Debates of March 5th, 1999

The Senate

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the government House leader. I want to ask him what the government considers to be a motion of confidence. It pertains of course to the request of the Senate for a 6% increase in its budget this year after a 10% increase last year.

According to parliamentary procedure a vote against the Senate estimates is not a vote of non-confidence unless the government deems it to be so.

I have a copy of a memo that went out to all Liberal MPs yesterday that appears to be deeming this vote a motion of non-confidence. My question is very simple to the minister.

Will the government be considering the vote on the estimates coming from the Senate for its increase of 6% a matter of confidence in the government?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to discover this new found interest in the upper chamber by the hon. member. The Prime Minister has indicated that he received his candidacy with enthusiasm last week.

The estimates of the other place, as with the estimates of this House, particularly the component having to do with the compensation package, were voted on by both houses of parliament and surely the member would not ask us to undo a bill which he voted on unanimously.

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

Mr. Speaker, the minister has not answered the question. I will ask him once again. I have a lot of respect for many government backbenchers in the House. I hope the minister has the same respect for his backbenchers as I have.

Will the vote on the estimates coming from the Senate where it wants an extra 6% this year on top of 10% last year be considered an issue of confidence in the Government of Canada? Answer that question directly. Will it be a confidence vote or not? We have to know that. Are members free to vote their own minds?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has been around the House even longer than I have, which is a very long time, and knows the institution of responsible government. He also knows that parliament functions when both Houses function to pass legislation that is enacted and that we do so on behalf of the people of Canada.

That is what parliament will continue to do now and in the future.

Health Care

[Charlie Power, Progressive Conservative, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Apart from the public squabbling between the finance minister and his close personal friend, Brian Tobin, there is the question of the fundamental principles underlying the per capita equalization payments. It is an undeniable fact that the scheme to calculate transfers on a per capita basis would be devastating to Newfoundland and Labrador, a province which has lost 30,000 people in three years. Equality of transfers per person simply does not translate into equality of available services.

Will the minister guarantee us today that the additional funding will be made available to ensure the principles of the Canada Health Act are available for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member understands that social transfers and equalization operate hand in hand. What we have done is reverse a discrimination against other provinces on a per capita basis so that all Canadian citizens, whether they live in Newfoundland, Ontario or British Columbia, are treated equally under the federal provision of health care.

At the same time we have improved substantially the equalization program. There are much larger amounts of money that will be transferred. That has been recognized by the Premier of Newfoundland.

[Charlie Power, Progressive Conservative, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is obviously quite pleased with himself, but his former colleague and close personal friend, Mr. Tobin with whom we know he has so much in common, is not wearing the same grin.

The Liberal finance minister in Newfoundland might be smiling for another reason. He calls this government's claims laughable. The Liberal health minister in the province has said outright that it creates a two tier health care system, one for Newfoundland and one for the rest of Canada.

For the sake of those caught in the middle in Newfoundland and Labrador and for Canadians everywhere who care about health care, will the minister tell us which group of Liberals are we suppose to believe in Newfoundland and Labrador?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a little out of date. The fact is that the Government of Newfoundland and the federal government are speaking with one voice. That one voice says that in fact there is very large scale funding going from the federal government to the province of Newfoundland in both the CHST and equalization, money which I know full well the Government of Newfoundland will put into the health care system because its interests are ours, and that is to have the best health care system right across the country.

The Senate

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, dictatorship is alive and well in the Liberal Party. Yesterday the Prime Minister ordered his own MPs to vote once again like sheep in favour of supporting the 16% two year raise for senators. He also had the gall to say “The Senate is doing its job and doing it well”.

I would like to ask the government exactly what the Senate is doing such a good job at. Is it taking Mexican holidays or is it not showing up for work? Which one does it accomplish best?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member across and some of his colleagues are in no position to talk about attendance in this House.

The raise for senators was 2% for subsequent years and 1.25% in the first year. The hon. member who asked me this question voted for it. How can he now claim the opposite of that which he voted on himself?

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in parliamentary committee the member for Calgary West asked the committee to call a senator to come before the committee to explain exactly where all the money was being spent. Under the Prime Minister's direct orders, the Liberal members voted against calling an accountability.

What is the government trying to hide in this Senate money spending? What kind of embarrassment is it trying to avoid? What is it that troubles the government about the way senators spend money?

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

Mr. Speaker, nothing is hidden. The full estimates were tabled last Monday. The supplementary estimates will be tabled today before all members of the House. Copies are supplied to all members of parliament and all members of the other place.

The hon. member knows the breakdown of every item spent by both houses of parliament. As it pertains to the compensation package, he voted for it himself.

Government Advertising

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

Since the government has recently converted to the principle of a per capita breakdown of public expenditures, can the minister tell us what proportion of the Canada Information Office's propaganda spending is in Quebec?

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is not involved with any propaganda.

We do inform Canadians from coast to coast on what the government is doing. All programs are created for the benefit of Canadians. In Quebec, as in the other provinces, our information programs are equitable.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs declared that the leaders of the Conservative Party and the Reform Party are more dangerous to Canadian unity than Quebec sovereignists. Last year, two-thirds of Canada Day funding was spent in Quebec.

Does the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs not think that a greater proportion of government propaganda spending ought to be focussed on the west where, according to his colleague, it would be better spent and would correct another injustice?

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, as the Government of Canada, we take part in all Canadian activities and festivals. Celebrations are held throughout the country, and we have a presence there, whether for Canada Day, Labour Day, or some other event.

Taxation

[Dale Johnston, Reform, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Labour what is with the government's aversion to saving taxpayers money.

A departmental study recommending the amalgamation of the Canada Labour Relations Board, the Artists Tribunal and the Public Service Staff Relations Board was ignored despite projected savings of $3 million to $4 million. Instead the government changed the name of one board and shelved the study.

What is the government opposed to, greater efficiency or the proposed saving of $3 million to $4 million a year?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have reviewed the agencies, boards and commissions. In that process we abolished hundreds and hundreds of positions. We amalgamated or got rid of up to 70 of these agencies, boards and commissions.

In the process we saved the government a lot of money. All these decisions were done in the interest of Canadian taxpayers.

[Dale Johnston, Reform, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, then perhaps there is a willingness on the part of the government to go the next step. The budget for the Artists Tribunal alone last year was $1.7 million yet it only completed 11 cases.

Why will the minister not combine these bureaucracies? Is it because he does not want to save the taxpayers $3 million to $4 million, or is the government saving these boards as nice little patronage plumbs for its political friends?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, we have done that review. There is a continuing review of all these agencies, boards and commissions.

Our purpose is to be able to give good government at the lowest possible cost. I think we showed it. We abolished hundreds of positions. We saved millions of dollars and we intend to continue to do so.

Contributions To Political Parties

[Maurice Dumas, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

In 1995-96, Atomic Energy Canada, the Business Development Bank of Canada and Canada Post, the latter now headed by a former Liberal minister, contributed to the Liberal Party of Canada campaign fund.

Does the minister think it appropriate for these organizations to contribute public money to his party's election fund?

[Some hon. members]

Shameful.

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, to my knowledge, crown corporations—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Individuals, perhaps, employees of the corporations can contribute to any political party they wish, but the corporation itself, I am not aware of that.