Jane Stewart

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, let me just go through the facts again. Indeed, we monitored this file very closely. Indeed, a senior administrative review was done of this file. Indeed, there were administrative errors and I talked about those on a number of occasions in the House. Most importantly, men and women in the riding of Saint-Maurice and in the riding of Trois-Rivières continue to be employed as a result of the partnerships that we forged with the private sector, with the Government of Quebec, with the communities and with yourselves.

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, why does the hon. member not ask his colleague from Trois-Rivières if he would have wanted us to do that?

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder how the hon. member opposite would respond to the 170 people who continue to be employed because of this relationship. Would he say to them “Sorry your jobs don't count. Sorry, you don't count?”

Whether we are talking about Placeteco or Techni-Paint, two companies that were part of our original contract, let us remember that 170 people are working and, from our point of view, that is a positive result.

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in the contract, 10.1 and 10.2, there is a discussion of the issues of bankruptcy or potential bankruptcy. What is clear is that the government has options in this regard. We sit down, we look at the files, we look at the intended results and we make our decisions.

As a result of continuing to be in partnership with these companies, 170 people, including 92 in the Bloc riding of Trois-Rivières, continue to be employed.

Is the hon. member saying that he would rather not have those people employed?

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have been wondering what the Canadian Alliance is an alliance of. I wonder if it is an alliance to restore those who were kicked out of the party back into the party.

When I listen to these questions, I have a feeling it is an alliance of destruction, of negativity and of elitism. They show it day after day in the extreme.

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, why should the Canadian public trust an opposition that refuses to talk about the positive things in this audit and only talks about the negatives? Why do they not talk about the fact that we did a successful job of designing and implementing Canada's education savings grants, or that we deliver services consistently even when making significant program and organizational changes, or that we are able to resolve problems once they are identified as having operational consequences? Why did they not talk about the department doing a good job of implementing program review?

There are always two sides to the coin. I would like the opposition to also recognize the good in this audit.

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, what is important to me is acting on information when I receive it.

Let us go through this one more time. An internal audit was done by the employees of the Department of Human Resources Development Canada, itself a control mechanism, itself a reference to ethical behaviour. Within the context of our department we made that information public and are acting on it.

Would the opposition have us do it any other way?

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at some of the other things that this report said. For example, it says “Senior management has taken steps to clarify roles and responsibilities where weaknesses have been identified”. We continue to build a strong public service.

What is interesting to me is that on that side of the House, they, day after day, attack us for taking action, for making an audit public and for implementing a new strategy of action that will change the relationship that we have with the Canadian public.

Which way would they have it?

[Human Resources Development, March 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, ethics are of concern to this government. From my point of view, the actions that we have taken on this particular audit that I have received as minister are exactly the right things to do. We got the information and we made it public. We told the Canadian public that we will improve our operation and, from my point of view, that is exactly what should be undertaken.

[Children, March 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the reason the Government of British Columbia is able to produce these services is because of the national child benefit, the income support provided by this government.

I point out that in the most recent budget we have increased that contribution through the Canada child tax benefit and the national child benefit by $2.5 billion. By 2004 a family of four earning under $25,000 will receive tax free and fully indexed $4,600.