Debates of Feb. 16th, 2000

Auditor General Act

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member for Québec has introduced an interesting bill aimed at putting into place under the auspices of the auditor general a poverty commissioner who would report directly to parliament annually.

The commissioner's task would be to analyze the causes and effects of poverty in Canada, to evaluate the effectiveness of federal measures to reduce poverty and to advise on measures that could be taken to reduce or eliminate poverty.

We should recognize that this function would not be at all in keeping with the mandate of the auditor general. For one thing, the task would confer an advocacy role on the office, which conflicts with the requirement for the auditor general to remain completely objective.

In fact, the Government of Canada has already in place what amounts to a de facto poverty commissioner. Some 30 years ago, in 1969, the federal government established the National Council of Welfare. Since then the council has published regular poverty profiles and further advises the Minister of Human Resources Development on matters of concern to low income Canadians. Unlike the proposed poverty commissioner, the National Council of Welfare enjoys and activates its advocacy role.

Let me assure the House, however, that the Government of Canada shares the hon. member's concerns for the poor. Much of the agenda of the government has been directed at creating the economic conditions and building a social safety net that protects all Canadians. The government has recognized from the beginning that an effective social safety net must be built on strong fiscal management and a sound economy. In the final analysis, the best way to reduce poverty is through a strong economy delivering opportunities to all Canadians.

In addition, the Government of Canada has been taking direct action to strengthen the social safety net and thus reduce poverty. The 1999 budget increased cash transfers for all provinces over the next five years, including $11.5 billion for health care and $5 billion in equalization payments. As well, $850 million was invested in the national child benefit in 1997. A subsequent $850 million in increases announced in 1998 by the federal government will provide substantial support to low income families with children. Moreover the government is committed to a third significant increase in July 2001.

Our employment programs help groups such as people with disabilities, youth, Canadians in areas of high unemployment and people who want to go back to school to get more skills. Aboriginal people have access to a number of programs, including help to increase their education. Centres are being created to reach out to street youth to provide support and counselling. The aboriginal human resource development strategy has a new urban component to focus on the unemployment of and training needs of aboriginal people in urban areas.

These initiatives and the issues they were designed to address serve to illustrate a point that is pertinent to the discussion of Bill C-203. We have to remember that poverty is a multi-jurisdictional issue. It is painted in many different colours across the country and varies over time.

Many initiatives of many governments impact on the issue of poverty. We must remember that the federal government does not hold all the levers of social policy. We share them with provincial and territorial governments. That is why a concerted co-operative effort of all the players is required to mount an effective campaign to reduce poverty across the nation.

The national child benefit is one example of a joint effort by the federal, provincial and territorial governments to support families and reduce child poverty. By July 2000 the federal government will have increased the Canada child tax benefit to $1.7 billion and, for their part, our partners in the provinces and territories are investing in complementary programs and services.

Yet another example of effective co-operation is the strategy that has been developed concerning Canadians with disabilities, an issue that is also related to poverty. All governments came together to release a document called “In Unison: A Canadian Approach to Disability Issues”. It establishes a blueprint for full citizenship for people with disabilities. It will focus long term policy development on three interrelated building blocks: disability support, employment and income.

I cite these initiatives to illustrate the point that in a multi-jurisdictional society like Canada poverty is an issue that must be dealt with through a partnership such as the social union. Poverty is a concern to all levels of government, as well it should be, but no one government acting alone can be expected to succeed in eliminating it.

I believe that the introduction of the bill has served a useful purpose in focusing the attention of the House, and we hope the Canadian public, on the subject of poverty. Let us hope it will serve to hurry the development of transjurisdictional policies and strategies to achieve our common goal of eliminating poverty across the country.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Madam Speaker, first of all, I wish to thank members who took part in the debate. It is a shame that we did not have more than one hour to discuss a problem as serious as poverty.

I will reply to the first question by the Reform Party member, who said that a poverty commissioner is no substitute for the assistance that the public should provide to the less fortunate.

I could not agree more that a poverty commissioner is no substitute for what each one of us should be doing to help those in need. However, a poverty commissioner is one means by which parliamentarians could keep tabs on what this government is doing.

I find most unfortunate the remarks of the Liberal member, who has rhymed off a long list of programs that have an impact on poverty. This is precisely the problem: we are not able to measure the full impact of all these measures. The HRDC scandal has made that abundantly clear. There were programs to help certain areas in various regions. We know how the money was spent and how effective the programs were.

I find the self-serving remarks by the Liberal Party member an even greater incentive to call for the creation of a position of poverty commissioner. The type of management under the Liberal government, the management of the Department of Human Resources Development, is not a recent development; it goes back some years. In 1987, a journalist wrote an article about this government's tax measures; in his view, those measure were catastrophic. So it is one failure after another. It is a massive machine, I agree. We should not be commenting on the track record over five years. This should be done every year for every measure. I think there has to be a better assessment of what should be done and what is being done.

I have heard from several national groups in Quebec and in Canada, who support the creation of a position of poverty commissioner. It was mentioned that such a resource does not exist. We talked about the Canadian Council on Social Development, which gives advice to the government, but the poverty commissioner would have much more authority and would have greater access to the government's management than any outside consultant.

While the figures provided by the CCSD are relevant, a poverty commissioner could ensure government effectiveness. He could give advice to the government and he could even hold public consultations to assess the situation.

I am very concerned. It may be that, ten years from now, I will no longer sit in the Canadian parliament. However, I am concerned about the fact that ten years ago we were deploring the way in which the government was managing public finances. This year, we have a scandal with Human Resources Development Canada, and we know that some communities are being excluded from these federal grants because things are done very much at random.

We could use the examples from Human Resources Development Canada and from the billion dollar gap created in 1983 by a few measures adopted by the then Liberal government.

This year, when we say we need more money and families can not make ends meet, it is precisely because there were not enough watchdogs to keep a eye on public finances. It is about time that parliamentarians decide to put their financial house in order and that the government's wealth is available to share around.

The problem is not that there is no money. What is important is how that money is spent and to what end. When policies are developed to prevent tax avoidance, when some companies which are are friends of the ruling party have better access to government grants, it is time to worry.

Unfortunately, I have used up all the time available to me to talk about such an important issue as increased poverty.

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired. Since the motion was not selected as a votable item, the item is dropped from the Order Paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Sarmite Bulte, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, epidermolysis bullosa or EB is a group of rare and debilitating genetic skin diseases in which the skin and mucous membranes are so sensitive that the slightest touch may cause painful blistering. EB is a lifelong disease often present at birth, which causes severe physical, emotional and financial hardships for the affected persons and their families.

There are two types of EB, non-scarring and scarring. The non-scarring type varies in form from the severity of seasonal blistering in the hands and feet to widespread blistering during much of the year. In some cases blisters appear over 75% of the body inside and out.

Even the mildest form can transform simple tasks such as walking and typing into impossible ordeals. Open sores and blisters that heal slowly if at all characterize the most severe form of EB. This continuous blistering leads to scarring causing disfigurement and immobilization of fingers, toes, arms and/or legs. Blisters that form in the mouth, oesophagus, throat and stomach cause serious complications leading to secondary infection, anemia and malnutrition, general debilitation, cancer and premature death.

When I think of EB I think of the courage displayed by those who suffer from EB. I think of the pain and frustration, the shame, the guilt and the toll it takes on one's self-esteem and self-confidence. I think of the parents of children such as the Foreman family whose son Quinn was diagnosed when he was five weeks old. Approximately 70% of his body was covered in blisters.

Through Mrs. Foreman's letters I have come to understand how their lives were turned upside down. Due to the lack of awareness by both the public and the medical profession, the diagnosis for Quinn was very slow in coming. For nearly five months Quinn was fed through a syringe because his mouth and throat were completely covered with blisters, but this child's suffering did not end there. He lost all his fingernails and toenails.

It seemed as though every time Quinn was picked up by one of his parents, he received a new blister. From then on the only time his parents picked him up was to feed or change him.

Mrs. Foreman describes the hardest part of this ordeal was having to break the blisters and bandage him up as if he were a burn victim. This process took approximately two hours every day.

When I think of EB and EB sufferers, I think of the almost total lack of services and support offered to those who live with this disease every day. I think of the measures taken by parents seeking a miracle which often involves going to the United States or abroad, where governments have invested in research into this illness and have attempted to treat its symptoms with procedures such as apligraf.

The parents of these infants are provided with little information, if any at all, about the disease at birth. A diagnosis is rarely arrived at easily.

When I think of EB, I think of my constituent Kevin Campbell. Both Kevin and his sister inherited this disease. Kevin is a perfect example of the hidden potential and ability that people with EB possess. If it were not for Kevin's initiatives to raise awareness of EB for all Canadians who suffer from it, there may not be the Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Research Association, more commonly known as Debra Canada. And I would not have joined this fight to raise awareness of EB in the House of Commons.

Living with EB means being engaged in a never ending battle to educate. My question is for the Minister of Health. What steps are being taken by his department to encourage and facilitate research and development into the cure and treatment of Canadians suffering from EB?

[Yvon Charbonneau, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, on behalf of the health minister, I would like to thank our hon. colleague from Parkdale High Park who raised the issue of epidermolysis bullosa with both sensitivity and competence.

As she pointed out, it is a rare genetic disease. It dramatically affects a number of our fellow Canadians. That is why the federal government is willing to help Canadians suffering from this disease and to improve the health of the whole Canadian population.

Through the Medical Research Council of Canada, the federal government is funding biomedical and clinical research expertise on skin diseases across Canada. The foundation of knowledge that these men and women are building will give the researchers of tomorrow the building blocks necessary to find cures on such conditions as EB.

To further its commitment to health research, the federal government proposed the creation of the Canadian institutes of health research.

Over the next few months, a number of health research institutes will be created and each institute will put in common the expertise of Canadian health searchers all across Canada. Just imagine for a moment how great it would be to bring your child, for example, to a hospital which would be linked to a Canadian Institute of Health Research. Then you would know that the physicians examining your child would be able to benefit from the expertise of searchers located anywhere in Canada and working in every field of health research.

Physicians linked to such an institute would have direct access to the most recent and relevant data, whether it be the latest developments in the area of biomedical research on that disease or other related diseases. That would be more reassuring than the current situation and your child's health would be in good hands.

Therefore I encourage our colleague to continue—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I am sorry, but I have to interrupt the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I rise tonight on behalf of Canadian consumers who, for months, have been paying high prices for gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil.

Those who are at home having dinner or on the road, as well as truck drivers who are working, wonder why the price at the pump of a litre of gas is so high. The only reason it is so high is because people do not know what the price would be if it were not for the federal, provincial and other hidden taxes.

Last Friday, I watched a program with Paul Larocque on TVA in Quebec City. On this program, Denis Dauray, from Les Pétrole Maurice, called for a real inquiry into the oil market in Quebec and Canada.

He is asking for concrete measures from the federal government and the Government of Quebec. This is what I am asking for tonight on behalf of consumers, of people who are at home tonight, of those who are in their truck working and of those who are driving to work.

I am demanding that the Government of Canada take concrete action in co-operation with provincial and territorial governments, towards the reduction of the federal excise tax, a uniform reduction of the road tax in Quebec and the restoring of a special monetary subsidy on the price of fuel oil for families that have used this product since December 1, 1999. It would be in force for four months.

It would be the same thing the President of the United States just gave several Eastern States. In Nova Scotia, steps have been taken in that direction.

My question for the industry minister is the following: Why can we not strike as soon as possible, in February or March, a real, public inquiry into petroleum markets? It must not be conducted behind closed doors, as all studies have.

What we are asking for, and the request comes from consumers, is a real public inquiry that will include—and we must not forget them this year—independent producers, in order to shed light on the production costs of a litre of gas, of a litre of diesel and of a litre of fuel oil.

We want concrete action because we want to know what is really going on in the Canadian petroleum industry, and we want to know as soon as possible. That is what consumers want.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for bringing the issue of increases in gasoline, diesel and home heating prices to the attention of the House.

Just last week following a question from the same member, the Minister of Industry asked the petroleum industry to meet with him so as to explain the reasons for recent diesel fuel price increases in particular.

The fact is that all members of the government are concerned about this issue since we all represent consumers.

The federal Competition Bureau must ensure that prices are determined by market forces and that the provisions of the Competition Act are respected. I can assure the hon. member that if the Competition Bureau finds that companies or individuals have engaged in anti-competitive conduct, it will not hesitate to take immediate and appropriate action under the Competition Act.

The fact is that no federal agency has the authority to directly regulate retail prices except in emergency situations. Consumers who may be asking the hon. member to have gas prices regulated should take their message to the provincial governments. Presently only Prince Edward Island and Quebec have elected to do so in some manner.

Finally, we must remember that there are also outside factors influencing the price of fuel. Such factors include cutbacks by OPEC in crude oil production, an increase in demand for heating fuels and low levels of stocks in industrialized countries.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Madam Speaker, on October 26, 1999, I warned the House and the Minister of Human Resources Development about the disastrous situation of seasonal workers.

Alain Boudreau, a young seasonal worker, is getting $50 a week in EI benefits because the method of calculation takes only his last 26 weeks of work into account. If the calculation were based on a year, Alain would receive $272 in benefits. This makes a world of difference for a young person starting out.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development answered this:

Mr. Speaker, we have to remember that EI is not an industry or a business. It is an income support program for those who qualify.

Mr. Beaudreau does qualify under the Employment Insurance Act, but he only gets $50 a week. The parliamentary secretary added:

Those who are eligible apply for it and receive benefits based upon the earnings they have been taking home from the jobs they have had.

If the calculation were based on a year, Alain Boudreau would get $272. For the government to believe that, when people qualify and get $50 in employment insurance benefits, it is an industry or a business is maddening. I wonder what is and industry or a business when the Minister of Human Resources Development gave away $300,000 of taxpayers money to relocate a company from Hamilton to Brant, in her own riding. That is an industry.

A company like Wal-Mart, which has millions and does not need money, was able to get $500,000 from the government to build a warehouse in Canada. Now, we very well know that this building would have been built here anyway and that Wal-Mart did not need money from the government.

How can the government say in this House that workers who have lost their jobs consider employment insurance as a business? They do not control jobs. They are not responsible for losing their jobs. Their employer is. Workers have no control over that.

Yet, the government rewards employers by giving them $300,000 here and $500,000 there. The Prime Minister sold one of his businesses in his riding to a friend who did not have the money to pay and who later got money from the government.

This employer bought the business from the Prime Minister, who later got his money. While such scandalous practices are going on in our country, the government refuses to help people like Alain Boudreau, who receives $50 a week, and who has been accused of seeing employment insurance as an industry.

This is unacceptable. This is why I ask the government, the minister and the parliamentary secretary to examine their conscience and consider changes to employment insurance—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but his time is up.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Human Resources Development]

Madam Speaker, let me begin by denying the allegation. No company was transferred from Hamilton to Brantford because of any HRDC programming. I also want to say that the company known as Wal-Mart received no HRDC funding. If the member would like to talk to me about that afterward, I will be happy to go into the details.

We are helping young Canadians like Alain Boudreau every day. Unlike the member opposite, we do not want to increase his EI benefits. Rather we want to encourage him to have the opportunity to access a good education and then a good job. That is precisely what we are doing.

We invest $155 million every year to help young people get on the job experience. As well we provide assistance and advice on how to enter the workforce. We offer various types of financial assistance so that young Canadians can have access to a good education and get a good job.

I remind the member that employment insurance is a temporary income support program for people who are between jobs. It has programs to help unemployed people return to work as quickly as possible.

It is not a needs based program. It is not like the social assistance programs run by the provinces. Rather, it is an insurance program. Those who are eligible apply for it and receive benefits based on the earnings they have been taking home from the jobs they have had.

EI is also about helping Canadians get back to work through a reinvestment of about $800 million in re-employment benefits. In addition, the Canada jobs fund was introduced to help create lasting jobs in high unemployment regions. We introduced an hours based system that addresses the special nature of seasonal work which often involves large numbers—

[The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)]

I regret to interrupt the hon. member but the time has expired.

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7 p.m.)