Debates of April 12th, 2002

Government Expenditures

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it makes us wonder if these planes will be able to land close to a certain spot called Shawinigan.

The other problem that relates to this big issue is that the Prime Minister said just yesterday that he would not use these planes. He said he needed bigger planes to travel with the media.

If the Prime Minister will not be using these jets, will they be made available for challengers for the Liberal leadership race? Is that what they are for?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations]

Mr. Speaker, frequently, as the hon. member knows, the Prime Minister travels with a media delegation and would therefore use an Airbus. He also may know that when the Prime Minister was leaving Sweden last June, the Challenger cabin depressurized and the plane was forced to land in emergency circumstances. Medical advice was that the Prime Minister should not have flown again for something like 48 hours.

I am sure he would want to know that in using these planes--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Lakeland.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, government reports have said clearly that the Challengers we have are perfectly safe, that we simply do not need new Challengers and that the ones we have are just fine. Three government departments said that we should not buy them. The Prime Minister said yesterday he will not use them.

Who ordered these luxury jets that we clearly do not need?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations]

Mr. Speaker, this is mister hair shirt again who basically does not protest against any kind of conveniences that apply to any member of parliament or to ministers or to the Prime Minister.

The truth is, and many members on that side know this, much of the work that we have to do on behalf of the government is only made possible by the availability of aircraft that can go places at times when commercial alternatives are not available. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that we would have planes that are the best Canadian technology currently available.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is about priorities. An official from public works said that they were asked to put together a deal on these luxury jets quick and fast. It took just 10 days for the government to buy these jets. Yet it has taken 21 years so far to find a replacement for the Sea King and we do not have it yet.

Why does the government continue to put the comfort and convenience of politicians ahead of the safety of our soldiers?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. We are proceeding with a replacement of the Sea King. The Sea King itself is still giving excellent service, as it is doing in the Arabian Sea at this very time. The process for the replacement is not in any way changed or detracted by the purchase of these Challengers.

Softwood Lumber

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

Mr. Speaker, for one month now, the Minister of Human Resources Development has been unable to tell us what specific measures she intends to take to help workers affected by the 29% duty imposed by the Americans on softwood lumber.

Is the Minister of Human Resources Development aware of the impact of 100 workers being laid off in a community with a population of 600? When a sawmill shuts down, it is a disaster for workers, for families, and for the entire area.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me reassure the hon. member that the government is working closely with our partners, monitoring the impact and potential impact of the softwood lumber dispute on Canadian workers. That means we are working with the provinces, the industry itself, their unions and individuals. We will continue to do so.

However at this point we feel and are encouraged that the strength of the employment insurance system is there for these workers, as it has been for other workers in other sectors like the airline industry. It has worked well for them and I anticipate it will work well for the softwood lumber industry.

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

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber industry is facing an unprecedented trade war that jeopardizes the very existence of that industry and, consequently, of numerous regions.

The minister's answers are telling us that she does not seem to understand that she must act now.

Is the minister's refusal to travel to Quebec regions, as suggested yesterday by my colleague, not evidence that the minister is insensitive and that she does not want to understand the disastrous and direct consequences of her inaction on many communities, on villages and on several regions of Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is acting now. We are acting through the employment insurance system. The premiums are there for those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves without income. The part II funds are there. The provinces are administering those on behalf of Canadians.

We are working very closely together. There are programs like work sharing and other strategies and we want to ensure they are flexible, efficient and useful to those who may find themselves in difficulty as a result of this trade dispute.

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government's attitude is unjustifiable. When it comes to taking taxpayers' money, the government is very quick to act, but when the idea is to help people out, as is the case with the softwood lumber industry, the government lets the clock tick away and the situation deteriorate.

Does the minister not realize that, by not acting quickly, she is sending to workers, communities and regions the message that she is totally indifferent to their plight?

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

Mr. Speaker, that is not at all the case. In fact, the employment insurance system is there and it is working now. I would remind the hon. member of the changes the government has made to the employment insurance system that specifically support seasonal workers.

I would also remind the hon. member that I have travelled to the province of Quebec to announce community solutions for seasonal workers that really make a difference in expanding the shoulder seasons for those particular industries. Our record is clear and we will continue to be there for Canadians.

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister takes comfort in boasting about the existing employment insurance programs, when the social reality experienced by the regions affected by this crisis is nothing less than their closure in the short and middle terms.

What is preventing the minister from acting before such a catastrophe occurs, instead of after?

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

Mr. Speaker, again I would remind the hon. member that the employment insurance system is structured so that it can respond to different levels of unemployment region by region.

I would also remind the hon. member that earlier this week a number of the cabinet met with the Premier of British Columbia. When he left he said “The message I'm taking back...is we've got a future in forestry and that the federal government is working with us to have a forest industry in B.C.”

The same is true for Quebec.

Government Expenditures

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. It is about the $101 million purchase of two Challenger executive jets by the government.

I want the minister to explain precisely why the government decided to buy these jets despite a memo from three officials of three departments recommending that the government did not follow proper procedure if they did so, and why did they do this without a full cabinet discussion?

Is this real or is this the Liberal version of air farce one and air farce two?

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, as the Deputy Prime Minister has already pointed out, there have been difficulties with the Challengers.

With regard to the $101 million, public works, in order to sign a procurement contract, requires cabinet approval. Cabinet did approve the Challenger purchase.

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

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if they will also be paying the $24 security tax when they fly on the Challengers.

Industry Canada, a year ago on March 12, approved a $100 million project for Pratt & Whitney and yet no details of the project were announced to the public.

I want to ask the Deputy Prime Minister, and he is looking around now for the answer I see, but I want to ask him, as the Deputy Prime Minister, how can the government spend $100 million of the public's money and yet not tell the public why that money is being spent and what it is being spent on?

[Serge Marcil, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell the hon. member opposite that all the projects approved by PWC are made public, through press releases, press conferences or public documents.

So, this is nothing new. It is something that was already in the October 2001 public accounts. It might be in the hon. member's interest to read the public accounts.

G-8 Summit

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we will see if the Deputy Prime Minister will deign to answer this question.

The decision to have the G-8 meeting in June split between the two sites means an increased security risk and an increased cost. Before the decision was taken to run these extra risks and costs, did the government receive written security assessments from the RCMP or other agencies on splitting delegates in two sites in Alberta? Further, was there advice from the RCMP or others which recommended against Ottawa as the first choice for the site for the summit? Will the minister table both those recommendations?

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

Mr. Speaker, the right hon. member should know from the experience that he has that we cannot get involved in the operations of the RCMP.

With regard to the question of the G-8 and the site as well, we do know that each and every time we have such an operation the RCMP, for example as a parallel with the customs department, are working based on a risk assessment basis. They did proceed with a good risk assessment. They have an operations plan in place, and of course depending on the threat and the risk assessment, they are flexible.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows this decision was taken by the Prime Minister on a whim without getting security advice or cost advice from anybody, and that is running a great risk for Canada.

I would like to ask the dumbstruck Deputy Prime Minister, is there a minister responsible for arrangements for the Calgary Kananaskis summit and, if so, who is that minister?

Second, will there be a zone for demonstrators in the Kananaskis region? How close to the summit facilities will this zone be and who will be in charge of the security arrangements, the RCMP or the army?

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

First, Mr. Speaker, there are so many questions involved in the question that I do not know exactly which one I should answer.

One thing I know is that we are proud as Canadians to have the G-8 taking place in June in Kananaskis. It is going to be a wonderful event indeed. Of course we do know that the RCMP is a fantastic police force. Its reputation is well known all over the world. We are proud of the work it is doing.

As I said, they are professionals and they did proceed with a good risk assessment. We are not getting involved in their operations but I know that they are doing wonderful work and we are going to have a great G-8 summit meeting.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government's bungling of security for the upcoming G-8 summit has called into question Canada's ability to host international meetings.

Can the solicitor general or the Deputy Prime Minister tell Canadians if the RCMP reviewed the blueprint for terrorists before it was placed on the Internet or only after others found it and raised the alarm?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member should not question the work of the RCMP. As I said, it is very professional.

Second, we all know, and the hon. member knows as well, that we are not getting involved in the operations of the RCMP.

Third, the RCMP is working on a risk assessment basis and of course we do know that its members are professional, they are flexible, they will react based on the threat and they have a very good operation plan in place. We do trust the work of the RCMP. This summit will be a huge success.