House of Commons Hansard #200 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was branches.
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we are already working to help Quebec have a role in international forums, but under the aegis of the federal government, the Government of Canada.
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, for almost five years this government has known that the reuse of disposable medical devices is potentially dangerous.
For almost five years this government has known that reused disposable devices like catheters and tubes going into stomachs and intestines can cause the transmission of disease and can even break down in the patient's body. For five years this government has known that hospitals want this government to act and they want national standards.
Why did this government, when it had a choice to act or do nothing, choose to do nothing and put patients at risk?
Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, the role of the government is to set the standards, and the federal government has done that.
The provinces and the individual hospitals get involved in the reuse. The minister has indicated that he is prepared to sit down with health professionals, the provinces and the hospitals to discuss this issue. It will very likely be a topic of discussion at a meeting of ministers in May.
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, this is my point. The government has not set standards for the reuse of disposable medical devices. As a result, patients are at risk. We know that from a study that goes back to 1994. We know that the Canadian Health Care Association has called for national standards. All we are getting is the minister saying that he is going to study the matter and consider national standards.
We want to know today if this government is prepared to stand and say that national standards will be implemented immediately and that patients will not be put at any unnecessary risk.
Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, I clarified and explained very clearly to the hon. member that the minister is prepared to sit down, but it can only take place and be effective if it is done in consultation with the provinces and with the medical profession.
He is prepared to do that and he will be having that discussion.
Charlie Power Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
Bill C-66 will retroactively legalize its mortgage insurance underwriting program. Given that CMHC has eliminated appraisals on applications for high ratio mortgages, will the minister tell the House what practices are in place to measure the conditions of Canada's housing and to ensure there is no fraud in the marketplace? Does the minister think it is fair that the Canadian home purchaser should pay for this policy change by higher insurance premiums?
Canada Mortgage And Housing CorporationOral Question Period
Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel Québec
Liberal
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the new program, called the emili, was implemented by CMHC. Since 1996 the industry has been involved in this program. There was a period so that underwriters could be ready for it. As late as last December I met with the Canadian Institute of Appraisers to discuss this issue.
The purpose of the program is to speed up the length of time it takes so that Canadians can have their mortgage insurance as soon as possible and can enjoy—
Canada Mortgage And Housing CorporationOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for St. John's West.
Charlie Power Progressive Conservative St. John's West, NL
Mr. Speaker, I would like for the minister to explain why the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation has eliminated appraisals on these mortgages at the same time as its counterpart in the U.S. is demanding more up to date and better appraisals.
Could the minister explain why this difference takes place? Why are property appraisals being swept aside? Does the minister agree that Canadian consumers could be better protected by professional appraisals on their properties at the time of purchase?
Canada Mortgage And Housing CorporationOral Question Period
Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel Québec
Liberal
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the reason is to accelerate matters. As a matter of fact the office is also open on Sundays so that they can have very speedy, easy and fast assessments.
Naturally that does not stop individual buyers having personal appraisers if they feel the general appraisal we do with the financial institution is not satisfactory or is not enough.
We believe that we have a good system. The results are there. As I said, last December I met with the Canadian Institute of Appraisers. We discussed how we could implement this program. They have been giving good service in the past and we are sure they will continue to work—
Canada Mortgage And Housing CorporationOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for South Surrey—White Rock—Langley.
Val Meredith Reform South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's apologists say that he was just acting as an ordinary member of parliament when he helped Yvon Duhaime secure a federal grant, but everybody here knows that the Prime Minister has more power than all the backbenchers combined.
Three years ago the current Minister of Transport had to resign from cabinet when his staff intervened in an immigration case because he was a cabinet minister and not just an ordinary member of parliament.
Why did the Minister of Transport have to leave cabinet for interfering on behalf of a friend, yet the Prime Minister seems to think he can get away with the same thing?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the program in question is structured so that MPs are consulted on each and every one of the applications under the transitional jobs fund.
The Prime Minister, through his representative in his riding, did exactly the same thing as the member for Prince George—Peace River, the member for Okanagan—Shuswap, the member for Nanaimo—Alberni, the member for Prince George—Bulkley Valley, and I could go on and on and on.
The input in question was exactly as required by the program and the Prime Minister conducted himself totally appropriately.
Val Meredith Reform South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the government's claim that the Prime Minister was acting just like any other ordinary MP is ludicrous. As the Minister of Transport can attest, that argument did not hold water three years ago and it does not hold water today.
If the government is certain that the Prime Minister did not act in any improper fashion, will it release every document relating to this grant, or is it hiding something?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, what the hon. member is complaining of is done every day by members of her own party. Why does she not admit that if she wants something out in the open?
René Laurin Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, based on the data compiled over a period of 26 years, the cost of the employment insurance program has always followed the unemployment rate.
The report on employment insurance that was tabled yesterday confirms this fact by pointing out that half of the reduction in benefits can be attributed to the changing labour market.
How can the Minister of Finance claim in his budget that the 11% cost increase for the EI program can be attributed to an improved economy, thus contradicting 26 years of statistics and the EI experts?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, clearly, when the economy is doing well, salaries are higher and many more people qualify for benefits because more people are working, that is they have not been unemployed for extended periods of time.
I can assure the hon. member that it is because the economy is doing well; many more people are working and salaries are higher.
René Laurin Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that the Minister of Finance is taking $5 billion out of the employment insurance fund to eliminate his deficit. But he is also hiding a cushion of at least $1 billion in that same employment insurance program.
Either that surplus was hidden to allow the Minister of Finance to boast, come the next budget, or the government refuses to admit that it has no choice but to improve the EI program.
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, if we look at the figures, it is very clear that there is indeed a surplus. When we took office, there was a deficit of $6 billion. I personally think it is much better to have a surplus.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, the more I look at the Prime Minister giving a government grant to his friend Yvon Duhaime, the more I am reminded of the situation back home in British Columbia.
Glen Clark had a friend too, a contractor who built a deck for him. The Prime Minister had a friend who took a money losing hotel off his hands. Glen Clark is being investigated because his friend received a casino licence. The same thing here: the Prime Minister is under fire because his office lobbied to have a grant given to a friend. I hope Glen Clark is not the new ethical adviser to the Prime Minister.
At the very least will the Prime Minister do what Glen Clark has done? Will he release all the documentation surrounding this affair?
Bonnie Brown LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I remind the questioner and all my colleagues in the House that funds from this program are available in every area of high unemployment.
Shawinigan is one of those areas. It has a set of criteria. Those criteria were met by the Shawinigan project. One of the criteria is that all local MPs are consulted.
By his question, the questioner is suggesting that MPs should not be consulted. If that is the case, he is expressing a total lack of faith in his colleagues in his party and in all of us. It is a lack of faith that we on this side do not share.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, I would say to the hon. parliamentary secretary that MPs with a shred of integrity would have absented themselves from those meetings if a friend were involved.
There is another similarity between Glen Clark and the Prime Minister. They both look like a deer caught in the headlights. There is a difference, though. At least Glen Clark has called for an independent inquiry. He is releasing all the documents. In fact, he is even doing interviews with the media. Imagine that.
Will the Prime Minister at least live up to Glen Clark's level of integrity? Will he release all the documentation and will he start talking about this event so we can get to the bottom of it?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, questions are being asked and informative answers are being given every day in the House of Commons.
One thing that my hon. friend neglects to put on the record is that this transitional jobs fund grant created 19 direct jobs. I guess they are against creating jobs for unemployed people. Also this project had to be reviewed and approved by the Quebec provincial government, no friend of the Prime Minister and no friend of this party.
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral Bloc Laval Centre, QC
Mr. Speaker, not only is the Minister of Finance helping himself to $5 billion from the surplus in the EI fund to pay down the deficit, but he is apparently planning an additional estimated cushion of $1 billion to $1.5 billion.
Since the Minister of Finance has let women and youth carry the load long enough, could he not make this $1 billion plus cushion available to his colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, so that the system can be improved and made less discriminatory towards youth and women?
Bonnie Brown LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, it is a simple fact that when unemployment goes down the number of claims and benefits paid out also goes down.
We think this report has some good news in it too. It tells us that our measures to help people are working. The 450,000 new jobs that were created last year made it the best year in a decade. Of those 143,000 were for youth and 300,000 were for women.
If the member wants to know what we are doing for youth and women, this is what we are doing: we are helping them by getting them jobs.