House of Commons Hansard #196 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was dollar.
Fred Mifflin LiberalMinister of Veterans Affairs and Secretary of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)
Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. member and to all members of the committee, let us have a look at the report and then we will see where we will go.
Dick Harris Reform Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals actually believe that the only way to sell Canadian goods and services, the only way to keep us competitive in world markets, is to slash our dollar to 65 cents or 66 cents. In other words, sell Canada at bargain basement prices.
Does the finance minister really feel good about selling Canadian goods and services at 40% below their real value? Does he feel good about that?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I feel very good about selling Canadian products.
I would simply ask the hon. member, when the Canadian dollar was under pressure last summer, if he is sincere in his concern, why did his leader—not in the House, not anywhere in Canada, but outside Canada—go through Asia knocking Canada and knocking the Canadian dollar?
The fact is that if members of the Reform Party are sincere, the next time they might ask their leader to stay home.
Dick Harris Reform Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister and the government are knocking Canadian manufacturers and providers of Canadian services by continually telling them through the low dollar that their products and services are not worth 100 cents on the dollar. That is what they are telling them.
Our high taxes and costly overregulation are keeping us uncompetitive.
Instead of giving foreign buyers a bargain when buying Canadian goods, why does the finance minister not give manufacturers and Canadians a break here at home by lowering taxes and easing regulation?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows, first of all, that in the last two budgets we have indeed lowered taxes.
The hon. member knows that in fact we have the third lowest corporate taxes of any of the G-7 countries.
The hon. member also knows that in the KPMG study the industries that were looked at were high tech industries, high value industries and the pharmaceutical industries; all industries which have grown and were spawned as a result of the government's research and development policies. That is why they have done well.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources Development has been in charge of the EI scheme for over two years now.
In this morning's La Presse , spokespersons for Force Jeunesse announced their intention of filing a lawsuit against the minister for discrimination.
What does the minister, who has seen the conclusions of several reports on the EI regime, have to say to these young people, who are accusing him of discrimination?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, obviously, I am unable to comment on complaints that may be before the courts.
As a government, we have carried out a reform of employment insurance. Naturally, we feel that this reform meets all our constitutional and legal obligations. Since we live in a free society, people who feel otherwise may turn to the courts.
I do not think that young people are being discriminated against in this country. On the contrary, we have given them the youth employment strategy, which helps them get into the job market and for which they are very grateful.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, does the minister, who told the House on June 1, 1998 that access to EI had purposely been made difficult for young people so as to discourage them from applying, not realize how extremely vulnerable a position he is in?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, clearly it is a mistake to make access to EI too easy for young people.
It is an error the preceding generation made for 30 years. We encouraged people to leave school too early. We encouraged young people to leave school, to embark on a precarious job cycle and rely on unemployment insurance.
We want to free young people from this dependence and from the precarious cycle of short term jobs, by helping them to further their education and by ensuring that real jobs are available in the labour market.
Howard Hilstrom Reform Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Mr. Speaker, as of this morning grain shipments in Vancouver had completely stopped.
PSAC has now set up picket lines at all five terminals and they have shut down as a result. Other labour unions are not crossing the picket lines.
Daryl Bean stated in an interview last week that grain is now a primary target and boats are starting to line up.
How long is the Treasury Board minister going to force farmers to wait for their grain to be shipped?
Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, it is very unfortunate that PSAC members have chosen to put up picket lines.
We are encouraging them to get back to the bargaining table. Unfortunately an impasse has been reached.
I had the opportunity last week to speak to some of the purchasers of our reliable products. They are beginning to get nervous as well. The unfortunate thing in the very end is that it is the producers who will be hurt when the product does not get shipped.
I encourage everybody to get back to the bargaining table to settle this and get the product moving.
Howard Hilstrom Reform Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Mr. Speaker, I will say who had better get back to the bargaining table. It is that government over there.
There has been a wage freeze for six years and the government is doing nothing to settle the strike. I want to know why in the last six months or in the last year it has not been able to do anything. What is the excuse? What is the reason? How many more millions of dollars do farmers have to lose while boats are lined up in the Pacific Ocean waiting for grain?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, we have offered the blue collar workers increases that are slightly higher than those which have been accepted by 85% of public sector employees.
They have broken the negotiations. What they are asking for now is not only almost impossible to meet, but at the same time it would force the taxpayers to pay much too much. In this case we must tell the blue collar workers that they have to be reasonable and accept rates which all other public servants have accepted.
Ghislain Lebel Bloc Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, according to documents tabled in the House in justification of the fact that a contract was awarded without tenders for construction of a road and a guard house at the Prime Minister's cottage, the security factor was foremost.
My question is for the Minister of Public Works. How can the awarding of this contract to Construction R. Cloutier Inc., which apparently had undergone security clearance, be justified, when the work was done by two subcontractors? Had these two subcontractors been security cleared?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated a number of times, the RCMP recommended that the road be built. It is important to note that the Prime Minister was not involved.
The RCMP indicated that it was needed for security reasons and Treasury Board guidelines were followed in this case.
Ghislain Lebel Bloc Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, of course this minister cannot answer the question I asked.
I would ask the minister responsible for public works whether Continental Asphalt was security cleared before it acted as a subcontractor for this contract to construct a short stretch of road and a guard house at the Prime Minister's cottage?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as we have indicated a number of times in the House, the RCMP recommended this firm. It was recommended for security reasons and that is why it got the contract.
Deborah Grey Reform Edmonton North, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is another day, another episode of the cabinet soap opera called Bill C-55, the split run.
The trade minister is worried about a trade war with the U.S. The heritage minister talks tough and is calling those Americans bullies using blackmail.
Bill C-55 is poor policy, period. Is that not the reason the heritage minister just tried to stare down the U.S. and she blinked first?
Sheila Copps LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised that once again when looking around this place there is only one party that does not stand up for Canada and that party is the Reform Party. Its members showed us that today in their comments on productivity.
Once again, the only members in the House of Commons which refuse to stand up for Canada are Reform members. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Deborah Grey Reform Edmonton North, AB
Mr. Speaker, in fact we are trying to stand up. This is about censorship and losing a lot of Canadian jobs. That is what it is all about.
Bill C-55 is dead and this minister knows it. Sure, it may pass the vote today, but it will never been enacted. The heritage minister can put it on her resume maybe, but that is about it.
Is it not true that Bill C-55, the split run, will never see the light of day in the long run?
Sheila Copps LiberalMinister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party talks about censorship. There is not a country in the world that would put up with the situation where 85% of the magazines on their national newsstands are from another country. If there is a demand across this country to save some free speech, it is the demand by Canadians to make sure that in this great country there is some small space left for Canadian stories.
It is unfortunate that in kowtowing to the Americans the Reform Party once again is prepared to sell out Canada.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, according to this morning's La Presse , Industry Canada has decided to interrupt a program announced just months ago, a program involving work placements in industry to develop exports. Oddly enough, a pilot project was already up and running in Quebec.
Why did the Minister of Industry not allow the Quebec pilot project to continue, instead of compromising the program in Quebec and in Canada?
Martin Cauchon LiberalSecretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
Mr. Speaker, in November 1996, a program was indeed created by Economic Development Canada and the Alliance in Quebec. The latter had the responsibility of recruiting for this program—perhaps an excellent opportunity for young people—20 young people for 20 international business internships in 20 businesses.
After a time, the program had to be deferred because of insufficient recruitment. An independent company was then commissioned to carry out an analysis, and unfortunately the program had to be terminated.
Sophia Leung Liberal Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.
How is he responding to the growing labour unrest and work disruptions among federal employees at the Revenue Canada tax centres and buildings, and will this delay Canadians' income tax returns?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her excellent question. It certainly shows that our members on this side of the House are on the ball and want to ensure that we provide full service to Canadians.
We regret any disruption of service to Canadians as a result of the rotating PSAC strike.
I want to assure members of parliament and Canadians that we are doing whatever we can to provide this service. We will not tolerate any illegal activity at our tax service offices. In fact, we got an injunction against the union in B.C. and will continue—