Debates of May 11th, 1999

Supreme Court Of Canada

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister carries out with the cabinet this appointment process, not only has it resulted, as it will in the future, in an outstanding supreme court, but the Prime Minister and his cabinet are accountable to this House for the decisions. Through this House the Prime Minister and his cabinet are accountable to the Canadian people. The Canadian people will have their say and I am sure they will support the decisions that the Prime Minister makes in this important matter.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister fails to consult this House on the most important judicial and administrative appointments. He signs treaties, even commits Canada to involvement in a war with neither a vote nor a mandate from this House. He does nothing to prevent appointed judges from short circuiting this elected assembly through rewriting the law rather than just interpreting it.

Why does the government not seize this opportunity to show some real confidence in the House and insist that the Prime Minister consult the House prior to any judicial appointment?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has just called for political interference with the work of the judiciary. I do not think that this is what the House wants. I do not think this is what Canadians want.

There is no reason to link this with the matter of the situation in Serbia and Kosovo. In that situation there has been and there will continue to be consultations with this House.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the government is refusing to hear the concerns of Canadians on this issue. The courts across the country are increasingly isolated from the people they judge. Hand picked ministerial appointments are eroding Canadians' faith in the justice system.

Will the justice minister continue to lock Canadians out of this process? Or will she take the first steps toward rebuilding confidence in the justice system and allow the next supreme court nominee to come before this parliament?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Let me say first of all, Mr. Speaker, that the appointment process that has been used in this country for the appointment of supreme court judges has led to the creation of the most respected final court of appeal anywhere in the world.

Let me also say, since our hon. friends across the way are so busy trashing federal institutions, that in the same poll they referred to, Canadians overwhelmingly voiced their confidence in the Supreme Court of Canada as the final appellate court in this country.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks about consultation. I want to ask her, did Canadians have an opportunity to be consulted on child pornography, on aboriginal land claims, on redefining the family? The list goes on and on and the answer is no.

These issues are too important to shut out Canadians. We should be able to see, learn and evaluate the supreme court candidates, before his or her appointment is a fait accompli. It is a closed shop today.

Will the minister open the door to public scrutiny and allow parliament to assess the nominees? Yes or no?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the last time I checked it was the Parliament of Canada that voted on the sections of the Criminal Code dealing with child pornography. This parliament will have the opportunity to debate and vote on the Nisga'a treaty.

Far from the public being excluded, I would hope the hon. members would do their business and in fact come to this House and debate in good faith those important proposed laws.

Transport

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the reform the Minister of Transport intends with Bill C-77 is causing great concern in all regions of Quebec.

The deregulation of interprovincial bus transportation will cause chaos in the regions of Quebec, because it will subject bus lines to the implacable law of the market.

Does the minister realize that his deregulation bill tolls the knell of bus transportation in all regions of Quebec?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the government has followed a process for three years. The result is the bill currently before the House of Commons for debate.

It is up to the hon. member and his colleagues to bring this up in debate. We will accept whatever consensus is reached in the House.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, one way of raising the issue is to ask questions and have the minister respond.

If he has travelled in Quebec, he should realize that the president of Orléans Express, one of the main bus companies in Quebec, has said that the federal bill could deprive some 100 municipalities in Quebec of intercity transport.

Would the minister explain, for example, how a circuit such as the one in the Gaspé, which loses up to $1 million annually, could operate without link cross-subsidization? Does he realize that he is signing the death warrant of bus transportation in Quebec?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, this bill is the result of a process that has gone on for three or four years. It follows a general consensus among the provincial and federal governments to move toward freer movement of goods and people within Canada.

There have been consultations with all the provinces. It is true that there are some concerns on the part of various members of the transportation sector in the province of Quebec, as there are in British Columbia. On the other hand, other provinces such as Ontario are completely opposed to the position as outlined by the leader of the Bloc.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to the newspaper Les Affaires , over half of the passengers using intercity buses do not have access to a car, one third are seniors or students, and one quarter are living below the poverty line.

Will the Minister of Transport admit that, by putting an end to the cross subsidizing of routes and by letting companies drop routes that are not profitable, he is hitting the poor and the vulnerable very hard?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raised a point of view, an opinion.

There are arguments against the hon. member's opinion. We agreed to discussions with the provinces. On Thursday evening, I will meet with my Quebec counterpart. A federal-provincial conference will take place this weekend, and this issue will be discussed.

There will also be a debate in the House of Commons on the bill. I hope the hon. member will put forth his arguments at that time.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I call upon the Minister of Transport on behalf of the regions and of those who need an adequate bus service.

Does the minister not realize that he must respond immediately to the concerns raised by Bill C-77 by unconditionally withdrawing it?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member says that the Bloc Quebecois supports the development of adequate service.

We, on this side, want superior service. This is why we are proposing amendments to the legislation. I hope we will have a major debate in the House on this issue, as we should under our parliamentary process.

Immigration

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, on the weekend I had the privilege of meeting with Kosovar refugee families who have come to Nova Scotia. I was struck by their immense gratitude for Canadians' generosity. The Prime Minister today is meeting with refugee families in Borden and no doubt he will hear the same sentiments.

Will the Prime Minister use the opportunity today to announce the elimination of the odious $1,000 refugee head tax? Will he assure the refugees that if they choose to stay they will not have to pay?

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, the refugees are here on a minister's permit. Their intent is to return to Kosovo.

I can tell the hon. member if and when they decide to stay, then it becomes an issue we will have to answer. Most new Canadians coming to the country want to contribute and help pay their way. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker—

[The Speaker]

The hon. leader of the New Democratic Party.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, these are homeless, penniless, persecuted people. They have lost everything that they had. They are highly vulnerable.

Why would Canada want to be the only country among developed nations that views refugees as a revenue source? Why not eliminate the head tax for Kosovars and for all other refugees trying to rebuild their lives?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, first I think we should reject the use of the words head tax. This fee is not intended to be a tax. It is intended to cover costs of processing applications. Furthermore, as the parliamentary secretary said, as and when the refugees apply to stay here permanently this is a matter which will be given further consideration. I can assure the House of that.

Taxation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today is tax freedom day in the United States, that day every year when taxpayers get to stop sending their paycheques to government and start keeping them for themselves. Canada's tax freedom day will not be for another month and a half, almost into the summer.

Canadians are paying more taxes than they have ever paid before. The finance minister is sitting on the biggest bag of cash that any government has ever sat on before. It is taxpayers' money.

When will he give that money back to the taxpayers? Why can we not have tax freedom day today in Canada?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it may well be that the discussions of the united alternative are going better now that the Tory party is allowing the Reform to ask its questions.

As the hon. member knows, we have cut taxes substantially. That is not the difference of opinion between ourselves and Reform. The difference of opinion is that we want to protect health care and education. The real question is, why is the Reform Party prepared to sacrifice health care in order to pay for upper income tax cuts?

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Health care and education. What a joke, Mr. Speaker. The real reason we have taxes galore in Canada is that the government funds garbage like Bubbles Galore .

Canadians are paying the highest taxes in Canadian history. The minister is sitting on the biggest surplus in Canadian history. Never has a minister taken in as much money as this minister right out of taxpayers' pockets. When will he give that money back to the people he took it from?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first, health care and education are not a joke. They are part of the social fabric of the country. That is one of the fundamental differences between ourselves and Reform. Second, we are generating surpluses. Think what a difference—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.