Debates of Feb. 7th, 2002

Health

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, let me remind the hon. member, far from stalling, the Prime Minister and the premiers signed an agreement in September 2000 in which they all recommitted to the five principles to the Canada Health Act and agreed to an eight point plan for the renewal of health care.

In addition, at that time the federal government added 21 billion new dollars over the next five years through the CHST for the funding of health care.

The government has not been standing still with its partners in the provinces in relation to the renewal of health care in this country.

[Rob Merrifield, Canadian Alliance, Yellowhead, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the provinces are threatening to pull out of the social union if something is not done in 90 days, while the Romanow report is all questions and no answers. We are no closer to a federal solution now than we were when Mr. Romanow started last May.

Since 1993 the government has spent $243 million just studying health care and it is still studying. The train has left the station and the provinces are already on their way so when will the government get on board?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the government has taken a leadership role in the renewal of health care. That is what the accord was about in September 2000.

In fact I am a little surprised that the Canadian Alliance, of all parties, should suggest that it is the federal government that would impose a solution upon Canadians and the provinces in relation to the renewal of health care.

Health care is a national program, a national asset. That is why Mr. Romanow is going to begin a national dialogue with Canadians. I am committed to working with the provinces and the territories to renew health care in this country.

Airport Security

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

Would the minister tell Canada's multicultural community that he is aware of their concerns and assure them that visible minority groups and individuals would not be subject to unwarranted or overly harsh treatment at security points in Canada's airports.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member raised that question. Transport Canada does not conduct racial profiling and we will never do so. We will respect the basic dignity of Canadians no matter what their racial origin. This is the hallmark of the government. It will be the hallmark of the new security agency that will soon be established.

Health

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, based on the comments the health minister made a few moments ago, I trust she agrees with us that the interim report on the future of health care, tabled yesterday by Roy Romanow, is significant in terms of the tone it sets out and the issues raised for this very critical decision for all Canadians. She may also realize that the worst thing that can happen is for any province to pre-empt the outcome of this very important and constructive process.

Will the minister seek an agreement from all provinces and territories that no precipitous action will be taken before the outcome of the Romanow commission?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, we have already indicated that we would like the provinces to await the outcome of the Romanow national discussions and recommendations before undertaking major changes to their delivery of health care in their respective jurisdictions.

I do hope the hon. member is not suggesting that any of us in the delivery of our health care services can afford to stand still and not make the kinds of decisions that are part and parcel of the operation of any health care system.

Justice

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, access to justice is a fundamental right in our democracy and that is why the 40% cut to legal aid by the B.C. Liberals is a devastating blow to justice. In fact the chief justice has said that legal aid to low income Canadians is an essential public service.

Why then is the Minister of Justice so silent when Mr. Campbell is clearly violating the federal-provincial agreement to maintain current levels of funding?

What action will the minister take to stop Mr. Campbell from stomping on the constitutional rights of low income Canadians?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the member is pointing at a very important question today.

The question of legal aid is of course about access to justice. A decision on that side is always taken by the provincial government. Indeed the Canadian government is getting involved through funding.

I am pleased to announce that we increased the funding to the provinces last year. We went from $80 million on a yearly basis to $100 million.

Minister of National Defence

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

Mr. Speaker, I remind the House what the Minister of National Defence said on January 28 during the take note debate. He said:

Canadians will treat people in our care as detainees...and that means treating them as prisoners of war until such other determination has been made.

We know that they have not been treated as prisoners of war and no determinations were made. This is once again about the integrity of the minister's word in parliament and nothing in the world will change that.

Does the minister stand by his earlier statement and, if so, has he not in his response provided inaccurate information to the House once again?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

No, Mr. Speaker. What I said was that while any prisoners were in our custody they would be treated according to the Geneva conventions in the standard of a prisoner of war, but that we would turn the detainees over to the United States. That is where the determination would be made.

Fisheries and Oceans

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

Mr. Speaker, I expect a more straightforward reply from the minister of fisheries.

The minister of fisheries is aware of the crisis in Canso, Nova Scotia over the inability to access fish resource to keep its plant operating.

I know the minister has agreed to meet with the stakeholders next week to discuss the 3o redfish proposal submitted last December and to look for solutions, but will he give assurances that all stakeholders, including the town, province, union, trawlermen and Seafreez, will be invited, and will he bring to the table a concrete proposal for quota to be processed in Canso to put the people in this hard working, hard luck town back to work?

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his genuine interest in the plight of the people of Canso. The member will realize that I get a lot of requests for quota allocation. The government can do a lot of things but it cannot multiply fish. I understand that left to their own devices in their natural habitat fish have been known to multiply.

Within the limits of the quota allowed in proper conservation of the resource, I hope to have a favourable answer for the people of Canso.

Airline Industry

[James Moore, Canadian Alliance, Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today Air Canada announced a $1.25 billion loss, Canada 3000 is dead and the transport minister still has not figured out that he is partly to blame because of his destructive policies.

In the December budget the government announced that it would collect $430 million with the new airport tax, yet it will spend $340 million on the new security regime. That means in the government's own numbers there is a $90 million surplus in year one going to general revenue. This is a huge tax grab by the government which will provide a huge disincentive to flying.

Why is the transport minister surprised that seven air carriers are dead on his watch?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately the hon. member across the Chamber does not understand the facts. The fact of the matter is the government has guaranteed that over the course of the five year program this will not be a revenue enhancing measure at all. Indeed, the legislation now before the House commits us to reduce the charge to the extent that the revenues over that period exceed the costs.

[James Moore, Canadian Alliance, Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in year one it is a $90 million surplus that will go into general revenue. In year five it is a $140 million surplus will go into general revenue. It is a huge tax grab.

On September 11 it was the United States that was attacked. The Americans have a much firmer air security regime than we have. They have done much more in reforms. They are doing it for one-third of the cost. Why? Because they do not have a government that is using the September 11 attacks to fill up its coffers with a huge tax grab.

Why is the government not learning a smart lesson from the Americans?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, once again the member does not understand the facts. In the early years when the government is buying equipment we will spend more than we receive. In latter years it will be the opposite. We are committed in legislation. It is very simple. If there is an excess in revenue, we will lower the charge.

Human Resources Development

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we know, the RCMP is pursuing its investigation in the case of the Conili Star company, which received a grant of more than $700,000 from Human Resources Development Canada to create 160 jobs.

Could the Minister of Human Resources Development tell us what progress has been made so far in this investigation?

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

Mr. Speaker, clearly that would be a question for the RCMP.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since all the employees were fired and no job was created, could the minister tell us if she intends to ask Conili Star to refund Human Resources Development Canada for the grant that it received?

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

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member rightly pointed out, the information is with the RCMP and those questions are best put there.

Access to Information

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

Mr. Speaker, the shutting down of the Access to Information Act and the bringing down of a veil of secrecy on ministerial exempt staff expense accounts is very disturbing indeed. However there is at least one ray of light shining through that dark Liberal fog because the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has said “The treasury board guidelines don't stop the minister of Indian and northern affairs from releasing whatever information he wants to release. You can call me and I'll give it to you”.

Therefore, I am calling the minister of Indian and northern affairs. Will he give me his expense account statements and those of his exempt staff for last year?

[Bob Nault, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

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

He deserves applause, Mr. Speaker. Let me also quote the solicitor general on his expense accounts, “I have no big issue with this. Every cent I've ever spent has been published from day one and I'm not too fearful of anybody seeing what I have done”.

Therefore my question for the Prime Minister is this. Does he have the decency to follow the lead of his minister of Indian affairs and his solicitor general and produce his expense account statements and those of his exempt staff for us to see them too?

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

Mr. Speaker, the member for St. Albert is trying to play games. He knows exactly what the guidelines are and what the advice of the Treasury Board Secretariat is to all departments. The fact is we should find a balance between the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, and we should respect both legislations. In that sense, it is clear that all departments should follow those guidelines.