House of Commons Hansard #183 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was farmers.
John Maloney Liberal Erie—Lincoln, ON
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Burma's military regime announced that Nobel laureate and National League for Democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will be released from house arrest. Will the Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific share with the House Canada's reaction to this news and inform us how it will affect our relationship with Burma?
David Kilgour LiberalSecretary of State (Asia-Pacific)
Mr. Speaker, as one of the world's most courageous and admired political leaders, Aung San Suu Kyi embodies the determination and enormous promise that Canadians have long known exist in the people of Burma.
We certainly welcome the long overdue news that she has been released after 20 months in prison. We hope she will be able to participate meaningfully in a political process. We also hope that the remaining 1,400 to 1,500 political prisoners will be released very soon.
Lorne Nystrom NDP Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.
The Americans have just added another $73.5 billion to their farm bill which now totals $180 billion in subsidies over 10 years. This is devastating for the farmers of Canada and harmful to the national economy.
Today the provincial agriculture ministers are in Ottawa. They are asking the federal government for $1.3 billion in support.
Will the Minister of Finance stop hiding behind the WTO and provide that support for Canadian farmers now? They need that support and need it desperately.
AgricultureOral Question Period
Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox And Addington Ontario
Liberal
Larry McCormick LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows, at this moment the federal minister of agriculture and all the provincial ministers are meeting across the street. About 100 of the largest farm organizations are here in the city today to meet together as we look at the agriculture policy framework for the future of the country.
We will do things in a positive way for our farmers. We made a commitment in the budget that we will have money there for the future. We will be there for our farmers.
Lorne Nystrom NDP Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK
Mr. Speaker, I have a finance question for the Minister of Finance.
The American farm bill will devastate western Canadian farmers and farmers right across the country and will hurt our economy. I want to know from the Minister of Finance whether or not he expects some compensation for the Canadian farmers who are being hurt by the bill. There is now a surplus in the federal treasury. Will some of that money be spent for Canadian farmers, yes or no? Can we expect that?
Larry McCormick LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, it gives me the same opportunity we had a couple of hours ago in the House to point out that the government invested $1.1 billion in Saskatchewan last year. Last week we invested $2 million in this country for the drought. We do have money there. In fact we will have great financing there. The government rural caucus, the Prime Minister's task force, the Senate have all been there. We have been listening to producers. We will be there. Last year we invested $3.7 billion in agriculture.
André Bachand Progressive Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, since speaking to the auditor general, the public works minister has behaved like Pontius Pilate in connection with the crisis over the sponsorship and visibility program: he is washing his hands of it and telling people to wait, that everything is under control.
But several names keep coming up: Groupaction Communications, of course, Lafleur Communications, Groupe Polygone, Columbia Communications and, who knows, perhaps Everest Communications in the not-too-distant future.
Is it not time that the minister launched a full public inquiry into his department's visibility and sponsorships program?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, I am not washing my hands of it. Since being appointed minister, I was the one who asked the auditor general to look into this, largely at the request of hon. members of this House.
The report will be released as early as Wednesday of this week. If members wish to ask questions then, I will answer them and take the necessary corrective action.
That is how I have operated thus far and that is what I will do in the future.
André Bachand Progressive Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Speaker, I still say that he is behaving like Pontius Pilate; he is waiting for the resurrection, someone to come to the rescue in connection with the allegations of patronage in his department.
As the minister is well aware, there have been other allegations. We know that Mr. Gagliano has taken off. Now, it is his responsibility.
After calling the auditor general, has the minister himself investigated other companies in connection with other allegations in his own department?
Don Boudria LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, this is the same question worded a bit differently, and the answer is the same.
The auditor general will reply on Wednesday. Any corrective action will be taken at that time. I will announce the results. The member will perhaps reply on behalf of his party; I do not know. The necessary corrective action will be taken and we will, of course, follow up on these recommendations.
Rob Merrifield Canadian Alliance Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, it appears that the fix was in when the CIHR announced guidelines allowing experiments on human embryos. The health committee recommended that research only be permitted as a last resort, but the minister has her ear closer to the scientists and it looks like they are going to get their way. Why is she ignoring her colleagues on the health committee?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Standing Committee on Health for the very fine work it did. We will certainly take into account the work of that committee as the government develops its legislative and policy responses to a very difficult area around assisted human reproduction.
Rob Merrifield Canadian Alliance Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, let us look at what the government is doing in this area.
Genome Canada is funding a major study on the ethical, legal and social concerns raised by stem cell research. That sounds like a great idea, does it not?
Why is the government pressing ahead with experimenting using human embryos before its own study has even been reported?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has identified an area which I know many members on all sides of the House are very interested in and concerned with. It is a very difficult and complex issue. None of us should treat it as a simple issue.
I am very mindful of the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Health. As I have said, the government will take those into account when we propose legislation to the House in the coming days.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, lumber producers will have between $2.5 billion and $3 billion in additional expenditures because of the duties imposed by the Americans. The industry has so little support from the federal government that a number of companies have decided on their own to sue the U.S. government, as Tembec has done.
Instead of denying reality, would the federal government not be wiser to immediately put a support plan in place, as the workers, their unions and the industry are demanding, until such time as the recourse before the WTO and under NAFTA is completed?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, we are very much aware of the requirements of the softwood lumber industry, the individuals and the communities affected by the unfair charges levied by the Americans.
We have not rejected any of the options. We intend to examine them all and to act in the best interests of the communities and the industry.
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade himself admits there is a problem, since he has made a statement on TQS that he was prepared to inject additional funding into the various programs if that became necessary. It is not only necessary but urgent.
Does the government understand this, or do we have to wait until there are more plant closings and more layoffs?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, there are already various programs available. We intend to pursue them. We have a totally open mind to other options. As I have said, and stressed, we have not rejected any option whatsoever.
James Rajotte Canadian Alliance Edmonton Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, according to the annual report of technology partnerships Canada, corporations that have received grants under TPC have only paid back 1.3% of the money owed. When the finance minister announced the program in 1996, he said that TPC would be able to fund itself and would pose no more risk to taxpayers than it would to the private sector. Clearly he was wrong.
My question is for the Minister of Finance. How much will it cost the taxpayers to shoulder the burden of all of these bad investments by absorbing the losses of TPC?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, for every dollar invested under technology partnerships Canada in Canadian enterprises, the private sector has contributed $4 in the same investment. Accordingly, it is the same risk as that undertaken by the private sector.
As for TPC itself, my hon. friend likes to call it welfare. It is anything but. It is an investment by Canadians into the future of their economy. Every advanced industrial economy in the world does it. We do it in the public interest.
James Rajotte Canadian Alliance Edmonton Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is an insult to taxpayers. The government has handed out $1.6 billion since 1996. It has received $20.1 million back. That is a 1.3% return. Technology partnerships Canada is a corporate welfare program and the minister should admit it.
The finance minister stated in the 1995 budget:
Across government, we are taking major action in this budget to substantially reduce subsidies to business. These subsidies do not create long-lasting jobs. Nobody has made that case more strongly than business itself.
What happened to the minister's own words? What is he doing to ensure that the government gets money back from these corporations?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that those investments have created over 35,000 jobs so far in this country. The fact is those investments are the future of our economy. Like every other country in the world, we are investing in R and D possibilities.
The real question is whether the member and the opposition would have Canada out of the game of international competition for economic advancement. Would the Alliance Party have Canada disqualify itself in the contest for economic prosperity? That is what the member suggests.
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.
On Friday, Moody's raised Canada's domestic and foreign currency debt rating. Will the minister explain the consequences of this new triple A credit rating for all of us?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, it will certainly lower borrowing costs in Canada. It will certainly encourage investment.
What is every bit as important is that when Canada was downgraded in 1995, this was deemed confirmation of the difficulties we faced. This upgrade to the highest credit rating is confirmation of the remarkable fiscal turnaround engineered by Canadians. This is not arid numbers on a balance sheet. This is a great Canadian victory.