Debates of May 8th, 2000

Youth

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend marked the beginning of International Youth Week. What is the Minister of Human Resources Development doing to help Canada's youth get the experience necessary so they can find decent and meaningful jobs.

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

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to tell all members of parliament that this is indeed International Youth Week. We should thank the youth action network for preparing opportunities for all of us to celebrate our very important human resource, our Canadian youth.

What is also interesting is that for the 32nd year in a row Human Resources Development Canada will, in this timeframe, be opening the centres for Canadian youth. This is where we have youth advisers working with their counterparts, young people, to find very often that very important first job. They connect employers with employees.

We anticipate over 400,000 young people to go through these centres. I would also note that as a result of our Canada youth strategy—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Calgary Northeast.

National Defence

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it seems every time the minister is asked about the Sea King replacements he says that the decision is coming soon. Those words are beginning to ring hollow. In fact they have been ringing hollow for seven years now and with this particular minister three years and we still do not have any Sea King replacements.

The truth of the matter is that this government has politicized the procurement process and has paid no attention to the needs of the military.

How much more embarrassment and unnecessary danger must our armed forces endure before the government acts to replace the Sea King helicopters?

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as I told the member earlier, the file is proceeding very well. However, we must look at the whole picture.

We have bought new equipment for our Canadian armed forces. We have got new Cormorant helicopters for search and rescue. We have got submarines. We have got the Coyote reconnaissance vehicle.

I would like to add as a final comment that this is the party that was going to cut $1 billion from the defence budget.

Government Response To Petitions

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 41 petitions.

Petitions

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present this petition from numerous people in Peterborough and elsewhere who point out that family life is becoming more complex, that the breakdown of marriage is producing more complex family arrangements, that the role of grandparents is becoming more, not less, important in modern times, and that whereas some parents are moving to strengthen the legal position of grandparents, some other grandparents are denied access to grandchildren due to death or divorce.

Therefore, these petitioners call upon parliament to grant through legislation visitation rights to grandparents and use its power and influence to strengthen the position of grandparents so that they can help children in need.

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to rise in the House today and present on behalf of 275 constituents both in my riding and across Vancouver Island a petition which says that many people receive health benefits from naturopathic practitioners and medicines. The petitioners believe these people are basically discriminated against and while they save the government a lot of money, these people must also be financially responsible for their own medical expenses.

The petitioners request that parliament pass some kind of legislation recognizing naturopathic practitioners as equal to members of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons. It is my pleasure to present this petition on the petitioners' behalf.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I wish to table a petition from the residents of my riding on the retention of the definition of marriage and recognition of the unique status of the institution of marriage.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure and indeed an honour to stand pursuant to Standing Order 36 to present a huge petition on behalf of the residents of Blue River, Vavenby, Little Fort, Birch Island, Avola, Clearwater, Barriére, Knouff Lake, Paul Lake, Pinantan, Valemount, Whitecroft and many of the smaller communities of the North Thompson Valley as well. The petition contains literally thousands and thousands of signatures.

The petitioners point out their concern about the Canadian tax system, feel it is unjust and unfair. The petitioners feel that it is biased and discriminatory and ask for a complete overhaul of our tax system. There is much more in this petition but I will not read some of the finer details.

[Nick Discepola, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the residents of Notre-Dame-de-l'Île-Perrot in my riding, I would like to present a petition.

These people are complaining about all the planes that fly over their houses, some times at about one in the morning, and others after six in the morning. The petitioners would like these planes to change their flight path so as not to disturb the peace of the residents of this municipality.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present petitions from Canadians who are very concerned about the fact that one in five Canadian children lives in poverty. The petitioners want to draw attention to the fact and remind us that in 1989 the House of Commons passed a unanimous resolution to eliminate child poverty. The petitioners urge parliament to fulfill its promise and to end child poverty in this coming budget.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to present petitions from people who are very concerned about homelessness and the lack of adequate, safe, affordable housing in this country. These are petitioners from right across the country who support the campaign for 1% for housing and call on the government to commit an additional 1% of the federal budget to meet the most basic human need in Canada.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I also have petitions that I would like to table from Canadians who are very concerned about the World Trade Organization, what it is doing to our sovereignty and the fact that it is giving more and more power to multinational corporations. The petitioners call on parliament to ensure that there are binding and enforceable rules to protect human rights, core labour standards and cultural diversity, our education and our environment.

Questions On The Order Paper

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. Q-91 and Q-98. .[Text]

Question No. 91—

[Svend Robinson, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

With respect to the APEC summit of 1997 in Vancouver: ( a ) did the Prime Minister discuss security arrangements with then director od operations Jean Carle either prior to or during the summit; and ( b ) was the Prime Minister aware of Mr. Carle's plans to displace security barriers in order to avoid embarrassment to visiting heads of state?

[Gar Knutson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister]

Commissioner Hughes made it very clear in a written ruling on whether to call the Prime Minister to appear as a witness before the APEC inquiry that “the simple fact of the matter is that evidence produced to date regarding the alleged involvement of the Prime Minister in the RCMP security operations does not indicate that his testimony is `requisite to the full investigation and consideration' of the matters currently before me”.

The commissioner also wrote in this ruling, after hearing more that 130 days of evidence, including from two senior officials from the Prime Minister's Office and a number of senior RCMP officers, that he “cannot see that the voluminous evidence produced to date points to or suggests that the Prime Minister may have given improper orders or directions to RCMP members respecting security at the APEC conference.

Any further comment on matters before Commissioner Hughes would be inappropriate. A responsible process is in place and should be allowed to complete its work.

Question No. 98—

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

With regard to the former program for older worker adjustment, could the Minister of Human Resources Development indicate: ( a ) which measures or actions were taken between 1996 and 1998 inclusively to establish a strategy for older workers; ( b ) what are the parameters of this type of pilot project and the eligibility criteria; ( c ) what projects are currently part of these pilot projects and what are their parameters; ( d ) what are the passive measures, such as income support measures, currently under study and are these measures eligible through the pilot projects announced in 1999; ( e ) what type of pilot project could be eligible in the case of Celanese employees, including income support measures; ( f ) what are the procedures to propose the said project?

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

(a) The Government of Canada is aware of the special difficulties experienced by older workers in the labour market. The Government of Canada takes seriously its responsibilities toward older workers and is taking action on several fronts.

(1) First, concern for older workers has been frequently raised in the federal-provincial arena. At the 1998 annual premiers conference, premiers agreed that “the situation of older workers should be addressed”.

The Forum of Labour Market Ministers, FLMM, established an ad hoc working group on older workers composed of representatives from the Government of Canada and from provinces and territories in December 1998. Quebec and Canada co-chair the ad hoc working group.

This ad hoc working group on older workers is responsible for developing a diagnostic of labour market adjustment issues faced by older workers, including issues specific to each province-territory. The ad hoc working group also co-ordinates pilot projects.

(2) Second, the Governnent of Canada underscored its commitment to assist older workers who lose their jobs and have a difficult time finding new employment by announcing the older worker pilot project initiative on June 18, 1999.

The Government of Canada committed $30 million over two fiscal years, 1999-2000 and 2000-01, to held older Canadians who want to stay in the workforce but who are facing difficulties. This money has subsequently been reprofiled to accommodate provincial-territorial starting dates.

At the Forum of Labour Market Ministers meeting on September 30, 1999, ministers agreed to put in place pilot projects to assist older workers to get back into the labour force.

The older worker pilot project initiative is a partnership approach between the Government of Canada and the provinces-territories in searching for innovative approaches to assist older workers.

(b)The parameters and key features of the older worker pilot projects initiative include the following: test innovative measures designed to reintegrate displaced older workers aged 55 to 64 who have an attachment to the labour force or older workers threatend with displacement into sustainable employment; focus on active measures; a variety of approaches designed to meet older workers specific labour market needs, to be tested: awareness, promotion, prevention, adjustment, and labour force participation; and that all pilots will be evaluated.

Pilot projects will be developed and implemented by provinces and territories expressing interest in participating in the initiative. Participating provinces and territories will also commit resources to the pilots. Projects will not duplicate or overlap existing federal or provincial employment programming.

(c) Currently, as of April 14, 2000, several jurisdictions have entered into negotiations with the federal government. However, jurisdictions vary widely in terms of where they are at with developing their pilot projects. Some provinces are still fleshing out ideas they have for pilots. Some provinces have developed their proposals and have submitted them for review, while still others are close to finalizing their agreements. It is anticipated that jurisdictions close to finalizing their agreements will be able to undertake their pilots in the near future.

The parameters of all proposals are to fall within the guidelines described in the key features. See answer to part (b).

(d) The Government of Canada is not currently studying passive measures such as income support measures.

The Government of Canada has been adopting active employment measures in assisting Canadians. The older worker pilot project initiative is designed to assist older workers experiencing a difficult time to find new employment. This initiative is intended to actively assist older workers back into the labour force. See answer to part (b) for details. Passive income supports are not featured in the older worker pilot projects.

(e) Pilot projects will be developed and implemented by provinces and territories. Projects that are proposed by the Quebec government, once approved that they adhere to the key features developed by all jurisdictions, would be available to older workers in Quebec that are interested in participating. Potential candidates could express their interest to the appropriate representative in their jurisdiction.

(f) The province is responsible for proposing and seeing the pilots implemented. The procedures to propose the projects have been described above. See answer to part (b).

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-11, an act to authorize the divestiture of the assets of, and to dissolve, the Cape Breton Development Corporation, to amend the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee; of the amendment and of the amendment to the amendment.

Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act

[Dennis Gruending, NDP, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on Bill C-11 which relates to the sale and dissolution of assets of the Cape Breton Development Corporation.

I wish today that I could say that it was my pleasure to rise to speak on this motion, but it is really not so. This motion really sounds the death knell for the jobs of many people in the community of Sydney in Cape Breton. It is never a pleasure to talk about that. Also, today the government introduced closure on this debate. It is never a pleasure to rise to talk about that and to talk in circumstances where the government has put us under the gun for the 65th time in this parliament.

My colleagues in the NDP caucus have detailed the situation in Cape Breton. I am not going into that in much detail. They talked about the history of mining there. They talked about the importance of mining to the local economy and to the provincial economy. They talked in some detail about the sordid history of how the government conducted itself in putting these mines and assets up for sale. On one hand the government wants to walk away from its responsibility of many years and sell off these mines to the private sector. On the other hand the government wants to do so in a way which does not fairly compensate the people who have worked in those mines for many years.

As a member for a constituency in Saskatchewan in the prairies and parklands area, I have not followed this debate perhaps as closely as I might have if it were grain transportation or the wheat board. I have left much of the heavy lifting to my colleagues in the NDP caucus, particularly those from Cape Breton. They have done a fine job of bringing the situation to light, holding the government's feet to the fire and standing shoulder to shoulder with the workers in the mines in Cape Breton.

Upon closer examination recently, I was actually shocked at what the government has done and what we often call the process. The process is often as important as the results.

Let us talk a bit about what happened. One of my colleagues has described what the government announced in January 1999 as a drive-by announcement, saying it was getting out of the coal business and closing the Phalen mine by the end of 2000 and beginning a process to sell the Prince mine as well.

My colleague from Sydney—Victoria made a convincing argument that the federal government already knew what it was going to do in 1995. It might well have delayed its announcement because of an impending election in 1997, but it knew what it was going to do. It had all sorts of time to consult with the community rather than engage in what my colleague called a drive-by announcement which pretty well took everybody by surprise.

Clearly, the government's severance and training support package is inadequate. The economic development package that came along with it which is in some way supposed to make up for the loss is inadequate. It was put together without consultation with the stakeholders despite the fact that the government said after the fact that it was going to do that. In fact, it appeared that the Minister of Natural Resources was not interested in meeting with the miners or with people in the community.

Let me briefly review, after about a year of frustration, what happened so that things could finally start to move a little. Last December there was a shutdown of the Phalen colliery. This resulted in a protest. A little later on in January there were wildcat strikes. The miners had finally had enough. They stopped operations and blocked coal shipments to Nova Scotia Power.

On January 8 several miners went underground and stayed there. It took that for the Minister of Natural Resources to start meeting with these people and getting serious about negotiations. That was more than a year after the announcement that the mine was going to be sold. We can imagine and understand why people in Cape Breton were so frustrated. It was that kind of heroic action that finally forced the minister to begin negotiating a pension settlement and agree to go to binding arbitration in the case of conflicts. It was said across the floor this morning that they had gone to binding arbitration. Yes, they did after the miners sat in, stayed in the mines and said they were not coming out.

I want to move on to something that I find particularly disturbing. I am going to focus my remarks for the last few minutes on this. Late in January this year reports surfaced that Canada Steamship Lines was hauling coal from Colombia and the United States to Cape Breton and that it was interested in Devco's assets. People in the House and in the country will be familiar with the owner of that company, a rather high ranking person in the House.

[Darrel Stinson, Reform, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Ask the Minister of Finance why.