Debates of Dec. 10th, 2001

Stratford Festival

[John Richardson, Liberal, Perth—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House today to congratulate the Stratford Festival of Canada for having the second highest attendance rate in its history. A total of 614,226 tickets were sold during the 2001 season, making this year's attendance the second highest in the festival's history.

This is the second year in a row the festival has sold more than 600,000 tickets. Although the tragic events of September required the refunding of $40,000 of ticket sale money to patrons from the United States, this did not stop the Stratford Festival from earning a $2 million surplus. This surplus will go to the For All Time Endowment, a fund that supports festival innovations such as its new Canadian play development program and its Conservatory for Classical Theatre Training.

I wish to congratulate the Stratford Festival on an excellent 2001 season.

The Economy

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today's budget is supposed to restore confidence in our security and economy by setting the priorities right. The government should feel the pain of Canadians and jump-start economic recovery from the recession it created. Businesses not the government are the engine of the economy.

I want to remind the finance minister that economic growth and innovation potential of businesses are seriously undermined by the cumulative effect of complying with thousands of regulations, which costs the private sector $103 billion a year or 12% of GDP. This hidden tax of $13,700 per household is a spending second only to shelter.

The Fraser Institute, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, CFIB and others have underscored the need for regulatory reforms. Ontario and Alberta's red tape commissions have done an excellent job of deregulating and the B.C. government is on its way.

Many provinces have taken decisive steps. Will the finance minister take decisive action to remove this regulatory burden in Canada?

Minister for International Cooperation

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in the democratic process, those of us who hold elected office need to be seen to abide the laws that govern our elections. It is now clear that the Minister for International Cooperation apparently broke the law governing municipal elections in Ontario and voted when she should not have.

Could the Deputy Prime Minister explain to Canadians why the Prime Minister has not asked this minister to step aside?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, in our system of justice based on British principles going back hundreds of years, people are found to have broken the law when they have been charged and convicted by a court and the court finds that they have broken the law beyond a reasonable doubt. This certainly has not taken place.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, she admitted it and that is quite clear. Bad news follows this minister wherever she goes. We recently learned that she paid her campaign manager lavishly to do communications consulting for her department, work that was only done after it was discovered. Now we learn that this same man was the campaign manager for the candidate the minister voted for in that byelection.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister explain to Canadians how much longer this minister will be allowed to continue down this path of cronyism and possibly law-breaking?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's position is that she acted in good faith based on information her staff had obtained from the municipality.

With respect to the contracts in question, they have conformed totally with the rules of treasury board. The hon. member should not spread insinuations about contracting procedures when the rules, as I am advised, have been followed correctly according to the provisions of treasury board.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a thin reed of defence here. The minister has admitted that she voted in the byelection incorrectly and now the Deputy Prime Minister sits over there and says that all is well. All is not well. She is an elected official and she has done something incorrect. How long will she be allowed to sit in cabinet?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is totally misstating the minister's position. She said that she voted, and it is a matter of public record. She did not say that she voted incorrectly. She said just the opposite. She said that she voted on the basis of information obtained for her by her staff which indicated that she could vote as she did. Those are the facts.

The hon. member ought to withdraw his insinuations and conclusions which are totally contrary to the facts and the principles of Canadian and British justice.

[Deepak Obhrai, Canadian Alliance, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Cooperation is continuing her pattern of disrespect for Canadian law. First, we have untendered CIDA contracts for her friends and now we know she voted for a friend even when she did not live in the riding.

By accepting her lame excuses, the Prime Minister is saying that cabinet ministers can break the law. Is this the message that the government wants to send to Canadians?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong. The Prime Minister is not saying that a minister can break the law. He is saying just the opposite. He is saying that from the information we have, the minister voted properly. The Prime Minister has asked the ethics counsellor to look into the matter and make a report to him.

On the basis of the information available, the hon. minister acted in good faith according to the advice she received about the municipal voting law. With respect to the contracts in question, they were found to conform totally with treasury board guidelines.

The hon. member ought to withdraw his unwarranted and unfactual assertions.

[Deepak Obhrai, Canadian Alliance, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister can spin whichever way he wants but, frankly speaking, the minister has broken the provincial law.

The Toronto election services states that, by law, one is supposed to vote where one lives and where one works is irrelevant. It is plain that she broke the law. In the House, all of us are lawmakers. If we do not uphold the law, who will?

Will the Prime Minister fire her or will she resign?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I can see what would happen in the unlikely event the Alliance Party achieved office. People would not have trials. There would not be judgments. It would be enough for the Alliance government to say something and then they would be guilty. No wonder people do not support the Alliance Party.

In our system, to say that someone broke the law there has to be a finding of a court, after charges are laid and a conclusion is reached beyond a reasonable doubt. This has not happened. I repeat that the minister acted in good faith and on the basis of information obtained for her by her office.

In any event, we have asked for the opinion of the ethics counsellor on this matter.

Employment Insurance

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government is using an accounting procedure to get hold of the billions of dollars in surpluses in the employment insurance fund, yet these surpluses belong to workers and businesses.

By recommending that these surpluses be put in the consolidated revenue fund, the auditor general had absolutely no intention of opening the door to systematic plundering.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister admit that, in order to protect the unemployed against government abuse, it is possible to set up an independent employment insurance fund, the surpluses of which would immediately appear in the consolidated fund, as is the case in Quebec with the CSST's funds?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that these surpluses are fictitious. He should know that employees and employers received $6.8 billion through reductions in the amount of their contributions. He should also know that improvements were made to the program. Finally, he should know that his party voted against all of these improvements.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member ever becomes a minister he will have to learn not to say that the surpluses are fictitious, because his minister always said the contrary.

What the hon. member just said confirms our view. The money was taken. It no longer exists. If there were a major recession right now, we would not be able to deal with all those who would lose their jobs.

Will the parliamentary secretary recognize that? Would it not have been wiser to capitalize the money from the employment insurance fund instead of using it, instead of grabbing it with both hands?

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

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that, as was recommended by the auditor general, these contributions are put into the government's general revenues.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is more and more interesting. I hope I will continue to get answers from the hon. member.

If the government stubbornly refuses to set up an independent employment insurance fund, it is because, as was just confirmed to us, the surpluses are put into the consolidated fund and are used to pay the government's debt?

Does the minister not realize that making the unemployed pay for its debt is one of the darkest initiatives of this government?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the hon. member criticized the government for not supporting and implementing the auditor general's recommendations.

But in 1986, if I am not mistaken, the government followed up on the auditor general's recommendation to set up the current system. Therefore, to be consistent in his approach, the hon. member should also support the auditor general's 1986 recommendation.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what is despicable on the part of the government is that it only implements the auditor general's recommendations that it likes. This is what the government does.

The Deputy Prime Minister, who has been here a long time, must know that it is possible to set up an independent employment insurance fund, as is the case with the CSST in Quebec, and to have that fund accounted for by the government.

Does the Deputy Prime Minister not find it a disgrace that his government is going along with an interpretation whereby it is the unemployed, those who are truly in need, who are paying off the government's debt? It is outrageous.

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

Mr. Speaker, all hon. members should know that it was in 1986 that the auditor general recommended that the separate fund be abolished. This was under the Conservatives. It was only after this government came to office that the auditor general's recommendation was implemented.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, imagine the surprise of first nations leaders to learn from the National Post that the Liberal government is fundamentally changing its policy toward aboriginal people. It says it wants to stop spending so much money on nuisance issues like rights and redress, land claim negotiations or access to resources. It has been the government's intransigence on these very issues that has led to a thousand outstanding land claims and expensive court cases.

What does the government hope to achieve by avoiding its obligations in this regard and by sidestepping the bilateral nation to nation process in dealing with first nations communities?

[John Finlay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, the government remains committed to addressing the needs of aboriginal people in Canada. The department has begun a process through the first nations governance initiative to provide the necessary tools for first nations to generate their own social and economic prosperity.

The department will be working with other cabinet colleagues to determine how to build on the progress already achieved. In doing so, the department will be looking at how to better target current spending.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, what we read in the National Post flies in the face of that. It sounds like déjà vu to aboriginal leaders. It is back to the future to the 1969 white paper. Everything has changed since 1969 except for the fact that the architect of that disastrous document is the Prime Minister of Canada today.

Instead of embarking on a destructive collision course with first nations, would it not be a better legacy to commit to a program of recognizing treaty rights, settling these outstanding land claims and embarking on a true economic development program by guaranteeing access to resources on first nations' lands to first nations peoples?

[John Finlay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what the government is doing with its money: supporting first nations treaty obligations and negotiations. There are first nations who are not prepared to go along with the minister at present, but there are 250 first nations who are. The National Aboriginal Women's Association is. Therefore, we are going to move ahead.

Minister for International Cooperation

[Deborah Grey, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the CIDA minister says that she sends our tax dollars overseas for “good governance”, then she breaks the law here at home. She has been in a pile of trouble for a while. Staff are fleeing like flies. Contracts go out for cash. Now she is wandering into other wards to vote, although of course it is in good faith.

I want to know from the minister if she is brave enough to quit the cabinet now or is she going to wait to get Shawinigan shuffled out of there in January?