Mr. Maurice Foster (Algoma):

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture and it concerns the

July 15, 1988

Oral Questions

desperate drought situation in many districts and counties of Ontario and in some areas of Quebec.

After the federal-provincial Ministers' meeting two days ago, the Minister announced that the same assistance would be provided in Ontario and Quebec as has been provided in the West. So far the only program is the livestock program in the West.

Will the same $60 per head of breeding cow be provided in the Ontario counties and districts affected? Will the same $15 per acre of assistance in tax deferral be provided for Ontario counties and districts affected? When will application forms be available? Will the funds be provided on the same date as they are being provided in western Canada, which I assume is using the starting date of July 1 with payments being made sometime in late August? Could the Minister clarify those issues?

Hon. John Wise (Minister of Agriculture):

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity for further clarification, although the message coming out of the federal-provincial meeting was very clear.

At the federal-provincial meeting in Toronto on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday I said that the same process that we followed in western Canada would be followed in eastern Canada. As of last Tuesday we had already formed the federal-provincial drought co-ordinating committee in the East. One meeting had already been held.

What I said then, and what I am saying here today, is that the same process will be followed in the eastern part of the country that was followed in western Canada.

Mr. Maurice Foster (Algoma):

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is the following. I hope that the Minister will be able to provide exactly the same assistance in eastern Canada as is being provided in the West. That is what farmers want to know. They are not so much concerned about the process as they are that the funds will be provided on the same basis.

I also want to deal with the question of the losses in wheat, soybeans, corn, and a number of horticultural crops. Those losses are estimated to be well over half a million dollars already. By the end of the month the losses could approach 80 to 90 per cent in corn alone.

Is the Minister prepared to accept the recommendation of the Ontario corn producers that the yield factor be raised from 80 per cent to 90 per cent, and that the pricing factor be raised to the current day pricing?

In co-operation with provincial Ministers is the Minister willing to extend the application date for crop insurance until September 1, provided that the producers enrol for a two or three-year period? Will that type of assistance that has been proposed by the Ontario corn producers cover other crops? Is the Minister willing to accept those recommendations, many of

which were contained in the federal-provincial review committee and were reported over a year ago? So far no legislation has been brought forward or policies adopted to implement those recommendations in the 1987 federal-provincial crop insurance review committee report.

Hon. John Wise (Minister of Agriculture):

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it would be appropriate for anyone who is paying the bill to accept any recommendations at this time. Any recommendations at this time are sheer speculation, and they will be speculation until later in the year when we are closer to harvest time, or at the normal harvest time, depending on the specific crop.

We will work jointly with the provinces and with the producer organizations to come up with recommendations to deal with the situation, exactly the course of action that we followed in western Canada.

We are interested in fairness and equity. We are interested in enhancing the crop insurance program. We are interested in encouraging a greater participation and a greater enrolment in the crop insurance program. But we are also interested in ensuring that there is fairness and equity in financing.

We are proposing to the provinces that we have a more equitable way of financing, more on a tri-partite approach. If the provinces would follow this, this would mean that there would be fairness and equity in crop insurance. It would also mean that Canadian farmers would pay somewhat less. That concept already exists in the Province of Quebec and in the Province of Newfoundland. If we get on with the job, if the provinces are prepared to pay their fair share, then we can make an awful lot of progress in the next week to ten days.

Mr. Ernie Epp (Thunder Bay-Nipigon):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. The Minister knows that despite the Government's employment equity program to increase employment of women in the federal Public Service, 232 scientific and professional jobs held by female public servants will be gone by 1991. Representing only 25 per cent of this group, women will lose 30 per cent of the jobs.

Will the Minister not admit that it is sheer hypocrisy to talk about increasing employment of women in the federal Public Service while making such disproportionate cuts in this very, very important category?

Hon. Pat Carney (President of the Treasury Board):

Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that the Hon. Member has

July 15, 1988

not congratulated this Government for being the first one to accentuate employment equity and to set targets for the employment not only of women but also of the disabled, natives, and visible minority groups.

Yesterday we published a report called On Target which indicated that in the first three years of this very important program we increased the number of women in the scientific and professional groups. It is reflected in the report that the increase was from 5,305 in 1985 to 5,580 in 1988.1 think that should answer the Hon. Member's concern.

Mr. Epp (Thunder Bay-Nipigon):

Mr. Speaker, that is what boasting does in refusing to deal with the fact that the numbers will be dropping back toward the levels they were in 1985. That is outrageous, Madam Minister.

Mr. Ernie Epp (Thunder Bay-Nipigon):

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the same Minister who knows very well that visible minorities are very seriously under represented in the Public Service, representing perhaps 3 per cent of the Public Service by her own figures, less than half of their proportion in the Canadian population.

How can the Minister reconcile the Government's supposed commitment to multiculturalism with a paltry 4.2 per cent increase in the numbers of persons from visible minorities who will be employed in the federal Public Service by 1991? At that kind of rate of increase, Mr. Speaker, it will take until the middle of the next century to achieve fair representation for visible minorities.

Hon. Pat Carney (President of the Treasury Board):

Mr. Speaker, I do not think that our efforts to increase the employment of women, minority groups, the disabled, and natives are outrageous. They are without precedent in the history of any previous Government. We are the first ones to bring in a commitment to employment equity and we have delivered, as yesterday's report shows.

The Hon. Member should be aware that, of course, there may be a downsizing in this group as the Member suggests because we are devolving certain aspects of employment to the territorial Governments and to Indian bands, where nurses and teachers will be affected. That will be because their jobs are being devolved to other agencies. The Hon. Member should take that into account.

In terms of the other issues he raises, I suggest he both read the On Target report and the targets that we have set for the next three years. The Hon. Member should be aware that this Government has spent in excess of $30 million in order to ensure that special measures for employment equity are both in place and enforced.

Oral Questions ABORTION

Mr. Jim Jepson (London East):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. As the Minister knows, researchers at Halifax Dalhousie University plan to use brain tissue from aborted fetuses for transplantation, a practice that I am sure most Canadians will find clearly unacceptable and morally repugnant.

The U.S. Government in a move to to stop fetal tissue transplants is refusing federal funds to any institution that carries out medical research with fetuses. Can the Minister assure this House that there will be no federal funds awarded to any university, institution or organization which would try to carry out this despicable practice?

Hon. Jake Epp (Minister of National Health and Welfare):

Mr. Speaker, I too read the news reports with great alarm. I think that human life either in utero or in vitro, which is induced for experimental purposes, is both ethnically and morally unacceptable and wrong.

That does not relate, for example, to the spontaneous abortions and the medical and ethical procedures relating to organ harvesting and cadavers. There is also a very strong medical difference with respect to the fact that other options could not be used.

I say, as the Minister of National Health, that while there is review for any federal funding of medical research, this Minister will not approve such a procedure.

Hear, hear!

Mr. Len Hopkins (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke):

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. There has been a definite deterioration in the morale of the Public Service of Canada under this Government and there has been a total lack of constructive dialogue between the duly elected representatives of the Public Service of Canada and the Treasury Board.

Today, regardless of what the Minister says, we find that in the science and professional job cuts female public servants have been the hardest hit.

Why has the President of the Treasury Board chosen not to meet with representatives of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada despite their many requests to do so over the past several months? Is the Minister prepared to commit herself to a meeting without further delay to discuss issues of pressing concern to its members and representatives?

July 15, 1988

Oral Questions

Hon. Pat Carney (President of the Treasury Board):

Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member should be aware that I held a special reception in May in order to meet with union representatives and to get acquainted with them, because this is a year of tough negotiations. I explained at that time that I did not want to undercut the collective bargaining process that we have in place at this time.

I am quite willing to meet with the representatives at a time when my participation would be helpful, but considering the lack of progress at the bargaining table I do not see what point would be served at this time.