Debates of March 15th, 1999

Investment

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Medicine Hat.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is very interesting that the minister now says that we are doing well with the 65 cent dollar.

The Liberals were not always so blase about the weak dollar. When the finance minister was running for the Liberal leadership the first time, he viciously attacked the Tories when the dollar fell under 80 cents. This is what he said back then: “The only choice is the way you manage it down to 78 cents. Michael Wilson's way, it drops down to 70, it collapses. The Canadian dollar should be 78 cents”.

Why did the finance minister let our dollar drop to 78 cents, then 75 and then 70? If 70 cents—

[The Speaker]

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that every Canadian province and municipality is using this study to promote itself, to promote Canada and to show how good it is to do business in Canada.

In the member's own province the Edmonton Journal said Edmonton was a good city for doing business. The Lethbridge Herald says it is cheaper to do business in Canada.

Why can the hon. member not see how good it is to do business in Canada and to promote Canada rather than trying to bring it down?

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the reason it is so good to do business in Alberta is that we have very low taxes. Unfortunately the minister did not borrow a page from Stockwell Day's book.

This is the minister's record, the weakest currency in Canadian history despite what he said when he was running a few years ago, falling wages, falling productivity and falling personnel savings. He does not have Mike Wilson to blame anymore.

Why will the minister not admit that the reason our productivity is falling and we have a weak currency is because of his high tax policy?

[Bob Speller, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I do not agree with the premise of the hon. member's question.

The fact is communities across this country are supporting studies like this to show how well Canada is doing around the world in terms of not only its productivity gains but in doing business in Canada.

That is why all the major communities across this country are supporting studies like this, to show how well we are doing in Canada.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this government is stuck in a fog of unreality. Every objective study from the OECD to Statistics Canada shows that Canadian productivity is falling.

The government is saying that we are more productive because it has slashed the value of the Canadian dollar and because it is now cheaper to buy goods from our overregulated, overtaxed economy. Devaluing our currency means foreign countries will take more goods off our hands. I am sure if the dollar were 50 cents or 10 cents we would do even better.

Does the finance minister not realize that selling our products and services for pennies on the dollar makes us all poor?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, first, I challenge the member to find a single study that says Canadian productivity has been falling. He will not be able to find one.

Second, in the KPMG study released a few days ago we see a series of criteria, including all kinds of costs, construction costs, municipal tax costs, income tax costs at the corporate level and on it goes, that shows Canada as the low cost provider of services. Instead of helping us to sell Canada as an investment destination, why does the Reform Party prefer to stand up and put its own country down?

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, what we are putting down is a government that has given us a 65 cent dollar and the highest income tax burden in the OECD, a country whose per capita GDP is falling through the floor in the OECD and among other industrialized countries. Does the finance minister not understand that just as with a company, foreign investors look at the state of a country's debt and the value of its currency? They see a country with a 65 cent dollar.

Does the finance minister not recognize the 65 cent dollar he has given Canada is a sign that we are less competitive and have a diminishing standard of living in the world?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party seems to have some difficulty finding good things to say about its country. We have the third lowest corporate income tax rate for manufacturing in the G-7. It is lower than in the United States. We have the lowest cost for transportation and electricity in the G-7. We have the lowest initial investment cost for setting up a new facility. If the Reform Party were not so bound and determined to knock its country, it would start looking at the real facts of the matter.

Quebec's Culture

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the latest rantings of the Minister of Canadian Heritage cast doubt on Quebec's place in Canada.

According to the minister, in the past 30 years, Quebec has gone from founding people, to distinct society, to principal focus, to unique character and now to regional component.

Does the latest brainwave of the minister not faithfully explain the government's thinking on the ever shrinking place of Quebec within Canada?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, if we look at the merits of what we have done together, we can see that, in parliament, the policy on copyright was supported by the Bloc, the policy on the Parks Canada Agency was supported by the Bloc, the policy on the Saguenay marine park was supported by the Bloc, the politic on the sound recording surcharge was supported by the Bloc, the supplementary assistance program for the publishing industry was supported by the Bloc. And today the periodical protection legislation was again supported by the Bloc. I thank them for their co-operation.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that proves we understand certain things, which does not seem to be true on the other side of the House. It proves nothing else.

The dynamics of the federal system, of which the Minister of Canadian Heritage is a strong partisan, denies the existence of the Quebec people. We would not exist as a people, that would be our heritage, the title of the minister as her Prime Minister calls her.

Quebeckers, however, are sure they are a people and so they are very interested, indeed intrigued, by the words of the minister. Could the minister tell us what regional component means?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, what I proposed to Ms. Beaudoin was that she participate with Canada in the discussions. I invited her to take part in the international network, and she refused. I invited her again last week and she again refused.

Why did she refuse? Because she does not want to be part of the Canadian delegation. If she does decide to participate someday, she will be the most welcome of all the provinces.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's culture is thriving all over the world, thanks to performers such as Céline Dion, Luc Plamondon, the Cirque du Soleil and many others. It is this culture, which belongs to one of the country's founding peoples, that the minister calls a regional component.

Does the Minister of Canadian Heritage not realize that, far from being a mere regional component, the Quebec culture is first and foremost a national culture that thrives at the international level?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, if we are currently supporting the Cirque du Soleil, it is precisely because we believe in it. If we are supporting the Montreal Symphony Orchestra, it is because we believe in it. If we are supporting the publishing industry's policies, it is because we believe in them.

We can work in partnership. Those who do not want to do so are those who have a single goal in mind, that is to break up the country. Such is the policy of the Bloc Quebecois and of the Parti Quebecois.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of amusing to see how the minister always gets off the subject.

Does the minister not see a serious discrepancy between the secondary role that it attributes to Quebec's culture and the fact that it is so thriving that direct contact between Quebeckers and the world is fully justified?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, there is direct contact on a daily basis. I believe there is a direct contact between the Government of Quebec and the Government of Catalonia.

There is nothing preventing Quebeckers from establishing contacts all over the world. All we want is respect of countries' sovereignty.

Plutonium

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. government appears on the verge of approving the export of weapons grade plutonium to Canada.

Canadians have not been consulted about these initiatives or about their possible consequences. Before this goes any further, before any decisions are taken about the importing of these nuclear materials, will the government commit today to full public consultation, particularly with those communities directly affected?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, there is a report that was placed by the committee on foreign affairs into the hands of the minister. The minister has 150 days to reply and I am sure there will be commentary on that very subject.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that is right. It strongly recommended against because weapons grade plutonium is highly retroactive. It may be coming across our border and through our communities. It is highly radioactive.

Canadians have a right to have their say. Governments spend big bucks these days to convince our kids that nuclear is safe. Will the government now consult their parents on the prospects of welcoming weapons grade plutonium into our country?

[Julian Reed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, plutonium may be retroactive as well. I suggest that the NDP raising this at this time really proves that it is beyond its half life.

Veterans

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

Mr. Speaker, Canadian merchant navy veterans will be appearing before the veterans committee on Thursday to make their presentation on compensation.

I want to thank all the committee members, the parliamentary secretary and the minister for giving them this opportunity to present their case.

Merchant navy veterans are dying at a rate of 13 per month. If the government takes the full amount of time allocated to respond to this study, it is possible that another 70 could die waiting for an answer.

Will the Minister of Veterans Affairs today commit to a quick response to the study when it is completed?

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

Mr. Speaker, at the outset I would like to thank all those who were instrumental in helping Bill C-61 with very fast passage last week.

With respect to the merchant navy veterans and their situation, the hon. member is right. They will be coming before the parliamentary committee in the near future. I am delighted this is happening. I am delighted that parliamentary processes kicked in.

When the parliamentary committee is finished with its work, it will pass it on to us and we will treat it so that it will be reported to the House in due course.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that the due course process gives them about 160 days in order to respond to the House. That means it would be when we come back after the summer break.

What I am asking of the minister is this: Will he please fast track this and make sure we get answer in the House before we break for the summer?