Rona Ambrose

[Business of Supply, October 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, of course the concept behind limiting the federal spending power is to do exactly what the member has recognized, which is to create a real partnership with the provinces. Previous Liberal governments spoke about federal-provincial relations and spoke about seeing the provinces as partners, but we know that was not true. Previous Liberal governments imposed their will on the provinces many times without them having any opportunity to fund those programs.

Limiting the federal spending power will make sure that if the federal government wants to create a partnership with the provinces, it will actually have to consult with the provinces. It will be law. The will of the majority of the provinces will be needed to proceed with a national program. That is a good thing for Canada. It is a good thing for Canadians, because all of our provinces represent Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and they will have a say in what matters at the national level. This is exactly what limiting the federal spending power will do.

This is a great thing for the partnership between the federal government and provincial governments and it a great thing for strengthening our federation moving forward.

[Business of Supply, October 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the real question for my colleagues is this: what is the true rationale for the Bloc Québécois in Ottawa? As I see it, the truth is that our government has delivered for Quebec and will continue to do so.

I wish to advise the House that I will be splitting my time with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, the hon. member for Macleod.

I am pleased to take part in this debate today on the Bloc Québécois motion to have the spending power eliminated. I want to stress the way that the government is proposing to deal with the issue of use of the federal spending power—not by eliminating it, but by passing legislation to limit its use in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction.

Our government believes that if use of the federal spending power is limited, the provinces will be in a better position to meet the needs and requirements of their citizens. The Canadian population will then benefit from better programs and services. This measure will also strengthen our federation—one of the key themes of throne speech.

Our government will be tabling legislation setting limits on the use of the federal spending power in new, shared cost programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction.

This legislation will allow the provinces and territories to opt out of these new programs, with fair compensation, provided they offer compatible programs.

It was the leader of the Bloc who put the following question to the Prime Minister: “Will the Prime Minister heed this consensus and introduce a bill to limit his spending power to his own areas of jurisdiction?”

The answer is yes.

This is something that has long been a priority for this government. Indeed, it was one of the commitments that Canadians voted for on January 23, 2006, a commitment that our government has now reiterated and a commitment on which we will deliver.

The Government of Canada values an approach to federalism that fully respects provincial jurisdictions and a key element of such an approach involves the limitation, not the elimination, of the federal spending power. In essence, unlike the Bloc, we do not want to eliminate the federal spending power. We want to eliminate the abuse of the federal spending power. Elimination, of course, means separation and we on this side of the House are federalists.

Over the last few decades, many provinces began to feel that the federal government was intruding into exclusive provincial jurisdiction through the use of its spending power distorting the ability of the provinces to provide programs and services that meet the priorities of their own citizens.

Many of these federal spending initiatives in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction meant additional financial pressure on the provincial and territorial governments, which forced them to make changes, and not changes for the better, to their priorities as far as taxation and expenditures were concerned, particularly in the area of 50-50 federal-provincial cost-shared initiatives.

Furthermore, while the federal government was using its spending power to dictate policy direction in areas of provincial responsibility, it was also creating risk with the uncertainty that the provinces would be left funding the total cost of the program if the federal government withdrew funding.

Indeed, the federal government often used the federal spending power to entice the provinces into significant long term financial commitments and then left them facing greater budgetary challenges when the federal government reduced its own contribution.

Increased spending in areas mainly under provincial jurisdiction weakened the links that unified our federation and created tensions between the federal government and the provinces and territories when spending was incurred without consultation or sufficient consensus on priorities.

Increased federal spending in areas under provincial responsibility and the insufficient attention given to areas falling clearly under federal jurisdiction has given rise to concerns about unclear accountability.

This lack of clarity has made it more difficult for Canadians to determine which level of government should be required to be accountable for a specific policy or initiative.

In the Speech from the Throne, the government laid out its position clearly: Our government believes that the jurisdiction of each order of government should be respected. With the government's commitment to introduce legislation to place formal limits on the use of federal spending power for new shared cost programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, an important step has been taken in federal-provincial relations in this country.

This legislation would allow provinces and territories to opt out with reasonable compensation if they offer compatible programs. Canadians now have a government that keeps its promises and delivers on its priorities. The government's approach to spending power helps define a clearer and more respectful vision of federalism, one rooted in our Constitution, not in the narrow impulse to centralize.

Our approach strikes a balance between the objectives of clarifying roles and responsibilities and maintaining an appropriate and meaningful federal role.

The objective our government has set by renewing its commitment to limit the scope of the federal spending power is indicative of the type of federalism we are determined to practice: a federalism of openness in keeping with the needs and aspirations of Canadians, while at the same time respecting the jurisdiction of our provincial and territorial partners.

Canadians want their governments to agree and to cooperate. They do not want our federation's development to be marked by discord and confrontation. Limiting the federal spending power will lead to a real partnership between the federal and provincial governments. Because of the accountability created by an opt-out provision, federal departments will have to partner with provinces to implement future cost shared programs in areas of provincial jurisdiction.

This will mean that federal officials will have to work harder and more effectively to achieve national objectives and this will serve as an accountability mechanism within our federal system.

The Right Hon. Prime Minister wants Canada's future to be one of vibrant optimism and renewed confidence. The throne speech mapped out that future in a way that inspires and rallies all Canadians. The direction that we want to take our country in reflects their priorities, their hopes and their expectations.

The legislation on the federal spending power that we will introduce will be faithful to that spirit of cooperation, respect and confidence. The future we foresee for Canadians focuses on a federalism of openness and respect with which all Canadians, no matter what region they live in, can identify and look to with confidence.

Such openness has, of course, not been received with the unanimous support of the House. One of the non-negotiable conditions set out by the leader of the Bloc Québécois in exchange for his support of the throne speech concerned the elimination, pure and simple, of the federal spending power. He claimed he was speaking for all Quebec political parties in opposing this power.

In recent days, however, we have seen that not everyone in Quebec politics shares his opinion. I would point out, first of all, that this is not the first time the Bloc Québécois and its leader have been wrong in claiming to be the only ones speaking for Quebeckers. This is clearly not the case. Other parties may perhaps be opposed to certain aspects of federalism, but not to federalism per se. When it comes down to it, what the leader of the Bloc has in mind is not so much elimination of the federal spending power as elimination of federalism itself. The motion before us shows that clearly.

The fact is that the commitment made in the throne speech and the announced legislative measure represent real progress. While some use nothing but words, we will be enacting legislation. As for the Bloc motion, this is once again an obvious attempt to undermine the very foundations of federation.

Our policy on the federal spending power will reflect our desire to strengthen our federation and make it more effective, while fully respecting the Constitution and creating real partnerships with the provinces. The government committed to addressing this issue and we are moving forward on our commitment.

At the same time, the government has concentrated on its national role by reinvesting in core federal responsibilities such as trade, defence, public safety and security, while pursuing our federalism of openness that respects provincial areas of responsibility and recognizing the strength and contribution of each region of this country.

The government will continue to provide leadership in promoting national interests in conjunction with the provinces and territories. It has absolutely no intention to subscribe to the separatist vision of federation the Bloc Québécois is promoting.

Quebeckers, like other Canadians, want their governments to continue working together. We have every intention of staying the course to build a better country and lead this nation to a great future.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador does not seem to have a problem having his voice heard. What I will say is that the offer to Premier Williams has always been on the table, the same offer that has been there since the budget was tabled. We have constructive relationships from the bureaucratic level with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. We will continue to offer the same deal offered to Nova Scotia and to the provinces in Atlantic Canada to Premier Williams at any time should he like to have a cooperative relationship with the federal government.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I must comment on the level of hypocrisy from that member. That is a member who talks about social progress when it is this party that wants to extend full rights to aboriginal women. It is this party that is supporting the mission in Afghanistan so that women can vote and little girls can go to school. The only people in the way of that is the member's party and the party across the floor. So this party will take no lessons from him on social progress.

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, when I speak with the premiers, finance ministers and other intergovernmental affairs ministers across the country, what they are happy about and what they do reflect on concerning the previous Conservative governments under Brian Mulroney, is that it is nice to have a federal government back in power that respects and collaborates with the provinces. I am proud that the member recognizes that our government has the kind of relationship with the provinces that Mr. Mulroney had.

Let me give some of the provincial responses to the Speech from the Throne. Nova Scotia premier, Rodney MacDonald, welcomed the news that Ottawa is going to--

[Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply, October 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome this opportunity to speak in the debate on the Speech from the Throne. The theme is: strengthening the federation and our democratic institutions.

This government is committed to pursuing a federalism of openness that recognizes the strength and the contribution of each region of our great country. We committed to respect matters of exclusive provincial jurisdiction and to ensure accountability by clarifying roles and responsibilities. We have taken historic action by restoring fiscal balance in Canada and by putting this country's fiscal arrangements back on a predictable, long term, principled track. In fact, by restoring fiscal balance, federal support for provinces and territories was brought to unprecedented levels to support quality services for Canadians.

In the Speech from the Throne, we took additional measures to advance our vision of open federalism.

We promised to introduce a bill to impose limits on use of the federal spending power for new shared-cost programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, while allowing the provinces to opt out with reasonable compensation if they offer compatible programs.

Our approach is anchored in a desire to make Canada an even stronger federation by recognizing the strength and contribution of each region of this country, and under the Prime Minister and this government, the federation is stronger and more united than ever. A strong federation and a vibrant democracy are the foundations of our united and great country. Indeed, these two elements--federalism and democracy--are inextricably linked in the history of Canada.

Looking back at Canada's history, it becomes apparent that a federal system like democracy was a wise and prudent choice by our Fathers of Confederation, a wise formula best suited to the changing needs and the aspirations of such a diverse people stretched out across this vast land.

Indeed, history has shown that Canada is a country defined by its economic, social, geographic and cultural diversity.

In this context, our practice of federalism allows Canada to strike a balance, pursuing national goals while taking into consideration various local and regional factors, all the while continuously remaining flexible and adapting to change.

In fact, the Canadian federation's flexibility lends itself well to finding solutions to public policy questions and helps it rise to the challenges that we face to meet the demands of this diverse and ever-changing citizenry. It grants security for local interests while lending scope for carrying out the will of the nation as a whole in matters of national importance.

Our federation is a world success story. We are a model to others for effective governance, respect and recognition of diversity and pragmatic consensus.

As a federation, we will always have some regional stresses and strains, yet our great strength has been in how we address them, overcome them and build a stronger and a better Canada.

We have clearly been a success in Quebec with our recognition of the fiscal balance and our settlement of the fiscal balance.

May I say on this note that I look forward to sharing my time with my hon. new colleague from Quebec who will be speaking on this issue, in particular, from a Quebec perspective.

When our government first came into power, it was clear that Canadian federalism was not working as well as it should have been.

It was becoming stagnant and unresponsive to the changing needs of the provinces and territories and the changing needs of Canadians.

What we saw before our government came to power was an unprincipled, what I like to call chequebook federalism, an unfettered use of the federal spending power to the detriment of the federation and to Canadians. Unplanned federal surpluses were used to spend massive amounts in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, often in the absence of consultation with the provinces and territories. This spending weakened the bonds of our federation. It resulted in strains between the federal government and the provinces and territories where expenditures were undertaken without adequate consultation or consensus on priorities and created resentment among the provinces.

This use of federal spending power in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction created new cost pressures on provincial and territorial governments, forcing them to adversely distort their taxing and spending priorities, particularly where initiatives required matching funds. Provinces were then faced with the dilemma of going into debt to help fund the new programs while still having to respond to their local demands of concerns of their citizens, and if they opted out from the program they subjected their citizens to taxation without benefit.

This spending in areas of primarily provincial jurisdiction increased uncertainty, where initiatives were introduced without long term or stable federal funding, leaving provinces facing greater budgetary challenges when the cost of the programs were fully downloaded as the federal government sought to slash spending.

Twenty one months ago, Canadians voted to change the government of Canada, because they wanted to change the direction of this country.

One thing that they wanted to see was a federalism of openness that allowed the provinces to provide the programs and services that their citizens required. The idea behind open federalism dates to well before 2006. It was born out of the idea that the federation is not static but an evolving institution that should respond to the changes and the impacts of a modern world. It was built on the idea of a strong national government working in cooperation with strong provincial and territorial governments, as envisioned in our Constitution and grounded in the British North American Act.

I am very proud of this type of federalism. It is also very different from the counterproductive and centralist federalism that had too often characterized the Liberal government's approach to federal-provincial relationships before we became government.

I am sure that we all hope, with the passage of this throne speech and our government's subsequent legislation, that this era will be well and truly behind us.

Canadians want their governments to agree and to cooperate. They do not want our federation's development to be marked by discord and confrontation.

The right hon. Prime Minister wants Canada's future to be one of vibrant optimism and renewed confidence in ourselves. The throne speech maps out that future in a way that inspires and rallies Canadians because the direction that we want to take our country reflects the priorities of Canadians, their hopes and their expectations.

The future we envision for Canadians will be made possible thanks to an open federalism that all Canadians can identify with and look upon with confidence, no matter where they live.

Open federalism means recognizing the maturation and evolution of the provinces and territories within the federation and respecting the clear and important role that they are playing in meeting their citizens' needs.

It means respecting areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction and limiting the use of the federal spending power. My colleague from Roberval--Lac-Saint Jean will be speaking to the House shortly and he will explain how important this is, particularly for Quebec.

By providing this kind of equitable and predictable funding for shared priorities and attempting to clarify roles and responsibilities in the federation, this government is offering a solid principle based approach on which provincial governments can continue to work.

Restoring the fiscal balance to the federation and proposing limits on the use of federal spending power gives the provinces the financial flexibility and ability to respond to the needs and demands of their citizens and ensure that there are adequate programs to do just that. It gives the provinces the resources and the ability to better meet their citizens' needs by providing better schools, better roads and better health care for Canadians.

As the Canadian federation evolves, we will continue to focus on measures to strengthen national unity. In the spirit of open federalism, this government has concentrated on its national role by reinvesting in core responsibilities such as trade, defence, public safety and security. We will continue to play a leadership role to promote national interests in cooperation and collaboration with the provinces and territories.

We will also continue to insert the importance of maintaining an open, honest and respectful relationship with the provinces and territories.

We also assert that true collaboration can only occur when resources and accountability are matched with clear roles and responsibilities. Our government believes that the jurisdiction of each order of government should be respected so that all Canadians can see their needs and desires moved to fruition.

That is why our government will introduce federal legislation to place formal limits on the use of federal spending power for new cost shared programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction. This legislation will also allow provinces and territories to opt out with reasonable compensation if they offer compatible services.

By forging ahead with our vision of open federalism, we remain focused on building Canada's future prosperity by expanding the many advantages we already possess as a nation.

[Speech from the Throne, October 17th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the Bloc is a separatist party but we are a federalist party and we will work together with the provinces, including Quebec, to ensure that when we do introduce new cost shared programs that we have the support of the majority of the provinces. If one province would like to opt out, as long as it delivers a comparable service to its citizens and we have comparable services across the country we will work with them.

[Speech from the Throne, October 17th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has already said this, and the Speech from the Throne stated it yesterday: we will table a bill. We are prepared to work with our Bloc colleague on an issue that is so important to the Bloc and to Quebeckers.

[Equalization Formula, June 20th, 2007]

As I said, Mr. Speaker, there is wording in our budget related to cost sharing programs and to limiting the federal spending power. It is the intention of our government, as we have with the settlement of the fiscal imbalance, to limit our spending in areas of provincial jurisdiction where it touches on obviously provincial programs.

Again, we are open to proposals. We have not yet seen a proposal from the Quebec government or any other province at this point.

[Equalization Formula, June 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, we have had negotiations and talks with the Quebec government and other provincial governments on the federal spending power. To this date we have not received a proposal from any provincial government.