May 24, 1978

PC

Ramon John Hnatyshyn (Deputy House Leader of the Official Opposition; Progressive Conservative Party Deputy House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Hnatyshyn:

He would not make that speech in his constituency.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OF HALL REPORT
Permalink
NDP

John Edward Broadbent

New Democratic Party

Mr. Broadbent:

He has made no fewer than three distortions in his answer: I will not put it any more bluntly than that. Since he talked about spending the money, he knows full well the Hall royal commission recommended that we stop giving away millions of dollars carte blanche to the railway companies, and instead recommended that any compensatory payments made to subsidize the railways between their costs and the actual Crow rate should be made to them in the context of the government announcing its intention to maintain the Crow rate and putting the onus on the railways to maintain and upgrade the grain handling facilities.

May 24, 1978

Oral Questions

Given that recommendation, which is central to the needs of western farmers, could he tell us why he continues to give out millions of dollars to the railways? Second, why has he not made an unequivocal commitment to maintain the Crow rate?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OF HALL REPORT
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OF HALL REPORT
Permalink
LIB

Otto Emil Lang (Minister of Transport; Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board)

Liberal

Mr. Lang:

Mr. Speaker, time and time again I have made the unequivocal commitment to maintain the Crow rate. 1 have said it is extremely important to me, as a westerner, that the value of the Crow rate be considered in the full relationship in this country of the cost of the tariff to grain farmers. I have observed that there may be better ways of conferring those benefits. When the west is ready to receive those benefits in another way, I will be delighted about that. The rate is being maintained; therefore, it is completely clear that that recommendation is being carried out. In any case, there is no departure from the Hall commission recommendation in that regard.

With regard to the moneys being paid to the railways, the Hall commission in its report would have us pay something in the order of $200 million to $250 million a year over the next four years, on and forever in order to make up the difference. We are not paying that full amount; we are paying that part of the amount which we force the railways to match dollar for dollar into the rebuilding of rail lines. In other words, every dollar we transfer is for the purchase of equipment to rebuild those lines and for the actual rebuilding of the lines. We have not given the extra $150 million or so which the NDP is now urging we give to the railways. Imagine that, Mr. Speaker- the NDP urging that we give that amount to the railways.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OF HALL REPORT
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh!

[ Translation]

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OF HALL REPORT
Permalink

MANPOWER

SC

Charles-Arthur Gauthier

Social Credit

Mr. C. A. Gauthier (Roberval):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Employment and Immigration. It looks as if the minister has already decided to reduce the personnel in charge of the preparation of projects under the Canada Works program in my area. A few employees have been laid off so far, so that in November not more than 50 per cent of the personnel will be left.

Does the minister mean by that that he intends to cut his third phase budget down by 50 per cent of what it was for previous phases?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink
LIB

Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen (Minister of Employment and Immigration)

Liberal

Hon. Bud Cullen (Minister of Employment and Immigration):

No, Mr. Speaker, what we will, in effect, be doing is

maintaining the figure at $225 million. But in keeping with the recommendations of the first ministers' conference, and as a result of recommendations from both sides of this House, $50 million of that will be put into the economic growth component factor so we will be able to create more permanent jobs rather than the temporary jobs created under the Canada Works program. We are trying to blend the two programs to make them as effective as possible in dealing with unemployment.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink
SC

Charles-Arthur Gauthier

Social Credit

Mr. Gauthier (Roberval):

Mr. Speaker, is the minister not concerned that with such a restricted personnel, even if it is permanent, the quality of the projects might suffer because they will not have time to make the necessary contacts with promoters and that could affect the number of projects?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink
LIB

Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen (Minister of Employment and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Cullen:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, most assuredly I have that concern, but I also recognize that the people who are on the job recognize the responsibility they have and will do their utmost to see that the quality of the projects does not, in fact, suffer. But you cannot have it both ways: on one hand criticizing the government for spending too much money, and on the other suggesting that we continue to hire temporary employees to complete our staff. You cannot have it both ways.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink
SC

Charles-Arthur Gauthier

Social Credit

Mr. Gauthier (Roberval):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a supplementary question. Can the minister tell the House if we can expect about the same amounts for phase III as for phase II?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink
LIB

Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen (Minister of Employment and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Cullen:

Mr. Speaker, certainly the figure will be reduced by about 22 per cent, in rough figures, but not in each riding. The figures in that respect will come out in approximately one weeks time. Where unemployment has increased in a particular region, of course, there may be more money available. The basic figure for each riding will be established at about $150,000, rather than $50,000, so it is difficult until we come out with specifics on each individual riding to give the hon. member a better answer.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   MANPOWER
Sub-subtopic:   CANADA WORKS PROGRAM-INQUIRY WHETHER FUNDS WILL BE REDUCED
Permalink

PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATES OF CANADA-MEXICO BUSINESSMEN'S COMMITTEE

LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. Before continuing the question period, I know that all hon. members will want to join with me in signalling the presence in our gallery of a distinguished visitor, the chairman of the Businessmen's Committee in his own country and head of the delegation to the eighth bilateral Canada-Mexico Businessmen's Committee in the person of Mr. Jose B. Zozaya.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATES OF CANADA-MEXICO BUSINESSMEN'S COMMITTEE
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

May 24, 1978

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATES OF CANADA-MEXICO BUSINESSMEN'S COMMITTEE
Permalink

TRANSPORT

PC

John Carnell Crosbie

Progressive Conservative

Mr. John C. Crosbie (St. John's West):

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transport. Yesterday the minister released the report of Mr. Justice Noel on the sinking of the Canadian vessel m.v. William Carson last June 3. In that report Mr. Justice Noel finds that the sinking was the fault of the vessel's operator, Canadian National Railways, and her master.

The report is dated January 27, which is 116 days ago. When did the minister receive the report, and why has it been delayed so long in being made public? In view of this finding that the CNR was responsible or was at fault, is the minister going to direct the CNR to pay the passengers and crew loss claims and the cargo owners their claims which have been in abeyance now for 11 months? They were to be paid for personal effects. There has been a great deal of hardship in Labrador, Happy Valley, because of these claims not being paid. Will the CNR now be directed to pay them?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES INCURRED IN SINKING OF M. V. "WILLIAM CARSON"
Permalink
LIB

Otto Emil Lang (Minister of Transport; Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board)

Liberal

Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Transport):

Mr. Speaker, I would have to check the exact date on which I received the report. The time in between has been taken up with printing and preparation for publication, as well as for some advance distribution to provincial authorities, and so on. It would not be my intention to give directions to the Canadian National. I am sure they are looking at their legal position and what is their proper course of action. They have, no doubt, the knowledge that I would want them to do what is right for them to do.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES INCURRED IN SINKING OF M. V. "WILLIAM CARSON"
Permalink
PC

John Carnell Crosbie

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Crosbie:

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to find out when this report was received. Some 16 weeks is a long time to print a report. If the minister could check that, I am sure the House would be interested. A number of cargo owners in Labrador were practically made bankrupt by the loss of this cargo, not insured by the CN, and they neglected to insure it themselves because they always considered they could recover if the vessel owner was at fault. Will the minister take steps to have the CN speed up the settlement, in view of this finding, to help these people who have had a lot of problems in the last 11 months?

The other part of my question is, what about the government itself? The government owns this vessel. Is it now going to take action against the CN to recover the value of the vessel at the time of the sinking due to the finding of fault on the part of the CN, or are the taxpayers going to be asked to cough up the $4 million odd to meet the fault that the judge found on the part of the CN? What action is the government going to take?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES INCURRED IN SINKING OF M. V. "WILLIAM CARSON"
Permalink
LIB

Otto Emil Lang (Minister of Transport; Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board)

Liberal

Mr. Lang:

Mr. Speaker, I would certainly be glad if I could do anything to speed up the resolution of the questions referred to in the first part of the hon. member's question. As far as the second part is concerned, the Canadian National was operating this vessel on behalf of the government and I would want

Oral Questions

first to have legal advice as to the implications of that in respect of any potential claim.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES INCURRED IN SINKING OF M. V. "WILLIAM CARSON"
Permalink

May 24, 1978