Debates of Feb. 19th, 1999

Social Union Agreement

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what change in position the member is referring to.

The meeting in Halifax went off very well. The following meeting did not go as smoothly. There were misunderstandings that were clarified and we now have a social union that will make it possible for the provinces and the Government of Canada to work together for the benefit of all Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is going around telling people that the social union agreement is the eighth wonder of the world.

Under that agreement, the federal government pledges to consult with the provinces at least one year prior to implementing funding changes in existing social programs.

Since, in its budget, the government significantly changed funding for social transfers, when did it give notice to Quebec of that change?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. The eighth wonder of the world is the Quebec City bridge.

As for giving notice under the social agreement framework, we have been talking about that change not just for one year, but since 1990, when the ceiling was imposed on the three richest provinces, for two years only. At the time, the current premier of Quebec was a federal minister, so he should know.

I remind the hon. member that the first Campeau budget provided for equalizing the transfer in 1996. Therefore, we have been talking about this issue for a long time.

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, the David Copperfield of Canadian politics is not answering our questions.

How can the federal government invoke social union to interfere in the health sector, but not comply with the terms of that same social union when it changes the funding of social programs, a change that adversely affects Quebec?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, there are three inaccuracies here. First, I just explained that this change, which was necessary, was discussed over a period of several years.

Second, Quebec is not adversely affected. Out of the $21.7 billion in transfers to the provinces, Quebec will get $7.4 billion or 34% of the total amount.

Third, there is no interference in health. The federal government is involved in research because it is also its responsibility, and Quebec researchers are very pleased about that. I could provide the hon. member with several quotes to that effect.

Health Care

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the real question today is why do Reformers think they need a united alternative conference when they have the Liberals to do their bidding on health care.

Both are cheerleaders for privatized two tier health care in this country. The Liberals do it through the back door through neglect and inaction. The Reformers are just more explicit by saying let us end the public monopoly on health care.

Now that we know the budget only gets federal spending up to 12.5% in five years time, a long way from the 18% that existed when the Liberals came to power, what is this government doing specifically to stop the slide toward Americanized two tier health care?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we categorically oppose two tier medicine.

We have gone far beyond what the NDP itself has been calling for. Before the budget it called for only $2 billion to be put back into health care. We are providing $11.5 billion of which $3.5 billion can be drawn on right now in addition to $1.4 billion directly from the federal government.

No wonder Roy Romanow, the NDP Premier of Saskatchewan, said about the budget “I am very pleased and I think the federal government should be congratulated”.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, this government continues to refuse to answer the question about money from its budget, public money, going to private, for profit health care companies.

We have a situation in Ontario where a company, Olsten, 100% U.S. owned and which has been under investigation in the United States for fraud, is getting home care contracts while the Victorian Order of Nurses, a non-profit organization to minister to the sick and suffering which has been around since 1897, has been shut out.

Canadians want to know what is this government doing to stop public money from going to American for profit corporations.

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I answered this question for the member last week. I will try again and I hope this time she will understand.

The federal government has responsibility for the protection of the Canada Health Act which requires public administration, comprehensiveness, portability, reasonable access and universal coverage. The provinces have responsibility for planning, managing, delivering, all aspects of the administration of health services. We do not interfere and tell them what to do and I am surprised the member is suggesting we should.

Fisheries

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the salmon farming industry in New Brunswick, particularly in New Brunswick Southwest, is a hundred million dollar industry. It could be threatened because of some international protocols being enforced by NASCO. I want some assurances from the minister that the industry will be consulted and have input into these protocols before they could endanger the survival of that industry.

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his interest in this. I take this occasion to thank the hon. Minister of Labour who has taken a very close interest in the matter. I can assure the member that what he requested will be followed. We will be having full consultations before there is any implementation of any new process as a result of the international protocols.

The Budget

[Greg Thompson, Progressive Conservative, Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I had a question for the finance minister with regard to this so-called health care budget. The minister yesterday responded that some of that money is going to pay down past debts. In other words, this health care budget will have a very short shelf life because it is doing nothing to resolve the waiting lines crisis in health care. In fact, it is going to pay off past debts. Can the minister assure us that all that money is going to patient care, or is it going to pay down past debt?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government is an important funding partner. The provinces deliver services. In order to assist the provinces the federal government in the budget made the enormous commitment of $11.5 billion over the next five years. What is really significant is that $3.5 billion of that money is available immediately and the provinces will decide how they will use those dollars to solve whatever problems they have. We want to know that people in Canada will have access to the services they need when they get sick. They need them but it is up to the provinces to deliver those services.

National Defence

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the defence minister admitted he did not know anything about the condition of our troops in Kosovo or in Macedonia. For the information of the minister, Macedonia is only 10 kilometres away from the war zone in Kosovo. He laughed and said he did not believe what he heard.

We all want to protect the lives of innocent Kosovars but we also want to protect the lives of our troops. Why would the minister want to send our troops into harm's way and not give them the tools they need to protect themselves?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, they are well protected. They are in the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia. There are engineers there who are doing an effective job. They have just completed renovation on a hospital. We had some trouble with the food contract. We changed the contractor. But they are well protected. As part of the collective defence there are proper patrols of armed guards to ensure they are safe and secure. I remind the hon. member that they are not in Kosovo and they are not intended to go to Kosovo. They are in the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is wrong about Macedonia and he is wrong about Kosovo. The minister relies on the French to hand out axe handles to our troops for protection. He also tells them not to worry, the French will protect them. Again, if the minister is to send our troops into harm's way, into a war zone, why will he not give them the equipment they need to protect themselves?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, they are not in a war zone, they are not in Kosovo. They are in the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia. They are there with the French and with other countries that are part of a collective and team effort. Different roles are played by troops from different countries. The French are doing the protection while the Canadians are doing the engineering work. It is a team effort.

Furthermore, the hon. member needs to get his facts straight with respect to this question of axe handles. There is a problem in that country as there is a problem in many other countries in terms of stray dogs. That is the reason they were issued those handles, not for protection against enemies.

Equalization Payments

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government gave Quebec $1.4 billion in equalization payments to get Quebeckers to swallow the fact that they will get only $1 billion of the $11.5 billion the federal government will be investing in health, when Ontario will be getting five times more.

My question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Can the minister finally admit that the sum of $1.4 billion is a one-time payment covering the past five years and that it is in no way a guarantee of the future for Quebec?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, if we look at how things have gone in recent years, equalization payments have been stable or have increased. That is a fairly solid guarantee.

What must be said, and I repeat, is that if we add up the planned increased in equalization payments for the next five years, plus the unplanned increase in the past three years, plus the planned increase in the Canada social transfer, we arrive at the figure of $21.7 billion, of which $7.4 billion will go to Quebec. That is 34% of the new transfers.

Could I ask the Bloc Quebecois to acknowledge that?

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, equalization payments vary a lot from one year to the next according to the state of the economy. Does the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs realize that, while he guarantees Mike Harris $5.5 billion to organize health care, he is saying to Bernard Landry “Good luck with your budget. That is about what you are going to get in equalization payments”?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I have the figures here to show the hon. member the stability of equalization payments in recent years and those planned for the future. This is for Quebec only. In 1995-96, $4.2 billion; in 1996-97, $4.2 billion; in 1997-98, $4.8 billion; in 1998-99, $4.6 billion; in 1999-2000, $4.5 billion; in 2000-01, $4.7 billion; in 2001-02, $4.9 billion; in 2002-03, $5.1 billion; and in 2003-04, $5.4 billion.

It is very stable and it will increase.

Health Care

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there was a time when we had one of the best health care systems in the world. That was before the Liberals took power and cut $20 billion from our health and social programs. The result of that is 200,000 in waiting lines and the wealthy and desperate going to the U.S. For example, a woman from Kelowna said: “It scares me to think about what would be happening to me now had I not gone to the U.S. for my neurosurgery last fall”.

Is the Liberals' worst nightmare not coming to effect, two tier American style health care because they are the cause?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Macleod has in effect been calling for two tier health care for years. For example, he said: “The Reform Party is prepared to support the complete rearranging of the concept of health care insurance. This concept might include such elements as basic deductibles and other variations of the health insurance concept”.

If that is not two tier medicine, I guess I am wrong when I say that the other hon. member, formerly head of the taxpayers federation, can't get no satisfaction. I think the hon. doctor is wrong even though he has been calling for two tier medicine. He has to take—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Macleod.

[Grant Hill, Reform, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there is room for an honest debate on health care which this crew will not enter into. But here is what it will enter into. It will enter into rhetoric on one side and actions on the other. The actions on the other side are very straightforward: 200,000 on waiting lists and the wealthy and the desperate going to the U.S. for care.

Again, is it not true that the Liberals have been the creators of two tier health care in Canada?