Debates of Feb. 15th, 2001

Government Of Canada

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

Mr. Speaker, if the ethics counsellor says something positive about the Prime Minister, then it is accurate. If he says something that is not positive, then it is speculative. That is very interesting.

It was yesterday that we saw the first signs of the government starting to cry uncle as we continued on this particular file. It does not want us to ask questions. I need to ask questions on this because it was the auditor general who said that the contract that Mr. Gauthier had should not have been given to him. The auditor general that the company should not have been selected.

Why is the Deputy Prime Minister so quick to defend a contract that the auditor general was quick to condemn?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this contract was awarded by competitive bid to a firm which I understand had extensive experience in this area. I would be happy to have the minister for international development supplement my answer with additional facts, but I think I have put the facts on the table of the House today.

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

Mr. Speaker, the fact is the auditor general said that the company should not have been selected.

I am certain that after two years of our questions about Shawinigan, the Prime Minister knows that there are a great many suspicions about the Prime Minister himself. There is only one way to eliminate all doubt. Why does the solicitor general not set up an independent inquiry?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, these suspicions are ill-founded.

Tim Naumetz wrote today in The Ottawa Citizen :

Despite Mr. Day's accusation that Mr. Chrétien met with the immigrants who invested in Mr. Gauthier's companies, his deputy leader later said she did not know the identity of the investors.

“I'm not aware at this time who the actual investors are,” said Ms. Gray. “I'm not alleging a whole lot here. I'm trying to join the dots. There are a lot of names floating around, but I'm not aware of any of those.”

I rest my case.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Some hon. members are pointing out something I failed to notice and that is that of course in reading quotations members must be careful not to refer to one another by name.

Budget Surpluses

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

Mr. Speaker, in his mini budget last fall, the Minister of Finance estimated that the surplus would reach $11.9 billion in 2000-01. He added that the government was undertaking to pay down a minimum of $10 billion in debt in 2000-01.

But, this week we learned that the real surplus could reach $18 billion, $6 billion more than forecast.

Are we to understand that the Minister of Finance's intention is to use the additional $6 billion to pay down the debt?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I must point out to the hon. member that the forecasts for the remainder of the year are not final. They will be confirmed in July or August. I can assure the House that we are going to continue to pursue a responsible tax policy, as we have done in the past.

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

Mr. Speaker, talking about the election campaign, the Prime Minister proposed to use 50% of the surpluses to reduce the debt and lower taxes, and the other 50% to fund social programs.

In his mini budget, the Minister of Finance proposed to allocate only 20% of the surpluses to social programs. Now, he is about to invest only 10% in transfers to the provinces and in social programs.

We would like to know the government's position. Is it the one stated in the Prime Minister's speeches, or the one presented in the Minister of Finance's figures? Which one determines government policy?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to pursue a balanced fiscal policy, that is we will continue to pay off the debt, to reduce taxes and, at the same time, to invest in social programs and in the economy of the future. This is the Liberal program and it is a very responsible program, in our opinion.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the surplus is far higher than predicted and the Minister of Finance could apply up to $16 billion to the debt instead of the $10 billion forecast last October. We have nothing against paying down the debt.

However, at a time when there are such crying needs in health and in education, does the Minister of Finance not admit that it is high time for him to adopt a balanced approach and to not only pay part of the debt but also transfer funds to Quebec and the provinces for health and education?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, first, the hon. member needs to acknowledge the historic agreement between the Prime Minister and the provinces concerning transfer payments and the Canada social transfer for health and social programs. This is what federal co-operation is all about and we will continue to act in this way with all of the provinces.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I are so anxious to be sovereign and to administer on our own the $33 billion in taxes we hand over to these people, instead of having to listen to ridiculous answers like that one.

I am merely asking this: will the minister admit that there are crying needs in health and education and that it is time this government, which refused any and all debate during the election campaign, transferred money to finance health and education? Those systems are in bad shape, yet the government has surplus funds coming out of its ears.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions) Lib.]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member ought to acknowledge what we have already done under the historic agreement signed by the Prime Minister and all the provincial premiers. When he talks of sovereignty, what also has to be acknowledged is what the sovereignists have done to the Quebec economy.

Taxation

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, some executive salaries in this country are obscene. There are bank CEOs taking home 7 and even 8 figure compensation packages that are 500 times the wage of their own employees. The gap between the highest and the lowest earners is wider than ever, making these inflated salaries even more unacceptable.

Why does the government not stop subsidizing this obscenity by denying corporations tax deductions on salaries in excess of $300,000?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the role that our financial services sector plays in Canada's economy.

It directly employs over 500,000 Canadians. It is one of the biggest exporters that we have, with more than 50% of its revenue coming from offshore and about 85% of the global taxes it pays are paid here in this country.

I am very pleased at the efforts that our institutions in the financial services sector have made on behalf of all Canadians.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking here about a question of simple fairness. The minister should step outside of his bubble and recognize that hard working Canadians do not regard a $17.4 million salary as simply the price of doing business. There is another word for it. It is greed.

The federal government should get out of the business of subsidizing through the tax system corporations that pay these salaries. Has the government not done enough lately for millionaires?

Why will the government not put a reasonable cap on deductions for bloated corporate salaries?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, we live in an extremely competitive world. I am pleased that many of our Canadians are reaching out and establishing new markets around the globe.

We see what the Prime Minister is doing by leading team Canada to China which has a market potential of 1.2 billion people. To try to put Canadians at an economic disadvantage vis-à-vis all our other competitors in the world would be to hamstring them, and we will not do it.

Ethics Counsellor

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Deputy Prime Minister. Did officials in the office of the Prime Minister prepare a memorandum proposing the answers that might be given by the Business Development Bank in response to inquiries about the Prime Minister's intervention on the Auberge Grand-Mère loan?

If so, how could that be described as an arm's length arrangement between a crown corporation and the Government of Canada?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that the only preparation for question period of which I am aware is the one that comes out of my department.

I can say to the member that he continues to draw a link with Mr. Jean Carle. A former chief of staff to the leader of the Conservative Party now works for government in a senior position. A former chief of staff to the Deputy Prime Minister, under the government in which he served, now works in a senior position in this government.

That former chief of staff of yours is my deputy minister and is a qualified individual, as qualified to work for government as Jean Carle.

[The Speaker]

I know the Minister of Industry will wish to address his remarks to the Chair.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would prefer to have him address his remarks to the question.

The ethics counsellor told the industry committee that the Prime Minister chose not to go to court to finalize the sale of the Grand-Mère shares. The Deputy Prime Minister knows that a promise to purchase is enforceable in law. An option to purchase is not.

Was the reason that the Prime Minister did not go to court the fact that there was only an option to purchase? Otherwise, why did he waste three years seeking some other purchaser instead of going directly to court to enforce what he considered to be a binding agreement?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, through you to the leader of the Conservative Party and further to his earlier question, the individual ultimately responsible for preparing response lines in question period for the minister on this file is my deputy minister and his former chief of staff.

Auditor General

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

Mr. Speaker, in his 2000 report the auditor general slapped CIDA for what he termed a lack of due diligence for awarding a $6.3 million contract to Transelec.

Transelec failed to meet CIDA's own guidelines for relevant experience and Canadian ownership. According to the auditor general, Transelec should not have been selected for prequalification. Why did the minister responsible for CIDA ignore her own guidelines and award a $6.3 million contract to Transelec?

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Minister for International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, this question has been answered many times before. The officials referred to the then minister seven companies as potential competitors. Three companies went to competition. Transelec was one of them.

In an open competition Transelec came in 30% below the competition, or $2 million less than any other bidder. The program that Transelec put in is now completed and taxpayers in fact saved money.