Debates of Oct. 31st, 2001

The Economy

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, in 1990 what I condemned was the total discord between economic policy, fiscal policy and monetary policy. What we condemned on that side of the House when we were there was the incredibly high interest rates that were being imposed on Canadians as a result of the failure of the then Conservative government to engage in reasonable and acceptable economic policies. That is what I condemned. What I condemned was an 11.5% unemployment rate which is what was in existence then. What I condemned was the absolute failure of the then Conservative government.

[Ken Epp, Canadian Alliance, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on May 14, 1991, when he was the leader of the opposition, the present Prime Minister asked Brian Mulroney a question. He asked:

Here is my question to the Prime Minister: Does he not think that time has come to abandon the current economic policies of high dollar--

Today we see where this thinking has led us, from the 87 cent dollar at that time to the new low of under 63 cents now.

Will the finance minister acknowledge that the government's misguided belief in some esoteric advantage in having a low dollar is wrong?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have only to ask the hon. member to read the answer just given by the Minister of Finance. At the time when the Tories were in power we had 11.5% unemployment, a $42 billion deficit, 11.5% interest rates and we were bankrupt. We are in a much better position today than we were in those days.

[Ken Epp, Canadian Alliance, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has signalled many times that he believes a low dollar is good for the country, but the esteemed economist, Dr. Sherry Cooper, has said that the inexorable decline in the Canadian dollar is both a reflection of our relative decline in economic prosperity and productivity, as well as the cause of it.

My question is for the finance minister. Does he support the Prime Minister's position of the low dollar or good common economic sense?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I support the Prime Minister's position which is that we will bring down the national debt by $35 billion, which is what we have done. I support the Prime Minister's position when he says that as a result of this there will be two and a half billion more dollars in the Canadian economy.

I support the fact that we have brought down unemployment rates. I support the Prime Minister's position in increasing productivity. I support the Prime Minister's position in giving the country hope for the future. That is what we have done and that is what we will continue to do.

St. Hubert Technobase

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in October 1997, the federal government launched an ambitious project to revitalize the St. Hubert military base, with an DND investment of $1 million. This revitalization project was to generate in excess of 1,700 jobs.

Could the minister of National Revenue explain why the millions invested for development of the Technobase have resulted in very few real jobs out of the promised 1,700?

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

Mr. Speaker, the St. Hubert Military Base Corporation was created in 1997.

Its purpose was to rediversify ensure that an economic safety net was created to provide sustained employment in the region.

Two funds were set up, one of $1 million, designed as a backup fund, and another of $6 million for technological development.

I must point out that large numbers of jobs were generated by these funds, particularly the technological development assistance fund, which created or maintained 600 jobs in the region.

[Pierrette Venne, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, according to the April 30, 2001 financial report of the Technobase investment fund, most of the companies in which it had invested no longer exist, have gone bankrupt or simply never located at St. Hubert.

In light of such a disastrous performance, does the Secretary of State for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec intend to demand a reckoning from the Technobase president, hon. Jacques Olivier, and its CEO, Clément Joly?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be glad to have had the opportunity to have such a dynamic team which has enabled us to create employment in her riding.

As I said, there were two funds created, a backup fund with a guarantee in the form of risk capital or loan guarantee and a $6 million fund for technological development.

As we speak, $3.7 million of the $6 million fund have been invested, have generated investments of over $27 million and have created or maintained more than 600 jobs.

Moreover, I should point out that a study by an independent firm last year recommended that we carry on, and that is what we will do.

The Economy

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister just said that his legacy of a falling dollar, a record low for the Canadian dollar, a country that is heading into recession and unemployment that is on the rise, that there is hope for the future. I think that is a poor legacy for the finance minister.

Why is the finance minister and the government refusing to take the action necessary to give investors the confidence that will be reflected in a stronger dollar?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, there are two pieces of good news. One of them is that the fundamentals of the Canadian economy are very strong. That is why the debt repayments and the large tax cuts are so important. That is why our growth rates are higher than in the United States. That is why when we compare our economy to those of others in what is a very difficult period, Canada, unlike previous slowdowns, is coming through this very well.

The second piece of good news is that I would like welcome the hon. member back to the finance portfolio on his side.

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we would really like to see an intervention from the finance minister on behalf of the economy. Canadians are concerned. We are in a recession. Unemployment is on the rise. We cannot get goods and services across the border.

We had business people from across the country in Ottawa yesterday to form a coalition because they want to get the attention of the government. When will the government take action that will get the economy back on its feet again?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I simply would refer the hon. member to the kinds of economic policies that he used to recommend when he was not speaking from such a far back position.

What he advocated were tax cuts that any economist in the country would say would take us into deficit. What his party has advocated in the last three weeks are massive spending increases that would put us into deficit.

The fact is that the actions of his party belie the words he is expressing. If we had listened to that party our balance sheet would be in tatters and the country would be in terrible shape. As it is, our fundamentals are strong.

Lumber Industry

[Andy Savoy, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade. Softwood lumber is a $10 billion industry in Canada. In my riding of Tobique--Mactaquac there are 14 sawmills representing some 2,500 jobs and one in six jobs is dependent upon the softwood lumber industry.

Taking into consideration the decision of the U.S. department of commerce today to impose a further tariff of 12.58% on all Canadian softwood lumber heading into the U.S., what is the government doing to restore unencumbered access to U.S. markets?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his interest in this very important issue. I do agree with him. I honestly think that the Americans are hitting themselves over the head with a two by four by imposing these taxes on our exports to the United States. They are harming their own economy at a time when it is very vulnerable.

I will continue to work very closely with the provinces and will consult widely with the industry. I will be meeting with Mr. Racicot whom President Bush has appointed to deal with this file some time next week. I will explain to him the damage they are doing to their own economy.

National Defence

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister said recently that our men and women serving in the Canadian forces are stretched too thin and cannot meet any new demands. That was before the new commitments in the war against terrorism. Now we learn that there likely will be a spring offensive in Afghanistan.

How will the minister meet the requirements for the next rotation and subsequent rotations without endangering the safety and security of our serving men and women?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, at one time we had over 4,000 people mainly from the army in foreign operations. We are now down to about 2,000. The people we have recently sent into the Middle East in the fight against terrorism are largely navy personnel.

We have been able to balance to ensure the operational tempo is reasonable so we are not overstretching the limit. However we still have thousands more who are available in case they are needed in this country or needed in foreign missions.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, why the contradictory message? The minister said when we only had the other obligations that we could not meet our commitments, that it was stretching our men and women too thin.

The government's longstanding lack of commitment to our military is putting the safety and security of our men and women in jeopardy. That is the fact. It threatens to tear our military families apart and it threatens the security in Canada.

Due to the government's total neglect of our military the minister will either have to pull our troops out of the war against terrorism or put at risk the safety and security of our men and women serving in the forces. Which will it be?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, that is absolute nonsense. That is not what I said. That is what he thinks he would like me to have said.

Let me give a couple of instances. When we had the ice storm here we had 4,000 personnel in overseas missions but we could still put 16,000 troops on the streets of this country to help Canadians citizens.

On the eve of the millennium when we were concerned about the millennium bug, we had 3,000 people overseas but we still had 25,000 troops, 11,000 reservists, ready to help their fellow Canadians.

Airline Industry

[Stéphan Tremblay, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean—Saguenay, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport has decided to limit his assistance to the major airlines providing service between large cities and to abandon regional carriers, such as Air Alma which provides service between Montreal and Alma, once again showing his prejudice against regional carriers.

Does the minister realize that by helping only the major airlines, he is giving their regional subsidiaries, such as Air Nova, an unfair competitive advantage over small regional carriers such as Air Alma?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think this would be the case. Our intention is merely to help the major carriers, which cover 95% of the market, and I think that if these companies are healthy, small carriers will be too.

Points of Order

[Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, today in the House I had occasion to ask a number of questions and to receive some answers. My concern is not with the direct answers that I received although the answers themselves were less than satisfactory. I am also concerned about some extraneous comments that were placed on the record afterward. I am very concerned and I think I am in order to stand to ensure that those remarks are withdrawn from the record.

In further response to the question that I had posed of the minister, asking her why the House should agree to jeopardize the civil liberties of religious and political groups in Canada when she could not explain why those provisions were in the legislation, she provided an answer and then later she stated words to the effect: since when did you guys care about civil liberties.

These words will appear in Hansard and they are unparliamentary. The record will demonstrate that I care very much about civil liberties and I know that the Canadian Alliance cares very much about civil liberties. It is not inconsistent to be concerned about security while all--

[The Speaker]

I am sorry but it does not sound like a good point of order to me. If the words complained of are the ones the hon. member has quoted, I am afraid I would like to hear his citation for saying these are unparliamentary. They strike me as not uncommon in debates in this place. It seems to me I may have heard them before from both sides of the House and did not rule them unparliamentary.

I am not inclined to intervene in this case on anything that I have heard. I have great respect of course for the hon. member. I think we will consider the matter closed under the circumstances.

Committees of the House

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, entitled “Crossing the Atlantic: Expanding the Economic Relationship between Canada and Europe”.

Government Response to Petitions

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the 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 four petitions.