Debates of Nov. 2nd, 2001

Anti-Terrorism Legislation

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-36 provides for the offence of terrorist activity which is broadly described to include facilitating, participating in, financing or directing terrorist activities.

The decision not to ban membership of groups is to overcome a major legal difficulty of proving membership. It also can have constitutional implications. The way of targeting anyone who takes part in terrorist activity or facilitates, participates in, finances or leads it is a much more effective way of catching those who are responsible.

Softwood Lumber

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, not only is the government not doing enough to combat terrorism on other shores and here, it is not doing enough to protect jobs in Canada. Incredibly, we heard the government response yesterday, not just to its inaction on the softwood file, but to British Columbians losing their jobs. The junior minister called them nervous nellies because they were losing their jobs and their families were losing their livelihood.

A member of the B.C. trade council said that he would ask the minister to stand in front of the communities that are flat on their back and tell them how they are a bunch of nervous nellies.

Has the Prime Minister asked that the junior minister stand publicly and apologize to the British Columbians he insulted because they are losing their jobs because of the government's inaction?

[Pat O'Brien, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely regret that that one phrase I used yesterday has led inadvertently to the interpretation that I am somehow insensitive to the serious situation faced by our lumber industry, by lumber workers and by their communities. In no way did I intend to make light of this very serious situation.

That is why I call on all those involved to maintain a united front, so that we can fight for free trade and fair trade in softwood lumber. I regret any remarks that may have caused others serious consideration.

[Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

That is one of the poorest non-apologies we have ever heard, Mr. Speaker.

The parliamentary secretary also indicated yesterday that the Americans are using softwood lumber to move other issues along.

He said that President Bush needs to make some progress in other areas in order to calm down congress.

Is the government admitting that its inaction in creating a North American security perimeter is holding up settlement of the softwood lumber issue?

[Pat O'Brien, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed refreshing to see the Leader of the Opposition engaged with this very serious situation, when in the spring he went weeks without even appointing a trade critic. It is nice to finally see his interest now.

The reality is the government has a two track policy on this important issue. We filed our legal avenue at the WTO on October 25. The minister and the Prime Minister are engaged in this issue very seriously. The Prime Minister raised it personally with President Bush as recently as the APEC meeting last week.

The Economy

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the state of the economy is becoming increasingly clear.

The dollar is reaching new lows, unemployment is on the rise, and the Americans' recent decision on softwood lumber is putting 130,000 jobs at risk, 40,000 of which are in Quebec. In short, the economic slowdown is more than just a vague threat, it has become an unfortunate reality.

Will the government give some indication of whether it intends to act on the strong warning given it by some economists, who are critical of the government's practice of basing its strategy for economic recovery on low interest rates alone?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the member should know that the federal government has already injected over $20 billion, in terms of tax cuts and increased spending, into the field of health care. Twenty billion dollars is the equivalent of $200 billion in the states.

So, it is not just lower interest rates, but a very significant injection of funds into the economy in addition to low interest rates that will help the Canadian economy in these troubled times.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing the economists to discover whether they agree with this new finance minister, because, as the Bloc Quebecois has already done, the economists are now criticizing the federal government's lack of initiative and inaction.

Will the government finally face the facts and acknowledge that the best way to fight the ever growing economic slowdown is to include a bold and detailed plan in the next budget to revive the economy.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Quebec finance minister on her budget yesterday, which added another $3 billion.

Governments in Canada must all work together in these difficult times. If we include the funds injected yesterday by Quebec and the $20 billion already added by the federal government over the past year, these measures together will give the Canadian economy a considerable boost.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as the parliamentary secretary just stated, Quebecers have shown, by the statement by their minister of finance, that they are determined and they have decided to take action to fight the downturn in the economy. While she did not have much room to maneouvre, Quebec's minister of finance did not hesitate to act.

What, then, is the federal Minister of Finance waiting for to present his plan, when he has considerably more leeway than Quebec?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the member must know, we have already announced a budget for December. We had to wait until the most recent information and the figures on the third quarter were available, toward the end of this month.

Once he sees all of this information, the member will see that we will have brought down a budget that will help the Canadian economy.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary must know that there are immediate needs, which require an immediate plan.

The government's action could have an incalculable effect on the efforts being made by the provinces to buffer the economic downturn.

What is the government waiting for to put some of its massive fiscal margin to work for Quebecers?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, this massive fiscal margin is all in the imagination of the Bloc Quebecois' finance critic. He is always talking about a surplus of $13 billion. He seems to think that he is right, and that all of the other economists are wrong.

The fact is that the federal surplus is much less than what the Bloc Quebecois claims.

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the acting prime minister. The unemployment rate has now climbed to 7.3%. More than 26,000 people lost full time jobs in the month of October alone. Net job losses this year are now more than 75,000 across the country. Then yesterday the Canadian dollar, for the second day in a row, hit an all time low.

In light of that, will the government bring in a stimulus budget with major public investment in areas such as housing, transportation, municipal infrastructure, agriculture and the environment?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member sees nothing but a glass half empty. The big news today was on the employment front. The United States lost more than 400,000 jobs, which is terribly bad. Canada was expected to lose a large number of jobs, like 20,000. The point the hon. member ignores, which is the news of the day, is we did not lose any jobs; we gained 1,800 jobs.

[Lorne Nystrom, NDP, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, Statistics Canada said we lost more than 26,000 full time jobs in October and that is before adding in the most recent losses at Nortel and CIBC.

Today more than 100 economists have written to the Prime Minister urging him to bring in a budget with a major investment in the economy to keep it afloat, saying that tax cuts and lower interest rates alone will not do it.

When will the government understand that public investment in the economy is required, and that we cannot simply wait for George Bush to stimulate the economy to benefit Canada?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the NDP remains mired in the failed tax and spend permanent deficit policies of the 1970s, a morass from which thinking lefties have long ago escaped. The budget will be in December.

Softwood Lumber

[Chuck Strahl, Canadian Alliance, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government says do not be a nervous nellie about the 32% U.S. softwood lumber tariff, but we have to wonder who it is talking about. Is it talking about the tens of thousands of B.C. people whose jobs are in danger? Is it talking about the hundreds of businesses that are about to shut down? Is it talking about the provincial and municipal governments which will lose revenue for health, education and other services?

These people are beyond nervous. They feel that the government has abandoned a $10 billion industry and has done nothing in five years to help settle this softwood lumber issue.

Will the government get out of its ivory tower and at least start by appointing a special envoy to the United States to help settle this softwood lumber--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade.

[Pat O'Brien, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that. I regret the use of that particular descriptive phrase. The message I was trying to give yesterday was that it was very important that we maintain a united front in this country, coast to coast to coast.

What have we done? The Prime Minister has raised this issue repeatedly with President Bush, as recently as at APEC. One member says that is nothing. I think that is a lot. There are daily contacts with provincial officials, federal officials and the minister. The minister has raised this issue repeatedly.

We need a united front on this, and that is the message I was trying to give yesterday.

[Val Meredith, Canadian Alliance, South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, one year ago when we asked about the thousands of jobs that were at risk with the expiration of the softwood lumber deal, the Liberals said “Don't worry. We are working on it”. Some 30,000 British Columbians will likely lose their jobs because of the Liberals' work on the file.

Yesterday a coalition of Canada's leading companies and business associations said that thousands of jobs were at risk by the federal government's inaction on border security. The Liberals said “Don't worry. We are working on it”. How many Canadians have to lose their jobs before the Liberals worry about it?

[Pat O'Brien, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member was a member of the official opposition we frankly never knew where she and that party stood. I am no clearer right now. Earlier they wanted to tie energy to softwood lumber. Then they wanted to negotiate our support with the United States against terrorism and tie in softwood lumber.

Now they seek to divide the country. The Leader of the Opposition said it himself in a special debate. They are playing the old west versus east divide game that is counterproductive to what we want: free trade in softwood lumber.

National Security

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the revenue minister has bragged in the House that the advance passenger information provisions of Bill S-23 would allow Canada customs to scrutinize airplane manifests prior to landing in Canada. Oddly enough U.S. officials released a list of countries not complying with the same measures they have put in place. Along with Syria and Saudi Arabia is Canada.

My question is for the revenue minister. How does he expect foreign carriers to comply with the new Canadian security measures when Canada will not comply with its closest ally?

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to report that yesterday I was down in Washington, D.C., to discuss the customs organization as well as future co-operation with the United States. The meeting was very positive for both our organizations.

As well, we will make sure that within the next 10 days a meeting of the steering committee on the shared border agreement which we signed in 1995 will take place to seek ways of co-operation.

I was pleased yesterday to tell those representatives that with Bill S-23 we will be able to put in place a framework.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I wish the minister would address the particular point because the U.S. has been urging Canada to participate in a continental security perimeter to secure our trade links. This includes sharing information on foreign travellers entering each country. Air Canada says it is not complying with the U.S. law because Canadian law does not allow it to do so.

The minister has talked repeatedly about harmonization, but we have to wonder how committed he really is. Why will he not agree to this reasonable U.S. request?