Paul Martin

[The Economy, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows there has been market turmoil in the Asian markets for a period of weeks. In fact last week the situation deteriorated and then came back.

As far as Canada is concerned—in fact as far as North American markets are concerned—our fiscal situation has improved substantially. I am very confident that the structural reforms that are required in Asia to prevent contagion are in place and I feel very confident about the situation in North America and in Canada specifically.

[Pensions, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Durham has been a fervent advocate of changes to the Canada-U.S. treaty, as indeed have a number of other members in the House, changes which would bring needed relief to tens of thousands of low and middle income Canadians. As he also knows, and as the House knows, our bill is currently on schedule and will be before the House in due time.

Although the bill is not yet on the floor of the U.S. Senate, we have heard encouraging news. The U.S. Senate foreign relations committee has recommended to the Senate that it pass the—

[Education, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows full well that the government is not going to engage in commenting on what goes on in individual provinces.

The fact is that to the best of my knowledge, when the Government of Saskatchewan was shutting down hospitals we did not make a lot of comment about that. Perhaps we should have.

There is one thing that we will do. We are going to protect Canadians. We are going to protect low income Canadians. We are going to invest in the things they want.

That is why the line in the sand is drawn between this side of the House and that side of the House. We are going to protect the basic social fabric and the values—

[Education, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member, a member of Parliament with considerable experience, will know that there were reductions in transfers, in Ontario's case, of close to a billion dollars. That is 25% of the $4.9 billion cut that the Conservative Government of Ontario has brought in and, as a result of which, is closing hospitals and shutting down schools.

That is precisely the difference between ourselves and the Reform Party. Of course we want to cut taxes, but we are not prepared to cut health care. We are not prepared to cut education. We are not prepared to—

[Canada Pension Plan, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, this is an important debate for Canadians.

What the Reform Party is talking about doing is destroying the Canada pension plan. Its members have a responsibility to tell Canadians, those who are currently contributing to the plan, those who rely on it, what Reform will do with about $600 billion liability.

Reform members have a responsibility to put their cards on the table and not engage in a bunch of fearmongering.

[Canada Pension Plan, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, once again, one really has to look at the adequacy of the research department for the Reform Party. The fact of the matter is the net worth of Canadian households is up. The fact is what the Reform Party has not done is tell the Canadian people what it would do with the very large liability that is owed to those Canadians who are currently retired or those Canadians who are currently working and putting money into the Canada pension plan.

As things currently stand there are only one or two alternatives. Either Reformers are suggesting a 13% premium versus 9.9% or they would renege on the commitments to Canadians—

[Canadian International Trade Tribunal, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal has now received additional information and, since it is an independent body, has asked to review the file. The information came from other manufacturers located in Quebec.

[Canada Pension Plan, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, again, the hon. member does have a responsibility to Canadians and to this House to get her facts straight.

The difference of opinion between Saskatchewan and British Columbia and the other eight provinces was that those two provinces wanted to see the rates go up higher and less moderation of benefits. Quebec has precisely the same plan. It was set up at the very beginning and it is putting through exactly the same changes in terms of premiums as we are.

The fundamental fact is that Alberta took a leadership role along with the other provinces when we put this together, and they have signed on to the deal. The hon. member simply has a—

[Canada Pension Plan, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the return is substantially higher than that. It is in fact a return which will be commensurate with any other pension plan given the fact that it will be administered at arm's length.

The former minister of finance, the treasurer of Alberta, Mr. Dinning, was one of the leaders and a very constructive force in the development of the Canada pension plan along with the other provinces.

[Taxation, October 27th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the harmonized sales tax is supported by the chamber of commerce and all of the small and medium size business groups in Nova Scotia precisely because it has lowered taxes for consumers, because it has lowered their administrative costs and it is enabling them to create jobs.

I am very surprised that the leader of the NDP, who has some experience in Nova Scotia, would not support the premier of Nova Scotia who is an outstanding Canadian, an outstanding representative of Atlantic Canada, and who is here to do his best by the province. What the leader of the NDP ought to do is to support him in his desire to improve—