Debates of Nov. 3rd, 1999

Economic Statement By Minister Of Finance

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that we are enormously concerned that there are children living in poverty. This is, moreover, the reason my colleagues in Cabinet have expanded several very significant programs.

I would like to mention a few: a $2 billion increase in the national child benefit; an improved child care tax credit, for a total of $45 million yearly; expansion of the community action program for children by $100 million yearly. And we will continue to—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques.

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

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister shed a tear for poor children when he himself has contributed greatly to child poverty by excluding thousands of unemployed people from employment insurance benefits, thus impoverishing their families?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, employment insurance is a program which provides benefits to Canadians who were working and who now find themselves without work. Let us understand that $7 billion a year goes to families with children through the national child benefit and the child tax credit. Those are part of the legacy of the government.

Research And Development

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in spite of the hundreds of millions of dollars that the government spends on research and development, Canadian companies are still at the bottom of the heap when it comes to R and D spending.

Yesterday, the finance minister's response was to throw more money at the problem. That is not the answer. The answer is to bring down the government's sky-high taxes.

When is the industry minister going to convince his colleagues to do just that?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we have the most generous R and D credits of any industrial country and they are working very well.

At the same time, we have outlined the approach we intend to take to tax reduction. We intend to make personal income tax reduction the priority. We intend to make families with children a priority within that. We also made it very clear that the government intends to move on business taxes to make sure that we have as competitive an area as possible when we have the room to manoeuvre to do so.

We understand full well the necessity of improving R and D. The issue really is why does the Reform Party not understand. Why has it opposed every single measure the government has brought forth in that area?

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, no matter what the finance minister says, there are many prominent Canadians who just do not agree.

Two weeks ago, Quebec economist Pierre Fortin gave this advice to the government “Reduce the public debt and cut taxes”. He did not say spend. He said cut taxes.

What exactly is keeping this message from getting through?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what is stopping the results of what we have done from getting through to the other side?

Let us talk about the debt to GDP ratio. In the last two years, Canada has had the most substantial drop in the debt to GDP ratio of any industrial country. That is what we have done. We have cut income taxes. We have cut them in each of the last three budgets. We are three years ahead of where the Reform Party said it would be if it were in office, but of course it will never be in office.

Air Transportation

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

Mr. Speaker, the government refuses to admit that it gave Onex assurances that the 10% rule would be changed, even before parliament was brought into the picture and before Onex made its offer on August 24.

However, a memo dated August 16, 1999, states that Onex was seeking a commitment from the Minister of Industry, the Minister of Transport, and the Office of the Prime Minister that the 10% rule would be dropped before going ahead with its offer. What does the government have to say about this?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. The government gave no such assurance. He is quoting from documents provided by Onex, and I repeat that the government gave no such assurance.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is extremely serious. The government refuses to admit what it did but, according to this memo, Onex did indeed require that the government drop the 10% rule before making its offer.

Will the government admit that it knowingly gave Onex a leg up by promising in advance to amend the legislation so that Onex's offer would meet legal requirements?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we made no such promise. The information contained in the hon. member's memo is false. We gave no such assurance.

Transitional Jobs Fund

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

Mr. Speaker, the sorry saga of improper dealings with transitional jobs fund moneys in the Prime Minister's riding continues.

The human resources department set up two unusual trust funds to keep from having to cancel a TJF grant the Prime Minister announced for a company that soon after headed for bankruptcy. We have now learned that both trust funds broke treasury board guidelines and one even illegally violated the Financial Administration Act.

Why was helping out the Prime Minister more important than honouring legal financial controls?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question gives me the opportunity to remind the House of the importance of the transitional jobs fund. Over a period of three years, the government has invested $300 million and leveraged that into $2.7 billion, creating 30,000 jobs for Canadians.

The program works and it works well for Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, the jobs fund works well for the Prime Minister.

The point is that it is not being legally and properly administered. This minister is responsible and does not seem to care beyond just some nice cant about how good the fund is.

Well the fund is being mismanaged. It is Canadians' money and the minister should start paying attention. What is she going to do about the mismanagement of the fund?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, let us clarify that the program is available to all areas of Canada where unemployment has been extremely high and it has been progressive.

In terms of the projects that the hon. member was referring to, they were managed appropriately. They went through the acceptable review process. That has been fully addressed.

Plutonium Imports

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is unanimous opposition to the plan to import plutonium.

In fact, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs rejected it in December 1998, and public opposition is growing. Yet the government is determined to carry out MOX trials at Chalk River as early as next month.

My question is for the Minister of the Environment. How can the minister initiate a debate on the route the plutonium will take, when the House has not yet voted on the appropriateness of importing it?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, all countries have a duty to support nuclear non-proliferation. Through Canada's nuclear sites, we can make a real contribution to world efforts for disarmament.

On this issue, the Canadian government has sought public views on the shipment of these samples. We have briefed local officials. We have held public forums. We have provided all answers to all questions. We have provided a public comment period. All of that input is now being weighed very carefully by the government and particularly by the Department of Transport before a final decision is taken.

Foreign Affairs

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

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

Canadians believe it is urgent that we protect Canada's water from removals and exports. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs inform the House when he plans to introduce legislation on bulk water exports and removals?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that this is a crucial issue. The government has been following a three-track approach.

First, the Minister of the Environment has been working with his provincial counterparts to develop a broad domestic consensus.

Second, we were co-operating with the United States through the International Joint Commission. A report has been tabled.

Third, and perhaps most important, I intend very shortly to bring in amendments to the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act which will provide very effective protection for Canadian water and make sure that we cherish this very important resource for Canada.

Agriculture

[Howard Hilstrom, Reform, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in the 1997 election I ran against a Liberal cabinet minister by the name of Dr. Jon Gerrard on the Reform platform for agriculture. I am here and he is there.

The Prime Minister must be the only one who believes that Saskatchewan's farm income has improved by $400 million overnight. Certainly no farmer I know will see the benefit of this bureaucratic—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. The hon. member can put his question.

[Howard Hilstrom, Reform, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

With these numbers that have apparently been cooked up in the last few days, why is the Prime Minister hiding the truth about the farm income crisis?

[The Speaker]

We are getting very close in the use of our words such as hiding the truth in this kind of question period. I would ask the hon. member to withdraw the words hiding the truth.