Debates of March 28th, 2000

Human Resources Development

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, in one of the Baluchon files and in other files as well, the Economic Development Agency of Canada intervened to help develop la Mauricie region.

As we know, this region has extraordinary potential for development as a tourist site. What we are doing is developing its capacity to attract tourists internationally.

On this side, based on our Liberal values and on our desire to help in regional economic development, we will continue to intervene not only in the Mauricie region but throughout the Province of Quebec.

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, what is extraordinary is that the Prime Minister's riding seems to be a bottomless pit for money. Every time we turn around we uncover another file that the Prime Minister has interfered with. Audit after audit complains about too much flexibility and too many broken rules.

Is it not true that this flexibility is deliberately designed to allow these kinds of Shawinigan shenanigans?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, the extraordinary thing here is having a party that would have eliminated all regional development agencies criticizing our intervention in regional economic development. It is shameful.

We are acting as a responsible government. Our priority is to create jobs. So long as we have regional development agencies, we will continue to intervene in all regions.

I hope that in the next election campaign, people throughout Canada will remind them that a government is there as well to help the people as a whole.

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

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with clause 10.1 of the contracts between Human Resources Development Canada and the recipients of funding:

The following constitute a breach of contract by the recipient: the recipient becomes bankrupt or insolvent, the recipient is in receivership or invokes any legislation in force at a given time relating to bankruptcies.

How could the minister authorize the payment of a grant of $1.2 million to Placeteco, in violation of the terms of her own department's contract, when Placeteco was under the protection of the Bankruptcy Act?

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

Again, Mr. Speaker, we have responded to issues on this file on a number of occasions. It has been clear that at the senior level of officials in my department this project has been reviewed. The invoices that we received clearly supported the transitional jobs fund program.

From our point of view, what was important was to make sure that the 170 people who are working in these two projects now continue to work. I cannot expect or believe that the hon. member opposite would rather have them out on the street looking for work.

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all, Placeteco lost jobs, it did not gain jobs.

The matter is a very simple one. Funding cannot be given to a company which is under the protection of the Bankruptcy Act, in accordance with clause 10.1 of her own contract.

How could the minister violate the terms of her department's own contract by creating a trust, against the advice of Treasury Board? That is what I would like her response on, and I would like her to stop using the workers as a camouflage of the illegal acts that may have taken place in her department.

[The Speaker]

Once again, I remind hon. members that care must be taken about words such as illegal acts.

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

Mr. Speaker, I only want to reiterate that it has been very clear not only to this side of the House but to people like Bernard Landry, like the Government of Quebec, like the PQ member Claude Pinard, that investments in that part of Quebec are very important ones.

In the context of this undertaking, officials have reviewed the file and found that there was no overpayment created. Again I repeat that while the numbers of employment have been up and down, today there are 170 people working and that—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, neither Bernard Landry nor anyone else from the Government of Quebec ever signed that contract. It is Human Resources Development Canada that signed a contract with Globax, a contract which led to the $1.2 million grant to Placeteco.

Why did the minister give the grant to Placeteco, considering that the contract clearly provides, in clause 10.1, that she cannot and must not do so?

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

Mr. Speaker, from our point of view again what is important is that we give people opportunities to work. I would like to quote from a recent article in La Presse :

This article says:

Since 1994, the image of La Mauricie has changed. The tourist industry has been developed and we have succeeded in changing people's defeatist attitude.

This was said by Claude Pinard, the PQ MNA for the riding.

He is no friend of this government but certainly he is a man who understands that investments in la Mauricie are important and that they are making a difference.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is simple: What is the use of the minister's signature if she herself does not respect it when she gives grants?

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

Mr. Speaker, everybody is advising me to clarify that Mr. Pinard is not a Bloquiste but a Péquiste. That allows me to make the point again that in these undertakings the Government of Canada is not alone, that it is together with the Government of Quebec which appreciates these investments. Individual members provincially appreciate these investments. It is absolutely clear that the people of la Mauricie appreciate the investments because they are working.

Health Care

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

We have built our health care system on the principle, on the dream that health care would be there for Canadians when they need it regardless of their financial circumstances and regardless of where they happen to live. Canadians are rallying here on Parliament Hill behind that dream because the federal government has walked away from the health care partnership, has failed to enforce the Canada Health Act and has actively encouraged privatization.

When and why did the federal government give up on the dream of a universal, not for profit, public health care system?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member were to be objective she would recognize that the only government that ever took money away from the provincial governments because they were not respecting the five conditions of medicare was the government of today.

I said very clearly to Premier Klein that he has to respect the five conditions of medicare. He told me that he wants to respect them. Good for him. But if he does not respect them, he will be revisited the same way he was visited a few years ago.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the premier of Alberta is not respecting the five principles of medicare now and he is not being penalized.

How can the Prime Minister pretend that the universal, not for profit, public health care system is healthy? Tell that to patients who are forced to pay $4,000 for routine eye surgery. Tell that to patients who are paying $400 an hour to get access to operating rooms for essential surgery.

Is that the government's idea of a public, not for profit, universal health care system?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the government has already demonstrated its commitment to the Canada Health Act. We know that private, for profit delivery of services is not the way to go. It does not help with waiting lists. It does not help control costs. It does not provide equal access. We do now and we will always stand for the principles of the Canada Health Act.

Canada Lands

[Gilles Bernier, Progressive Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, in November 1997 Canada Lands sold 30 acres of prime industrial real estate to John di Poce for $1.7 million. Thirty days later Mr. di Poce resold the same land for $5 million. That is 184% profit.

Does the Minister of Public Works and Government Services believe that this deal was a good deal for Canadian taxpayers?

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, this property was on the market for resale for 18 months and Canada Lands did not get any offers.

It put it for sale again and had an offer. I have been told that it was a normal transaction. A few months later someone came with a better offer and it was sold. For 18 months this property was for sale and we did not have anyone to buy it.

[Gilles Bernier, Progressive Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think they looked too hard for 18 months. The average selling price for industrial land in north Brampton in 1997 was $225,000 an acre, but the Liberal government decided to dump 30 acres of land across the street from the Chrysler Corporation for only $58,000 an acre. My question for the minister is why.

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, first, I do not think the hon. member has the dates right. I think he should also call his friend, this gentleman who was involved in this piece of land, who strangely enough is very supportive of the Conservative Party. If he has anything to ask, maybe he should call the Harris people.

Human Resources Development

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when the government has to kick in over 50% of the funding for a business deal and government officials question the viability of that deal, taxpayers are put at risk. In the case of the PM's brewery, over $1.25 million of the $2.1 million spent on this project was public money.

Why should taxpayer money be risked on a project that the private sector would not touch with a 10 foot pole?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, I think the problem here is not what we are doing. The problem is that they know very well that, since 1993, the Reform Party—I cannot keep track of what they are called, they have changed names so often—or the new party would never have taken into account all regions of Quebec and of Canada.

I am proud to say that since 1993 this Liberal government has built links with all regions of Quebec and of Canada. We have created some wonderful partnerships. We will continue to do so and, during the next campaign, all Canadians will remember the great job we have done.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, with beer and bringing home the bacon, I am sure Bob and Doug McKenzie are firmly on side. This is yet another example of a boondoggle in the Prime Minister's riding.

Why does this government, this minister and the Prime Minister continue to hose taxpayers with their own money?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, what we are now doing, not just in the riding of Saint-Maurice but throughout Quebec, is making smart investments, investments that will further the cause of all regions.

But first, what is needed—