House of Commons Hansard #87 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-31.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about all the programs and we wonder if the council is not to be audited in connection with all the money accorded it by the government because a few Liberal buddies are benefiting.
If they really want some programs examined, will Option Canada be one of them? It would be interesting, as about $4.8 million has disappeared to date.
Mauril Bélanger LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, the people who benefit from the programs managed by the Council on Canadian Unity are the young people of Canada, primarily.
There is the Canada student exchange program in which 89 MPs took part. All political parties were represented there. Over 50,000 young Canadians participated in the programs of Encounters with Canada, and there was an Experience Canada program, which will be interrupted between now and the fall.
Those are the programs and the young people are the ones who benefited from them.
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC
Mr. Speaker, this morning a spokesperson for Heritage Canada was quoted in a newspaper report as saying that her minister was waiting for the Council for Canadian Unity's programs to be running smoothly before any audit of its financial activities.
Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage acknowledge that the Council for Canadian Unity, which was founded in 1964, has had ample time to get its programs in working order and that it is high time they were audited?
Mauril Bélanger LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, we have already answered that question. The programs I mentioned will be audited. These are the programs administered by the Council for Canadian Unity to which the Government of Canada contributes, for the benefit of the young people of Canada and the future of Canada.
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC
Mr. Speaker, may I remind the hon. parliamentary secretary that, in 1997, the director general responsible for departmental audits at Heritage Canada reported that, as far as Option Canada was concerned, 20 of the 22 criteria required by the standard procedures for obtaining grants had not been met, nor had even the Treasury Board requirements for the payment of grants.
Above and beyond what the parliamentary secretary may say, can we expect the government to commit to finally administering public funds properly and to finally putting an end to doing favours for its friends?
Mauril Bélanger LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage
Mr. Speaker, the friends to which the hon. member refers are the 89 members of this House who last summer were involved in the Interchange Canada program, which benefited over 700 young Canadians.
Every year 3,000 students, totalling over 52,000 to date, have benefited from the Encounters with Canada program.
That is who the government's friends were: young Canadians who benefit from such programs.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
Unfortunately, over the last week's recess in Alberta the premier of Alberta has not had a change of mind and bill 11 is set to go forward. When I last asked the minister about this he said that the government was studying the implications for NAFTA.
Can the minister report on what is the federal government's judgment with respect to the NAFTA implications of bill 11? What is it going to do about it? Time is even more of the essence. Will the minister be going to Edmonton tonight to the rally sponsored by the Friends of Medicare to indicate what the government intends to do to stop Premier Klein from putting medicare for all Canadians at risk through NAFTA?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, we raised NAFTA concerns in our initial reaction to the Alberta government's proposal back in November. Since that time, various legal opinions have been received.
We have raised more than NAFTA concerns. We have expressed the view that this is bad policy and it will not solve the problems that Mr. Klein thinks it will. We have asked him to make specific changes in the legislation now before his legislature.
We are watching with interest as the public of Alberta expresses their own displeasure at this legislation. We will see whether the legislature actually adopts the bill, and in what form, in the days ahead.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, the time has passed for watching with interest. The time has come for action on the part of the minister. Will he go to Edmonton tonight to join the leader of the NDP? If it is a matter of money, we have a ticket here bought and paid for—
HealthOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. The hon. member knows better than to use props. If the hon. minister wishes to respond I will permit him.
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, I went to Calgary a few weeks ago and expressed in some detail the reasons why this government thinks bill 11 is not in the public interest and expressed the concerns we have with the bill. Since then I have given detailed requests to the minister that the bill be amended to accommodate the real concerns we have.
The bill is before the legislature. There are amendments before that body and the debate continues. We do not yet know the final form the legislation will take when it emerges from the Alberta legislature.
One thing that is clear is that we will focus on and protect the five principles of medicare.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, last week a Canadian citizen was tied up, gagged and shot by the Government of Vietnam. While the family of Ms. Nguyen Thi Hiep continues to grieve over her horrific death, the Liberal government continues normal trade relations and aid programs to Vietnam.
Canada has taken minimal action, simply boycotting this weekend's Vietnam memorial and withdrawing support for Vietnam's efforts to join the World Trade Organization. This is weak. Canadians expect more.
My question is for the Prime Minister. What concrete steps have been taken by the government to demonstrate Canada's outrage over this execution?
Maria Minna LiberalMinister for International Cooperation
Mr. Speaker, Canada condemns the execution of Ms. Nguyen Thi Hiep and extends our deepest condolences to the family.
The Vietnamese authorities have not responded to any of the concerns that have been raised by the government and we remain completely unsatisfied with the public renouncement. Therefore, the Minister of External Affairs has suspended all ministerial level contact between Canada and Vietnam, other than the contact that occurs in the context of multilateral meetings.
I am also postponing indefinitely upcoming consultations on existing development assistance and future programming in Vietnam. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has also requested that our ambassador to Vietnam, who is currently—
VietnamOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, despite assurances from the Vietnamese authorities to put the execution on hold while reviewing fresh evidence from Canada, Vietnam proceeded with the shooting of a Canadian woman who may have unwittingly been duped into carrying drugs.
On the heels of a disastrous trip to the Middle East, where the Prime Minister's ineptitude with regard to foreign affairs was evident, the Prime Minister remained completely silent on this international tragedy.
While playing golf again this weekend with the President of the United States, did he enlist the support of the United States in condemning this injustice? This is a woman's life.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the decisions and interventions of the government were made last week. As the minister said, we deplore this absolutely unacceptable conduct of the Government of Vietnam. We have taken all possible steps to make sure it understands that such action cannot be accepted and that the Canadian government absolutely condemns it.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, thousands of Canadians are lining up today to send their tax returns and personal cheques to Shawinigan. There are going to be a lot more than three coins in that fountain.
Can the finance minister tell us why Canadians should literally and figuratively send record high taxes to Shawinigan to fund fountains and private businesses?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, three and a half months after the budget I would like to congratulate the hon. member for his first question.
I would point out to him, three months later, that in the budget the government brought down $58 billion worth of tax reductions over the course of the next five years. We have reintroduced indexation of the tax system to protect low and middle income Canadians. We have cut the middle tax rate from 26% to 24%, and it is on its way to 23%. I shall continue.
Monte Solberg Reform Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, it goes to show that if they torture numbers enough they will confess to anything I guess.
The finance minister overtaxes Canadians by billions of dollars a year in order to fund boondoggle spending. Yet, before the budget, he was running around telling journalists that the government cannot pick winners in the private sector, but losers sure can pick governments.
When did the finance minister change his mind and decide that it was the role of government to fund fountains in the Prime Minister's riding and private businesses?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member wants to see losers all he has to do is look in the mirror. He looks a little fried.
The member only has to look at the government's industrial policy in terms of our support for research and development, our support for education and our support for the Canadians who will build the economy of the future. If the hon. member would look at our infrastructure program, which will be signed by the President of the Treasury Board with the provinces and municipalities across this country, he would see that the government is laying the climate and creating the basic structure that will give us the best economy we have ever seen.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC
Mr. Speaker, we know that the RCMP filed an affidavit in the Court of Quebec to the effect that it has evidence that CINAR used other people's names.
Obviously, Revenue Canada's voluntary disclosure program therefore does not apply in the case of CINAR. But negotiations between CINAR and Revenue Canada under this program continue nonetheless.
Will the Minister of National Revenue assure the House that he is not in a race to save CINAR before the RCMP has completed its investigation and reported to the Attorney General of Canada?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
Mr. Speaker, as I have said on numerous occasions, first, under the law, with respect to questions on specific files, this is confidential information that I may not comment on.
Second, Canada has something called the Income Tax Act. It applies to all Canadians, both individuals and corporations.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC
Mr. Speaker, without going into the details of the particular case of CINAR, will the minister admit that, when the RCMP has evidence of apparent tax fraud in a particular instance, his department's voluntary disclosure program by its very description is no longer applicable?
Martin Cauchon LiberalMinister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)
Once again, Mr. Speaker, first, I cannot provide any specific information; second, the law applies to everyone; and third, I wish to repeat what I have already said in the House—there is excellent co-operation between the RCMP and the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency.
Val Meredith Reform South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC
Mr. Speaker, according to senior civil servants who run job creation partnerships, the majority of funds for this program are supposed to go to salaries.
However, in the Deputy Prime Minister's riding over 80% of $1.6 million went to buy materials like trees and toilets for a waterfront park.
Would the minister not agree that this is the latest example of flushing taxpayers' money away just to provide a Liberal member of parliament with a photo opportunity?