Mary Clancy

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

Absolutely.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

The agencies major objectives are to help ensure that the construction of the project contributes to ACOA's major corporate objectives of long term job creation and attracting new industries, to help ensure that the developer complies with the regional benefit agreement, to help mitigate the negative impact of the cessation of the marine Atlantic operation, to help minimize negative effects on marine Atlantic workers displaced by the construction of the fixed link, to help maximize development opportunities and benefits for the Borden area of Prince Edward Island and the Cape Tormentine area of New Brunswick arising from the Northumberland Strait crossing project.

The federal government is committed to providing $20 million to fund development activities in these areas. As a maritimer, as an Atlantic Canadian, I say hooray.

Like the other Canadian provinces, those in Atlantic Canada must face the major stakes created by the world economy which has become more and more competitive because of trade globalization and free trade. Moreover, Canadians from the Atlantic region must deal with a new reality: a systematic structural transformation of some major industries like the groundfish fisheries.

If ACOA really wants to help the area to cope with the situation, it must absolutely use the meagre monetary resources it has in the best possible manner.

The agency favours direct support of those sectors and companies which hold the most promise in terms of permanent jobs creation for Canadians of the Atlantic region. This government is determined to make the best possible use of its meagre resources by eliminating duplication and overlapping in services and programs offered to businesses and by reducing the number of departments and agencies providing those services.

Besides, the agency will continue to improve the efficiency of public investments by obtaining a greater commitment from the private sector towards the development of small and medium-sized businesses. But it is also the agency's responsibility to administer the resources allocated to it in the most effective way possible.

Discussions about the necessity for Canadian businesses to improve their productivity to allow the country to be more competitive on the markets have become commonplace. However, the improvement of productivity is very important for the overall competitiveness of the country. The government is determined to improve the effectiveness of the bureaucracy, and I can tell you that any other private or public organization would die to be able to show results comparable to those of ACOA.

The agency's move to focus its activities on improving the competitiveness of small and medium sized business is more credible because ACOA has demonstrated it has an understanding of what is needed to improve efficiency and the benefits that are possible.

Over the last three years ACOA has been able to reduce corporate administration costs as a percentage of total agency costs by 20 per cent. The agency is forecasting a further drop of 25 per cent and so costs are expected to be only 3 per cent this year of total costs.

Part of this government's commitment to creating opportunity has been to look at the relevance of all bodies and recommend elimination or downsizing.

Shortly after taking charge of the agency a study was commissioned by Dr. Donald Savoie of the ACOA advisory board. The study was made available by the minister to the public. The recommendations are now being considered and he will soon be making recommendations in a number of areas, including the issue of streamlining the board's operation.

The savings which have been achieved and those which are able to come will potentially allow a transfer of funds from operating costs to contributions in support of SME growth and competitiveness.

We in Atlantic Canada are very happy with ACOA. We are very happy as members of Parliament for Atlantic Canada and as Canadian members of Parliament that this government is committed to the regional development of every part of the country. The best and happiest Canadians are those with economic security. This government and ACOA know how to put that in motion.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

I would bet even the member for Guelph-Wellington would agree with me.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I am absolutely delighted to be able to stand here today and set the record straight on some rather outlandish statements by Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition and Official Opposition.

To claim that regional economic development efforts are creating overlap and inconsistencies resulting in "administrative chaos" could not be further from the truth. This government's approach to economic development is working and is working toward eliminating the very overlap and duplication my hon. colleague speaks of.

In particular, the record shows that the approach being taken in regional economic development by the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency is extremely effective. In fact, given its success in creating permanent jobs, ACOA is this government's prime instrument to create economic development in the Atlantic region.

The regional agency approach has the full confidence of the government. Important gains have been made, but our government is still not satisfied with the rate of economic growth in Atlantic Canada. As such, much remains to be done to assist the region in attaining its full potential.

In order to help it respond to new development challenges, the agency must strategically direct its help to the most promising economic development opportunities in terms of job creation. Moreover, ACOA must become more aggressive in its efforts with small businesses to help them discover viable commercial ideas and actively realize them.

Atlantic Canada's economy is going through a transition, which can also be said of the rest of Canada and, in fact, most industrialized countries. Many factors explain this transition, the most notable being the changing structure of international trade, the speed of technological development and the generalization of government policies and the changes made to them.

This trend is likely to continue at a rapid pace over the current decade. Trade liberalization offers numerous opportunities for trade development. New technologies offer tremendous opportunities for productivity improvement in all sectors of the economy and in all phases of the production process. All of these will open new opportunities for Atlantic Canadian producers and entrepreneurs, but will also translate into increased and intense competition on domestic and world markets.

Governments increasingly constrained by mounting debt loads are forced to rethink their role and review social and economic programs. Speaking of learning from history, that is what this government is doing and that is what it is doing particularly through the mode of ACOA.

First let me talk about the comprehensive approach to the economic development of the Atlantic economy. Regional economic development programs are not immune from this review process and ACOA is currently defining new corporate directions.

The current government recognizes that strong regional economies are the building blocks for a strong Canadian economy. However, a new and more innovative approach to regional development needs to be developed, taking into consideration the global environment and tight fiscal constraints. Job creation will be the prime guiding principle for this new approach. This fulfils the promises we made in the red book and it is part and parcel of the philosophy and the base of this Liberal government.

Small and medium sized enterprises, SMEs, will be the focus of ACOA's programming and initiatives. The general approach will be to build on the expertise of all agents for economic development. This calls for economic co-operation, joint action and integrated development at the regional level.

Strong emphasis will be put on public sector and private sector partnering and the mobilization of scarce resources necessary to achieve strong regional economies and help regional firms and industries meet the challenges of international competition and change.

Second, we have to improve co-ordination among federal and provincial governments. A major regional development priority of this government is to work closely with provincial governments to ensure that the federal government is a partner in the formulation of regional development.

A second guiding principle given for job creation is as follows: in conjunction with provincial governments, we will try to reach the goals set in the strategic economic plan by focusing our efforts on tourism infrastructure, on commercial applications of research and development in local institutions and on assistance directed particularly at small businesses.

The government also recognizes that it is imperative to take at the regional level some action to improve co-ordination and effectiveness under the present circumstances of fiscal restraints and a heavy debt load.

There must be a greater harmonization of efforts and actions by the federal government and the provinces in the area of regional development. In view of its size and population, the Atlantic region will be able to compete more effectively on the world market if it integrates its economy, harmonize its strategies and co-ordinate its activities on a regional basis. ACOA has already taken the first steps by establishing such co-operative efforts at the regional level. Partnership with the tourism industry in Atlantic Canada, which was talked about earlier, is an eloquent example of that.

I also just recently announced an important measure on trade in the whole region, that is the co-operation agreement between Canada and the Atlantic provinces. That measure deals with the promotion of external trade. It will unite the four Atlantic provinces, ACOA, Industry Canada and Foreign Affairs and International Trade, in their efforts to help small and medium business in capturing export markets.

However, it is possible to do even more and, in order to do so, the president of ACOA conducts a forum of deputy ministers responsible for economic development in the provinces. This forum has the mandate of harmonizing even more the development efforts in the Atlantic region.

Improving government services to small and medium sized business is a high priority for this government. In "Creating Opportunity" this government pledged to review regional development programs and grants to business to ensure that they reflect a commitment to streamline government operations and eliminate duplication, to provide better support to commercial applications of R and D, to export oriented industries, and to small and medium sized businesses.

To this effect ACOA has established a Canada Business Service Centre in Halifax. One is currently being set up in Fredericton. Plans call for two other centres, in St. John's and in Charlottetown. These will serve as one stop shops for all federal and provincial government assistance to business. These centres will help improve considerably the delivery of assistance to these businesses.

There is currently numerous overlap and duplication in programs and services among federal departments and between provincial and federal governments. The CBSCs as well as the harmonization process between the federal government and provinces will contribute significantly toward elimination and reduction of overlap and duplication.

ACOA as the government's primary industry for supporting small business in Atlantic Canada is well placed to play a lead role.

The emphasis will be put on the creation of permanent jobs as well as on the economic renewal, through the infrastructure program.

We expect that 7,500 jobs will be created in the Atlantic region during the first two years of the infrastructure program. This program is making good progress and to date, 164 projects have been announced, representing a federal contribution of over $72 million earmarked for projects worth almost $200 million. This will create a little over 2,500 jobs.

Effective infrastructures will be put in place to attract industries to the communities. This new way of doing things will lead to increased competitiveness, a positive adjustment of the declining sectors, and a maximization of new opportunities.

ACOA, together with other federal departments, the provincial governments and its partners in the private sector, will concentrate its efforts on improving the competitiveness of the businesses in the Atlantic region so that they can compete on regional, domestic and international markets. To achieve this, ACOA will target the aid for adopting and adapting high technology processes and information technology as well as developing human resources to improve the quality of labour management and finally allow companies in the Atlantic region to exist and to grow in today's highly competitive environment.

One example of the type of innovative small company which the agency intends to target is Holland Stafford of Charlottetown which has become a leader in seafaring technology. This company has recently developed hundreds of new patterns for boat propellers by incorporating the latest technological developments and using new computerized design methods. This expertise has enabled the company to successfully expand into international markets for these products, as I am sure my colleague from Egmont would agree.

Another example is Eastland Industries in Minto, New Brunswick which has set up a new computerized assembly line of production machinery. This innovation has helped it expand its sales of European style cabinets and countertops to the Atlantic and New England markets.

Rationalization is occurring in all traditional industries: pulp and paper, fisheries and mining. As a result, employment in these industries has been declining. The transportation sector, notably railways, has also been shedding unprofitable activities which will also result in job losses.

The demilitarization ensuing from the end of the communist regime in eastern Europe is resulting in the closure and downsizing of many bases in Atlantic Canada. This has been accompanied by the loss of military and civilian jobs.

ACOA is taking a lead role in working with other federal departments, provincial governments and the affected communities to put in place development to replace these jobs. Some funds will soon be available to help communities get organized and develop and implement projects. ACOA's regular programs will of course be available to assist businesses seeking to establish or expand in these communities.

Trade liberalization, as reflected by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement and the NAFTA and, to a lesser extent, the economic integration of the European community, offer numerous new opportunities for Atlantic firms.

ACOA will put significant emphasis on trade development so that entrepreneurs in Atlantic Canada can take full advantage of opportunities arising from trade globalization.

A proactive approach will be adopted to support sectors and firms which have high growth potential. There will be a focus on high growth potential sectors such as communications and information technology, health industries and pharmaceuticals, geomagnetics in space. Development at the firm level will be encouraged through such measures as diagnostic services, benchmarking and strategic planning.

Another example of a small company that has been able to penetrate export markets is Day Industrial and Minetech Incorporated in Cape Breton. The company has developed a long lasting, durable lamp for Cape Breton coal mines. It now sells its products to mining and other markets in Canada, the United States, Australia, Europe, South Africa and South America.

Some of our friends across the way do not think that this is a good way to invest in Canadians. I think that is a shame.

Ultima East of St. John's, Newfoundland has developed into a world leader in the development of access technology for mobile satellite data networks. Satellite Communications is a global industry and the company has developed a large foreign

market, including Brazil, Norway and the United States. Ultima East has rapidly emerged as a success in a highly technical and competitive field. Started in 1985, Ultimate East and its parent company, New East, now employ 50 people, but hey, why should we put money into ACOA?

ACOA with other federal partners and the provinces has also a major role to play in maximizing the benefits from major projects such as the Northumberland Strait crossing project, the link, or as some of us like to call it, the span of green cables, and in helping deploy effectively the workers who will be displaced from cessation of the ferry service. The link will be unique in North America and world class. It will cost about $800 million to build and generate 5,000 person years of employment, 2,000 during the peak employment period.

The project will offer numerous regional benefits in terms of procurement, including goods, services and labour, significant investment opportunities and spin-off activities. The developer is committed under the regional benefit agreement to procure 70 per cent of goods, materials and services and 96 per cent of labour content from Atlantic Canada. I think that is a great idea. I think the member for Egmont would agree with me.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member, with his great knowledge of Canadian history, is aware of a certain phenomenon that took place in post-war Canada, in Atlantic Canada and eastern Canada in general but most particularly in Atlantic Canada.

Atlantic Canadians paid $5 over world price for their oil that went to the province of Alberta so that the oil industry could off the ground. Eastern Canadians, maritimers, Atlantic Canadians, did this in good faith because they believed we were one country. They believed an oil industry in Alberta would be a good thing for Canada, and they did it with pleasure.

Therefore, would the hon. member like to comment on that fact, if he knows about it?

[Seniors-Reduction Of Age Credit, May 31st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome this opportunity on behalf of the government to clarify the measure proposed in our February budget regarding the old age credit.

This is an issue deserves better than partisan politics, sacred cow logic and misinformation because the challenge of an aging population is very real for every region of this country.

The hon. member's motion states quite bluntly that we plan to reduce this credit and he implies that the old age security program and Canada pension plan are being altered. Let us deal with the facts.

To start, the budget contained no changes to old age security and the CPP. Here the member's motion is no more than unfortunate fearmongering. Next, simply put, budget action on the age credit means there is no reduction for three-quarters of seniors, about three million people with incomes under $25,921.

I want to be very clear on this. This budget measure will have no effect on the majority of low-income seniors. However, some seniors will indeed be affected by this measure.

I would like to remind the House of what the finance minister announced in his last budget. The current age credit provides special tax relief for all Canadians subject to tax 65 years of age and older, regardless of their income. This includes 200,000 seniors with personal incomes over $50,000. I am talking about personal and not family income.

If we want to preserve a social safety net that protects those who really need it while reducing the deficit and debt burden that translates into ever increasing taxes for all Canadians, we cannot continue to subsidize the wealthiest in our society.

That is why the budget provides for a gradual reduction of the age credit for taxpayers with net personal incomes over $25,921.

As a result the credit which reduces federal taxes for a senior by just over $600 a year will be reduced for some 800,000 people with incomes over the set mark. Of this group the credit will be eliminated for some 200,000 seniors, 5 per cent of the total with yearly incomes over $50,000.

It is true that the budget announced a policy paper will be released this year that will examine the challenges and opportunities posed by our aging society. The government indicated that this paper among other things would examine what changes are required to the national pension system to make it financially sustainable.

I find it ironic and insulting to all Canadians, especially seniors, that here we have a member dedicated to the dissolution of our country with all the chaos and cost that would entail and that same member has sanctimoniously advanced a motion demanding the preservation of key elements of that country's social safety net. Obviously some status quos are more equal than others.

I cannot prejudge what will be in the government's policy paper on an aging society but it is absurd to demand today that something so important as old age security be retained ever more unchanged when the pressures of an aging society are themselves changing at a rapid clip.

Let me remind the member of some more of those basic facts that no Canadian dare overlook. Because people are on average living longer and having fewer children, our population is aging. The proportion of people over age 65 will almost double over the next 40 years from 12 per cent today to 23 per cent in the year 2030. This will have real fiscal consequences. It is estimated that this evolution will demand that the contribution rate under CPP be pushed up from 5.2 per cent of eligible income to 13 per cent by the year 2030. That is almost a triple increase in the burden on employers and working age Canadians, a prospective increase that will compound a tax burden most people already feel is excessive.

Given this outlook I again see this motion as being absurd in trying to bind the government's hands by demanding that we retain the existing system that would prevent any action to improve and preserve the old age security system and the Canada pension plan.

That is not surprising. I doubt if the hon. member wants to see anything that would improve things for all Canadians, including seniors who have spent their lives, building a country that the United Nations has again identified as the best place to live in the world.

I passionately believe that one of the most sacred responsibilities any nation has, any government has, is to the senior citizens who have built and shaped that nation. Those facing economic hardship have a priority call on the best support that we can afford. However this respect and responsibility means that we must do what is needed to ensure that we can deliver this support consistently and securely in the years ahead. Those years will be years when the number of seniors grow dramatically.

The only way to resolve these dual demands for appropriate assistance today and to ensure that government can provide assistance tomorrow, this government-the government of a united Canada-has to ensure that our fiscal house is put in order. The budget did that by wide ranging action to set the deficit on a path down to just 3 per cent of GDP. Beyond that we are committed to balancing the books in the medium term.

Income testing of the old age credit is one part of that fiscal action. It reflects the fact that our $500 billion public debt is a national problem and that the solution demands actions that will touch on many Canadians in all regions. Again let me remind the House that for every dollar of fiscal improvement on the tax side, our budget took five dollars out of action on the spending side. Our actions, like those affecting some seniors, were carefully balanced to ensure we do everything possible to protect those in real need.

In conclusion, I see this motion as nothing more than an attempt to play cheap politics with Canada's senior citizens. It misrepresents government action and it fearmongers, and that is a shame. It supports a status quo without recognizing the shifts that are taking place in society. For all these reasons it merits our dismissal.

Canadians, senior citizens as well as those not yet facing the exigencies of retirement age, are willing to pay certain prices to ensure that this country remains the best place on earth to live. With this government at the helm it will.

[Income Tax Act, May 30th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have the opportunity to make a few comments in this debate. I begin by congratulating the hon. member for Nepean on bringing forward the motion. Her interest in and her support for women and children caught in untenable situations have long been known. We are all very grateful to the hon. member for Nepean for bringing it to the forefront in the House of Commons.

With regard to the whole way the income tax system deals with the questions of child support and maintenance, there is a rather high level of misapprehension and misunderstanding out there among even those people who are involved in the system.

The first thing to remember is that we have a very bad rate of collection of maintenance and child support in the country. Currently only 37 per cent of child support orders are enforceable in Canada.

When I started practising law in 1980 it was worse. The non-compliers were in the high nineties. However clearly 63 per cent of child support payments are unenforceable and in the province of Ontario 80 per cent are either unenforceable or in arrears. That is unacceptable in a country like Canada. That is why I want to speak very much in favour of the government's initiative in setting up the task force to go across the country to consult with Canadians, the women who receive these payments on behalf of themselves and their children, the men who pay the payments, and the lawyers who represent them both.

The ramifications of the Thibaudeau case are not simple. They are very complex. The problems of the tax system are not simple; they are very complex.

We have here a question of fairness, not just fairness to those people who are the payers and payees of child support but fairness to families as my colleague from Central Nova and other colleagues have mentioned. There is a question of fairness to those mothers and fathers who co-parent and who also need tax breaks.

There is the question of poverty among women and children. It is very important to note that we should not separate women and children. The number of children who live below the poverty line is unacceptable and in the vast majority of cases their mothers live with them. We have to look at the problem and deal with it in the broader sense, not merely in the context of the Thibaudeau decision and in the context of the Income Tax Act.

Fair taxes are something that we on this side of the House are very concerned with. It is absolutely crucial that Canadians, and Canadian women in particular who think the Thibaudeau case was a bonus for them, understand there is more to it. We must have a policy.

I commend the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Justice, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and the Secretary of State for the Status of Women. This task force will bring us the consultations we need to formulate the policy.

[High-Speed Train, May 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has already stated unequivocally on the floor of this House that there is no disagreement between himself and his colleague from the province of Quebec vis-à-vis their respective roles in helping new immigrants successfully integrate.

Settlement programs and services in every province in this country help newcomers access services in their new community and participate in local life. Much of the information provided relates quite specifically to the communities and province in which the immigrants live.

For immigrants destined to the province of Quebec the Canada-Quebec accord recognizes Quebec's exclusive responsibility for settlement and integration services for which there is federal compensation.

Not only is there no problem but the federal government appreciates that understanding and appreciation of Quebec culture and society is vital in helping immigrants in Quebec adapt to their new surroundings.

The minister has told his Quebec counterpart and stated in this House that he thinks that Quebec has a first rate settlement program for its immigrants.

Conversely, the Quebec government understands the role of the federal government in promoting awareness of Canada. In its responsibility for citizenship, the minister is committed to promoting what he has called a strong, exciting patriotism and love of Canada. This is the essence of the citizenship review that he recently announced.

Immigrants throughout Canada have the opportunity to seek Canadian citizenship. It is the mandate of this ministry to provide information and assistance to Canadians seeking information about citizenship and particularly to immigrants preparing for citizenship.

I am pleased to report that the federal-provincial committee responsible for the Canada-Quebec accord met on April 29. It considered the questions raised in the media about the integration of immigrants in Quebec. At this meeting Quebec representatives tabled a copy of their linguistic integration program highlighting that its purpose is to provide immigrants with the basic tools necessary for integration into Quebec society.

The Quebec program is not designed as an introduction to citizenship, the latter being a federal responsibility.

On April 14 the minister announced his plans to develop a new Citizenship Act for a renewed and reinvigorated citizenship for all Canadians. The Canada-Quebec accord clearly gives the Government of Canada sole authority in citizenship matters.

Most eligible immigrants apply for and receive Canadian citizenship. Any measure to promote citizenship will of course address their needs as well. Members of the federal-provincial committee or comité mixte exchange information as required. That is its mandate and the minister believes in letting the committee carry out its mandate.

[High-Speed Train, May 24th, 1994]

Yes.

[1995 G-7 Summit, May 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, in 1995 Canada will host the G-7 summit. Even better, Halifax was chosen to represent Canada as the site for this conference.

This decision may have surprised some people but Haligonians have always known that our city is a great place for such an event.

Halifax can compete at the international level in business, education, research and, of course, tourism. The beauty of the city goes unrivalled due to its setting, its significant historic landmarks and its modern infrastructure.

Those of us who are fortunate enough to know of Halifax's fine qualities first hand are very proud of the city's accomplishments and are very proud that we are given the opportunity to represent our great nation from east to west, from north to south, anglophone, francophone and allophone on the world stage.