House of Commons Hansard #206 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was reform.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, as a participant in all of these discussions, I am asking the Prime Minister whether this possibility of a Serbian invasion of Albania had been envisaged by the Canadian government, and how the Canadian government plans to react to what took place this morning.
Have discussions been undertaken, as we speak, in reaction to this?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, yesterday at the NATO ministerial meeting the matter was raised about any potential incursion across the border.
The best answer was given by Secretary General Solana when he said that any attempt by Milosevic to destabilize the frontline states along current borders would be taken with great seriousness by NATO itself, and that we would be expecting him to respond to the very clear letter of responsibility he has not to cross those borders.
The matter was addressed, the warning was issued, and we would take this very seriously and ask the Milosevic government to cease and desist any further incursions.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Yesterday the defence minister insisted that Kosovo peacekeepers be a NATO led force.
Just hours ago the Russian foreign minister dismissed that position as a non-starter. Canada's foreign affairs minister showed some flexibility yesterday when he stated “NATO will be heavily involved but it will not necessarily be exclusively NATO”.
Could the Prime Minister tell us what is Canada's position: a NATO dominated force or a truly international force?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I replied to this point yesterday. The leader of the the New Democratic Party approved of what I said yesterday. I said that we hope it will involve more than NATO.
I have always spoken about the involvement of others, especially the Russians. I said that in the House and the same thing was said in Brussels by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The position of this government is very clear, but, as I said yesterday, if we cannot have an agreement to have more than NATO we will have to go with a NATO force.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of what the government hopes; it is a question of what the government is doing about it.
It is clear that for Russia a NATO dominated force is out of the question. For France, a key NATO member, Russian involvement is absolutely essential. The Prime Minister says that Russian involvement is hoped for. Other NATO members are speaking up.
Will the Prime Minister assure the House that Canada too is speaking up in favour of a truly international force?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I spoke about it yesterday. The Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke about it yesterday. I wrote to President Yeltsin last week asking the Russians to get involved and saying that it was very important for them to get involved.
The position of the Canadian government is clear and was stated before any question was asked by the leader of the NDP.
David Price Progressive Conservative Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Yugoslav infantry occupied the village of Kemenica, Albania.
I have just confirmed that briefings were held in Kingston, Ontario, that offered three ground force options for Kosovo: one for a small observer force, one for a 500 to 800 person group built around an armoured squadron, and one for a much larger force of 2,000 soldiers.
Will the minister confirm that there are plans in existence to deploy 2,000 soldiers to Kosovo?
Art Eggleton LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, the only plan in existence and the only plan that is approved is the plan that involves some 600 troops that would be part of a peacekeeping implementation force following a peace agreement.
David Price Progressive Conservative Compton—Stanstead, QC
Mr. Speaker, has the minister or any other minister in the government already agreed to send Canadian ground troops to Kosovo for offensive military operations? Is this why the Prime Minister will not allow a vote in the House?
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, just before the finance minister took off on his “I am not running for leadership” tour, the government released an astounding number. It pointed out that the EI surplus will hit $26 billion by year's end, $1,800 per worker is what that works out to. That number is absolutely outrageous.
How much more money will the minister rip off from workers before he is satisfied?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, when we took office the EI premiums were at $3.07. They were going to rise to $3.30 in that time period. Since we have taken office they have dropped to $2.55. That is over $4 billion. It is the largest decrease in EI premiums in the history of employment insurance.
Regarding the trip to British Columbia, the people of British Columbia in the ridings of the members opposite were delighted to see me.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, I think the finance minister just told another whopping rival. We have the tape running.
The unemployment rate is 85% higher in Canada than in the United States. We know the finance minister recently admitted that young people are leaving Canada to go to the U.S. because they are paid better wages. Certainly the minister should not be proud of that fact.
Given these facts, why is it that the minister continues to refuse to lower taxes in a significant way so that Canadians can see their standard of living improve?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that we have cut taxes by $16.5 billion over the next 36 months.
We could have cut taxes more but we did not because our priority in the last budget was health care. That was the priority of Canadians. It was not the priority of the Reform Party. Yesterday Canadians in Windsor—St. Clair told the Reform Party what they thought about its priorities.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, to explain his refusal to deal with the possibility of ground warfare in Kosovo and the possibility of Canadian troops participating in such operations, the Prime Minister said the whole issue was hypothetical. Now, there is every indication that it is becoming less and less hypothetical.
Would the Prime Minister agree to have a motion put before parliament today to allow for an emergency debate on the latest developments, with the intrusion into Albania this morning of Serb troops and the implications—
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, yesterday's debate is not over. It will continue this evening. If the hon. member wants to make representations, he can do so this evening. We have agreed to extend the debate this evening if there are members who want to address this issue.
Therefore, I do not see the need for a new debate, particularly since there have been no significant changes since yesterday in the conflict in Kosovo.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister just surprised his parliamentary leader, because there is no debate on Kosovo planned for this evening. If the issue is being dealt in such cavalier fashion, this is worrisome.
Our colleagues from the Reform Party would gladly agree to postpone their opposition day to hold a debate on sending ground troops into the Balkans if this is necessary, and particularly to vote on such a measure, instead of being put before a fait accompli.
Will the Prime Minister wake up and find out what is going on in the House?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, at this point, as the Minister of National Defence mentioned, the strategy approved by the 19 countries is the air bombing phase in Kosovo.
The only commitment made by Canada during the talks in Rambouillet is that we are prepared to send 600 Canadian troops to take part in the peacekeeping mission, if an agreement is reached to allow Kosovars to return to their homes in Kosovo.
This is not the time to discuss sending in troops, because this possibility is not being mentioned at any level in the discussions.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is bad enough that the EI overpayment will reach a whopping $26 billion this year, but even more disturbing is the fact that half of that amount will come from Canadians who earn less than the average wage.
I ask the finance minister, does it bother him that it is low income Canadians who really bear the brunt of his EI rip-off?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, obviously the single most important part of any government's policy is job creation.
If the hon. member will take a look, it is low income Canadians who have benefited from the fact that over 1.5 million jobs have been created since 1993, that over 500,000 jobs have been created in the course of the last year. Low income Canadians and high income Canadians are benefiting at the same time.
If the hon. member looks at the policies of the government, the policies of my colleague the Minister of Human Resources Development and the child tax benefit, those are directed to low income Canadians.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is nice to have a job. It is also nice to keep the income that one earns. The finance minister keeps taking more and more of it. It does not have to be this way. The finance minister knows very well that the chief actuary of the EI fund told him that premiums could go down by as much as a third, not the pennies that the finance minister grudgingly put back in the last budget.
Everyone but the finance minister agrees that relief in the EI overpayment is long overdue. How much longer will Canadians have to wait for EI tax fairness?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, $4 billion to $4.5 billion may be pennies to the Reform Party, but it happens to be real money to Canadians.
The real issue is if the Reform Party members are so concerned about low income Canadians, why did they vote against the child tax benefit? Why did they vote against the prenatal nutrition program? Why did they vote against CAPC? If they are sincere in what they are saying, why have they voted against every single legislative measure brought to this House to help low income Canadians?
Daniel Turp Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Speaker, this morning, Milosevic's Serb security forces crossed the Yugoslav border to continue their attacks on Albanian soil, even taking the village of Kemenica in the process.
My question is for the Prime Minister. In view of the possibility the conflict may spread into the region, does the Prime Minister not consider it essential now to raise this possibility with the UN security council?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, yesterday there was an important meeting of all the NATO ministers of foreign affairs.
We decided unequivocally to continue the air campaign against the Milosevic regime. This is the best way to fight the actions of Milosevic. I call on members to support this decision. It is vital to have the support of all Canadians and all members of this House.