House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1997, with 54% of the vote.
Pay Equity October 1st, 1997
Mr. Speaker, it is of course false to say that the government has been evading the law.
The government has been applying the law and the government has been paying over $1 billion over the last 20 years in applying the law. The government has also offered $1.3 billion to the unions that represent the women involved in order to give justice and pay equity in the country. This government has been a model in the application of pay equity.
Access To Information September 30th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the government of course remains committed to the principles of openness and accountability that are inherent in the Access to Information Act. We recognize that there is a need for amendments to the act. It is up to the departments to apply the act and we will support these amendments as soon as they come forward.
Pay Equity September 30th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the government continues to meet its obligations in terms of pay equity.
These last few years, the government paid out $1 billion to meet its pay equity obligations. At present, a number of persons have lodged a complaint before the human rights tribunal. The union is clearly waiting for its decision to know what the amount will be, what the methodology will be, what will have to be paid. The government has no unpaid debt at the present time. On the contrary, we offered, during these negotiations, over $1.3 billion.
Pay Equity September 29th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, clearly it would be better to reach a negotiated settlement with the unions.
This is why we are continuing our negotiations. However, the government will look at all the options necessary so that our employees may have their money in their pockets without delay.
Pay Equity September 29th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the government clearly supports pay equity, since it passed legislation on the matter in 1978.
What remains to be decided is the amount of the adjustments to be made to ensure pay equity exists in practice. The government has already paid out $1 billion for pay equity and it has proposed nearly $1.3 billion in its current negotiations, which it intends to continue.
Supply September 23rd, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I move:
That this House consider the business of supply at its next sitting.
(Motion agreed to)
Infrastructure April 18th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, in early February I indicated to Minister Eves of Ontario that we were ready to have an agreement on the basis of the current guidelines.
Mr. Eves then proposed an approach where the province of Ontario selected all the projects and subsequently presented the federal partner with a list. This is a very substantial change from the current guidelines where the municipalities had the responsibility to identify and select the projects.
I cannot in good conscience agree the municipalities which pay one-third of the cost of the program would have no voice in deciding where the projects are.
It is true, according to the current list developed by Ontario that has not been fully revised by federal officials in particular, that the counties of Muskoka, Haliburton and Parry Sound received disproportionately high benefits relative to population. Coincidentally and to our great surprise, this is Minister Eves' riding.
Taxation April 18th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, accountants could go on about this at length. Is it better to pay him the salary of a Deputy Minister, around $140,000 or $150,000, so that he will have a net income of $97,000, or to pay him his salary tax free, because technically, the Crown cannot tax the Crown? That is a choice accountants have to make, and one way or another, it will not have much of an impact on the future of this country.
Canadian Cultural Institutions April 18th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, when we are putting more than $1 billion annually into supporting our cultural institutions, there is no doubt that our government is showing that it wants to give effect to the principles of which we spoke and to continue to defend our cultural institutions.
As for the privatization of Bon Matin , I would like to remind the hon. member that the CBC is an autonomous agency in which we do not interfere. It is precisely because we do not want there to be any political interference that we are allowing the CBC to take decisions such as the one it may eventually take regarding Bon Matin . Opposition members would be the first to complain if there were any political interference. In this case, we are not interfering, so how can they complain?
Canadian Cultural Institutions April 18th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, through its protection of Canadian cultural institutions in recent budgets, I think the Canadian government has shown that it values
them greatly and that it intends to continue to protect them in the future.
Whether we are talking about Telefilm Canada, Radio-Canada or the CBC, the federal government has stated its objectives, and we intend to continue to serve the Canadian people, including the people of Quebec, in such a way as to promote the development of culture in Canada through strong and sustainable institutions.