Debates of Feb. 22nd, 2001

The Economy

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition to take a look at the transcript of the press conference that he gave earlier in the week. He kept begging the press to ask him, to use his words, “Ask me about the recession. Ask me about the recession. Don't ask me about my litigation fees. Ask me about the recession”.

That is exactly what he was saying. I would suggest to the Leader of the Opposition that what he might want to do is to go on a speaking tour of the United States and the litigation fees alone would turn the U.S. economy around.

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

Mr. Speaker, that is about as on topic as me talking about him registering his ships in other places and avoiding taxes and having people in other countries build his ships when the shipbuilding industry here could use that business. Some of us cannot avoid those taxes.

A falling dollar means a weakened economy. It zaps the buying power of Canadians. It puts our economy at a disadvantage. He might be at an advantage by taking his business offshore but how much lower will the dollar have to go? It fell below 65 cents just a few minutes ago. That is not my fault. I did not talk it down.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

The question, Mr. Speaker, is how much lower can the Leader of the Opposition stoop?

If the Leader of the Opposition wants a report on what is going on in the economy, let me give some examples. In addition to housing starts, let us look at our retail sales. In December our retail sales were the strongest they have been in the last three years. Our trade surplus is $5.8 billion. That trade surplus is a record monthly surplus for this country.

Industry Canada

[Brian Pallister, Canadian Alliance, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, just last summer Industry Canada renegotiated a sweetheart loan for $32 million to Buhler Industries in Winnipeg with no strings attached.

This week, after less than eight months, Buhler Industries announced the closure of their Winnipeg plant and its relocation to Fargo, North Dakota, guaranteeing the loss of over 200 jobs.

Would the industry minister explain to the House how creating jobs in North Dakota is a benefit to Canadian taxpayers?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, neither the Department of Industry nor the Government of Canada have any interest in creating jobs in North Dakota. Our interest is in creating jobs in Canada, and the member knows that.

[Brian Pallister, Canadian Alliance, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, if that was the case, then why did the industry minister preside over such an occurrence? We have in fact transported jobs from Manitoba in Canada to Fargo in North Dakota. We have assured it happening by our taxpayers' $32 million funding that transfer.

I ask the minister again to demonstrate he has some understanding of his own department as much as he has of many of the other members' departments in the House. The fact remains that Canadian taxpayers should not be fleeced to bolster the United States economy. The fact remains that $32 million is a lot of cross border shopping.

I again ask the minister why it is that Canadian people should be paying taxes to create jobs in North Dakota?

[Brian Tobin, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the member knows that the dispute in question regarding this particular operation is a labour dispute.

If the member is suggesting that parliament should somehow intervene with respect to the rights of workers and/or the union or the rights of the company, then I wish he would tell us how he would suggest that we intervene at this time.

Employment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, during the latest election campaign, the Liberal candidates promised change to the employment insurance system. Some even made personal commitments. I am thinking of the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport and of the Minister of Public Works. Even the Prime Minister acknowledged errors in the employment insurance plan.

Nothing in the minister's proposed bill honours the Liberal candidates' promises, especially with respect to seasonal workers.

I would ask the minister if she intends to amend her bill to honour election promises.

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, we have presented a balanced package of amendments for the House. The bill is now before committee. Witnesses are being heard. The committee will make up its own mind, and we respect that process.

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

Mr. Speaker, the contents of the bill do not correspond to the promises made, particularly in the case of seasonal workers.

The Bloc has been saying this for a long time. For months, we have been asking questions. Ministers made commitments during the campaign, even one candidate, now an MP, said yesterday in committee “This is a cry from the heart. People are living in abject poverty. We cannot wait”. These are the words of a Liberal.

The minister is waiting. Will she honour the promises? Will she break new ground and get the Liberals to honour their promise, for once?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, our approach is to ensure that the bill makes its way through the normal legislative process. The hon. member's approach is to block the bill, to split the bill. Block and split is nothing new from that party.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the mayor of Forestville, Gaston Tremblay, also reacted with shock when his region found itself facing the shutdown of a large multinational corporation.

This region has diversified its economy by creating numerous small businesses that rely on such natural resources as peat bogs, forestry, outfitting and the shell fishery, thus creating many seasonal jobs.

Does the minister realize that her bill is driving people out of the regions, and that the solution is an employment insurance plan which supports their economic activities and not one which destroys them?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, what the members on the other side of the House do not seem to realize is that employment insurance is but one tool that we use. It is a very important tool but it is there for Canadians who find themselves between jobs.

Another very important part of the formula is to build with economic development a diversified economy in the communities in Quebec and in New Brunswick. We are doing just that.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister stubbornly maintain such a rigid and close-minded attitude when, year after year, she rakes in an EI fund surplus in the billions?

[Jane Stewart, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, how can the hon. member be so stubborn as to say to his constituents that their only future is to rely on employment insurance? That is not a future at all. Benefits need to be there and they will be there.

However, it is about more than that. It is about working together with the provinces and with communities to diversify economies so everyone can benefit.

National Defence

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped to address my question to the Prime Minister, but perhaps the Minister of National Defence could address it.

The Prime Minister insisted yesterday that Canada lacks sufficient information to take a position on the U.S. missile defence system. The Germans do not lack information. They have expressed grave reservations. The French do not lack information. The Italians do not lack information.

Would the defence minister acknowledge that it is not a lack of information but a lack of conviction and courage that prevents the Government of Canada from condemning the national missile defence proposal?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, quite the contrary. The United States has not yet said what kind of system it will employ in terms of national missile defence. It has not given the parameters of its project. It has not given the timing of it. It has not asked Canada to participate because it has not made the decision itself on the parameters of its own program.

Meanwhile, we are monitoring the situation. We have brought to the attention of the United States our concerns about global security and the need to take into consideration those issues. We will continue to monitor it.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Italy, Germany and France do not seem to have a problem in understanding how dangerous this proposal is. The NMD proposal violates the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty. Canada used to enjoy a reputation for leadership in promoting disarmament treaties, but sadly, under this Prime Minister and under this government, that reputation is in peril.

Why will the government not live up to Canada's proud tradition? Why will the government not just show some leadership and condemn the NMD madness?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and this government have made it very clear that we are concerned with global security issues. We are concerned also with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We are watching this situation very carefully. We are in dialogue with the United States on the matter. We are in dialogue with our other allies, as is the United States.

We have made it very clear that the ABM treaty is an important treaty, that it is important to address it and that it is important to talk to the Russians, the Chinese and all our other allies.

Business Development Bank Of Canada

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

In June 1999 Michel Vennat and the BDC board stripped the bank president of his role in approving or rejecting loans just days after he had expressed his intention to call the Auberge Grand-Mère loan. In this letter the president wrote Mr. Vennat and said:

The authority to approve loans in the absence of the president ... affects the arm's length relationship which exists between the bank and the government, and has the potential to create the perception of political interference.

Did the government approve of this stripping of the bank president's normal powers?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member wants me to use the House of Commons to interfere in a court proceeding now underway. I do not think this is the way to use the House of Commons. If the leader of the Conservative Party wants to do that, he has to bear the responsibility for this improper interference.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me remind the Deputy Prime Minister of the law. Under section 114(2) of the Financial Administration Act, a bylaw change like this must be brought to the appropriate ministry, the Minister of Industry, and to the Treasury Board of the Government of Canada.

Was that notice sent? Did the government support the change? Is there any other crown corporation in which the essential powers of the president have been stripped away? Why is there this special treatment of the Business Development Bank?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I reject completely the unwarranted premise of the hon. member's question. He really has a lot of nerve lecturing me about the law. Which law school did he ever graduate from?

Fundraising

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the finance minister and the CIDA minister were offended when we made reference to their choice of dinner companions. Last spring they dined with FACT, an organization Department of Citizenship and Immigration lawyers have now identified as a fundraising front to the Tamil tigers terrorist group.

Will the government make it clear to all its ministers that attending fundraisers for FACT hurts Canada's interest and puts innocent lives in jeopardy.

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend is starting out with something which I do not think is correct. I am advised that this dinner, a social and cultural event involving the Tamil New Year, was not a fundraising dinner. It was also attended by some 25 elected people at the municipal and Ontario Conservative provincial levels, including the editor of the Toronto Sun .

Is he trying to smear them as well in saying they are knowingly attending a fundraising dinner for terrorism? That could not be accurate and what he is saying could not be accurate either.