House of Commons Hansard #187 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was million.

Topics

HealthOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Etobicoke Centre Ontario

Liberal

Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health

Mr. Speaker, the budget of two weeks ago did more than simply commit $11.5 billion to health care to help turn around the situation and restore the confidence of Canadians. We also recognize the importance of preventing illness and health promotion. For that reason the budget committed $75 million over the next three years to increase the scope of our program for prenatal nutrition for pregnant women and the health of their babies.

There are about 20,000 women now who are served by this program and that will go to 35,000 women throughout the country because of this increase.

This government believes strongly in preventing illness.

Pascal HudonOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Maud Debien Bloc Laval East, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

In early January, Pascal Hudon was arrested in Mexico and found to be in possession of Mayan pottery. Although this young Quebecker is far from being a trafficker in art objects, the Canadian government was slow to react, and a consul was sent only last weekend.

Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs give us a report on what measures of diplomatic protection have been provided by the consul, and on the conditions under which this Quebec national is being detained?

Pascal HudonOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Winnipeg South Centre Manitoba

Liberal

Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, we made immediate contact with the family. We operated quickly to talk with Mr. Hudon. He was not willing to receive us at the first instance. We are now in direct contact with him. We have raised the issue with the Mexican authorities. We have raised the issue to make sure that he gets proper medical treatment in the penitentiary. The ambassador has already written to Mexican counterparts to ensure that the sentencing of the courts is properly defined.

We are providing fully applicable consulate services to Mr. Hudon and we will make sure that his rights are protected.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Angela Vautour NDP Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB

Mr. Speaker, this government has given responsibility for part II of the Employment Insurance Act to the province of New Brunswick. Unfortunately, it did not impose any conditions on the provincial government before transferring the funds. It ought to have made sure that the programs provided by the province met the needs of the unemployed.

Today, we find ourselves with a program set up by the province with federal funding which does not meet the needs of all the “gappers”.

Is this government going to finally assume its responsibility for the unemployed and transfer additional funds, this time making sure that all the “gappers” are going to get help? There are critical situations in New Brunswick, with a provincial government which—

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

The Speaker

The Minister of Human Resources Development.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Papineau—Saint-Denis Québec

Liberal

Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments by the hon. NDP member, who acknowledges the excellent job done by our government last year in helping the government of New Brunswick to truly solve the problem of the “gappers”.

In fact, their numbers in New Brunswick have dropped from 7,500 down to fewer than 2,000, thanks to the co-ordinated efforts of the Government of Canada and the Government of New Brunswick.

TaxationOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Reform

Jason Kenney Reform Calgary Southeast, AB

Mr. Speaker, we heard earlier from the Secretary of State for International Financial Institutions the specious claim that the government claims to be taking 600,000 people off the tax rolls through tax policy changes in this budget. But he seems to have forgotten in his new Liberal math that 1.2 million taxpayers were added to the tax rolls since 1993 because of bracket creep and that another 300,000 will be added back on in the next two years as a result of bracket creep.

How does he come up with this specious figure when in fact 900,000 people will be paying taxes in 2001 who were not when this government came to power?

TaxationOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Willowdale Ontario

Liberal

Jim Peterson LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)

Mr. Speaker, when we took office, unemployment was at 11.4%. Today it is at 7.8%.

It is very simple mathematics. When a person is working they are able to pay taxes. The person who is unemployed does not pay taxes. We are very proud of our job creation record.

AgricultureOral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Rick Borotsik Progressive Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, last week the agriculture committee travelled to Washington and it did not take very long for the committee to realize that there is a very strange relationship between Americans and Canadians when it comes to agricultural trade.

According to U.S. officials, they have targeted supply management as a deal breaker in the next round of negotiations. The Canadian Wheat Board is still in their sights.

Recognizing that open market access is very necessary for Canadian agricultural trade, is the agriculture minister prepared to sacrifice supply management or sacrifice market access to other agricultural commodities?

AgricultureOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Prince Edward—Hastings Ontario

Liberal

Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, no we are not prepared to sacrifice supply management. We are working very hard with the industry. I meet every week with sectors of the industry. We are going to put together in co-operation with the industry and the provinces, a strong, unified and credible approach to be in position to go into the next round of WTO meetings.

Research And DevelopmentOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, research and innovation are key to the excellence of Canada's health care system and to the prosperity of our nation.

Could the Secretary of State for Science, Research and Development tell the House how the 1999 budget will prevent the loss of our medical, nursing and basic research scientists who leave Canada?

Research And DevelopmentOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Saint Boniface Manitoba

Liberal

Ronald J. Duhamel LiberalSecretary of State (Science

Mr. Speaker, we have taken several positive steps. We are building on the past: the Canadian Foundation for Innovation in 1997; the Canadian millennium scholarship fund in 1998; $1.8 billion in investments in science and technology this year; the centres of excellence, the granting councils, the National Research Council, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation; $1.5 billion in health research, prenatal programs and research and for nurses doing research to enhance health care.

We want to keep our brightest and our best in Canada. We want to make Canada the place of choice for knowledge based workers.

Presence In GalleryOral Question Period

March 2nd, 1999 / 3 p.m.

The Speaker

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of His Excellency Osama Faqueeh, Minister of Commerce of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Presence In GalleryOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

Points Of OrderOral Question Period

3 p.m.

Papineau—Saint-Denis Québec

Liberal

Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, during Oral Question Period, I spoke of the letter from Mr. Legault, which referred to the right to opt out. I was referring to his press release of a few days later and not to his letter.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government; and of the amendment.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, as I was indicating when debate was interrupted for question period, budget '99 has allocated $30 million for the Medical Research Council and Health Canada's national health research and development program for each of the next three years. This new allocation is to provide immediate support for advanced health research.

For example, at the University of Manitoba, researchers are working to reduce the 30% rejection rate for kidney transplants. Moreover, $65 million is initially set aside in the year 2000-01 to support the launch of the envisioned Canadian institutes of health research, an amount that will be increased to $175 million the year thereafter.

The combination of all the initiatives announced in budget '99 is to increase the funding for health research, both medical and nursing, by $550 million over the remainder of this fiscal year and the coming next three years.

Let me now return to the component of the budget that focuses on creation, dissemination, sharing and the application of knowledge as it impacts the economy, and on the component of the budget that supports employment.

Over the next three years $465 million has been earmarked for the youth employment strategy and another $110 million per year for the Canada jobs fund. These two particular strategic funds alone will help ensure a bright future for our youth as well as attend to the employment needs of our adults of today.

First, to help create knowledge, the federal government has earmarked the following budgetary amounts: $200 million to the Canada Foundation for Innovation; $75 million to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council; $15 million to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council; $31 million to the National Research Council; and $55 million for biotechnology research and development by federal science based departments and agencies. These amounts total $376 million for initiatives to create knowledge.

Second, to help disseminate and share the created knowledge, budget '99 has allocated the following amounts: $60 million to smart communities to establish demonstration projects that promote the effective use of information technologies in such areas as education and lifelong learning, government services, business and industry, employment, library and information services, transportation and culture; and $60 million to GeoConnections to make available to the information highway comprehensive and integrated data about Canada's geography, environment, people and resources.

Third, to commercialize knowledge so as to reap the economic and social benefits for all Canadians, budget '99 has allocated the following amounts: $90 million to the networks of centres of excellence; $150 million to technology partnerships Canada; $50 million to the Business Development Bank of Canada to expand financing for small and medium size knowledge based and export oriented businesses; and $430 million to the Canadian Space Agency.

Budget '99 is indeed the best budget of them all. These initiatives in budget '99 are the products of the determination, will and sacrifice that Canadians have collectively shared since 1993 when they entrusted this government to change their despair to hope, their pessimism to optimism, their doubt to a renewed sense of confidence.

I am humbly proud to be part of this government's team that worked with Canadians to succeed in eliminating the national deficit, balancing the books of the nation and reducing the national debt and personal income taxes.

I am proud to be part of this government that believes we have achieved what we have achieved not because of any single value we have pursued, but because of the many values we have advanced together, because of the sharing and openness we have shown to each other as fellow citizens.

I am proud to be part of this government team that working with Canadians is truly building today for a better tomorrow.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Guy Chrétien Bloc Frontenac—Mégantic, QC

Mr. Speaker, we have known for a number of years that the federal government is making surpluses. A round of extravagant spending has begun.

Thus, The Minister of Human Resources Development, with the help of the enforcement assistance fund, provided $35,000 for a study on the establishment of a technological company in the Asbestos RCM. This financial assistance to one person represents and will always represent structural duplication, because there existed and still exists a federally funded CFDC, a community futures development corporation and a Government of Quebec funded CLD.

How can the member for Winnipeg North—St. Paul justify his government's use of the surplus in the employment insurance fund, which, by the way, should be set aside solely for future users, that is, the unemployed? How can he justify his government's spending $35,000 to duplicate structures?

Why, for example, did he not give this money to the very responsible diversification committee in the Asbestos RCM, chaired by Jacques Lussier? Or why did he not give it to the community futures development corporation, chaired by Raymond Simon, the mayor of Pontbriand, a corporation governed by the federal government, or to the CLD, headed by Rivard Beaudoin?

The awarding of this $35,000 to a single individual, who spent barely five months on his study, represents high class social assistance.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have noted that in the question the hon. member has not really doubted the merit of the study. He has only raised grave doubts as to the duplication of the efforts. In other words, it appears to be more about a wounded ego than anything else. On that note I would say that unless he says that it was not a good study, that type of question should not merit an answer at this time.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

NDP

Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member for Winnipeg North—St. Paul, if he feels this budget is so good and he was doing a lot of bragging about it in his speech, why did the government feel it had to spend $3.6 million to advertise it and engage in its public relations?

I would hope the member for Winnipeg North—St. Paul is as concerned as we are about the $500,000 the Manitoba Conservative government is spending on feel good health care ads.

I wonder if the member will join with us in condemning both the Manitoba Conservatives and the federal Liberals for wasting public money to engage in self-serving ads. Would he not agree that every penny available should go into the care of patients and not into propaganda?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I should note that the member opposite was a member of the provincial legislature. At that time if at any time the provincial government she was part of did not inform Manitobans on the government's programs, then I would say she would have a legitimate basis to pose that question.

On the substance, it is our duty as a federal government to inform Canadians of the budget. How can we not be proud of $11.5 billion for the health care system as new money over and above the $12.5 billion that is presently there? Even the NDP premier of Saskatchewan applauded budget '99.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS

Mr. Speaker, I question the hon. member with respect to this budget and his government's priorities when it comes to law and order in this country.

We know they have a record of late of being very soft on crime. We are still waiting for the tabling of the Young Offenders Act. We know there have been massive cuts to the organized crime budget. We know the RCMP computer system is rusting out, yet millions and millions have been pumped into a useless gun registry system.

Why has this government set such a low priority for law enforcement in this country?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Rey D. Pagtakhan Liberal Winnipeg North—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I think we have allocated sufficiently in this budget for the law enforcement agency of Canada.

The gun control law is now part of the law of the country, part of the rule of law. I hope the member opposite will obey the rule of law.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:15 p.m.

Reform

Jay Hill Reform Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, I wish I could say it was a great pleasure for me to rise today to address this budget. This budget is a disaster, as every Canadian is learning. I am sure hon. members opposite will be riveted by the speech I am about to deliver. Maybe they will be quiet enough to hear it.

I start this afternoon by focusing on the beginning of the finance minister's rather lengthy budget speech: “A budget always brings its own special vocabulary. We talk in the language of rates and ratios, of percentages and decimals, of accounting methods and measures. What all this obscures is what budgets should be about. It is to make the lives of Canadians better. It is to improve their standard of living”.

What the finance minister is obscuring is that the rates, ratios and numbers do not lie. The numbers are his undoing. His accounting practices are unorthodox and are not even supported by the auditor general. The numbers show clearly that increases in payroll taxes and bracket creep have not been offset by his minuscule tax cut.

In short, this is what budgets should be all about. They should be about being straight with Canadians. They should be about telling them the whole story or, as Paul Harvey says, at least the rest of the story.

Do not take my word for it. Neville Nankivell calls this budget “a clunker, disappointing and miserly in its approach to reducing what are the highest overall taxes of any major economy”.

According to Diane Francis of the National Post : “The latest budget is a big con job designed to hoodwink Canadians into believing that health care costs are why they cannot get the dramatic tax cuts they deserve. The fact is Canadian taxes are excessive due to unbridled public spending on non-health items. Canadians are being taxed to death and this budget is insulting to taxpayers by perpetuating myths”.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business calls the budget “disappointing and a missed opportunity”.

The government is spending a lot of money advertising this budget, as my colleague just pointed out, but it is not being straight with Canadians. My constituents voted to re-elect me because I call them as I see them. I would like to clarify for Canadians facts and fiction, or the myths and realities of this budget.

The finance minister made choices in his budget and the consequences of those choices need to be explained to Canadian families.

Myth number one is that the Liberals have not increased taxes. In fact, we are to believe we just got a tax cut. Unfortunately even Canadian Airlines is perpetuating this myth.

Reality number one is that Canadian taxpayers will pay $2,020 more in taxes in 1999 than they did in 1993. That is $42 billion more, 42 thousand million dollars more. That is a tax hike of 34%, the highest tax increase in the world. That is the reality.

That is a five year period but even if a comparison with 1999 to last year is made, Canadians will still be paying more in taxes due to mammoth increases in CPP premiums and of course because of bracket creep.

Myth number two is that Canadians' taxes are higher in order to pay for universal health care. Reality number two is the latest OECD health data report reveals that the United States spends 90% more on each citizen on public health care than Canada does. Even with the so-called reinvestment in health care, Canadians are getting $4.3 billion less in health care spending from these Liberals.

When we take health care spending out of the picture Canadian taxes are double the rate of the Americans. The reality is that health care has nothing to do with the exorbitant taxes being charged by this bunch of Liberals across the way.

We have to love myth number three, that excessive taxes do not harm Canadian businesses or the economy. Just ask the industry minister. According to him, high taxes are good for business. Reality number three is Canada's taxes are double that of the U.S. and, surprise, our unemployment rate is nearly double that of the United States. Coincidence? I think not. Payroll taxes and user fees have taxed small businesses, the engine of job creation, out of prosperity into a daily struggle just to survive.

One small example of this government's lame brain policies is the recent change to T-4 slips. It used to fit four forms on a page which could be sent out in a standard letter sized envelope. The geniuses at Revenue Canada decided to change that format. Now only three forms fit to a page and due to their new and improved size, they require larger envelopes. Members are probably saying big deal, so they need new envelopes. The postage for these new envelopes is 90 cents instead of the 46 cents it cost for the old form. That is just one small example of how this government nickels and dimes small business people.

Myth number four is that the finance minister says his budget will give substantial tax relief to low income Canadians, in fact it will more than cover bracket creep for all Canadians. Reality number four is the minuscule tax cut given to low income Canadians is only half the amount of money they would receive if the finance minister would index personal income taxes. In 1980 a person making $10,505 paid no income tax. Now that same person pays taxes on only $6,496. Britain does not start taxing until $9,000 and the U.S. not until $9,500. No wonder our best and brightest are fleeing the country. Is there a pattern developing with this?

Myth number five is that the Liberals have been prudent—they love that word—and have balanced the budget by cutting costs and responsible priorizing. Reality number five is the single largest expenditure in this budget is interest on the national debt, which has grown by over $130 billion since 1993. The Liberals reduced 70% of the deficit by raising taxes while only cutting costs by 2%. The finance minister also got a break from lower international interest rates. The reality is this budget was balanced by charging Canadians more taxes and giving them less in return. That is neither prudent nor responsible. It is shameful.

Myth number six is that Canadians are better off today than they were before the Liberals took over in 1993. Reality number six is Canadians are worse off today than they were in 1993. I take no joy in saying that. There is no victory for the official opposition in that statement. This government has failed Canadians. It uses smoke and mirrors to manipulate the truth so Canadians will feel better about themselves and blindly spend more money so government revenues will climb even higher.

The numbers the finance minister says obscure what is important about a budget are all that is important about a budget. I will list them so members can see for themselves why the finance minister wants to avoid them. Canadians are paying $900 million more in income tax through bracket creep. Canadians are paying $1.14 billion more in CPP premiums just to receive less in benefits when they retire; in simpler terms, paying more, getting less. Canadians are paying $42 billion more in taxes in 1999 than they were in 1993.

The national debt has risen by $130 billion since 1993. Balanced budgets are the result of excessive tax hikes and onerous cost recovery schemes. Canadians are receiving $4.3 billion less in federal health care in 1999 than in 1993; paying more, getting less.

This budget was supposed to make the lives of Canadians better. It was supposed to increase their standard of living. These are the finance minister's own words so he must admit that he has failed, for Canadians are being forced to pay more and get less. We pay more taxes and get less health care. This is obviously reversed.

I quote once again Diane Francis who hits the nail right on the head, despite the cries of protest from the other side, when she says: “Ottawa should be forced to work backward. Taxpayers should demand back the billions Ottawa has over collected since 1993 in the form of pro rata tax cuts, to repay the unfair deindexing in an era of non inflation. After all, working backward while paying for essentials is exactly how Canadian households and business must conduct their financial affairs. Canadians struggle to pay escalating taxes, rents, food and other expenses. Why hasn't Ottawa ever suffered? Because it does not have to. That's why this budget is a national insult”.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

3:25 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Before we get to questions and comments I wanted to confirm with the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River that he was splitting his time. Is that correct?