Debates of March 19th, 1999

Bulk Water Exports

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago in this House we passed a motion unanimously calling for an immediate national moratorium on the bulk export of water. We had an announcement the next day from the government which did not live up to that motion. Instead, we had a call for 10 provincial moratoriums.

Yesterday in Montreal we saw the inadequacy of that approach. Apparently the Quebec government has indicated its intention to consider proceeding with the bulk export of water. If that happened, it would prejudice the ability of Canada as a nation to bring in a ban on bulk water exports because it would set a precedent under NAFTA.

I would urge the federal government to bring in the moratorium immediately to respect the motion. I would urge the Quebec government not to act in a way that prejudices the ability of the rest of Canada to bring in a ban on the bulk export of water by doing something precipitous.

Trade

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, hon. members will have read in today's Ottawa Citizen the latest account of the Reform Party's involvement in Canada's WTO trade dispute with Brazil.

First the member for Red Deer denied that the Reform Party gave documents to Brazil. The next day the Reform Party admitted that it had, but Reform claimed that the documents were available to the public, including on the Internet. What Reformers do not mention is that they caused civil servants in 13 government departments and agencies to work countless hours to provide the Reform Party with that information.

Today we learn that the Reform Party provided its research document dated October 22, 1996 to Brazil. It was not until one month later that the Reform Party posted this information on its web site.

Surely the 60,000 Canadians from coast to coast who are employed in our aerospace industry deserve better from a political party that purports to represent Canadians.

Merchant Navy Veterans

[Peter Goldring, Reform, Edmonton East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-61 effectively reduces outstanding merchant navy concerns to one. After 55 years, Bill C-61 finally gives merchant navy veterans recognition as war veterans, prisoner of war benefits and recognition for ceremonial days, but it ignores the issue of compensation completely.

The merchant navy was truly comparable to the other three services yet veterans suffer from government imposed poverty. They are not seeking great wealth, only the respect and benefits given their armed forces brethren.

This final issue has existed for over 50 years. Merchant navy veterans have little time left to enjoy restitution for inequalities. They want our government to act now, not later. Our merchant navy veterans' final concerns should not be a new millennium project.

Sledge Hockey

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Kitchener-Waterloo Sidewinders and wish them good luck when they host the International Sledge Hockey Tournament in my riding of Kitchener—Waterloo this weekend at the Waterloo Recreation Complex.

Sledge hockey is a form of ice hockey played by people who have physical disabilities. The game is played with players on a sled that has two skate blades under the seat. Players move around the rink on these sleds using two short hockey sticks which have picks on one end for pushing and a blade on the other end for shooting.

The opening ceremonies taking place tonight will be hosted by Ron Maclean of Hockey Night in Canada. Teams from across Canada, the United States, Holland and Norway are expected. A total of 30 teams with 700 players will be taking part in this exciting tournament.

I wish to congratulate the Kitchener-Waterloo Sidewinders for hosting this event. I wish them the very best for the tournament.

Poverty

[Gilles Bernier, Progressive Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, opposition parties such as the Reform Party can rant and rave against every idea that comes along, but unless a party is prepared to seek out and propose solutions to real problems, it can never hope to form a government.

It was in the spirit of finding workable solutions for real Canadians that the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada established our national caucus task force on poverty and homelessness.

As an associate member of this important task force, I am pleased to say that today marks the launching of our cross-Canada consultations in Saint John, New Brunswick. The task force members will meet with several anti-poverty organizations in New Brunswick and with individuals who live in poverty.

The growing incidence of poverty is a national disgrace. Parliamentarians need to take a leadership role in developing concrete solutions to the problems facing low income and homeless Canadians. As Joe Clark said, the PC Party of Canada will provide that leadership. This task force will demonstrate to Canadians our desire to make Canada a better place to live for all of its citizens.

I wish the task force good luck.

Canada Elections Act

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a recent court decision in Ontario striking down discriminatory provisions of the elections act concerning smaller parties was a significant decision.

I recently attended a press conference as a result of this decision to uphold and support the fundamental principles of democracy and fairness in Canada. How we conduct elections is fundamental to our democratic system. The discrimination faced by smaller parties is shameful. These provisions have been struck down.

Now it is up to the government to be clear that it will not appeal this decision and will indeed bring in amendments to the Canada Elections Act to eliminate punitive and discriminatory provisions as struck down by the court.

Will the government give an assurance that it will do the right thing?

The Economy

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday at 2.15 in the afternoon the Prime Minister told us that Canada's productivity is still on the rise. But yesterday at 3 p.m. the industry department released a study called “The Productivity Gap between Canada and U.S. Firms—as of February 5, 1999”. That is the name of the study.

It showed that as recently as last month Canada's standard of living was still plunging. According to the report, the gap between Canada and the U.S. “has been widening”.

Why does the government continue to deny that Canada's standard of living is lower than in the United States by $7,000 per person per year?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, apart from the fact that the hon. member is mixing apples and oranges, let me simply say that what the productivity gap which the Department of Industry demonstrated is that in fact over the last 15 years there has been a decline in productivity.

The study began in 1985. What we are dealing with are numbers throughout that period and a tale from that period. At the same time, let me be very clear that as a result of the actions of this government and of Canadians across the country, more recently the numbers have begun to turn around. That is what the Prime Minister has said, that is what I have said and it is what the Minister of Industry has said.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that may be what the finance minister says, but it is not what our manufacturers and exporters are saying. Yesterday they released a statement in response to the finance minister saying “The finance minister is simply off base when he says Canadians should not worry about falling living standards”. That is from the Alliance of Manufacturers and Exporters. It said that the current situation is not adequate to ensure continued growth in Canada's place in the international marketplace. It said that last year Canada had gone from fifth place in the G-7 in terms of productivity to last place.

Is the finance minister telling us that the Alliance of Manufacturers and Exporters is wrong when it says that Canada—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I have met with the alliance on numerous occasions. In fact the productivity numbers differ substantially from industry to industry. One of the problems that we have, as an example, is that obviously there are more productivity improvements in the higher value added area, the newer economy, than there are in a number of our older industries, those which produce basic commodities.

That is why it is so important to emulate, for instance, what has been done in the oil and gas industry where a lot of the newer technologies are involved and are in fact improving substantially our productivity.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let me get this straight. Last month the industry minister gave a speech in which he said “Canada's productivity is falling. We are $7,000 per person behind the United States”. Yesterday the industry department released another report saying that as of February of this year we are falling behind.

Yesterday the Alliance of Manufacturers and Exporters said that we have fallen from fifth to seventh in the G-7 in terms of productivity and this finance minister still stands and denies the cold, hard facts.

Why does he not agree that we have a problem and develop a solution in terms of tax relief and debt reduction to improve Canada's productivity?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, not only is the hon. member misquoting the Minister of Industry, the fact is that he is misquoting me as of about one minute ago.

There is no doubt that we have had a long term decline in our productivity, going back well into the eighties. There is also no doubt that it is absolutely crucial that this be reversed and, if we look at the more recent numbers, we are in the process of turning that around. That is why we put money into research and development. That is why we reduced the debt. That is why we have reduced taxes and put money into education.

There is no doubt that we have to continue to work on improving productivity because it is the source of wealth. There is also no doubt that we have a long way to go—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Dewdney—Alouette.

[Grant McNally, Reform, Dewdney—Alouette, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister likes to talk about quotes, so let me read for him what the industry minister said. He said “The debt is simply too large”. He also said that “taxes are 20% higher than they should be”. One of the ministers is wrong and I want to know which one it is.

The Liberals are embarrassed by the dropping standard of living which has been found by these reports. Now we know. It is out in the open. They have to admit there is a problem before they can deal with that problem.

Which minister is right about the dropping standard of living?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member continues to make perceptive glances into the obvious. Of course our debt is too high. That is why we have been reducing it. We have taken the debt to GDP ratio from 71% to where in two years it will be 62%.

Yes, we want to reduce taxes. They were too high and that is why we reduced them in the last budget. That is why we reduced them in this budget and that is why we will reduce them in the next budget.

Yes, we have to improve our productivity. There has been a long term declining trend. We have now arrested it and we have to do everything we possibly can to make sure we have an upward trend in the future.

[Grant McNally, Reform, Dewdney—Alouette, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister likes to brag about tax cuts, but the chief economic adviser for CIBC says that there are no tax cuts after the bracket creep and after taking a look at the real effects of what this government has done.

The industry minister said that the debt is simply too high and that taxes are 20% too high as well. Is that something which this finance minister is going to address to help improve the standard of living for Canadians which has dropped so dramatically under his guidance and leadership?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member has been for the last four or five years. We have addressed it in every single budget. We are one of the very few industrial countries that is actually paying down debt. The income tax cuts which we brought in, $16.5 billion over the course of the next three years, will more than compensate for bracket creep, and every economist in the countries knows that.

What I would really suggest to Reform is that instead of writing its supplementary, it actually listen to the answer and then pose the question based on that.

International Cultural Forums

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, not only does Quebec have trouble gaining the ear of federal politicians, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs in particular, but now the ambassadors are getting involved too.

Jacques Roy, Canadian ambassador to Paris, has apparently stated that Canada would never give Quebec the status Belgium has given the Walloons and the Flemings.

Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us whether the opinion expressed by Ambassador Roy was personal, or whether it was the government's position?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, after having their bid for separation rejected twice by Quebeckers, the PQ and the Bloc Quebecois are now developing a new strategy which requires outside support. The leader of the PQ refuses to acknowledge the existence of such a strategy, but the new adviser to the Bloc Quebecois, Jacques Parizeau, is frank enough to admit it. In Paris yesterday, Mr. Parizeau stated “Yes, that is exactly the strategy we need, and what is more, it is very timely”.

Meanwhile, Mr. Bouchard is trying to convince us that this new strategy has nothing to do with his separatist designs. So which one is right, the old leader of the Parti Quebecois, or the new one?

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, someone ought to have told him, when his reply was being prepared, that asking the questions is our job. He is supposed to give the answers.

I will repeat my question, and I would very much like an answer from the government, because this is an important issue.

Can someone in authority tell me whether Jacques Roy was expressing the position of the Government of Canada, or his personal opinion? No parliamentary secretary is in a position to tell me that.

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it has always been our intention to help promote the French culture of our country throughout the world.

Unlike the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois, we are working to help French language and culture flourish across Canada.

As well, we are seeking to do the same thing throughout the world, under the leadership of the federal government, the national government.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, even the very federalist Liberal opposition in Quebec City is reminding the federal government of the need to accord Quebec its rightful place in international organizations where language and culture are concerned.

Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us whether the federal government will continue in its isolation as it has since the start of this matter or will it heed the consensus in Quebec and listen to basic common sense?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are doing exactly the opposite, namely expanding Quebec culture and the French language across the country and around the world.

The Bloc and the Parti Quebecois are trying to isolate one million French Canadians outside Quebec, and they should be ashamed of this lack in their policy.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us then whether the federal government intends to honour the consensus in Quebec expressed by the premier and the Liberal opposition on negotiating an administrative agreement to establish Quebec's place in international forums?