Paul Martin

[Publishing Industry, May 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, first, I can tell the member that these costs are within our budget. That being said, I want to congratulate the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Minister for International Trade, who both did a tremendous job. The Minister of Canadian Heritage was successful in protecting Canadian culture.

[Tainted Blood, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to respond.

Connaught Laboratories were a subsidiary of a subsidiary of the Canada Development Corporation. I was on the board, but I must point out that both Connaught and the other company, the parent company, had their own boards as well.

The government administrator, the one most involved, has said that this was not the kind of thing discussed in the CDC, and that he had no recollection of this event. Nor do I.

[Canada Development Corporation, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question is no. I do not remember that.

The CDC director, the most knowledgeable and nominated by the government, has said that he had no recollection of this matter ever being discussed at the CDC board which was the only board on which I happened to sit.

I would be delighted to make public whatever papers I have available but I have no such papers. I have asked the government to look at its papers and if we have them we will make them available to the hon. members.

[Canada Development Corporation, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, Connaught Labs was the subsidiary of a subsidiary of the CDC. In each case Connaught Labs, and in fact the parent subsidiary, had its own board of directors.

The government director, who was on the CDC board and the most knowledgeable about this, said that this was not the kind of thing that would have come to the CDC board. He also has no recollection of it coming to the CDC board. I have no recollection of this particular matter coming to the CDC board.

I would be delighted to have whatever papers could be made available to be made available. I have asked my officials to look at our papers but at the present time we have found nothing.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, Canada first raised this issue a number of years ago at G-7 meetings and at the annual meeting of the IMF.

Since the vote in the House, there has been a G-7 meeting and I raised this issue. I also raised it at the IMF meetings that took place some three weeks ago.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the government's revenues are up because there are 1.5 million more Canadians working; 450,000 last year alone. Our revenue is up because business confidence is up and consumer confidence is up. We have had very high housing starts over the course of the last year. Our revenues are up because Canada is functioning very well.

North America is part of one of the strongest economies in the world. That is why we are doing well and why we are going to keep on doing well.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this is very difficult to understand. The hon. member's party opposed the agricultural assistance and now he stands to talk about it. It opposed health care funding and now he stands in the House to talk about it. It opposed the child tax benefit and now he stands in the House to talk about it.

The fact is one is entitled to ask the Reform Party to keep its lines consistent if not from week to week at least from day to day.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, those of us who were elected to this House in 1993 will not forget Reform member after Reform member standing and saying “Cut spending. Cut health care spending. Cut the transfers to the provinces. Cut the social fabric to eliminate the deficit”.

The fact is that we eliminated the deficit and we preserved the social fabric of this country.

At the same time as this government was bringing in special tax incentives for the physically disabled and for young children, the Reform Party fought against them. The Reform Party has not had a balanced approach on any issue. It has been scorch and burn all the way. That is why it is at 6% in Ontario.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, these are the facts. In the previous parliament the Reform Party said that it wanted to take $3.5 billion out of the health care system.

Fact: Two weeks ago the member for Elk Island said that health care spending was irresponsible.

Fact: The member for Calgary—Nose Hill said that spending on health care was irresponsible.

Fact: The member from Okanagan, who started the whole thing, said that health care spending was questionable.

Let me tell the Reform Party that health care is part of the basic fabric of this country and we will protect the health care system.

[Taxation, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's facts are simply wrong. The government's revenues are up because economic activity is up and there are more people working, over a million and a half. The fact is that personal disposable income growth is up. It is not down. Our national net worth is up. It is not down.

Now that I have answered the hon. member's question, I ask him to answer mine. Where is the Reform Party going to get $26 billion worth of cuts? Why will he not answer the question? What is he afraid of?