Debates of Nov. 2nd, 1999

Poverty

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Vancouver East.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the provinces are not rejecting any child care programs. In fact, recently B.C. wrote to the federal government asking for leadership for a national strategy. Time is running out and more and more Canadians are facing grinding poverty, one of the root causes of which is the lack of affordable housing.

My question is for the homelessness minister. When will the government stop talking about its concern about homelessness and housing and start building a national housing strategy and building housing for Canadians who need it? When will that happen?

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, we understand that across Canada it is a serious problem. Members on this side of the House are as concerned as the hon. member. However, it must be realized that we are putting $1.9 billion into social housing. We have put $50 million more into RRAP funding and many, many projects are growing through the RRAP program. We are seeing them being built across the country. We are doing something at this time.

Airline Industry

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, in a privileged and confidential Onex memo about project peacock, dated August 16, 1999, Onex laid out the rules. It said that prior to launch Onex would want confirmation of political support, including the removal of the 10% ownership limit from the Air Canada Public Participation Act.

We now know that the Minister of Transport has proposed to change that 10% rule, just as instructed by Onex. Why did the minister tell Onex of his plans to change the 10% rule a full 60 days before he told the rest of the country?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the standing committee to see whether or not in its wisdom parliament should consider raising the limit. That is what we are asking parliamentarians and it is a matter we look forward to hearing from them about.

With respect to the general issue, we have answered this question many times before. No assurances were sought by Onex from the government and none were given.

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the quote is “prior to launch” it wants those confirmations.

In yet another peacock memo dated July 29, there is a statement that says, “Onex has already been assured that the Government of Canada will grant a special executive order under section 47 of the Canada Transportation Act to suspend merger review under the Competition Act”.

Again, as instructed, this time the Minister of Industry granted a section 47 suspension. Why did the Minister of Industry provide this information to Onex 14 days ahead of everybody else?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we have covered these particular memos for the last week. The hon. member asked questions in the House before. I have given answers. The Deputy Prime Minister has given answers.

This afternoon I suggest that the hon. member question the president of Onex when he comes to the committee. These are Onex's memos, not the government's.

Elections Canada

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are using children for their own political purposes.

Elections Canada is asking children as young as six years old to vote for their favourite right. Parents and school boards concerned about the politicizing of children have rejected this intrusion. Now government documents ask where the government can get the most mileage out of this. Liberal senators are encouraging MPs to be in their ridings on the day of the vote, presumably for self-promotion.

Why is the government using our children and Elections Canada for its own crass, political purposes?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, that kind of accusation is completely false and nonsensical.

Elections Canada is a non-partisan organization. Together with the United Nations, it is holding simulated elections with children in Canada as part of a public education program. Maybe members of the Reform Party do not want future young Canadians to know what they are up to today. Perhaps it is a result of its shame.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the results of this exercise are going to be presented to the Prime Minister's office and the government.

As one parent has put it, this rights vote is not about teaching democracy. It is about using students—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. The hon. member for Calgary Centre.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as one parent puts it, this is not a rights vote. It is not about teaching democracy. It is about using students as pawns in a political process.

Government departments are spending half a million dollars on this intrusive exercise which politicizes kids and the Liberal caucus plans to use it for self-promotion.

Why is the federal government invading our schools, politicizing our children and using kids for shameless self-promotion?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, children and the United Nations are not exactly partisan organizations. Elections Canada is not a partisan organization either.

They are being asked in a simulated election to talk about what is important to them: culture, family, liberty of opinion, their name, non-discrimination. That is what they are being asked to vote on. The Reform Party seems to be against all of these principles.

Air Transportation

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for several weeks now, in connection with the Onex-Air Canada takeover bid, we have been trying to find out from the Minister of Transport whether he can give those living in regional areas any assurances with respect to the competitiveness of airline services.

Apart from paving the way for Onex, can the minister tell us whether he intends to ensure quality, affordable services to regional areas or whether, in this same connection, he simply intends to go on lobbying for Onex?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we are certain that both proposals will guarantee good services for small communities throughout the country.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we can see from the minister's answers that he is unable to present a clear policy on the airline industry.

For the benefit of parliamentarians now considering this in committee, can the minister tell us whether he had a comparative study done of both proposals with respect to regional services, and whether he intends to tell us about it?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, once we have a conditional agreement from Air Canada or Onex, we will examine the proposals.

We have clearly set out our five criteria. One important criterion is the guarantee of services to small communities. This is when we will determine public interest in this issue.

National Defence

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs says he finds it tiresome when people criticize Canada's defence capabilities. We find it tiresome that Canada was forced out of a NATO operation with Poland because of faulty equipment. We find it tiresome that Canada's NATO commitment is second to last. We find it tiresome that our military equipment is rusting out and personnel are being put at risk by using it.

Why does the defence minister allow the foreign affairs minister to belittle our troops with his tiresome opinions?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the actual fact is that when it comes to the NATO countries, Canada ranks sixth in terms of expenditure on defence. It also happens that when it comes to the Balkans, to Kosovo and to Bosnia, we have been the 10th largest contributor in terms of troops. Indeed Lord Robertson, the secretary general of NATO, said that when called upon, Canada has always been there.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's military has a proud tradition of serving overseas but they have not been given the proper tools to do the job.

The foreign affairs minister finds it tiresome to talk about the equipment they so desperately need. He finds it tiresome to worry about whether or not our troops have the protection they need when they are putting their lives on the line.

Why does the defence minister defend the foreign affairs minister's insults and not defend our troops?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, it was said well in the throne speech. The comment in the throne speech is one which the foreign affairs minister, all members of the cabinet and all members of the government subscribe to and that is that we are going to ensure that the Canadian forces have the capabilities to do their jobs.

Lord Robertson, the secretary general of NATO, also said that Canada actually uses its defence budget better than most. We will continue to do that to make sure our troops have the training and the equipment they need to do the job.

Employment Insurance

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today the Minister of Finance is going to report on the budget situation. Today, however, also marks another far less glorious event: on November 2, 1999 the federal government has already collected enough employment insurance benefits to finance EI until March 31, 2000.

Does the Minister of Human Resources Development realize that, from this date of November 2, 1999 on, all employment insurance contributions will be diverted by the Minister of Finance to cover expenses other than employment insurance? Is that not scandalous?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, where finances and taxation matters are concerned, it must be noted that the Government of Quebec, in its latest budget, raised its expenditures by 4%. At the same time, it cut expenditures for education and health.

A budget is a matter of government priorities, and we can see where the PQ's priorities lie.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at a time when the Minister of Finance is making such a show with our surplus billions, how can the Minister of Human Resources Development still be refusing to defend the people paying into employment insurance who, between now and April 2000, will see all their contributions going to pay other government expenses?