House of Commons Hansard #71 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was refugees.
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, in the federal government's propaganda document, transfer payments are hurting its visibility, so it took a different tack with Quebec.
My question is for the President of the Privy Council. Is this not the real reason for the drop in federal government transfer payments for education, and the explanation for its stubborn insistence on a millennium scholarships program that nobody wanted?
Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Mr. Speaker, as I have had occasion to point out, transfer payments have increased. They have never been as high as they are today, if one takes into account the increase in the value of tax points.
If the Bloc Quebecois is so intent on scandal, why does it not ask its head office to release the infamous Plan O, which would have squandered over $16 billion of Quebecers' savings in the vain hope of calming the markets after a yes in the referendum?
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is the smallest investment in education in 30 years.
Does this document not also make it clear why, in September 1999, contrary to all expectations, the federal government terminated its agreement with Communication Québec and set up its own communications program, 1-800-O-Canada?
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for her question, because it gives me an opportunity to point out that 1-800-O-Canada is one of the rare telephone services to have a human voice at the other end of the line, and it is a great success.
The reason we ended this contract with Quebec and with Manitoba as well is because, with a central telephone system for the entire country, we must naturally be able to answer in both official languages.
Dave Chatters Canadian Alliance Athabasca, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Alberta government has officially declared the province a drought disaster area. Almost 90% of the provincial agricultural area does not have enough soil moisture for annual cropping this year.
In my riding conditions are reminiscent of the dust bowl of the 1930s with precipitation at 20% of the last 50 year average. Farmers are crippled by this drought and it could get worse. Forage crops in many areas have already been lost and forest fire conditions have been extreme in northern central Alberta for some weeks.
What is the government prepared to do to help farmers deal with these extreme drought conditions?
Larry McCormick LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, certainly it is very unfortunate about the conditions our western neighbours are putting up with in regard to the pastures, but this year for the first time in history two million acres of pasture can be insured under crop insurance. That is a federal-provincial program. I certainly encourage all the ranchers to enlist in the program.
Also, the order in council on Friday approved a transfer to the Alberta treasury of its balance of the $500 million. This $126 million is available today.
Dave Chatters Canadian Alliance Athabasca, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Alberta provincial government has offered $73 million in emergency drought relief to the province's livestock and honey producers. The PFRA, supposedly existing to help farmers with water supply, ran out of money four days after the renewal of this year's budget.
Again, what will the government do to help farmers with this crisis of drought conditions?
Larry McCormick LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving me the chance to remind him that this money that is coming from the federal government to Alberta will be available today, but first the Alberta government has to sign the contract.
Alberta is one of the provinces that has not signed yet. As soon as the member encourages his premier to sign, this $126 million will be available.
Richard Marceau Bloc Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Speaker, the federal government's philosophy is abundantly clear: avoid transfer payments because they take away from the visibility of the federal government.
Does this not explain the federal government's refusal to negotiate with Quebec a true parental leave program that would cover all families?
Is it not because agreeing to negotiate would deprive Ottawa of its visibility, so families are left to bear the brunt of its refusal?
Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the government is guided by but one concern, providing Canadians with the best services and the best policies.
If Canadians find these services and policies to be good ones, it is certainly not the result of brainwashing; it is because they are being given good government.
Richard Marceau Bloc Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Speaker, there has been $500 million worth of propaganda since 1995. Page 12 of the document identifies the three problems the federal government has in Quebec: transfer payments, provincial autonomy and Canada-Quebec agreements.
Does this description of the federal government's problems in Quebec not explain the rigid federal attitude when it comes to having to negotiate with Quebec?
Does it not explain certain behaviours seen on the other side of this House when the time comes to discuss Quebec and its needs?
Stéphane Dion LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Mr. Speaker, it would not be difficult to demonstrate that ours is the most flexible federation possible. Every time the Bloc Quebecois tries to come up with a foreign model, we can prove to them that Canada is more flexible than other federations. For almost any example they can come up with, we can prove—as for example once again recently with the Young Offenders Act—that the practice in Quebec finds support and assistance within the Canadian federation.
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, there is yet another internal military document that contradicts the minister's statements in the House. This report clearly states that the end of the cold war did not eliminate the threat of foreign submarines in our waters. Rather, it compounded the threat. We now need better protection against rogue nations and modern day aggressor submarines than we ever did.
Why do so many internal military documents call for increased protection when the minister politically calls for cuts in capability?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has the situation all wrong. The helicopter that has been proposed to us by the military, and that we have accepted the statement of requirements for, will have a vigorous and robust anti-submarine capacity, but it will have that robust capacity to deal with the current threat by submarines and will not live in the past like my hon. colleague.
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, cold war requirements should be minimum standards, not maximum standards.
It is well known to all that the threat to Canada's maritime territory is largely subsurface, by many more nations' submarines than in the 1960s.
Submarines with missile capability are in place or can be available to rogue nations worldwide. Why would Canada ever consider decreasing its NATO anti-submarine capability by politically decreasing the fly time and range capabilities of the helicopters that hunt them?
John O'Reilly LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I draw to the attention of the member the committee meeting of last week in which Vice Admiral Maddison indicated to the member that all written requirements were written were written by him, written by the military to do a job in today's world, not in the cold war era in which the member seems to live.
These submarines, these helicopters, everything that the Canadian forces have re-equipped with, are on military specifications, and they meet the demands of Canada's national defence.
Yolande Thibeault Liberal Saint-Lambert, QC
Mr. Speaker, the community of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu has a long military history dating back to the 18th century. This tradition is being maintained with the presence of the Canadian forces in the region.
The Minister of National Defence recently made an important announcement in St-Jean, Quebec. Could the parliamentary secretary inform the House about this announcement?
John O'Reilly LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, last Friday the Minister of National Defence announced a five year, $45 million support contract with the Fort Saint-Jean campus for use of the site facilities. Four programs will be located there, bringing in 400 students annually: the military training assistance program for the partnership for peace countries; the Canadian forces management development school; the regular officer training plan year; and summer second language training.
The Fort Saint-Jean campus is a wonderful site and we are pleased to continue our relationship with it.
Lorne Nystrom NDP Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Canada is the only industrial country in the world where the national government has not made a serious financial contribution to public transit. Under its transportation equity act in the United States, the federal government there is now contributing some $10 billion Canadian per year to public transit.
Will the Minister of Finance now follow the lead in the United States and make a substantial contribution to public transit in this country? He has had seven long years to show some leadership. Will he show leadership on this issue now?
David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I have news for the hon. member. The Minister of Finance showed leadership last year by announcing a $2 billion infrastructure program to be matched by the municipalities and by the provinces, and much of that money can and will be spent on public transit.
Lorne Nystrom NDP Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if someone has stolen the Minister of Finance's tongue today. He is not responding to questions.
I will ask him again. Every year the Minister of Finance collects some $5 billion on excise taxes and GST from gasoline and diesel fuel and yet puts very little of it back into public transit in Canada, which reduces smog and is good for the environment.
Will the Minister of Finance now initiate a tax credit or tax exemption on public transit passes, which would be great for the environment? Why does he not show that leadership and show it now?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows the Canadian government, as do other governments, receives its sources of funding from a series of taxes. Those taxes are then spent in terms of the Canadian priorities.
Those priorities are very clear. The Minister of Transport has just outlined what is a very aggressive and a very imaginative program of the Canadian government, working with the provinces and with the municipalities to do so, in the same area as the Minister of the Environment has demonstrated.
We are doing it in a wide range of areas, working with the municipalities in terms of the environment and in terms of climate change as the Minister of Energy has outlined. The fact is we do receive money—
John Herron Progressive Conservative Fundy Royal, NB
Mr. Speaker, since the tragedy of Walkerton, Canadians have been demanding national drinking water standards. The least Canadians expect from the government is for it to invest in drinking water and sewage infrastructure.
Why is the environment minister failing to fight? Why is he so reluctant to promote green infrastructure to properly treat sewage and to ensure Canadians have safe drinking water?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure program just referred to, of which the entire opposition appears totally unaware, makes $2 billion available for infrastructure projects. Green infrastructure is the theme. In my province the figure is 75% must go to water, sewage and solid waste projects and 25% to other projects.
There is a major program which the Conservative Party never brought in when it was in power, and of which it is still unaware. I suggest the member look at the figures. He will find it is an important contribution to improving the infrastructure in municipalities.