Debates of March 22nd, 2000

Human Resources Development

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, it is not for me to comment on the transaction of a particular business outside the relationship that we have with the transitional jobs fund.

What I can say, as I have said on a number of occasions, is that the invoices that we received from the company for salaries and supplies were appropriate under the conditions of the transitional jobs fund program. They were of a value that was equivalent to the moneys that were allowed.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I would invite hon. members to please stop yelling at one another when the question is being asked or when the answer is being given. The hon. member for Roberval.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answers on the two previous cases are disconcerting. Lots of people are watching us. We have the proof here in front of us that, out of the $1.2 million, $1,061,000 was used to pay the National Bank. The minister tells us it was used to pay invoices.

What I am asking her is to tell us the truth. What invoices were paid with this money? Did the money get paid to the bank, yes or no, as the agreement I have just disclosed states? That is what we want to know. We want to know the truth. Where did the taxpayers' money go? That is what we want to know.

[The Speaker]

When a member from any side speaks to the House, the truth is what we are going to get. This must never be challenged.

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, despite the hon. member's huffing and puffing, the answer remains the same. After reviewing the circumstances with the sponsor, we received invoices for salaries and for overheads that were equivalent to the amounts of money that were invested through the transitional jobs fund.

Export Development Corporation

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in typical Liberal fashion, the international trade minister only told us half the story about EDC loans.

In the last six years taxpayers have had to reach into their wallets and bail out just one arm of EDC to the tune of $640 million. That is how much money EDC has lost in bad loans to foreign countries, loans that were made so that foreign countries would buy products from some of Canada's biggest and most profitable corporations.

Why does the government think that Main Street should have to bail out Bay Street?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I know the Reform Party does not like good news, but I will begin by informing the House that Statistics Canada reported yesterday that our January exports exceeded $33 billion and up 2% just last month. This is more proof that Canada is a country largely dependent on trade and that EDC is an essential tool for our Canadian exporters.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that has more to do with the Canadian peso than anything.

If we give someone a loan but there is no interest paid on it and there is no requirement to pay it back, is it really a loan or is it just a giveaway of taxpayer money? Six hundred and forty million dollars was written off in bad EDC loans and who had to pay for it? The working people of Canada.

Is it not true that anyone could make a profit if they could shuffle their losses off to the taxpaying public just like EDC does?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, EDC has made more than $500 million over the last five years in terms of profit. It is helping Canadian companies to do very well on international markets. Indeed, the EDC works with two accounts. It has a corporate account with 98% of the transactions that describe exactly that.

The member keeps coming back to the Canada account which represents less than 2% and is there to help Canadian exporters on distorted markets. It respects every OECD rule and every OECD country has similar tools.

Human Resources Development

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, at the standing committee on human resources development, Mel Cappe, who was appointed to the highest position in Canada's public service by the Prime Minister, said in answer to questions from the opposition that the internal audit reports for 1991, 1994 and 1997 cannot be released because they have not yet been translated.

Are we to understand that the highest public servant in the country is using the Official Languages Act to hide the administrative mess for which he is responsible?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

No, Mr. Speaker. I understand the translation will be completed shortly and the documents will be available soon.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the minister find it normal that reports that are nine, six and three years old have yet to be translated?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, they are being translated and they will be made available as soon as possible.

Export Development Corporation

[Deepak Obhrai, Reform, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, from 1977 to 1984 the EDC provided specific information on its transactions listing the borrowing bank, the product, the Canadian exporter and the amount. In those years Canadians could track EDC loans for individual projects. Today none of this information is available to parliament or to Canadians. Why the secrecy?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, on any EDC transaction all parties involved have to agree to release any information on the terms. It is a matter of commercial confidentiality.

Would the member appreciate it if his banker revealed what was in his bank account or if Revenue Canada shared information? The permission of the parties, both the seller and the purchaser of the goods, is needed in order to release information.

[Deepak Obhrai, Reform, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, let me give the minister an example of information found in an 1983 statistic review of the EDC: Country: Egypt; Borrower: Emac International; Products financed: aluminum form work and shoring equipment; Principal exporter: Aluma Systems Incorporated; Amount: $458,000.

If this information was available in 1983, why the secrecy now?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, on both the accounts we have described—I understand they do not want to understand because this is such good news—the EDC is trying to provide a level playing field for Canadian exporters on distorted markets, which every other country is doing. We on this side of the House want to promote the national and commercial interests of Canadians. We want to create jobs and export Canadian technologies around the world. We will continue to do so.

Cinar

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the serious allegations against Micheline Charest in the CINAR case are well known.

We also know that, in the past, she presided a fundraising dinner for the Liberal Party of Canada.

My question is for the Prime Minister. In light of these facts, does he not agree that common decency requires him to ignore his buddies and demand that Micheline Charest withdraw from the board of directors of the Millennium Scholarship Foundation?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I already said many times that the member is making allegations that weigh very heavily on the whole industry.

If he wants to make allegations, he should go to the RCMP, as we have suggested to him at least ten times.

National Defence

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.

One of the most disturbing security issues facing the world today is the plight of war affected children. According to the UN, over 300,000 young girls and boys are taking part in armed conflicts as soldiers.

How will Canada now strengthen its position to help with this international issue of children in armed conflict?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Senate a bill was introduced as an amendment to the National Defence Act, which entrenches, in law, a practice that we have carried out for a number of years, and that is that no one under the age of 18 can be deployed to an area of hostilities in the name of the Canadian forces.

That helps to set a good, strong example of leadership for Canada to participate with other countries at the UN in dealing with the problem of war affected children. I am pleased to be working with my colleague in Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation to reduce the plight against war affected children.

Export Development Corporation

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. company Amtrak has been losing billions of dollars for many years. What happens? This government takes a billion dollars of taxpayer money and loans it secretly to this company.

My question is very simple. Why is this government lending billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars to a failed U.S. company?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I should perhaps repeat this answer in French, because Reformers seem not to understand their own language.

The Export Development Corporation does not give grants. The Export Development Corporation does not use taxpayers' money. It funds grants from its own budget, from its own funds, and its transactions are strictly commercial.

[Keith Martin, Reform, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is an issue of using Canadian taxpayer money wisely. Canadians who have cancer are waiting more than 14 weeks for the treatment they require because we do not have the money.

My question is simple. Why is the government lending taxpayer money to a failed U.S. company, a company that the U.S. government would not touch with a 10 foot pole, instead of spending it here in Canada for Canadians?