House of Commons Hansard #219 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was preclearance.
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I will be quite frank. I have seen some reports in the paper this morning, but I have not yet received the text of the ambassador's remarks.
Without saying that we are in favour of changing our existing arrangements with the United States, there are a lot of ideas out there. Even if we are not interested in changing our position, certainly these different ideas can be discussed at many different levels.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of the speech. Perhaps I could provide a copy of it to the Deputy Prime Minister.
The fact is that he did say “What about a customs union?” He is not just anybody having a chat in a coffee shop; he is the Canadian ambassador. I ask again, is that the position of the Canadian government?
He also referred to the economic value of our water resources. This is the ambassador of a country that is committed to a ban on the bulk export of water. That does not seem to jive. Is the government still committed to a ban on the bulk export of water? If it is, what could the ambassador have meant by talking about the economic value of Canada's water resources?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, our position on water resources has not changed. As the government House leader has just been saying to me, a bill on that subject will be tabled very shortly.
Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the Minister of Finance agreed yesterday to meet with the CEO of Newbridge Networks to discuss the possibility of tax relief for high tech workers in Canada.
The government must cut personal income tax rates to prevent top R and D workers from leaving Canada for opportunities south of the border. Taxes are too high, not only for Canadians involved in high tech, but for all Canadians.
Will the minister show leadership and commit to providing meaningful, broad based tax relief and tax reform to benefit all Canadians?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, surely the hon. member knows what the government is doing when it is reducing taxes, as it has done. I have already announced a $16.5 billion tax reduction. The government is repairing the terrible damage inflicted upon the Canadian economy by the government of the party of which he is now a member.
The fact is that the Tories increased taxes some 38 times when they were in office. Yes, as a result of that Canadian taxes are too high and, as a result of that, in the last budget and in the one before that we brought those taxes down and will continue to do so.
Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS
Mr. Speaker, the previous government also implemented free trade against the wishes of the Liberals and that has provided the engine for economic growth in Canada that has allowed the current government to reduce the deficit.
Nortel is losing about 400 employees per year to U.S. competitors, despite the minister's feel good speeches. Will the minister show leadership and convene a summit of all high tech CEOs in Canada to discuss the problems they are suffering as a result of the government's continued reticence to provide meaningful tax relief and tax reform to benefit all Canadians?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, I will meet with Mr. Matthews. I have met with leaders of the high tech industries across the country and I do so quite often.
I would be delighted to meet with them as a group. I know the Minister of Industry has met with them as well. We will continue to do so.
I have to say that for a Tory to complain about high taxes is like Mike Tyson complaining about somebody biting his ear.
Randy White Reform Langley—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, that is pretty good.
On Wednesday I asked the solicitor general about a dangerous prisoner who was given a bus ticket to be transferred from one prison to another, unescorted. I want to give the House and Canadians the response I got from the solicitor general's department on this issue.
Spokesman Jacques Bélanger said “most of them finish their trips”. Members can imagine what my question is. How many do not finish their trips?
Maybe the solicitor general will establish a lost and found for wayward prisoners so that we can get them back into the prisons of this country from their unescorted bus trips.
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we have a number of types of institutions in this country: maximum, medium, minimum and some halfway houses.
My hon. colleague is talking about an offender who had finished his term in minimum security and was going to a halfway house. As a few do, he did not do what he was supposed to do under the Conditional Release Act.
Randy White Reform Langley—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general has that right. He did not do what he was supposed to do. He was supposed to end up at the other prison on the bus.
Let us talk about Jean Paul Wright then. Jean Paul Wright was convicted for vicious attacks and beatings that left one man dead three years ago in Moncton. Let us talk about this fellow. He was put on a bus to go from one prison to another. Guess what? He was a no-show, AWOL, goner, out of sight.
I would like to ask the solicitor general about this fellow. Is he among the missing? Will he come back? Do we need—
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we have Correctional Service Canada and when a person serves a term or comes to the end of his or her term, or is released on conditional release, he or she has a number of conditions. Sometimes, very seldom, things do not work as Correctional Service Canada wants them to work.
Quite simply my hon. colleague needs to realize that when he brings up individual cases I do not know all offenders in this country. Possibly they are close friends of my hon. colleague, but I do not know them all.
Dangerous OffendersOral Question Period
The Speaker
I am not sure we want to go down those two roads.
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, in the matter of the millennium scholarships, the Minister of Human Resources Development, the one with the time to write books but no time to read his mail, has said for months he supports the Gautrin resolution. It is being offered to him again, and he again wants more time to think about it.
Will the minister stop hiding and playing a game of semantics and tell us today whether or not he agrees with the unanimous proposal by the leaders of the parties in the Quebec National Assembly to negotiate government to government to break this Ottawa-created impasse?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, I have never shirked my responsibilities, contrary to the allegations of the Bloc.
This matter is important to us. The Government of Canada decided to help students finance their studies. I think this is a vital step in a knowledge based economy. Everyone knows how vital education is to the future of our economy.
My remarks yesterday were very clear. I said the Government of Quebec's inflexibility seems to have softened. It seems now to have dropped the right to opt out with full compensation and to have opened up more promising avenues.
So we will be watching that with interest.
Pierre Brien Bloc Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister said he had not had the time to read the letter. So we will read him a passage from it, which says:
We propose to you that you identify a government negotiator to represent the federal government, one who is not associated with the Foundation.
Where does the minister see in the letter it stated that the federal negotiator cannot be an elected representative, such as himself, and why would he not agree to be this negotiator, as the president of the Fédération des étudiants universitaires du Québec asked him yesterday?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, first, contrary to what the hon. member is alleging, I never said I did not have time to read the letter. Quite the opposite. They are once again trying to exaggerate. I never said I did not have the time to read the letter. I said it came yesterday, in the evening.
I am an avid reader, easily able to read a letter of a page and a quarter in the space of an evening. I promise you that.
I had read the letter. I never said I had never read it. What I did say is that, unlike the Bloc members, we have government responsibilities and we must take time to think things over, unlike those who take pleasure in systematically opposing.
John Reynolds Reform West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the solicitor general. We do not expect the solicitor general to know every prisoner in Canada but we know he can set policy.
With summer coming and a lot of parents sending their young children on buses because of its cost effectiveness, will the solicitor general assure the House that his department will inform the bus companies and other people when prisoners are travelling on a bus so the safety of all Canadians is protected?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, what my hon. colleague refers to is totally unacceptable and I can assure him that it is under review.
John Reynolds Reform West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC
Mr. Speaker, parents have a right to know if their children are seated next to an unescorted prisoner. Their safety should be of the utmost concern to all of us.
Will the minister assure the House and commit today to notifying bus companies and passengers of the existence of criminals travelling by bus?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to my hon. colleague before, the matter is fully under review.
Pierrette Venne Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Mr. Speaker, since it is the Minister of Finance who, behind the scene, calls the shots in this government and who, after siphoning $20 billion off from the employment insurance fund, is about to get his hands on the $30 billion surplus in the federal public service pension fund, will he at least agree to appear before the committee reviewing Bill C-78, to explain his decisions?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, the committee invited its own witnesses. This is up to the committee.
As for the $30 billion surplus, again, the rights of public servants are not only fully respected, but their benefits are guaranteed under the law. The legislation currently before parliament even increases these benefits.
With regard to the surpluses, public servants are getting all the benefits for which they made contributions. Since the risks are fully assumed by the taxpayers, the money should belong to them.
Pierrette Venne Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government is trying to unilaterally appropriate a $30 billion surplus, without any regard for active and retired public servants.
Will the minister finally admit that no provision in the existing act allows him to claim that he is the sole owner of that $30 billion surplus, and that nothing in the act allows him to use that money as he pleases?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, again, the act is very clear. The issue went all the way to the supreme court. Taxpayers, through the government, are the sole owners of the surplus. Public servants will receive all the benefits that they were promised under the act. They will even get additional benefits under the proposed legislation.
It is the taxpayers who must get the surplus that they paid for.