Debates of March 4th, 1999

Taxation

[The Speaker]

Order, please. The hon. member for Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière.

Shipbuilding

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec gives tax deductions as a stimulus for shipbuilding, while at the same time Ottawa taxes these benefits, thus cancelling out the positive effect of these measures.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. Is it not absurd for the federal government to cancel out the effect of measures that have been put into place in order to support shipbuilding in Quebec?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

This is not true, Mr. Speaker.

We have a taxation system that is highly favourable to shipbuilding. We have the capacity for an accelerated write-off for ships built in Canada. We have very high tariffs for ships built elsewhere and a government purchasing system that favours Canadian production.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the question may have taken the minister unawares, but other responses are needed.

How can we explain to Quebec shipbuilders and shipyard workers that federal government decisions cancel out provincial ones?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Quite simply, it is not true, Mr. Speaker.

National Defence

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, DND documents received today show that the statement of requirement for the Sea King replacement was actually completed over a year ago. However, the contract has yet to be put out to tender by this government.

The government is sitting on its hands while Sea Kings are falling out of the sky. This is the worst case of political interference Canadians have ever seen. Why is the government delaying?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the government is not delaying. We are moving along expeditiously on the matter. All of the details have not yet been finalized. As soon as they are, the procurement strategy will be brought forward. It is recognized that we have to get on with the replacement of the Sea Kings.

I can assure the House that there is no political interference. The matter is being dealt with at a staff level to make sure that we get the right kind of helicopter with the right kind of equipment to do the operational job that needs to be done.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is political interference and I will tell the minister why. It is because the minister does not want to embarrass the Prime Minister when the fact comes out that the best helicopter for the job is the one that he cancelled in 1993. This helicopter fiasco has cost Canadian taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Will the government stop the political interference today and put those contracts out to tender?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we are going to want to get on with the procurement as quickly as possible. This procurement will save us money over that contract which was quite rightly cancelled.

Health

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Health told the House that he had asked his officials to develop a plan with a view to legalizing the medical use of marijuana.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Does the government intend, in the meantime, to support my parliamentary motion and take immediate action to have the police stop harassing gravely ill individuals using marijuana to alleviate their suffering?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House the minister said that the policy of this government and his policy as Minister of Health was to try to help those who believe that the medical use of marijuana can help relieve their symptoms.

He has asked his officials to develop a plan that would include the establishment of appropriate clinical guidelines, clinical trials, and deal with the issue of securing safe access. That is the policy of the government.

National Revenue

[John Maloney, Liberal, Erie—Lincoln, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Revenue has introduced a revised travellers declaration form for Canadians and travellers to Canada.

Would the minister please tell Canadians the benefits that will result from the introduction of this form?

[Herb Dhaliwal, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member. I have to report to the House on a matter very important to all members of parliament.

I have made some changes to the travellers declaration form. In the past when coming into Canada each individual was required to fill in the declaration, including young children. Now I have made a change so that one form will suffice for a whole family thereby reducing the cost to Canadians by half a million dollars and the paperwork by 37%.

Gun Control

[Garry Breitkreuz, Reform, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have earmarked millions more in next year's budget to implement new gun control laws. Taxpayers can add these millions to the $200 million already spent on the government's gun registration scheme.

The government said that it would only cost $85 million over five years. Would the Minister of Justice please explain how her department could have bungled things so badly?

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, no one has bungled anything. In fact the gun registration system is working very effectively.

Canadians are respecting the law. It is only the opposition that does not want to respect the law of the land.

[Garry Breitkreuz, Reform, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Talk about being misled, Mr. Speaker. While the minister wastes hundreds of millions on this totally useless project, Statistics Canada recently reported that the number of police officers per capita had dropped for seven consecutive years.

In 1998 there were fewer police officers per capita than in 1970. Meanwhile, the number of criminal incidents has more than doubled since 1970.

Why did the Liberals blow hundreds of millions on a gun registration scheme when millions are needed to put adequate numbers of police officers on our streets and highways to fight this dramatic increase in crime?

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what I said earlier. Gun registration is working very effectively. We have had thousands of requests for registration across the country. The only people working against the law of the land is the Reform Party.

The Senate

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. It is a follow up to my question about the Senate a couple of days ago.

Some of the senators, who of course are unelected, are now threatening to delay or even to block some of the work of parliament because of a dispute over the request for an extra 6% in their budget on top of 10% last year. Such an action would thwart the will of the elected member of parliament.

Will the Prime Minister now consult with the premiers in the provinces and, after that consultation, come before the House and put the appropriate resolution before the Parliament of Canada to abolish the Senate?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to answer the question of the hon. member with regard to the Senate's expenses, which he appears to be against.

May I remind him that a good portion of those increases are for the salaries of the employees of the Senate. We know the member is against many things; I hope he is favour of labour.

The second component of it is the increase in compensation for members of parliament and members of the Senate, and he voted for it.

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Prime Minister was about the abolition of the Senate. No wonder we have cynicism when questions are not answered.

Fourteen years ago the Prime Minister, speaking in the House, said “I am appalled by the attitude of the prime minister”, meaning Brian Mulroney. “He is the prime minister and he wants to abolish the Senate. He has enough members to do it. He does not have to play games with anyone in this House and cop out like that”.

In light of those statements by this Prime Minister in those days, why does he not now consult with the premiers in the provinces and put a motion before the House to start the process of the abolition of the Senate?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I never proposed the abolition of the Senate. I have proposed some reforms to the Senate and we voted for some reforms to the Senate.

I met the premiers many times and none of them have asked me to make a motion to abolish the Senate. We need to reform it. We tried to reform it. We tried to make it elected, and of course the Reform Party was opposed.

He wants to abolish it. When there is a very large consensus we might act, but at this moment what is important is that the Senate is doing its job and doing it well.

Taxation

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, “parents who make the sacrifices and deliver quality care have earned the right to get support”. These are the words of the Liberal member for Mississauga South.

He went further to say that our tax system discriminates against families that choose to provide parental care. Why does the Liberal government not listen to a member of its own party and end its discriminatory tax treatment against single income families?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member from Mississauga for having raised this issue long before any one of the opposition parties thought about it.

In fact I congratulate our entire caucus that has been working on this matter. As we look ahead toward the possibility of tax relief as a result of the elimination of the deficit, it will be the pioneering work by this caucus that will lead the way.

The Budget

[Jean Dubé, Progressive Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the budget brought down with such fanfare by the Liberal government penalizes single income families.

Parents who decide to raise their children themselves are being treated like second class citizens by this government.

Will the government undertake today to do something about the tax inequalities their budget creates for single income families?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Once again, Mr. Speaker, the member is a bit behind the times. I will merely refer to the 1999 budget.

It provides that by July 2000 a typical single income family will receive $2,600 a year, more than double the $1,200 received by a typical two income family. So the government has already done something.