Debates of Oct. 6th, 2004

Canada Post

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the facts of the matter are that the board of directors of Canada Post proposed names to me, one of which was Mr. Feeney, whom I recommended to the cabinet for the position of chair of Canada Post, which, by the way, carries an annual salary of a maximum of $17,100.

In the spirit of give and take befitting a minority government, Mr. Feeney has agreed to appear before a parliamentary committee between now and October 28. I will listen very carefully to anything that the opposition members have to say about him.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, a committee review of the candidate is not enough. The minister's friend is slated to fill this new position effective October 28. The decision has already been made and the minister knows it.

Will the minister rise today and tell us why we should believe that he will not bend the rules again in favour of his friends?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I have already explained the procedure. I have full confidence that Mr. Feeney has the necessary qualifications for this important position, which carries an annual salary of $17,000.

However, if hon. members on the committee want to ask him questions, he is prepared to comply. As for me, I will listen carefully to anything the opposition members have to say.

Intergovernmental Affairs

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said that the throne speech was vague and ambiguous and he deplored the fact that it is completely silent on the notion of asymmetrical federalism. The federal Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs replied that this notion was now a principle, a fait accompli. She said that this work with the provinces can be found throughout the speech.

How can the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs claim that the notion of asymmetrical federalism is a fait accompli when we can see that the federal government's real intention is to step up encroachments on Quebec's jurisdictions such as education, manpower training and municipalities?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to hear the Bloc Quebecois talk about federalism, in whatever form. Yes, we in this government are implementing asymmetrical federalism. Yes, we are working to set common objectives. Yes, we are offering the necessary flexibility to all our provinces and to all our territories, so that they can implement their programs and achieve these common objectives. Yes, we have a federalist government in Quebec that just happens to be participating in the establishment of these common objectives.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, will the minister admit that the throne speech could have stated that this asymmetry should apply not only to Quebec's jurisdictions, but also and particularly to federal jurisdictions, so as to allow Quebec to pursue its own agenda in the areas of telecommunications and justice, for example, or so that it may speak for itself at international forums?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois has become a federalist party. Hooray for asymmetrical federalism for all our provinces and territories, promoting national unity. This is precisely the direction taken by our government.

Employment Insurance

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the Speech from the Throne, the government made a commitment to continue, and I quote, “to review the employment insurance program to ensure that it remains well-suited to the needs of Canada’s workforce”. To hear this from the government is surprising.

How can the Prime Minister write such a thing when the citizens of all regions of Quebec keep repeating that the current EI system does not work?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Mr. Speaker, it comes as no surprise to me to read such a sentence in the Speech from the Throne. It really shows that the government is aware of the importance of the topic and of doing whatever must be done to resolve problems that affect not only the regions of Quebec but also those across the country.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on the same topic, the government has plundered the EI fund to the tune of $45 billion for purposes known only to it. And it continues to do so. The employment insurance program has become a disguised tax instead of insurance for those who lose their jobs.

Why did the government not commit, in its throne speech, to put an end to such shameless robbery by creating an independent employment insurance fund truly designed to help the unemployed?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, on the advice of the Auditor General, there has been no separate EI account in existence since 1986. All surpluses and deficits are part of the consolidated revenue account. We have in fact reduced premiums every year since 1993.

Our objective is to achieve equilibrium between revenue coming in and expenses going out, and we think we will in fact achieve that this year with premium rates at $1.98.

Government Appointments

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised to bring transparency to the appointment of Supreme Court of Canada judges. Instead, he sent the justice minister to tell Canadians what he decided in private.

The promise of transparency has been abandoned for a rubber stamp process. Why did the Prime Minister break his word again?

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, it is the hon. member who is breaching the agreement that he himself agreed to; that the Minister of Justice would appear before that committee.

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think Canadians want to hear from the person who actually made the decision, not his messenger.

The Prime Minister's position that further transparency would politicize the process is simply disingenuous. The fact is that this process was only designed to retain the absolute authority in the Prime Minister's hands.

Why has the Prime Minister abandoned his commitment to democratic reform in favour of centralizing power in his own hands?

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, it was the Prime Minister who first stated, as a matter of principle, that there would be parliamentary review of appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada and it was the Prime Minister who made it, as his first act, to refer that matter to the justice and human rights committee of Parliament.

Agriculture

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on September 10, 2004, after finally giving in to farmers' demands for action on the BSE crisis, the agriculture minister announced an inadequate aid package.

Today, there are still no application forms for farmers to apply for this desperately needed money. Cash strapped livestock farmers are going out of business. Why are there no application forms available, a full month after the announcement?

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by congratulating my critic on her appointment.

The reality is, over the last 16 months the government along with our provincial governments have put forward initiatives totalling $1.9 billion to assist the beef industry. On September 10, we announced another round of funding, one quite frankly that we developed with the industry, that we developed with our provincial counterparts, and a program which is seen that will be of great of assistance to our beef producers in Canada.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, administering farmers' BSE relief through the CAIS program is a proven recipe for disaster. To quote the president of the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, “CAIS is a mess. It's all part of the mess of BSE”.

Many farmers are still waiting for the CAIS cash advances for 2003.If that is the government's definition of an advance payment, how long will it take to get a delayed payment for 2004?

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, working with the industry this past month and with the provinces for this latest round of BSE support, we have been doing a number of things: first, continue to work to open the US border; second, initiatives to expand our marketplace beyond the US and around the world; and most important, bring some rationality back to the marketplace by balancing supply and demand by both investing in new slaughter capacity on the one side and helping with set aside programs on the other.

This is what the industry indicated to us was a priority and this is what we are proceeding with.

The Environment

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am extremely proud to have this opportunity to ask my first question as the member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

I am pleased to see that the Minister of the Environment has decided to appeal the Federal Court decision concerning the Belledune incinerator, and I congratulate him on that.

Can he tell us when the people of Belledune and of Restigouche will see an environmental assessment process put in place?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Madawaska—Restigouche for addressing this issue from the moment he was elected. He has been of invaluable assistance in the decision I have had to make about this appeal.

Not only will we appeal, but I am today announcing that I have instructed my staff and legal counsel to speed up the appeal process and move as quickly as possible on this file.

Electoral Reform

[Ed Broadbent, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. I want to begin by complimenting the Prime Minister for finally including electoral reform in a throne speech.

In this context, considering that the present electoral system almost invariably produces parties both on the governing side and on the opposition side of the House that do not in any way reflect accurately the regional votes in Canada and thus, this in itself, contributes to regional conflict, will the Prime Minister promise that before the Christmas recess the government will take concrete action to implement this commitment?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I too wish to congratulate the member for his re-election to the House and congratulate him for his appointment as the critic for democratic reform.

The suggestion of the member is one that we certainly will take note of. There is a commitment on the part of the government to take a look at electoral reform. We will do that, but we will do so in a way that engages citizens, that engages Canadians and that engages parliamentarians. In due course the government will state its intended course of action. I am sure that the member will be quite encouraged in the manner in which we will do so.

National Defence

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. It seems odd to us that at the same time as the government is contemplating the enormous expense of being involved in George Bush's national missile defence plan, we do not seem to have the money to properly and safely outfit our submariners. Therefore, at the same time as we express concern about the crew of the HMCS Chicoutimi , I want to ask the Minister of National Defence this. Is there an intention on the part of the government to go after the British government for having sold us this equipment in the first place and to go after it for the costs associated with what are obviously inferior submarines?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister made clear in his answer in the House earlier, the present concern of the government is the welfare of the extraordinary men who are serving aboard the submarine under very difficult conditions with tremendous professional capacity.

The submarines were acquired by the navy because they will serve Canada well in this program.

We of course will be looking at all remedies, but this is not the time to discuss legal action. This is the time to discuss getting the sub home, getting our men safe and looking after what we have to do first.