Debates of May 18th, 2001

The Economy

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, very clearly, we must always be vigilant with respect to inflation, but the figure the member is referring to is known as the headline rate. The one and two spread has to do with what is known as the core rate. Yesterday's figure was 2.1%.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Like I said, Mr. Speaker, not a good record. It did not even last 24 hours.

One of the big drivers of inflation has been energy costs such as home heating fuel. Just before the last election the minister arranged for a rebate program so that individuals could get some relief from that. Sadly, many of the people who received those rebates were convicts in jail.

How is it that convicts in jail ended up with a lot of the relief rather than senior citizens who really deserved that relief?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that is simply not true. Some 99% of Canadians who received the home heating rebate were Canadians who deserved it.

There is no doubt, as we have stated, that there were anomalies in the whole situation, the same anomalies that the Alberta government found when it made its rebates.

I would simply point out that there are 11 million Canadians who received the home heating rebate.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one thing the finance minister said is that when these massive tax cuts wend their way through the system, everything will be fine.

A recent poll, however, found that 76% of Canadians have not noticed any drop on their paycheques. The finance minister's own focus test group came up with exactly the same conclusion.

Why is it that Canadians cannot see that tax reduction on their paycheques if those tax reductions are so massive?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, those tax reductions are 21% on average. That is truly significant. For a family of four with an income of $60,000, it is 18%. A single mother or a single father raising a family and earning a salary of $25,000, he or she will now receive a child benefit of over $2,500. That is significant amount of money going toward helping Canadian families and we are proud of it.

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

Mr. Speaker, the bank needs to reduce interest rates to stimulate our economy but it needs to increase interest rates to fight inflation and to save our sinking dollar.

How will the finance minister solve this dilemma?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the agreement between the government and the Bank of Canada at 1% to 3%, mid point 2%, the trend rate, which is the most important rate, not in any single month but the trend rate over a series of months, is the core rate and that core rate is at 2.1%.

As to the basic question, I would simply point out to the hon. member that under our system the Bank of Canada is independent.

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

Mr. Speaker, this issue is very important to seniors. An inflation rate of 2% means that the value of a dollar goes down to about 82 cents in 10 years. The 3.6% rate, which is the rate the seniors are interested in and the actual rate, not the fudged one that the bank uses, means their dollar goes down to about 70 cents in 10 years.

This inflation is a hidden thief of savings and purchasing power for everyone and it is hard on seniors. What does he propose—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt about the pernicious effects of inflation. That is why the government signed a five year agreement. It has enabled us to control inflation in the country.

The fact is that as a result of the actions of the government and the Bank of Canada we are now considered around the world as a low inflation country and we are going to stay that way.

The Environment

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the president of the United States announced an ambitious energy plan to make extensive use of fossil energy, including fossil fuels from Canada.

This plan is already generating a great deal of controversy at the international level, since it goes against all the efforts made in recent decades to protect the environment and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Could the Prime Minister tell us how Canada intends to react to the Bush plan and whether the position presented this morning by the Minister of the Environment, who said that he disagrees with the direction taken by the United States, is the government's official position?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, as we review the plans announced by President Bush, we will be looking, first, for balance between the supply side and the demand side of the equation. We will be looking for virtues like energy efficiency and energy conservation. We will be looking for diversification among our energy sources, including renewables, alternative fuels and new innovations like fuel cells.

We will be looking, in particular, for the principles of sustainable development which are the guiding principles of Canadian policy.

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

Mr. Speaker, Europe strongly condemns the Bush plan and the reaction of the president of the European Union, Mr. Larsson, reflects the unhealthy climate generated by the announcement of that policy. He said “the discussion between friends no longer exists”.

Given the minister's evasive answers, is the government telling us that it will support the White House in its totally irresponsible approach, which is incompatible with climate change problems ?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the plan announced by President Bush is a domestic plan for the United States of America.

Within Canada, we will be insisting that insofar as that plan affects us that we will expect respect for Canadian needs and priorities, respect for our sovereignty, respect for our regulatory processes, respect for the sustainable development principles and the security of the environment that are fundamental to Canadians.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, President Bush's energy plan even includes oil drilling in the Great Lakes, which is liable to cause significant damage to the St. Lawrence.

Could the minister say clearly today whether Canada intends to oppose such a project?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the plans of the United States with respect to further drilling programs are not particularly clear at this point.

I would make this fundamental point. Insofar as those plans impact upon Canadians and Canada, we will insist that all the environmental rules and regulations of our country are fully applied and fully respected according to the law.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of insisting but rather of demanding.

Canada, minus Quebec, has the world's worst record for carbon dioxide emissions per capita. What is more, Ontario and the northeastern United States produce sulphur emissions that end up falling as acid rain on Quebec, damaging our forests and lakes.

Is the minister aware that the Bush plan, with its coal fueled generating plants, will undermine all the years of effort Quebecers have been putting into acid rain reduction?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, we have indicated that we disagree with the United States position with respect to climate change. The Americans have indicated that they do not intend to implement the Kyoto protocol. From the Canadian point of view, we remain committed to the objectives in the Kyoto protocol. We have already invested $1.1 billion toward that end and that will take us one-third of the way toward our goal.

From our point of view, climate change is a serious global issue and it will be treated seriously by the Government of Canada and by all Canadians.

Energy

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the same minister, who appears to be still beating around the bush. My question involves yesterday's announcement by the president about U.S. energy policy, one which will demand more and more energy exports from Canada and tighter U.S. control over energy supplies and our prices. Today, because of NAFTA, as the minister knows, we have very little control over security, supply and pricing.

Would the minister make a commitment that before Canada enters into any new export agreements with the United States for energy, we negotiate new terms under which Canada will be able to control its own energy supply and its own commitment to completing the Kyoto agreements?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, obviously we will put the needs and priorities of Canadians first. That is the fundamental obligation of the Government of Canada and it will be honoured by the government.

With respect to climate change, we have already indicated that we intend to fulfil our obligations under the Kyoto protocol. We have made substantial investments to that end already. I am pleased with the degree of engagement that we are now achieving from the provinces. From Canada's point of view, the Kyoto obligations are critical. We intend to make sure that Canada abides by the undertakings that we have made.

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

Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, the oil companies are making huge profits and paying less in taxes, thanks to the Minister of Finance, and Canadians are now paying California prices at the pumps. We are being gouged at the pumps.

Would the minister tell us what the government will do to make sure Canadians control their own price at the pumps and that they are not being gouged by big oil in this country and big oil in the United States of America?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the largest factor driving consumer oil prices at the present time is the international price of crude, over which Canadians have very little control. The influence of OPEC is obviously a very serious factor.

To the extent that action can be taken within Canada, we have indicated the kind of action that is already on the books in terms of the home heating fuel rebate of last winter. The Minister of Finance has indicated that he is prepared to revisit the tax question if the provinces are willing to come to the table and participate.

Census Records

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday a class action suit was filed against the crown claiming that the long form of the census violates a person's right to privacy and discriminates against 20% of the population.

Statistics Canada has told complainants they would be taped and possibly jailed or fined for not co-operating. The long form of the census requires sensitive information, including mental infirmity, sexual orientation, mortgage payments and family time be filed.

How does the government justify this collection of detailed and intimate information? And, who guarantees the security of this big brother privacy intrusion?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the form of the census is established and carried out by Statistics Canada which operates to some degree at arm's length from the government. It is a highly respected agency that has a firstclass record of protecting the privacy of its information and I am sure that will continue.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, this is not very reassuring.

Given the class action filed in Quebec, can the government inform this House as to whether legal opinions were sought on the content of these questions before they were made public?

What assurance can the government give us that these questions are not in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?