House of Commons Hansard #95 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was federal.
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will know that we have consistently, every year since 1993, reduced the EI premiums and the UI premiums. Year after year they have been reduced, as other taxes have been reduced as well. By next year, the rate will be set in a transparent fashion intended to set a rate approximating the cost of the program.
Monte Solberg Canadian Alliance Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, that is not the point. The fact is that he is charging people a lot more than they are getting out of the system.
Let us see if we can help the minister do the right thing. Every year the government spends billions of dollars on corporate welfare but the Liberals cannot find the money to quit overtaxing through EI premiums.
Where are the government's priorities? If it can fund corporate welfare, why can it not reduce premiums for workers?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, when we started the premium rate was $3.07 scheduled to go to $3.30. Instead, as we speak it is $2.10 scheduled to go to $1.98 next year.
I do not know what the hon. member is complaining about. What we have seen is a steady and continuous reduction in EI premium rates. We have benefited employers and employees while we have done so. At the same time we have reduced overall taxes and charges by $100 billion.
Walt Lastewka Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Speaker, the peak tourist season is quickly approaching and this important sector of the economy is undoubtedly impacted by the tension surrounding SARS.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry please tell the House what the Government of Canada is doing to help this important sector of the economy?
Serge Marcil LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, today, the Minister of Industry is participating in the Canada Media Marketplace fair in New York City to promote tourism and emphasize that the whole world is welcome in Toronto and Canada.
The Government of Canada is continuing to work in conjunction with the Canadian Tourism Commission, through CTC offices in the U.S. and overseas.
We have earmarked $10 million for a campaign to promote Toronto, Ontario and all of Canada as desirable destinations. We have earmarked $1.45 million to support the Canadian Tourism Human Resource Council and, through the Canada Development Bank, to defer capital payments for four months without penalty and provide small businesses with additional working capital—
Tourism IndustryOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Souris—Moose Mountain.
Roy H. Bailey Canadian Alliance Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, when amateur athletes are chosen by government to train for special athletic events these selected athletes are provided with living accommodation without being taxed for their accommodation.
Why has the government taxed the living accommodations of unpaid amateur athletes who are in training under the auspices of the Saskatchewan Junior A Hockey League?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency administers the Income Tax Act equally so that all Canadians properly pay their fair share and no one pays more than their fair share.
We have initiated an outreach program with the Canadian Hockey Association regarding the employment status of hockey players and their eligibility for access to Canada's social safety net.
I want to assure the member opposite that all Canadians are treated equally under the Income Tax Act, the Canada pension plan and the Employment Insurance Act.
Roy H. Bailey Canadian Alliance Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, I hope Saskatchewan is listening because at the present time the Anavet Cup, sponsored by the Royal Bank, is now underway in Charlottetown. Junior hockey teams from every region in Canada are there but the only team in this competition to have been fined, both the players and the team, is the Humboldt Broncos from the Saskatchewan Hockey League.
Why is there this blatant discrimination against only Saskatchewan, the only province, and only against Saskatchewan teams?
Elinor Caplan LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is trying to create an impression that is absolutely not true. No one has been discriminated against. All hockey teams are expected to obey the law. When there is a problem they are subject to fines.
However, in this particular case, we are doing a public education outreach via the Canadian Hockey Association. It is the Canadian Hockey Association that is helping us to ensure that all teams know what their obligations are, that all teams live up to those obligations and that those young players have access to the social programs--
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Speaker, if the missile defence shield proposed by the U.S. administration were to be deployed in its present form, one thing that would happen is that debris from intercepted missiles would land in Canada, and we would have no other choice but to let that happen.
Could the Minister of National Defence tell us, once and for all, where he intends to stand on this issue and clearly state his position?
Bill Graham LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister clearly indicated in the House today, we are currently examining this project. We will go ahead only if it is in the best interests of Canada. I can assure the hon. member opposite that Canadians do not want to see either debris or missiles falling on them. We must therefore seek a solution that is appropriate for the North American continent, and that is what we in this government will be doing.
Jay Hill Canadian Alliance Prince George—Peace River, BC
Mr. Speaker, residents in north central British Columbia continue to experience the economic devastation of the mountain pine beetle and the softwood lumber dispute.
After years of effort by Canadian Alliance MPs to educate Liberals about the economic damage caused by these two disasters, B.C. has seen precious little in the way of any action from Ottawa. However, within days of a recent drop in tourism caused by the SARS scare, Toronto attracted the entire Liberal cabinet with open cheque books.
Why does the government care so little about B.C.'s forests and the families who depend upon them for their livelihoods?
Nancy Karetak-Lindell LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, Natural Resources Canada has an established research expertise on the mountain pine beetle and has been key in providing forest management options to land managers on beetle control. The department is delivering a $40 million initiative over the next five years.
Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, the tourist industry has been very hard hit by the slowdown in international travel, due to the war in Iraq and the SARS crisis. Travel agencies are having problems dealing with the administrative slowness of Human Resources Development Canada so as to be entitled to the employment insurance's work sharing program, which they had, however, been entitled to after September 11, 2001, and they are personally appealing to the Prime Minister on this.
Can the Prime Minister explain why he refuses to respond to the appeals of these agencies, in their attempts to avoid massive layoffs and even closures?
Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, first and foremost I would like to apprise the hon. member of the fact that the employment insurance program is there, is serving and will serve fully 88% of those Canadians in paid employment who might have need of the benefits.
In addition, I had the pleasure today of meeting with industry leaders in the Scarborough—Agincourt area talking particularly about the employment insurance system and the work sharing opportunity that exists for them to help retain their employees while the employment insurance system pays for some of their income requirements. This program is there and it is available. I would encourage those in the tourism industry to contact our offices to see if it would apply in their circumstance.
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Mr. Speaker, on September 25, 2002, the Prime Minister announced funds for dealing with the Windsor border infrastructure issue. We told him at that time the issue had to be above reproach and had to have confidence for the citizens there. Instead, he set up a committee that was supposed to report in 60 days. We are now 222 days into the process. Last week more turmoil erupted when we had government leaks.
I would like to know if the Prime Minister will give us a commitment that municipalities that have to live with these decisions are going to have input before those decisions are made. Will you commit to that, Mr. Prime Minister? Yes or no.
InfrastructureOral Question Period
The Speaker
I am sure the hon. member for Windsor West intended to address his question to the Speaker as required by the rules, but the hon. Minister of Transport has the floor, please.
David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I would inform the hon. member that the City of Windsor and the surrounding municipalities have had a lot of impact on the discussions that we have had with the Province of Ontario. Certainly nothing will be done that does not seem to receive favour with the local residents.
However we must move on. This has become an urgent priority. The Windsor gateway is being choked with traffic and the initiative announced by the Prime Minister and Premier Eves is one that the country needs and we will go forward.
Presence in GalleryOral Question Period
The Speaker
I wish to draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of His Excellency Luis Ernesto Derbez Bautista, Secretary of Foreign Relations of the United Mexican States.
Export Development CanadaRoutine Proceedings
Papineau—Saint-Denis Québec
Liberal
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister for International Trade
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the annual report on Canada's account 2001-02 of Export Development Canada.
Geoff Regan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions.
Stockwell Day Canadian Alliance Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC
Mr. Speaker, I move that the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade presented on Tuesday, April 8, be concurred in.
The issue that gives rise to this motion is one of significant importance. It involves a request from Taiwan to be recognized as having observer status at the World Health Organization.
I appreciate the efforts that have gone into pursuing this very important item by a number of members of Parliament, some within the Canadian Alliance Party, some within the NDP and by somebody who preceded me on the foreign affairs committee, the member for Burnaby--Douglas.
The member for Burnaby--Douglas has been vigorous on this file for the right reasons and the right principles. I give him special credit for spending some time trying to get this particular motion through the committee, highlighting it and making Canadians aware of its importance. I thank him for that.
I thank members of the governing party, the Liberal members of Parliament who, when this came to committee, voted to support the motion. We believe the motion has importance on its own merit. It is simply the right thing to do and I acknowledge the Liberal members who voted for this when I presented it in committee and we were able to carry it there.
I also acknowledge the members of the Bloc Québécois and members of the NDP, the former leader of the NDP, and members of the Progressive Conservative Party who also supported this. It is somewhat unique having that amount of opposition party support and also support from Liberal members.
Taiwan has requested observer status only at the World Health Organization. It is not requesting membership. It is not requesting any status beyond observer status. It is one of the few jurisdictions in the world which has not been accorded that status. As a matter of fact a jurisdiction does not have to be a nation recognized by the United Nations to have observer status at the WHO. That is why the Vatican has observer status. That is why the Palestinian Authority has observer status. Even tiny jurisdictions like the Cook Islands have observer status at the WHO.
Taiwan is a democratic jurisdiction. It is in many ways a recent jewel of democracy, only recently having joined the list of democratic nations. It has been an economic jewel certainly, not just in its own Pacific Rim area but globally. Now it is a democratic jewel in terms of believing and supporting things such as the freedom to vote, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and of course freedom of enterprise.
Taiwan is also known for its high degree of medical advancement and medical technology. Taiwan has been instrumental in many key areas of development in its own particular area and around the world.
Taiwan is asking for this support and it is asking that nations agree to that support. The WHO meeting is coming up this month and that is why there cannot be any delay on this. Taiwan is asking for support from other nations like Canada, a nation which proudly says it believes in democracy. We support democracy and our foreign policy should tend toward being a government which supports, above and beyond others, democratic jurisdictions. We should not hesitate in making sure we are speaking up and doing what we can do for the good of those nations. Taiwan is an island of 23 million people.
I understand, and I think people within the House and across the country understand, the political ramifications of a one China policy. We are not speaking to that issue today. Other jurisdictions, such as the United States congress and the European Union are on record supporting Taiwan's request for observer status at the WHO. They are on record and they are jurisdictions that recognize the one China policy. We are not challenging or contradicting that.
We are asking members of Parliament today, regardless of political stripe, to simply look at this issue on its own merit and not to be intimidated by any other jurisdiction or any other country which may try to read more into the motion than is there. We are simply saying on its own merits that Taiwan deserves to have observer status at the World Health Organization.
It is very clear that article 3 of the WHO constitution stipulates that membership in the organization shall be open to all states, that is membership should be open to all states. We are not even talking about membership. We are talking about observer status to a country, an island of 23 million people. On January 1, 2002 Taiwan became a member of the World Trade Organization. It is observer status only that we are asking for at the World Health Organization.
We have seen a recent development without which the merits of this request would still be valid. The outbreak of the SARS virus and the so-called epidemic brings sharply into focus the need for Taiwan to have observer status at the World Health Organization. I ask my fellow colleagues, how could we in good faith deny this especially at this time? As I have already said, this issue could fully stand on its own merits before the SARS outbreak but now it becomes incredibly more compelling.
Again, I am emphasizing that it is not nation status that is being requested. There are other entities, as I have already said: the Vatican, the Holy See; the Palestinian Authority; the Order of Malta; the International Committee of the Red Cross; and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. A number of small jurisdictions not recognized at the United Nations as nations in and of themselves have been accorded this status.
We do not want to see a lack of WHO participation for Taiwan. We do not want to see the development of what some are already calling a possible health apartheid. We do not want to see Taiwan excluded when there is no valid reason for it to be excluded other than political intimidation and some worried about what could be the fallout if another jurisdiction--and let us be honest, we are talking about mainland China at this point--reacted and somehow retaliated because a nation, an island of 23 million people, is asking for observer status, simply to be recognized. On principle, it would be unfounded for another group or nation to try to block this for political reasons.
There is no question that this issue goes beyond the political stripe of those of us who are debating and voting on this. I appeal to members. Let us be honest about this. The possibility that this vote might not carry is a real one and it will be based on political concerns. I respect that. That is what this House is all about, politics.
I am asking members to follow the example of members of their own party who serve on the foreign affairs committee who voted to support this particular motion. They set aside, for a brief few moments in time, political differences and stood on principle for what is right. For a group of 23 million people who have health needs, as any jurisdiction does, who are facing some extreme situations especially related to SARS, it is the only right thing to do. It is a matter of principle that this would be recognized.
Taiwan has donated to the international community over $120 million U.S. in medical supplies and humanitarian relief to 78 countries spanning five continents. That was just from 1995 to 2002. Taiwan has stepped up to the plate for others. It has been there for other nations. It is there for other nations. Through its efforts and goodwill and its ability to constructively share its resources, Taiwan has been there for others. To be excluded now from the position of observer status would create a loophole in the health network and the organization would be somewhat less than it could be and it would be failing in its obligations.
We know that China has been in opposition to Taiwan's WHO bid and has said that Taiwan's participation in the organization violates China's sovereignty. It does not. It merely promotes the health concerns and the health needs of its own people.
In 1998 China prevented WHO experts from helping Taiwan combat a deadly form of enterovirus. The following year when a massive earthquake struck central Taiwan, over 2,400 people were killed and more than 10,000 were injured. China again flexed its diplomatic muscles to obstruct the shipment of emergency medical equipment and rescue assistance offered by the Red Cross and the Russian federation at that time unless they agreed to work through China itself.
I understand and appreciate and we want to continue to further good relations with all people on this planet, including the people of mainland China. We acknowledge there are differences of systems. We also acknowledge and promote the freedom of speech. We can contest those differences without intimidation.
This is the 21st century, a new century and there are new realities dawning upon all of us. One of those realities when it comes to diplomacy, which we already are seeing having moved into the 21st century is a reluctance to be satisfied with diplomatic niceties between diplomatic representatives, between nations. There is an urgency among people around the world to have their diplomatic representatives speak openly and frankly, with respect recognizing those differences, but to be open and frank about these things and not to be intimidating one another but to simply put forward the principles based upon the merits of the arguments themselves. That is what we are doing today. It is what I am asking all members of the House to concur in today.
The WHO meetings in which Taiwan wants to be involved are coming up this month and will require support. Canada has a history of speaking clearly and forthrightly for democracy, for freedom of speech, for the freedoms of all individuals, for the natural rights of individuals. It is the natural right of people in Taiwan to have available to them all of the health connections, information and support that can possibly be made available to them. It is the right of the people of mainland China to have that and we support that regardless of political differences. It is the natural right of citizens of Taiwan to be a part of the global health community at least at this very minimal level.
I appeal to members especially of the governing party, to give this issue serious consideration in the time we are debating it today.
Especially in a time of emergency with the SARS epidemic upon us, we are thankful that in Canada we have had a collaboration of people who have worked to properly contain this situation. We know it is still serious and there is still work to be done, but I am asking that members here would go beyond today and relieve their minister of a tenuous situation in which he finds himself and in fact in which the government finds itself. If the government has a certain policy position related to the one China policy, then allow this to be one of those moments where Canadians could watch and look at MPs debating and voting on something on its principles, on its merits, not according to what or how one party has been told by its whips to vote. The Canadian Alliance is bringing forward this policy and this policy request. We are doing so not whipping our members to vote a certain way. We have asked among ourselves that our colleagues consider this on its merits and vote accordingly.
That is what I am asking the federal Liberal members of Parliament to do today: that this would be voted for in the affirmative today, the concurrence. All we are asking is that we concur with the motion the foreign affairs committee has already passed, supported by Liberal MPs, and not to run the risk, and it would be more than a risk, it would be the reality of having Canadians, should this motion fail in the House today, ask those individual MPs who voted against it why on earth they would have voted against 23 million people having a representation of observer status only, along with the Palestinian authority, which already has that observer status at the World Health Organization.
Let Canadians not be dismayed or discouraged at the thought of the political process grinding down to the point where we would back off from supporting a democratic jurisdiction. Frankly, even if this were not a democratic jurisdiction, their request would be right on its own merits and on its own principle.
The people of Taiwan today will be wondering about Canada's support. Their friends and family who are Canadians of Taiwanese descent will also be watching today and tomorrow to see and listen to the arguments being presented, to listen to who supported them and why the support was there or not there.
To me, it is a fairly clear and straightforward issue. I know and understand the political struggles that members of the government would be having on this, as I have said, but once again I encourage each one to see this as something that parliamentarians in Canada have decided to do, to join those in the EU who have also voted in support of this, and we will be asking for that support. Let not Canada stand almost isolated with certain other nations not supporting Taiwan when the countries of Europe or representatives of the European parliament and of our friends south of the border will have voted to support this somewhat meagre request, not for membership, but for simple observer status at the World Health Organization. It is a good and right thing to do on its own merits. I would appeal to the good sense and good judgment of my colleagues, especially those in the Liberal Party, to join the members of the Liberal Party who have already done so.
I again want to thank the member for Burnaby—Douglas who has also worked to allow this to come forward and members of the Canadian Alliance and other members who supported this. Let us send a positive signal to the people of Taiwan today that we stand with them on this simple request. I thank members for their consideration.