 billion federal contribution will be paid directly for health services.

Hepatitis C

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, young hep C victim Joey Haché pedalled across the country this summer from Halifax to Victoria. He met with the Prime Minister today. The Prime Minister said “Sorry, Joey. You and the victims left out are just going to have to go to court”. Why has the Prime Minister left those poor victims to go to court for what is proper and compassionate?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I received Mr. Haché a few minutes ago and he gave me a petition. I said that the position of the government was to offer some compensation for those who were the victims between 1986 and 1990. For the others the Minister of Health in collaboration with the majority of the provinces has a new program that is being discussed at this time to help the other victims.

We think we have seven provinces on side at this time. Most probably almost everyone will sign the proposition made to the provinces by the Minister of Health last week.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in France the courts are not being used to batter the victims. In France the prime minister and the health minister are both charged today with manslaughter. Their tainted blood scandal has ended up with charges of that magnitude. Is this Liberal government trying to prevent similar charges against a previous Liberal government?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday as the Prime Minister mentioned, I put before ministers of health a proposal that included steps and suggestions that involve $525 million of federal money that will make certain that anybody who got hepatitis C through the blood system will have access to the needed medical services and drugs for treatment and care without paying out of their own pockets.

We believe that when people in this country are sick, they require treatment, not payment. We show our compassion through care and not through cash.

Pay Equity

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

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

After agreeing in writing on June 11, 1993 to honour the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal on pay equity, the government is now not only not honouring its decision, it has announced it will appeal it.

Is the Prime Minister not ashamed of once again going back on his word?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is clearly in favour of pay equity, because we passed the first piece of legislation and have already paid out over a billion dollars for pay equity, in addition to putting another $1.3 billion on the table.

Certain federal court decisions were contrary to the decisions by the Human Rights Tribunal. We will have to leave it up to the courts to decide which is the correct interpretation of the law.

[Judi Longfield, Liberal, Whitby—Ajax, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.

The government has recently appealed the decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal regarding pay equity for federal public servants. This has caused a great deal of frustration for our employees and has raised many questions.

Does the government still believe in equal pay for work of equal value? If so, can the minister tell us what actions are being taken to achieve pay equity?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the question because it permits me to restate the issue.

The issue is very clear. The government believes in pay equity but it does not believe in two standards of pay equity, one for the private sector in the Bell Canada case and one for the public sector in the case of the human rights tribunal. With two different interpretations of the law by two different tribunals it was clear that we had to go to the appeal court and ask them to interpret the law in the same way for the private sector and for the public sector.

The Economy

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are profoundly unhappy with the Prime Minister's handling of the economy over the summer. While he was hitting his three wood out on the golf course, our dollar hit 10 new lows in the month of August alone. It is time for action. We want action now, not six months from now.

When is the Prime Minister going to realize that we need lower taxes and debt repayment now in a budget this fall? When is he going to wake up and realize that?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I suppose there is no better indication of the intellectual bankruptcy of the Reform Party than once again they come up with the same old refrain that we need a mini-budget in the fall.

Throughout the whole last mandate we could count on it like clockwork. Every single September the Leader of the Opposition would stand up and say “You are not going to hit your deficit targets. We need a mini-budget”.

They have no plans. They have no ideas. The only thing they want to do is get together and talk.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, look who is here. We have not seen him all summer. We thought he had resigned and had not told anybody. It is good to see him back. Welcome.

We have documents from the finance minister's office indicating that they have brought in $21 billion in income tax hikes since he became finance minister. That is $1,500 per person, an incredible amount.

Now that he has done so much damage to Canadian taxpayers, why will he not bring in a budget now while the problems are occurring instead of six months from now when it is too late?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, when I was not here in fact I did spend some time in the member's riding. I want the member to know his constituents want me to say hello to him.

Banks

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Qu'Appelle, SK]

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

There are indications that the minister is increasingly uneasy about the proposed mega bank mergers that are coming up, particularly in the consequence of a failure of a mega bank in light of what has happened in Japan and elsewhere around the world and he is now looking to the Competition Bureau to say no.

If that is the case, why does the minister not save us time, save us money, end the uncertainty and say no now to the proposed mergers?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that prudential matters of safety of the Canadian banking system are uppermost in the government's mind.

That is why following receipt of the MacKay report in which there will be public hearings, and it has been referred to the House of Commons finance committee, we have asked the office of the superintendent of financial institutions and the Competition Bureau to report on that matter.

We are dealing with one of the most fundamental changes in Canadian financial institutions in history. It is important that we have public debate. I thought the member would support that.

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I will take the minister up on his offer.

It is indeed one of the most fundamental changes we have seen in Canadian financial history. In light of that I believe the decision should be made by parliament on behalf of the people of this country and not by the Minister of Finance.

Is the minister prepared to do something really radical, really dramatic and really democratic and allow this House to make the decision on behalf of the people of Canada?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what is democratic is to allow the House of Commons finance committee to hold a series of hearings on the MacKay report. Then if consideration were to be given to the mergers, there would be further hearings on that.

What I do not understand is how the member can contradict himself. He says let the House decide but in his first question he said why do I not decide. There really is a contradiction in the member's two questions.

Apec Summit

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister should really learn from the president of the United States, his golfing buddy, that the longer he bobs and weaves to avoid public accountability on this issue, the more he will undermine the integrity of his office and his government.

There are numerous documents that indicate direct interference of the Prime Minister and his office in the RCMP security of the APEC summit.

Will the Prime Minister make a full ministerial statement in the House, this public forum, on his role in the affair, or is he going to persist with his slippery guy from Shawinigan routine?

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, I urge you to be very judicious in your choice of words.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that documents he is referring to, the allegations that have been made and the questions that have been put are all subject to a public complaints commission review. That review is being undertaken right now.

It does a discredit to those Canadians who choose to serve their country as members of that commission to suggest in any way that their integrity should be in question. That does a disservice to this exercise and to the truth.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, what does a discredit to this institution is the fact that answers are given in this House.

The Prime Minister and the solicitor general know full well that the RCMP public complaints commission is not holding a criminal proceeding. There is absolutely nothing to prevent the government from answering questions in the House. Instead, the Prime Minister is hiding his role in oppressing innocent Canadians to appease a foreign dictator.

Why is he afraid to talk about this issue in this House? When can we expect the Prime Minister to show some integrity and leadership on this issue?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I find it shocking that the member opposite as a critic for the solicitor general would not be aware that it would be completely inappropriate for the minister responsible for that tribunal to speak to it in this House during the investigation.

Land Mines

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West—Mississauga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Canada has shown strong leadership in the international community in the pursuit of a global ban on anti-personnel mines. What is the significance of the 40th country's ratifying the Ottawa convention? How will this important milestone make a difference in the lives of people in mine affected countries?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday when the president of Burkina Faso was here he announced that country had provided the 40th ratification. What that means is that it turns the treaty into a permanent part of international law and sets in motion the conditions of the treaty. This means the destruction of the stockpiles and the movement toward the reduction of land mines within 10 years.

In other words, the land mine treaty has now become international law.