Hon. Paul Dick (Minister of Supply and Services):

Madam Speaker, I am not saying that equality necessarily means fairness. I am saying that we will try to make sure it is fair. Sometimes those things are different. We will take a look at the problem which has been raised and will get back to the hon. member as soon as possible.

Mr. Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ottawa-Vanier):

Madam Speaker, my question is for the minister answering for Treasury Board.

Oral Questions

When the Conservative government took office in 1984 it boasted of its managerial skills and said it would make the Public Service efficient, but yesterday the public accounts committee was told that 2,500 public servants are still on the government payroll even though their jobs have been declared surplus and no reasonable job offer has been made to them.

I ask the minister to explain why people are being paid to come to work when there is no task to be performed. Where are the government's skills in managerial matters?

Hon. Harvie Andre (Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons):

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is right. We have been downsizing. Faced with limited resources there have been cutbacks. We are also doing that within the context of treating employees fairly and within the context of agreements we have with the unions, for example in terms of offering alternatives, relocation and so on.

It is within that context that as we downsize at any one point in time we may find there are surplus persons still on staff. The trend is there and we are trying to do it in a fair manner for the employees concerned.

Mr. Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ottawa-Vanier):

I wish to ask a supplementary question, Madam Speaker. Yesterday, we also saw the annual report of the Public Service Commission of Canada and learned that the number of public servants rose by 5,780 in 1992, for a grand total of 223,598 in Canada.

Why did the government hire 5,780 more public servants when we know that there are 2,500 paid fulltime public servants whose positions have been declared surplus and for whom suitable employment has not been found?

Hon. Harvie Andre (Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons):

Madam Speaker, it is a question of where the jobs are, what the qualifications are and where they are needed. Those do not always match the people who are declared surplus as a result of a change in government operations.

May 14, 1993

Oral Questions

Yes, with the kind of operation the Government of Canada has at any one time, people are leaving and people are coming in. For example, because of tax changes there has been a considerable increase in the number of people employed in administering the GST. Because of changes to UIC as well as the tremendous pressure on the department of immigration there have been substantial increases there. Therefore there are increases but the capabilities have to be matched with the job required. A person cannot necessarily be taken from a job declared surplus and be forced to fit into a job opening.

Mr. J. W. Bud Bird (Fredericton-York-Sunbury):

Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Forestry.

In March 1992 the minister was a party to the signing of the Canada forest accord. That accord contemplated close consultation among the federal government, the provinces of Canada and the territories in pursuit of the practice of sustainable development in the forests of our country.

The accord recognized provincial jurisdiction but it also identified the federal role in terms of science and technology, the environment and international marketing. In effect it identified the federal-provincial partnership that is really required to bring about sustainable development in our forests.

I want to ask the minister if the Canada forest accord is being implemented as it was intended. Is the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers meeting regularly to advance its purposes? Is the federal government playing a lead role?

Hon. Frank Oberle (Minister of Forestry):

Madam Speaker, I welcome my colleague's question.

He knows that the accord was the product of a broadly based coalition and consensus including the provincial ministers, industry, conservation groups and others. It is coupled with the new national forest sector strategy which is under the trusteeship and custodianship of the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. It has put in place

a monitoring and auditing process so that we can be assured that progress is being made.

These two documents will guide us to a better defined role for the federal government in forestry, one that would allow us to emphasize the issues my colleague has mentioned. These include the strengthening of our efforts in science and technology, our international trade efforts, the management of our international obligations pertaining to the environment and the management of federal lands including Indian lands throughout Canada.

Mr. Rod Murphy (Churchill):

Madam Speaker, my question is for the Acting Prime Minister.

Twelve years ago on Parliament Hill 100,000 Canadians protested the high interest rate policies of the then Liberal government. Tomorrow we know that tens of thousands of Canadians will be here to protest this government's policies on free trade, high unemployment and high interest rates.

Would the Acting Prime Minister not agree that these people, whether they are the Catholic bishops, NAC or the Canadian Labour Congress, are not enemies of Canada?

Hon. Tom Hockin (Minister for Science and Minister of State (Small Businesses and Tourism)):

Madam Speaker, the hon. member speaks of high interest rates.

We have a prime rate now of 5.7 per cent, the lowest it has been in 30 years. If people are going to come to Parliament Hill and talk about historically high interest rates, there is something wrong with their arithmetic. They can talk about unemployment. I agree that unemployment is a problem in all industrialized countries, Canada included.

However I have to tell the hon. member the OECD and the IMF both forecast that Canada is going to lead the G-7 in growth in 1993 and 1994. They expect us to have the highest growth rate of employment.

We are winning the horse races with other industrialized countries. We can keep winning every race. It will never be enough for us until we get unemployment down to 4 per cent, 5 per cent or 6 per cent. We are doing the best job of any industrialized country and we are going to continue to keep the course so that we can create jobs. In

May 14, 1993

the 1980s, under this government, we were the largest creator of jobs per capita of any industrialized country.

Mr. Rod Murphy (Churchill):

Madam Speaker, the minister is right that interest rates have gone down over the last few years.

The reality is however that for the majority of years this government was in power it was a deliberate policy to keep interest rates high to beat inflation. That caused more people to be at food banks and put more people on welfare. It created high unemployment across the country. In some regions of the country unemployment is over 24 per cent. Young people are unemployed. Women are unemployed.

Tomorrow when those people come to Parliament Hill, are they or are they not enemies of Canada?

Hon. Tom Hockin (Minister for Science and Minister of State (Small Businesses and Tourism)):

Madam Speaker, it is quite appropriate for people to come to Parliament Hill to talk about the unemployment rate in their regions. I quite understand that.

However, those who believe in the government's policies should put props on the lawn as well. These would be cradles of the new businesses bom and created in the last nine years under this government.

As a matter of fact we had a net business creation in the small business sector of over 150,000 a year from 1986 to 1990. Even during the recession we have had net job creation and small business creation. Those cradles should be out there too because small business is creating 82 per cent of all new jobs in this country.

Also with the cradles, as I have said, should be those barriers against Canadian exports, against Canadian jobs that we have removed. Those barriers existed in the United States and we hope to remove them in Mexico.

Mr. Jack Iyerak Anawak (Nunatsiaq):

[Editor's Note: Member spoke in Inuktitut.]

My question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. There is a housing crisis in the

Oral Questions

Arctic. In the Northwest Territories severe overcrowding is causing serious social, educational and health problems for aboriginal people. Yet this government has systematically slashed social housing funds. By 1994 this government will provide no new social housing assistance to the Northwest Territories at all.

Why is this government refusing to help provide basic shelter to the aboriginal people of the Northwest Territories?

Hon. Pierre H. Vincent (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and Minister of State (Indian Affairs and Northern Development)):

Madam Speaker, I disagree with my colleague. Since 1984 this government has doubled the funding for native communities across Canada in all areas, including housing. I think the evidence is there and the money is there. Again this year, in the departmental budget, despite all the cuts, there was an increase in the amounts given to native communities across the country.

Mr. Jack Iyerak Anawak (Nunatsiaq):

[Editor's Note: Member spoke in Inuktitut.]

The money that this minister is talking about is for housing on reserves which does not help the aboriginal people of the Northwest Territories who do not live on reserves.

Last December the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs recommended that the government provide the funds necessary to meet the desperate housing needs of northerners.

Will the minister tell northerners today that he intends to implement this unanimous all-party recommendation and that he will reverse these devastating cuts?

Hon. Pierre H. Vincent (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and Minister of State (Indian Affairs and Northern Development)):

Madam Speaker, we know that native housing in the north is a complex issue and I understand my colleague's concerns. That being said, the committee did an excellent job, as well as the 40 individuals and organizations that participated in it. We are now reviewing the committee's report and the

May 14, 1993

Oral Questions

department and the government will make the necessary decisions in due time.