Debates of June 13th, 2000

Parental Leave

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there were negotiations that produced nothing. They withdrew.

From that point on, the government, which had complied with the legislation, was forced to assume its responsibilities. In the interests of good social policy, we decided that it was very important to extend the period during which parental leave benefits are paid. Everyone was pleased with this measure at the time of the throne speech and the budget speech.

Only as the program is about to begin does Quebec suddenly wake up.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the national assembly unanimously passed a motion supporting the parental insurance proposal by the Government of Quebec.

Does the Prime Minister not realize that, if he persists in remaining as stubborn as he has since the beginning of this affair, he will once again be acting contrary to the unanimous will of the Quebec national assembly as well as a broad consensus of Quebecers?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we established our position on this matter very clearly, a year ago already.

If the benefit we are paying is insufficient, as Quebec claims, if 55% of earnings is not enough, it is fine with us if they want to bring it up to 75%. We shall praise them for it, if they have the money to do so.

What we want is to treat everyone equally, and the money we will be using is already in place for it. If they want to use their own resources to raise the benefits, that is fine.

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Prime Minister again: Is he capable of grasping that the motion passed unanimously by the national assembly is not in support of improved employment insurance benefits, but of a parental insurance program focussing on the future and aimed at all of the young families of Quebec?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if the provincial government wants to have that program, it is free to do so.

We have a responsibility under the Employment Insurance Act. For years now, we have been providing those covered by employment insurance with maternity benefits. Now, we are improving those benefits.

If there are other social programs the Government of Quebec wishes to improve, all the better for them. We have our responsibility under the Employment Insurance Act and we are continuing to improve what we have been doing since—

[The Speaker]

The hon. leader of the New Democratic Party.

Poverty

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, recent income statistics show a growing gap, a disturbing gap, between Canadians with high incomes and those with lower and middle incomes. StatsCan documents that government policies are aggravating this problem. While European countries are relatively successful in fighting poverty, the U.S. record is abysmal. Why? Because economic growth alone will not defeat poverty. Better income support and child care programs are needed.

Why does the government insist on mimicking the American approach?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in fact we have worked very hard on that. Some of the statistics do not take into account the fact that we have instituted in Canada a national child benefit program. We are developing with the provinces a national children's agenda. We plan to lengthen employment insurance benefits for parents to 12 months. We have many, many other programs that are in place at this moment that were in the Speech from the Throne and in the last budget. We are making a lot of progress.

At the same time Canadians now have more revenue than they had before. There were a lot of changes in the last budget to help the lower—

[The Speaker]

The hon. leader of the New Democratic Party.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, if this government were serious about defeating poverty, it would be willing to learn the lessons in the recent income report. If we adopt U.S. style tax policy, then we are going to get U.S. style social policy and the growing income gaps that come with it. Sadly, that is the goal the government is pursuing. As UNICEF reports, countries that make up their minds to tackle poverty succeed, but in Canada, the odds are that a child of a lone parent is poor.

How can the government be so complacent about its record on poverty?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it has been one of the items that we have devoted a lot of time to. Statistics Canada yesterday reported that now our policies are beginning to pay off and said that fewer Canadian families are living in poverty today than there were some years ago. We are making progress but the job is not over. We have to keep working at it.

Banks

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister proposes in his financial services reform bill to grant himself unfettered power to say yes or no to bank mergers. If merger proponents pass all the hurdles of his public impact review process, will he say yes to the mergers?

[The Speaker]

That is a hypothetical question. I see the minister is on his feet. If he wishes to respond he may do so.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid the hon. member misunderstands the nature of the reforms. The fact is that ultimately the Government of Canada has the right to make the decision and in fact must make a decision either yea or nay, and obviously that voice is expressed through that of the Minister of Finance.

The fact is that in this particular process we have introduced a number of steps, including the mandatory public hearings by the House of Commons finance committee and the advice from the Superintendent of Financial Institutions and the Competition Bureau.

I can assure the hon. member that any decisions would be very well taken after a full examination in the public interest.

[Scott Brison, Progressive Conservative, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have waited seven years for this government to introduce its financial services sector reform package which will not see royal assent until at least a year and may in fact be derailed by a general election.

With the changes in the global financial services sector occurring at web speed, why is this government moving at a snail's pace?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the government is certainly not moving at a snail's pace. We intend to push as aggressively as we possibly can, obviously subject to the prerogatives of parliament, to make sure that this legislation is passed as quickly as possible.

However, we do want to have the public debate on the legislation. That is why fact we commissioned the MacKay report about 18 months to 2 years ago. We wanted to examine every possible avenue open to make sure that on the one hand our banks are able to grow as much as possible and, on the other hand, that our consumers are protected as much as possible.

Department Of Finance

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it looks like the finance minister has been getting some lessons from the human resources minister.

It turns out that the human resources minister is not the only one with a dodgy set of books. An internal finance department audit wonders whether the finance department's contracting practices could “be defensible if disclosed in the public eye”.

I would like to ask the finance minister if he can tell the House why his department's contracting practices are not publicly defensible?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is of course that the hon. member opposite perhaps read the newspaper report. What he should have done was to have read the report of the internal audit.

If I can just quote, it states:

Our review of CI&S controllable expenses indicated they were generally processed in compliance with applicable policies and procedures.

We also observed a desire on the part of CI&S staff to do things right.

All professional service contracts adequately demonstrates CI&S's organizational needs.

In other words, there were obviously defects in what the hon. member was pointing to but overwhelmingly the report was positive for CI&S.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, they wonder “if the contracting practices would be defensible if disclosed in the public eye”. There is a problem there.

We are perhaps talking about some suspect contracting services in the Department of Finance. This minister is the keeper of the cash, the taker of our taxes. If there is suspect in his department, how can any Canadian trust anything the government says or does?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the premise of the hon. member's question just simply does not bear any kind of scrutiny.

Let me give one more quote from the report, following up on what the member said. It states:

In all professional service contracts reviewed, the fact that the contractors had excellent qualifications for the tasks defined was adequately demonstrated.

Banking

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec government, through its Minister of Finance, is demanding legislative guarantees from the federal government regarding the conditions that must exist before authorizing a takeover of Quebec banks by a buyer.

However, in the 871 page document tabled by the federal Minister of Finance, there is no indication that such guarantees exist.

Will the Minister of Finance confirm that the only guarantee that exists in his bill is the discretionary power he is assuming, and nothing else?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, in the case of the acquisition of a bank, such as the National Bank, the criteria will be exactly the same—and this is provided in the legislation—as those for major bank mergers.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is no guarantee in the act to protect Quebecers.

Why should we feel confident? Why should we be reassured about the possible acquisition of Quebec banks by a potential buyer, since the only guarantee we have is the decision of the federal Minister of Finance or of his successors? Mr. Speaker, you will agree that there is nothing reassuring in this situation.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I just said that the criteria in the case of an acquisition are exactly the same as in the case of major bank mergers.

Now, if the hon. member thinks that we should have more elaborate criteria for major bank mergers, his colleagues are certainly free to make that suggestion in committee.

But I am telling the House that, in the case of an acquisition and of the criteria, if not the process, things would be exactly the same as in the case of a bank merger.

Human Resources Development

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, here is HRDC's idea of a good business venture in Strathroy, Ontario: One, buy a motorhome; two, fill it with computer equipment; three, register the motorhome in an individual's name; four, pay out $127,000 in salaries with no job descriptions; and five, park it in a garage and terminate the project.

How did this boondoggle on wheels benefit taxpayers?