Debates of Nov. 1st, 2002

Terrorism

[Aileen Carroll, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, as has been said several times in the House, we have listed the military wing of Hezbollah. In that regard we join all of our other allies. We have not listed the political wing of Hezbollah, nor have the British, nor have the Europeans.

If the hon. member or anyone has any information regarding terrorist activities in Canada, it is incumbent on them to bring them forward to the Solicitor General, which he made adequately clear in the House yesterday.

[Darrel Stinson, Canadian Alliance, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government would have us believe that Hezbollah kills thousands of people with its left hand and makes peace with its right. However CSIS commentary number 63 shows that after funds are raised by the political wing there is “no way of controlling how the funds are actually used”. The entire group is controlled by Hassan Nasrallah who had VIP seats at the Prime Minister's francophone speech.

What proof can the government provide that the political funds raised by Hezbollah in Canada are not being used to further fund terrorism?

[Aileen Carroll, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, in listing Hezbollah's military wing we freeze all its assets and we prohibit any fundraising. It does not have charitable status in Canada and the activities to which the hon. member expresses his concerns and views are simply being very carefully monitored by CSIS at all times.

Taxation

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, not only will the government not participate in any debate on how the surpluses ought to be used, but it will not discuss the fiscal imbalance issue either, going so far as to deny the existence of such an imbalance.

This issue is the subject of public debate in any case, and there is even unanimity, both among all opposition parties in the House of Commons and among provincial governments, on the existence of a fiscal imbalance.

Will the minister commit to taking part in a real debate, since his management style is to ignore people's concerns and since he is reneging on the commitment made by the Prime Minister during the 2000 elections?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is prepared to discuss the issue of fiscal imbalance. That is what we are doing. We have explained why it does not exist. We have also explained that, in a federation where the provinces all have access to the same source of revenues and even have a monopoly on natural resource royalties—and Canada is a country rich in natural resources—they are responsible for managing their finances to the best of their abilities, and some do better than others.

There could be a debate in Quebec on why, of all the provinces, Quebec is the deepest in debt, has the highest taxes and is spending in many areas, not necessarily health.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister must be aware that the same taxpayers are paying income tax to the provinces and to the federal government, and that these taxpayers realize that they are sending too much money to the federal government, when the services they consider as essential are provided by the provinces.

If the minister really had the best interests of the taxpayers at heart, would he not recognize that there is a fiscal imbalance?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the International Monetary Fund recently determined that Canada had the healthiest public finances in the G-7, and that Canada also has the strongest economic growth in the G-7.

The worst mistake we could make, in my view, is to change direction. The provinces have much lower deficits than ten years ago. Their situation has improved as well.

There is no fiscal imbalance in Canada, but there is definitely an obligation to support one another to provide Canadians with the strongest growth possible.

Health

[John Williams, Canadian Alliance, St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it only took one day for the finance minister to revert to typical Liberal spending. On Wednesday he touted fiscal prudence and responsibility, but by Thursday there was a call for an additional $5 billion in new spending.

The government says that there is no money for health care and yet it finds $72 million for gun control, bringing that up to $900 million; $8 million to Communications Canada, that discredited organization that breaks every rule in the book; and $100,000 for marijuana research.

I do not know what the minister is smoking but he sure has the money munchies with taxpayer dollars. What does he say?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, all the estimates that were tabled this week are included in the fiscal framework of the government. I think the member would agree with us that we must have very good spending for the citizens of our country.

What does the member have against giving some money to CIDA? What does the member have against giving more money to the health institutes to have better health research? What about the fact that we will also help with pay adjustments for our army personnel?

All this spending is worth--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Prince George—Bulkley Valley.

Government Spending

[Dick Harris, Canadian Alliance, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, no matter how we cut it, it is another $5 billion up in smoke. While the minister continues to blow smoke with his $5 billion spending program, Canadians are kind of concerned about things like health care, the state of our military and the quality of life for our seniors.

Instead of blowing smoke, when will the government's spending programs reflect the real priorities of Canadians? When will that start?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, what about affordable housing? I think all members of Parliament are for the fact that we should improve affordable housing and they will find us spending money on that.

What about disability pensions for veterans affairs people? Are they saying that we should not pay disability pensions to our people?

What about homelessness? Are they saying that we should not spend money for that big problem?

I think the opposition is completely wrong.

Government Contracts

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the list of Liberal scandals is getting longer and longer: the Auberge Grand-Mère, the sponsorship program, the resignations of the former Minister of National Defence, Solicitor General, and Minister of Public Works and Government Services. Now Democracy Watch has added to the list by establishing a direct link between the awarding of highly lucrative government contracts and the amounts contributed to the Liberal Party of Canada by the companies awarded those contracts.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister agree that it is high time to cast some light on this government's system of awarding contracts, by calling at last for an independent public inquiry?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite is no doubt aware, having listened to the excellent speech by the Prime Minister as I did, that he has said here in this House that, in addition to the rules on transparency already in place, there will be additional rules within the bill I myself will be introducing before the Holidays. These will address leadership races, the nomination process, limits on corporate donations and on those from the unions, of course. There will be a whole series of other rules to enhance transparency—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. Member for Laval-Centre.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we have been waiting ten years for some proof of transparency, and are still waiting. The government's handling of surpluses, its methods for awarding contracts, and its hesitancy about political party funding, are a clear indication of this.

Are we to understand that only those companies that are cozy with the Liberal Party of Canada will benefit shamelessly from the Prime Minister's largesse and that of his government?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat for the hon. member's benefit: the contributions are already public and the rules of transparency will be enhanced by the bill that is going to be introduced shortly. Finally, I might point out to her and her party that, when we reinforced the rules for third party transparency with Bill C-2, her party voted against it.

Kyoto Protocol

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, developing countries are now saying that they have serious doubts about ever being part of the Kyoto protocol at any time in the future. Now developing countries are out. We have no clean energy credits. Eight out of ten provinces are opposing Kyoto. Industry is out. It seems everyone is out except the government. It is simply out to lunch on this issue.

When will the government agree to a made in Canada solution and give up on this flawed bureaucratic Kyoto protocol?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I find it absolutely incredible that Canadians know what the Kyoto protocol is all about. Like so many international undertakings, the developing world will be the first phase, which is the period between 2008 and 2012. After that we will look at including developing countries.

We have an incredible opportunity for Canadians and Canadian technology to be on the cutting edge, to come up with technological advances that we can then export and help developing worlds deal with this very important issue. Canadians understand.

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the petroleum industry like any business requires a stable economic climate and long term planning. Thanks to the Liberals' continued bungling of the Kyoto accord, industry cannot count on anything but uncertainty. It has no idea what the government has planned other than imposing Kyoto on Canadians.

Husky Oil and Petro-Canada pulled back $5 billion of investment in western Canada. Will the government now consider a made in Canada approach or will it continue to force Kyoto and drive investment like this away?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, clearly, we have said two things throughout this entire negotiation, which is well over five years in the making. We have said that no region will be disproportionately burdened nor will any sector be disproportionately burdened, which is why we continue to talk to industry and to our provincial counterparts.

I will point out to the hon. member opposite that Syncrude, for example, has reduced its emissions intensity by 22% since 1990 levels and aims to attain a 45% reduction. The industry understands what we are up to.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

Mr. Speaker, we know that experiences in early years influence a child's development, affecting lifelong health, well-being and learning abilities.

While conditions are improving, the general health status of Canada's aboriginal population is still below the national average. Sadly, first nations and Inuit children have higher risks of infant mortality. There are higher risks of FAS and poor nutrition and too many babies are born with unhealthy birth weights.

In the last throne speech the government committed to enhance early child development programs for aboriginal children--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. Secretary of State for Children and Youth.

[Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Liberal, Secretary of State (Children and Youth)]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that the early childhood development strategy for first nations and other aboriginal children was launched yesterday at the Oneida of the Thames First Nation in Ontario in the presence of Chief Terry Doxtator of the Oneida, Chief Joe Miskokomon of the Chippewas and all their parents and children.

The strategy provides $320 million over five years to improve and expand early childhood development programs for aboriginal children by building on existing programs and services for first nations and other aboriginal children, including head start and programs addressing fetal alcohol syndrome.

Grain Transportation

[Bev Desjarlais, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in the 1970s and 1980s the Canadian government bought a fleet of hopper cars which were then leased back to railroads to haul western grain. The government no longer wants the cars but a farmer rail car coalition is prepared to acquire and manage the fleet. The coalition is broadly based and it has a business plan ensuring that benefits will flow back to all western farmers.

Will the transport minister commit to turn these cars over to the farmer rail car coalition for the sum of $1?