House of Commons Hansard #155 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, the accusations against the thousands of employees of my department are totally unjustified. I would hope the member would stick to the substance of the matter.
As for the report, as I have said, if I had it I would table it in the House.
Rahim Jaffer Canadian Alliance Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Mr. Speaker, this is just a shame. The minister cannot find a $500,000 report and if it were not for our pushing, the minister would not even care. This report was commissioned by Alfonso Gagliano who left embroiled in scandal. The company he hired to produce the report donated $70,000 to the Liberals. It probably was written on a cocktail napkin.
My question for the minister is simple. Has he asked the RCMP to investigate what happened to this half a million dollar missing report?
Grants and ContributionsOral Question Period
Glengarry—Prescott—Russell Ontario
Liberal
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member is raising this. He claims to be interested in finding out what was in those documents. Yesterday before the committee and in the House I offered members access to all of the supporting documents which I have here. How many took me up on the offer? How many came, Mr. Speaker? Zero members of the House. That is how much the hon. member and his colleagues are interested in the facts. They have zero interest.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance can deny the existence of fiscal imbalance all he likes, but this reality, with its serious impact on health and education in Quebec and the provinces, will not go away just because he refuses to talk about it. The problem must be addressed.
Instead of stubbornly denying something which has been acknowledged not only by Bernard Landry, but by Mario Dumont, as well as by Jean Charest—who is not a sovereignist—and by all Canada's finance ministers, will the minister agree to talk about fiscal imbalance with his provincial colleagues at the next meeting of finance ministers?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I am certainly prepared to talk with my colleagues about topics that interest them.
That having been said, it is the Chambre de commerce du Quebec and the Conseil du patronat that are denying fiscal imbalance, not me.
According to the Conference Board projections for the next five years submitted by the Séguin commission, there is no imbalance.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
That is an odd reaction and an odd way of reasoning, Mr. Speaker. He takes the part of the report which suits him and ignores the overall conclusion that fiscal imbalance exists.
I therefore ask the Prime Minister, who set up the Romanow commission on health, an area which clearly falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec and of the provinces, if it would not be worth it to set up a commission to study all aspects of taxation and how it is shared, because that is an area which affects the federal government directly.
Is it not time to set up this sort of commission, which we have not had since the Carter commission in 1964, and ask the real questions—
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, whenever I meet with my provincial counterparts, we talk about all aspects of taxation. We did so at our last meeting, and we will do so at our upcoming meetings.
That having been said, I am happy to see that the Bloc Quebecois leader now agrees that by making projections for the next five years, the Conference Board has clearly established that there is no fiscal imbalance.
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, according to the Conference Board, “There is unquestionably a problem of fiscal imbalance”.
All over the country, in Quebec, in all the newspapers, major topics are being discussed and analyzed, such as a common currency, equalization payments, fiscal imbalance and globalization, while this government is ignoring the real issues and governing on a piecemeal basis.
Since the Carter commission in 1964, there has not been any substantial review of taxation. Will the Minister of Finance agree that it is high time for him to assume his responsibilities and to strike a commission on the sharing of fiscal resources, as soon as possible?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I repeat once again that I am certainly prepared to discuss with my provincial counterparts any topics they wish to address.
Now, speaking of taxation, I ought perhaps to just remind the Bloc Quebecois critic that, with the October budget, Canada reduced taxes by the greatest amount ever in our history: $100 billion over five years.
Yvan Loubier Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Mr. Speaker, the government is quick to invade areas that are not under its jurisdiction, and quicker still to sweep under the rug the problems it has created.
I am asking the Prime Minister whether he can call his Minister of Finance to order and inform him that he would be well advised to strike a commission on tax sharing, because there is a real problem of fiscal imbalance in this federation, and this is an area that affects him first and foremost. For once, let him take care of business and get busy doing something. It is time.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has done a very good job over the past eight and one half years. One of the problems we have at the present time, according to the opposition, is that we have done our job too well.
When he became Minister of Finance in 1993, we had a deficit of $42 billion. Today we have a surplus. The provincial government wants to lower its taxes. It does so and then wants us to pay in its stead. We have done our job properly. Let the province do its job properly as well.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, the latest census confirms that 80% of Canadians live in urban centres today.
While in opposition, the finance minister headed up an urban task force to propose solutions for urgent problems already plaguing our cities. Once in government, the Liberals tossed the proposals in the garbage and 10 years later municipalities are still waiting.
Recently the Minister of Finance offered a ray of hope stating “Our cities are entitled to a new deal”.
Could the minister tell Canadians what is the new deal to reverse the neglect of our Canadian municipalities?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, at a very important meeting with a number of the big city mayors, a number of ministers present here today met with them, discussed their financial problems, talked about the necessity of a new deal and recognized the very severe financial constraints under which they operate.
It is our intention to continue with those discussions because we recognize the urbanization of Canada. At the same time we also recognize the very real needs which exist in the regions of Canada. We will approach both with the same degree of dedication.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians are well aware that the big city mayors came to Ottawa, but they went away empty handed. They tried to persuade the government that our cities could not survive the continued neglect of the government.
It is time for a cabinet level commitment to reverse urban deterioration with strategic infrastructure investments. Is there any plan to do that? The minister says “let's have a new deal”, so where is the proposal? Where is the deal, not the rhetoric but the deal?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the deal can be seen in the unprecedented number of major infrastructure programs in terms of highways, in terms of clean water, in terms of the amount of money, with the doubling of funds, that has gone to the municipalities for green infrastructure, the strategic infrastructure fund under the Deputy Prime Minister, and in terms of the very active and in fact unprecedented work that has been taken by the caucus transport committee on urban issues.
The fact is that this side of the House and that side of the House in that corner have taken their responsibility very--
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knows that unilateral cuts by the federal government devastated health care and education in Canada. They reflected combative federalism at its very worst.
Now the conference board confirms that the costs the provinces must pay are going up sharply while their revenues grow much more slowly. The opposite is the case federally. The surplus is growing. There is a fundamental imbalance in our federation.
Rather than camouflage the problem with transfer payments, will the government ask the Standing Committee on Finance to look seriously at repairing the serious fiscal imbalance in Canada?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the committee is the master of its own rule and if the members of the committee want to look into that they can.
The reality is that when his party was in power the federal government had no surplus. Since replacing the Conservative Party, we have a surplus. While the provinces are reducing their taxes they would like us to give them the money that they have used to reduce the taxes rather than use their own money for their own programs.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, last week Yves Séguin, a Quebec federalist, acknowledged the need to rectify the fiscal imbalance that exists between the federal and provincial levels.
The same thing is being heard elsewhere. The provincial premiers agree on the fundamental importance of this problem. They say so at every conference. There is a consensus everywhere except in the federal cabinet, which will not acknowledge this reality.
Can the Prime Minister assure us that fiscal imbalance will be on the agenda of the next first ministers' conference?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, at the last conference with the provincial first ministers, we committed $23 billion to help them with the health system. They were very pleased with this and signed on for five years. They were not obliged to do so.
If we have a surplus at this time, it is simply because we have had good administration since Canadians decided to vote the fifth party out of power.
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, a report ordered by the Liberals on government visibility is itself invisible. This invisible report on government visibility cost taxpayers $550,000. The $550,000 cheque to Groupaction was very visible. Groupaction's cheque of $70,000 to the Liberal Party was very visible.
Will the minister rise and confirm to the House that the invisible report never was, that there never was a report?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, let me offer some visibility for the member who has chosen to make invisible his presence to look at the documents which are very visible and which I have in front of me.
I offered him, all his colleagues and the entire House yesterday to see all the supporting documents but he did not even avail himself of that. Obviously finding out the facts and finding out the truth does not seem to be a priority for those making these accusations.
Peter Goldring Canadian Alliance Edmonton Centre-East, AB
Mr. Speaker, obviously the minister is confusing documents with the report. Any way we look at it, Canada's taxpayers have been stiffed by the Liberal government through either a fraudulent act or gross incompetence: fraud, if the invisible report was never produced; gross incompetence, if the invisible report was lost.
Could the minister tell the House which it is? Are the Liberals concealing gross incompetence or are they concealing fraud?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I find these questions about asking me to table a document that I do not have particularly interesting, especially when the hon. member across refuses to look at the documents that we do have to prove in fact that the document exists.
If the hon. member across is willing, I will read some of it to him later on today if he has the time.