Debates of Feb. 18th, 1999

The Budget

[An hon. member]

They won the jackpot.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

I have been conducting a little survey throughout this debate. I am looking for ministers and members from Quebec. I am wondering where the Liberal members from Quebec were when the decision was made to give Ontario approximately 50% of all new funding, and Quebec less than 10%? Where were the Liberal ministers from Quebec? Where were the Liberal members from Quebec?

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

They are nothing but doormats.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg, QC]

I am also wondering where the Liberal members from Quebec were when the decision was made to give $950 million to Ontario and $150 million to Quebec. Where were the Liberal members from Quebec?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am really surprised. I am almost upset that the Quebec members are not prepared to admit that we are going to give Quebec $1.4 billion today—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

So where were our colleagues from Quebec? They were there in cabinet, still asking for a lot of money for Quebec, as Canadians. That is where they were.

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It seems to me that the member who has just spoken is so worked up that he is going to have to check his blood pressure. Otherwise he might be a victim of—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

This is not a point of order. It is debate and there is no time left.

It being 6.15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the amendment to the amendment now before the House.

The question is on the amendment to the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment to the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

All those in favour of the amendment to the amendment will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment to the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

Division No. 318

[The Speaker]

I declare the amendment to the amendment defeated.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Michelle Dockrill, NDP, Bras D'Or, NS]

Madam Speaker, in January the Cape Breton Development Corporation was abandoned by the federal government after three decades of lives lost, lives invested and communities dedicated to doing what Cape Bretoners have done for centuries, mine the rich coal beds that reach beneath our island.

In war and peace coal fed our nation and it was recognized when Devco was created by a Liberal government that the nation owed something to these people who had given their lives. It was recognized that they deserved dignity and a graceful transition from an industry that was gradually and inevitably declining.

Only a Liberal government could dedicate 30 years to closing an industry and still, at the end of those three decades, find itself in the same position as when it started.

In 1999 we still see dependent communities, massive liabilities and a new generation that was promised it had a future underground.

What happened in those 30 years? What happened to the billions of dollars the Liberals talk about when they say why Devco must be sold? It went to their friends. Instead of trading miners for new jobs, instead of helping the economy adjust to new challenges, the government helped its friends get rich.

Some examples. Devco, a mining company, imported sheep. Cape Bretoners joked that maybe Devco would now start to make steel wool with the help of scrap from the Sydney steel plant. This is economic development Liberal style, $250,000 into Liberal pockets. A cabinet minister built a pile of rocks three feet high around the University College of Cape Breton; $400,000 into Liberal pockets. Economic development Liberal style.

Just last year, weeks before Devco's sale was announced and when it was clear that the end was near, Devco's management bought $11 million worth of new equipment, new equipment needed for long term development that management knew would never happen. That money came from the $41 million given the corporation so it could meet payroll until the end of March of this year.

Does a corporation that cannot pay its workers buy new and unnecessary equipment? Only a corporation being run into the ground by those paid to preserve it. Hundreds of miners were laid off in 1998 while dozens of managers were hired.

This is the reality that Cape Bretoners have lived with for decades, the impression of incompetence that reflects on all of us but which is in fact a reflection of the incompetence of management, of this Liberal government, because Cape Breton coal, despite all the claims, has made money. For every dollar invested it put five back. If we look at Devco's mining operations and remove the workers compensation and environmental liabilities, we see a profitable business, a business that will now be passed to a private firm to extract private profit. Managed mismanagement.

When a company sells off the part of its business that makes money and keeps the part that loses money that is economic development Liberal style.

Of course there is money to be made in Cape Breton. On December 17 a prominent Liberal registered an environmental cleaning company and has hired a lobbyist, a gentleman well known to the government and to the people of Cape Breton. Of course it would be unfair for me to begrudge the former minister of health some work. God knows we need jobs in Cape Breton.

With these examples I am sure members can appreciate the frustration Cape Bretoners feel about the way Devco has been run and now the way it is being closed.

I was not thrilled after more than a year of extending invitations that the Minister of Natural Resources decided to make two trips to Cape Breton in January, two trips a few hours each. That is all he felt Cape Breton was worth. That is what he thinks about nearly 2,000 jobs.

Now, in the weeks since the announcement, we see the latest chapter in the Liberals' attempt to blame anyone but themselves for this economic nightmare.

Is the government telling Cape Bretoners that it does not make decisions based on economics?

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Madam Speaker, in response to this question I would like to input the following additional information the member may not necessarily be aware of.

Last October the chairman of the Cape Breton Development Corporation came to Ottawa to inform the Minister of Natural Resources that Devco would indeed require $41 million in additional funding to operate just until March 31, 1999.

However, at that time it was also apparent that this new injection of funds into the corporation would not necessarily resolve all its difficulties. It was clear that the government's goal of commercial viability, set for Devco in 1996, was out of reach.

This meant that the federal government had to review its long term position on Devco and set a new direction. As part of that review the Minister of Natural Resources asked Devco to look at different options for its mining operations and discussions were undertaken with the stakeholders to obtain their views on a new direction for the corporation.

Many community leaders, Nova Scotia Power Inc., Devco's senior management and board, the Premier of Nova Scotia and Devco's unions provided input into the process.

On January 11, 1999 the minister accompanied by Senator Al Graham and Senator Sister Peggy Butts visited Cape Breton and had a day long meeting with the community and unions. These meetings were very important to discuss a process for determining a new direction for Devco and I understand that the hon. members from Bras D'Or and Sydney—Victoria also participated.

Again on January 28, 1999 the minister went to Cape Breton and personally addressed the miners and the community to announce the government's final decision. The Minister of Natural Resources believed it was important that he make the announcement directly to those affected.

The government has approved $111 million in funding for the human resources strategy which includes $60 million in pensions, $46 million in severances, $5 million—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I must interrupt. The time has expired.

[Mike Scott, Reform, Skeena, BC]

Madam Speaker, last week I rose in the House on several occasions. I provided the Minister of National Revenue with information with respect to a consortium of environmentalists in British Columbia. I provided him with a document and I asked him why these organizations were continuing to receive charitable status, in other words a tax holiday, particularly in light of the document that had come into our hands.

Essentially the document outlines about a dozen environmental groups, many of them Canadian, that are involved in a strategy which amounts to nothing more than an attack on mining in British Columbia, and more specifically mining in my riding of Skeena.

The minister is aware of the participants. Some of them are the Sierra Club, the Sierra Legal Defence Fund and the Suzuki Foundation. There is a list of them. At least some of these organizations are getting charitable tax status.

At the same time, and this is outlined in the document of which I have a copy here, they are accepting huge contributions from wealthy American corporate trusts and family trusts, hundreds of thousands of dollars from American corporate and families trusts in a paid campaign to attack a mine proposal in northwest British Columbia.

Redfern Resources has a proposal called the Tulsequah Chief Mine. It was actually an operating mine many years ago. It has been dormant and the company wants to reopen it. It went through a 3.5 year rigorous environmental review in which the federal and provincial governments and all their various appropriate line ministries participated. The state of Alaska participated in it. Last year, at the end of that process, the Premier of British Columbia publicly stated that the mine was to get approval to go ahead.

The environmentalists have shifted gears. They do not want the project approved. They do not care about the facts. They do not care about the fact that there was an environmental review done. They do not care about the science. They do not care about truth. They do not care about balance. Above all, they do not care about people, particularly the people in my riding who are counting on that mine as an economic development opportunity.

They have joined forces with Alaska Governor Tony Knowles in pressing for this project to be reviewed at the International Joint Commission. Furthermore, the same Alaska Governor Tony Knowles is an environmentalist and wants the project halted.

He is the same governor whose rapacious actions on Pacific salmon have devastated many coastal communities in my riding and have hurt recreational and commercial fishermen. Commercial fisherman on the north coast are devastated as are commercial sport fishing operations. Virtually all commercial sport fishing operations were shut down last year. Aboriginal fishermen, aboriginal people who are fishing for food, ceremonial and commercial purposes, have been dramatically prejudiced by the actions of the same governor whom the environmentalists want to join in lockstep to shut down this mining opportunity in northwest British Columbia.

It is clear these organizations may be getting charitable tax status. I have given the minister the names of all the organizations and asked him to provide me with that information, but I am aware that some of them are getting charitable tax status.

[David Iftody, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to respond on behalf of the Minister of National Revenue this evening to this question.

The member for Skeena is requesting that the charitable status of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund Society, the David Suzuki Foundation and the B.C. Spaces for Nature Society be revoked.

The member has stated that a leaked document reveals that a number of Canadian environmental organizations including these three registered charities are accepting contributions from American corporate and family trusts.

He also stated the documents show that these charities are counting on these funds to finance a smear campaign and manipulate share prices of a Canadian company, Redfern Resources Ltd., to scare off investors and kill a mining project, as he has alluded to, in northern British Columbia, resulting in lost jobs and investments in Canada.

These are indeed very serious allegations that could result in severe consequences for these charities, even though it has not yet been conclusively established that these charities have done anything wrong.

The member has provided, as he said, the documents to Revenue Canada. I can confirm that the Sierra Legal Defence Fund Society, the David Suzuki Foundation and the B.C. Spaces for Nature Society are indeed registered charities under the Income Tax Act.

However, under the confidentiality provisions of the same Income Tax Act, I cannot discuss the affairs of these charities or indeed any actions the department may take in dealing with them.

The charitable sector should be an asset for all Canadians, and parliament has recognized this by providing through our tax system important financial support. To be registered as charities they must have charitable purposes and we will ensure that these are carried out properly in the country.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7.05 p.m.)