Debates of March 25th, 1999

The Economy

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is the deputy minister who appears to be simplifying this by saying that our standard of living is low, taxes are too high and our depreciating dollar seems to be totally responsible for this. That is the minister's own deputy minister. It is sort of like Pravda which said that wheat production in the Soviet Union was just absolutely terrific when in fact there were food shortages there.

The minister's deputy minister is telling the truth. I would like to ask the minister again. Does he agree with his deputy minister or not? Is he going to send him away for political indoctrination?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, what I do not agree with is the foolish representation of those views by the hon. member for Edmonton North.

If the hon. member had the faintest understanding of what she is talking about, she would be standing in shame and saying that she regrets that she voted against support for research and development in the private sector. She would say she is sorry that she has not put a focus on the lack of training in Canadian firms. She would say she understands the years of Tory governments that she supported ran up a debt load that is still burdening this country.

Those are the real causes behind Canada's productivity challenge.

Poverty

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the 1993 election campaign, the Liberal government promised to fight poverty in Canada.

The number of poor children in Canada has increased from one million to one and a half million under the Liberals.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Does the government intend to act on my proposal that a position of poverty commissioner be created in order to more effectively fight this terrible phenomenon, poverty?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, what our government wanted to do, for the very purpose of fighting child poverty, was to bypass structures and appoint individuals to look after it.

I think the member's idea is interesting, and we should look at it, but let us look at what we have done as the government.

We have invested $3 billion a year in the national child benefit. These investments will come back each year. We established this national benefit in co-operation with the provinces so that they too are contributing to the fight against poverty.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a human rights commissioner, an official languages commissioner and an environment commissioner to ensure these matters get more appropriate attention.

Is poverty not of sufficient concern to get this government to agree to the appointment of a poverty commissioner, right now?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, we have done a whole pile of things. We have improved our employment insurance system by giving the most disadvantaged unemployed access to family income, a family income supplement, specifically to help fight child poverty.

We have introduced specific measures to put money into the pockets of those responsible for children. I think there is already an improvement in the situation at the moment. In the coming years, I think it will be even greater.

Softwood Lumber

[John Duncan, Reform, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this government trumpeted the certainty and stability brought by the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber agreement. The very opposite has happened. The newest U.S. attempt is to restrict Canadian exports of painted and manufactured wood product by reclassifying it as softwood lumber. This could cost thousands of jobs.

Why is the minister not fighting this unjust reclassification?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, yet again the Reform Party is late. Not only are we fighting but we have already consulted the American side. We have told them that we will be proceeding through the dispute mechanism system as well as taking this to the World Customs Organization.

We are trying to work within the confines of this agreement. But we do not accept the American intention to expand the agreement into areas that quite frankly are unfair. We will, and have already started the claim.

[John Duncan, Reform, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is going through the motions. NAFTA phased out duties on value added products to create free trade. That is why U.S. special interests want to classify these products so they become subject to restrictions under the softwood lumber agreement. The softwood lumber agreement has already cost Canadian jobs and now more are threatened.

Will the minister commit to not renew the agreement when it expires?

[Sergio Marchi, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, the member should know that a few years ago four provinces and the entire industry recommended to the federal government that we enter into this agreement. The member also knows that I have instructed our officials, two years before the agreement lapses, to consult with the same industry and the provinces to try to gather a national consensus on where we go from here. Will they want to continue the agreement? Do they want changes? Do they want to have no agreement?

We are engaged in that process. It is the member that is going through the motions.

Shipbuilding

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when we ask questions of the Minister of Industry on the federal government's shipbuilding policy, he always says that the government is doing enough and that its programs are working.

But surely there must be something wrong, since Canadian shipowners have their ships built abroad.

Instead of telling us that everything is fine when it is not the case, is the Minister of Industry willing to take a closer look at what is not working with his support measures for the shipbuilding industry, and improve his policy, so that it will finally yield results?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we are not prepared to give subsidies to the shipbuilding industry.

I also want to reiterate that we have made changes in recent years, particularly as regards our support to exports. EDC changed the rules and increased support.

If the hon. member really wants to change things, he should give us examples which do not involve subsidies.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will provide one example to the minister.

In 1998, the Minister of Finance rammed Bill C-28 through the House, to help shipowners.

When will the Minister of Finance introduce a Bill C-29 to help Canada's shipyard workers?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, we already have tax shelters to help the shipbuilding industry.

We have systems to help them with regard to exports. There is already a lot of support provided to this industry.

Aboriginal Affairs

[John Cummins, Reform, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government tells us the Nisga'a treaty is a done deal. Yet the minister of fisheries refuses to allow his bureaucrats to brief the fisheries committee on the impact the treaty will have on the fishery. What does the minister have to hide?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, we are working diligently to prepare legislation to bring to this House to debate the very important and historic Nisga'a treaty. We are working on all aspects. We will have good legislation that truly reflects the treaty. I am looking forward to good and fulsome debate in this House.

I would only ask the members opposite to consider what their side of this story is and to realize that they will not bring certainty or investment to British Columbia. Their point of view will only bring chaos.

[John Cummins, Reform, Delta—South Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the deal is signed but I want to tell the House what the problem is. The department of Indian affairs and the department of fisheries cannot agree on what the treaty means for fish.

Why did this government sign a deal when it did not know what it meant? Why is it prepared to ram it through parliament without knowing what it means?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, this side of the House knows precisely what writing modern treaties in British Columbia is all about. It is about bringing certainty to that province. It is clarifying who has what jurisdiction and who has what authority. It is about making investments in a province so its economy can very much appreciate and benefit from the settling of these land claims.

This government knows precisely what it is doing. It is that side of the House that has no idea how to reconcile aboriginal rights in a modern Canada. All that side would suggest is to bring chaos.

Pay Equity

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

Mr. Speaker, in its annual report, the Canadian Human Rights Commission again criticizes the delay tactics being used by Treasury Board in the matter of pay equity.

While employees have been deprived for years now of equal pay, the government is spending time and money on various approaches in order to put off the inevitable.

Can the President of the Treasury Board acknowledge his error today, commit to withdrawal of the appeal application, and pay what is owing once and for all?

[Marcel Massé, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, not only is the government in favour of pay equity, but it is the one that proclaimed it and the one that wrote it into Canadian legislation. The government has already paid out more than $1 billion for pay equity.

Our experts are clear, however: the human rights tribunal is wrong in its judgment. We have filed an appeal, as unions do when they believe the courts to be wrong, and we have to wait for a ruling by experts in the field in order to find out what portion the Canadian public really needs to pay.

National Defence

[Hec Clouthier, Liberal, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, I travelled the country last year and learned firsthand that many of the men and women in our internationally respected armed forces work for low wages and live in substandard housing. Hopefully the concerned and compassionate Minister of National Defence will tell us what he is going to do to improve their quality of life.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian forces are an important national organization. They contribute a great deal to the life and security of this country and deserve to have fair compensation for a reasonable standard of living.

I was very pleased to table today the government's response to the 89 recommendations of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs. It did a fine job. We agree with most of all its recommendations.

We will be putting into effect for example pay increases come the first of April this year. As an example, for privates the committee recommended some 10% and we are making it 14.4%.

Fisheries

[Gary Lunn, Reform, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, business people in the Vancouver Island community of Ucluelet have spent millions of dollars upgrading their fish processing facilities, yet we hear this government is about to sell out on them. In fact, it is going to give this fish to foreign nations, Polish vessels offshore to process this fish.

My question is very simple. Before the government gives any Canadian fish to any foreign nations to process offshore, will it ensure that every single Canadian processor has priority access to this resource and no foreign nation will get fish before Canadians to process?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, the member should know that our objective is to Canadianize the fishery.

The current quotas that Cubans are fishing are Canadian quotas. Foreign participation by Cuba this year, 1999, in the silver hake fishery is low. The catch has been reduced from 55,000 to 30,000.

In terms of the ships that the Cubans are building, the Cubans have been made fully aware that there is a three year program in place setting quotas that will end in the year 2000 and it is uncertain if those quotas will be renewed after that date.

Transport

[Rob Anders, Reform, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have yet another example of Liberal interference with tax dollars at the St. John's Port Corporation.

The Liberal appointed CEO, Sean Hanrahan, tore down the old building and is spending millions to put up a new one with offices bigger than the premier's. He ignored the request of clients to invest in dock improvements, he ignored the request of the mayor and increased the already high vacancy rates in St. John's.

Why was this transport money not spent on docks rather than on these posh new offices? For a Liberal—