Debates of April 3rd, 2000

Health

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we know tax points are not for the federal government to give. In 1993 the government put in $18.8 billion. It then went down to $12.5 billion. Now it is back up to $14.4 billion. That kind of math is this government's track record.

He cut $25 billion out of health care, which is responsible for huge waiting lines, and he encourages health care workers to leave Canada, yet he will not meet with the premiers.

If he is so concerned about health care, why did he give another $3 billion for grants to the bungler over there at HRDC?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. My colleagues, I remind you to please call each other by your titles rather than using names.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the transfer payments are not only for health. They are for universities and for the welfare of the provinces.

The reality is that the government has not only re-established the level of 1993-94, we have re-established the level of 1994-95. This is the only government program where the money has been more than re-established. Because we have made cuts, the provinces have benefited a lot. For example, hundreds of millions of dollars have gone to every province because they pay less money to the interest on their debts.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's platitudes may console his colleagues but they do little for the families waiting for heart surgery.

This government's track record is why thousands of Canadians have waited months for elective surgery. For every year that this government has been in power, it has chosen to increase the spending for grants and contributions rather than health care. Every single year the government's choice of treating cancer patients on one hand or buying votes on the other is what it is always talking about.

Why does the government choose giving cash to its friends rather than giving health care to Canadians?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to congratulate the hon. member for becoming the health critic of the Canadian Alliance. That happened some months ago but today is the first day that the member has asked me a question about health.

While members opposite have been off playing politics, we have been worrying and working toward a better health care system for all Canadians. I think I suspect why this member has been reluctant to raise the issue of health. He is afraid we might quote the Canadian Alliance Party to itself, like quoting the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, who said that two tiered health—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Red Deer.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that the numbers do not lie and the numbers are there in black and white. The government has cut $25 billion from health care since 1993. Every single year it has chosen to raise the grants and contributions rather than health care.

The question is very, very simple: Why does the government choose grants rather than health care?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, there is a gulf between that party and this government. This government believes in the Canada Health Act and that party believes in American style private-for-profit medicine.

The hon. member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca said “A two-tiered health care system will strengthen the public system, not erode it. This can occur if, within a private system, only private funds are exchanged and no public money is used”. He went on to say that the solution to increased resources was to allow for private health care services. They are out of touch. Never.

Human Resources Development

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

Mr. Speaker, whenever we ask the Minister of Human Resources Development about Placeteco, she justifies the $1.2 million grant by referring to Techni-Paint.

However, in the secret contract signed by the National Bank, Claude Gauthier and Mr. Giguère, clause 6.1.2 provides that Techni-Paint waives any rights to the grant, up to an amount of $1.11 million.

How can the minister base her statements on Techni-Paint when a clause proves beyond any doubt that the grant went exclusively to Placeteco?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to talk about Placeteco because the Placeteco story is good news for Quebec. Just recently it signed a five year contract worth $8 million with a major aeronautical company, Bell Helicopter. There are 78 people working at Placeteco with a bright future.

Does this party want us to dissuade fine companies like Bell Helicopter from investing in the regions of Quebec? If so, it should say so. This story is good news for Quebec and its workers, and members opposite are trying to nitpick and find fault.

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

Mr. Speaker, it takes some nerve to say what the parliamentary secretary just said, since we know that a $1.2 million grant was paid and that there were 81 jobs at the time. Since then—as the parliamentary secretary just said—the number of jobs went down to 78. The government invested $1.2 million to eliminate three jobs.

Can the parliamentary secretary explain the brilliant logic whereby a $1.2 million grant led to the loss of three jobs? These are her own figures, the figures she just mentioned in the reply suggested to her by her department.

She finally gave us the numbers mentioned in the documents of the Department of Human Resources Development: a loss of three jobs after a $1.2 million grant. That takes the cake.

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

Mr. Speaker, when the grant was approved there were 64 people working at Placeteco. The company had some problems and faced bankruptcy. We decided to stick with the company and not abandon those workers, as this party would have done.

Therefore, we have a vibrant company with 78 people working and, as my math tells me, that is 14 more jobs.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, section 7.2 of the Treasury Board rules governing grants, which relates to transfer payments, states that managers must make an effort to avoid making payments in advance, by instead making payments on account to reimburse recipients for expenditures that have actually been incurred.

My question is for the President of Treasury Board. By paying out over $1 million in order to create 42 jobs, only one of which was created, has the Minister of Human Resources Development not been in serious contravention to Treasury Board's rules?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, herself tabled an internal audit report by her department indicating that there were problems relating to financial administration and practices within her department. She subsequently also tabled an action plan specifically to remedy this and to ensure that these practices would conform to Treasury Board policies.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the reply by the President of the Treasury Board.

I would now like to ask the following: Admitting that the minister noticed an error within her department and that the payment was made without any jobs being created, why then, as allowed by the contract, and as the Prime Minister has announced, has Placeteco not been asked to pay back the money, since it did not use it for the intended purpose?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have already stated that a review of this file showed that no overpayment could be established. We have invoices from the company showing where the money was spent. Everything was above-board.

Health

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

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

On the weekend the provinces were chided by the feds for putting tax cuts ahead of health care. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. It was the federal budget that allocated two cents for health care in cash transfers for every one dollar in tax cuts.

Before the health ministers' meeting, the Prime Minister acknowledged the need for more money for health care. Why has the Prime Minister refused an early first ministers' conference and why has he backed away from his commitment to put more dollars into health care?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I want to repeat what I have said many times in the House. The CHST transfers to the provinces in 1993-94, including medicare, were $28.9 billion. The total transfer for the year 2000-01 will be $30.8 billion. That is $2 billion more than what we gave them when we formed the government. This excludes the transfer of money that was given to the poorest provinces through the equalization payments, plus what we have done for Ontario and Alberta on the—

[The Speaker]

The hon. leader of the New Democratic Party.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty clear that the Prime Minister has refused an early first ministers' meeting. It is also clear that there will not be more money for health care until there is a meeting. Otherwise, how is the Prime Minister to do his kiss the ring routine that he has come to love so much?

When the need for urgent action on health care is so obvious, why is the focus on what is good for the Prime Minister and his election, instead of what is best for Canadians and medicare?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, one thing that is very useful is the ineptitude of the NDP. It will help us in the next election.

Last year the CHST transfers amounted to $29.3 billion. This year, 2000-01, it is $30.8 billion. This is an increase of $1.5 billion just in this fiscal year.

Crown Corporations

[André Bachand, Progressive Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on the subject of money, a number of heads of crown corporations have received very generous raises and/or performance bonuses.

For example, the president of Via Rail got $30,000. In the case of Canada Post—we all know who is the president there—the figure was $37,000 in salary increases plus a bonus of $80,000.

Could the Prime Minister explain why these amounts were handed out, when health care needs it so much?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, it is perfectly normal in our system at the moment for us to compare the salary of senior executives, and especially the senior executives of crown corporations, with similar salaries in the private sector.

We have established a new system by which they receive a basic salary and a risk or performance bonus. The boards of directors of each of the crown corporations recommend salary increases to the government.

It seems to me a system that is appropriate for crown corporations.