Debates of Nov. 4th, 1999

Agriculture

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister does not get it. The government does not get it. What is needed is an immediate infusion of $1.3 billion to keep the family farm from dying. What does the government come up with? Less than one-tenth of that amount.

It is like a patient who needs a transfusion, needs 10 units of blood and receives one unit. The prognosis is certain death.

Why is the government letting the family farm die?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are absolutely not doing that. On the contrary, I explained to the House a minute ago that it is $1.1 billion that the federal government put on the table this year, plus the contribution of 40% of that amount from the provincial governments.

It is an agreement that we have developed with the provinces to try to cope with this type of problem. Now the farmers are making their applications. They are being processed. Those who qualify will receive the money as quickly as possible.

We are very preoccupied but the reality is that we have to know all the facts. Some of the requests were based on figures from July that had changed—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Saint John.

Veterans Affairs

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Veterans Affairs met today with the representatives of the merchant navy veterans, the brave gentlemen who are in the gallery today.

Will the minister outline for the House and all those outside as well exactly what he is planning to do starting today to bring about a fair and just compensation package for these Canadian heroes?

[George Baker, Liberal, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Secretary of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)]

Mr. Speaker, I have met with every veterans organization that represents the merchant navy and some of them twice in the last three months.

There is one thing they all told me. It was that I have to consult with them and proceed carefully to arrive at a solution. That is exactly what I intend to do. I take my marching orders from the veterans, not from the official opposition.

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Knowing that we have to have—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I would like to hear this question.

[Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, knowing that they have an enormous surplus, which was announced just this week, would the Prime Minister please assure these wonderful gentlemen who are in the gallery that he and his cabinet will look positively upon a compensation package for them and show them justice and respect once and for all?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to hear the leader of the Conservative Party in the House recognize that in Liberal days we have a surplus. We are not under the Tories any more.

I know that the Minister of Veterans Affairs has the confidence not only of the members on this side but of a lot of members on both sides of the House of Commons.

Port Of Vancouver

[Val Meredith, Reform, South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the port of Vancouver received a 72 hour lockout notice. Thousands of jobs will be lost if a strike occurs.

What immediate action will the minister take to ensure that the port is not closed?

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, both parties are sitting down and both parties are bargaining in good faith. We must let the process work.

Experience has shown us that a lot of these disputes are settled at the last hour. I urge the hon. member to let the process work in this situation.

[Val Meredith, Reform, South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the markets in Japan have informed the shippers that if there is any delay at all they will move to another source of product, in other words Scandinavia.

Is the minister willing to lose thousands and thousands of jobs in western Canada to Scandinavian countries, if this is not resolved immediately?

[Claudette Bradshaw, Liberal, Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, my department is quite aware of what can happen in a strike situation.

Last year 95% of these disputes were settled and they were settled at the last minute. I urge the parties to negotiate in good faith. Hopefully there will not be a strike and lockout. At this time it is crucial that we let the process work.

Employment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, in an interview he gave on television yesterday, the Minister of Finance said that the employment insurance surpluses were the product of a payroll tax.

How can the minister justify the fact that the government's enormous surplus is made up of money from the middle class, which is the primary contributor in the reduction of the debt and in the payment of new expenditures the government intends to make?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first off, 60% of employment insurance contributions are paid by employers, as the member must know.

Second, when we look at the cuts in taxes our government made in the 1998 and 1999 budgets, we can see that the vast majority are tax cuts for the middle class and the most disadvantaged in society.

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

Mr. Speaker, has the Minister of Finance visited the families he has made poor through employment insurance to thank them for paying taxes he does not pay, that professionals and business people do not pay and that senior officials pay only on part of their salary?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is why it was so important for us to lower contributions each year since we came to office. This had never been done.

We lowered the contributions and concurrently introduced the national child tax benefit, raised the tax threshold and eliminated the 3% surtax of his friends on his right.

Agriculture

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the government through the agriculture minister has announced AIDA-II. Most farmers, all farm organizations, all farm related industries, all MPs and all Saskatchewan senators who relate to our crisis have spoken out against AIDA-I.

Does the minister realize how many farms and how many farm families have been destroyed because the government deliberately and callously said no to AIDA-I?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, in answer to the member's final comment, the government did not say no to AIDA-I.

This is the government that put AIDA in place. This is the government that said all along that it would continue to be flexible and innovative with the program. This is the government that added more money to the AIDA program today. Now it is at nearly $1.1 billion in assistance to producers.

[Roy H. Bailey, Reform, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, AIDA-I denied over 70% of the applicants any funding whatsoever. Time is of the essence, not by the month but by the day.

Will the minister personally assure the farmers who did not qualify for AIDA-I that they will not have to wait as long for their financing and the money they deserve from AIDA-II?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, we are glad to aid twice, if that is the way the hon. member wants to put it, but naturally if there are changes to criteria then applications will have to be reviewed so that those who are eligible under the new criteria will be able to receive their money.

Farmers have been asking us to make some changes. We made a number of changes and announced them today in response to some of the advice of the safety nets advisory committee. We did that today.

All week the opposition has been asking us to give more assistance to farmers. Today we give more assistance to farmers, and again it does not want us to do that.

Millennium Scholarships

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, not only is federal interference in provincial programs creating problems that, unfortunately, are costing the public but, when it comes to the millennium scholarships, we have learned that the federal government wants to exclude vocational students, first year CEGEP students, and those studying for a master's or Ph.D.

Does this requirement of the federal government not show that it wants to undo all that we have done in the area of grants and loans in Quebec and introduce a two-tier system based on the level of study?

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

Mr. Speaker, rather than creating a two-tier system, the millennium scholarships will reduce the indebtedness of students with the greatest financial need.

Students have asked that the loans be changed to scholarships. But what Minister Legault is not saying is that, using his calculations, students will get only another $175 annually. He must promise to put the students on a more solid financial footing. When he does, we will have an agreement.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when a first year CEGEP student does not qualify, a second year one does, and a master's student does not, I call that a two-tier system. One plus one makes two.