1986-11-07

THE LATE LUCIE GRATTON

Mr. Speaker:: I would like to inform all Hon. Members of the House that Lucie Gratton, whose services as a procedural clerk with the House of Commons have been greatly appreciated since 1978, passed away yesterday at the age of 30 years after a long and valiant fight against cancer. On behalf of the Members and staff of the House of Commons, I have expressed my deepest sympathy to her husband, Michael Kirby, one of our Principal Clerks, and to her mother, Pierrette Gratton, Administrative Assistant to the Sergeant-at-Arms.



STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO S.O. 21


Mr. Andre Plourde (Kamouraska-Riviere-du-Loup):: On
Saturday and Sunday November 14 and 15, Mr. Speaker, in the City of Hull the Quebec Chamber of Commerce will hold its annual convention. This apolitical organization includes over 210 local and regional Quebec chambers of commerce.
I want to focus on this annual event because it highlights the socio-economic prospects in the Province of Quebec.
On behalf of the Government of Canada I extend a warm welcome to all delegates and wish them great success in their endeavour, more particularly to the representatives of the chambers of commerce of the Kamouraska-Riviere-du-Loup riding who have accomplished an outstanding job in their respective municipalities.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all chambers of commerce members, I should like to thank the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney) for responding to their invitation to be the guest speaker at the annual dinner next Sunday. This is the first time a Canadian Prime Minister has agreed to make an appearance at a Quebec Chamber of Commerce convention, and we are very proud indeed. Best success to all participants.



SOCIAL SECURITY


Mr. Gilles Grondin (Saint-Maurice):: Mr. Speaker, a number of workers in my riding who are entitled to labour adjustment benefits are not treated quite as well as the recipients of other Government services-unemployment insurance, old age security, family allowances and so on-who all receive their benefits on the appointed date.
Unfortunately workers who depend on labour adjustment benefits are not as lucky. Those who have to complete a questionnaire every other week must sometimes wait for four or five weeks before they get their cheque, which is a source of untold problems since the amounts involved are not very big to begin with. Every time they receive a cheque they have no idea when the next one will arrive.
I would therefore ask that a special effort be made so these people will not be victimized by delays resulting from administrative bottlenecks in the Department of Manpower and Immigration or from Canada Post delivery problems.
There is room for improvement in this service, and the recipients are frustrated by the response they get from some of the civil servants who handle their case.



ATOMIC ENERGY CONTROL BOARD


Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg-Birds Hill):: Mr. Speaker, as you may know, the federal NDP is conducting an inquiry into the nuclear industry in Canada, partly as a result of the failure of the Progressive Conservative Government to live up to the promise that it made to the Canadian people to have such an inquiry.
We had our first hearings in Toronto last week at which we had the opportunity to meet with representatives of CUPE 1000, the union local that represents most of the workers at Ontario Hydro. One of the matters they brought to our attention was the request by the Canadian Labour Congress for the Government to appoint a labour member to the Atomic Energy Control Board.


I wish to take this opportunity to call upon the Government to accede to that request and to appoint a labour member to the Atomic Energy Control Board. While the Government is at it, it could consider appointing a wider variety of people to the Atomic Energy Control Board, people who represent energy consumers, environmental concerns and other interests and views which should be brought to bear upon decisions made about the future of nuclear energy in Canada.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


Mr. Mel Gass (Malpeque):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a negative report which was aired on CBC's The Journal on October 14, 1986, regarding the Charlottetown Driving Park in Prince Edward Island.
The CDP is considered the heart of the harness racing industry in P.E.I. and has been referred to as the Kentucky of Canada on many occasions. The Charlottetown Driving Park has operated since the late 1800s, has one of the highest wager rates per capita in Canada, and is one of the few tracks making a profit. The CDP has turned out such greats as Rumpus Hanover, a pacer who holds the world record for two-year-old colts, and was home to Captain Jamie, who has a trotting record of 1.57.
The harness racing industry is a major contributor to tourism in P.E.I. Therefore, Prince Edward Islanders were angered and appalled when CBC reporter Tom Alderman chose to portray the CDP as a small-time track at which racehorses were of poor quality, no money could be made, and as a track which neither the public nor the harness racing industry should take seriously. Tom Alderman, the reporter for CBC, should not be taken seriously. This type of biased, negative reporting is disgusting and disgraceful.
Mr. Speaker, pretty soon the Government will be praying for people to die in this country, to create more jobs in funeral homes.
Mr. Speaker, this Conservative Government has decided to lean on the poor. Today, 4,000 Canadians have no protection as far as drug costs are concerned, neither from Government or private plans, and these 4,000 Canadians are going to suffer as a result of the incompetence and injustice of the Conservative Government.



EMPLOYMENT


Mrs. Lise Bourgault (Argenteuil-Papineau):: Mr. Speaker, my Government was elected in September 1984, because it promised Canadians jobs, jobs, and I want to take this opportunity to prove this was not an empty promise.
Mr. Speaker, in October the unemployment rate was 9.4 per cent, the lowest since March 1982. This means that since 1984,
610.000	jobs have been created in Canada, that we have
255.000	fewer unemployed in this country and that 339,000 more women are working today than was the case in September 1984.
Mr. Speaker, youth unemployment has gone down from 18.4 per cent to 14.9 per cent. Over 80 per cent of the jobs created are full time jobs.
In the Atlantic region, jobs are being created at a rate of 1,080 per month, twice the figure of 509 produced under the Liberals.
Since September 1984, 303,000 jobs have been created in Ontario and 5,760 jobs in Quebec-eight times as much as under the Liberals.
Mr. Speaker, that is a performance that is hard to beat.



PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
English]
Mr. Jean-Claude Malepart (Montreal-Sainte-Marie):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Conservative Government tabled another Bill that puts an additional burden on senior citizens, low-income families and the sick.
Mr. Speaker, after imposing a 10 per cent tax on drugs and thus taxing illness in this country, just to reduce the deficit, that same Government has now decided to give in to blackmail by the multinationals, the excuse being that it will create jobs.



PORT OF CHURCHILL-PERMANENT STAFF LAID OFF

Mr. Rod Murphy (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, it is apparent from the Government's recent action that it has no intention at this time of making a commitment to the support of the Port of Churchill. The Government stalled for months before making public yesterday the results of four independent studies which looked at the viability of the port. As has now become known, these studies have shown that the port can be made viable.


The studies point out the unique value of the port as Canada's only Arctic seaport with a rail connection to the south. However, the Government has moved recently to lay off the permanent staff at the port and to shut down the facility completely during the winter for the first time in three decades. This was done in the full knowledge of these studies which were kept hidden.
It is time for the Government to stop pretending Churchill is not viable and to offer this unique resource the support it deserves. It is no wonder that Conservative MLAs from Brandon are suggesting that provincial Tories need a new name.



PENITENTIARIES


Mr. Alan Redway (York East):: Mr. Speaker, according to the November issue of Atlantic Insight, the new maximum security prison in Renous, New Brunswick, is about to open. According to the magazine, it was built as a result of a 1980 election promise made by the former Liberal Government.
The prison was built despite the fact that experts said it was not needed and that it could be built elsewhere for $10 million less. It was built despite its isolated location, and despite opposition from the John Howard Society, the Elizabeth Fry Society, the Salvation Army, and the Criminal Justice Association.
According to the former Member of Parliament for the riding in which it was located, the prison was built because:
"It is the Government of Canada . . . My job was to get what I could for this riding and I have a very firm belief that the free citizens of this country have more rights than prisoners do."
Does that all sound familiar, Mr. Speaker?



NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL


Mr. David Berger (Laurier):: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Science and Technology (Mr. Oberle) has announced that he will be appointing a committee to review the cuts at the National Research Council, cuts which he himself told the Council to make. Now he is telling council members that he does not like or trust their judgment. This begs the question: why is the Minister questioning the judgment of council members whom he himself has undermined by making ill-advised demands? Why does he not just back off, go back to square one and cancel the cuts?
The Minister has also said that he is dismayed to learn that council members are sitting beyond their term. I think he
should be grateful that these people are willing to serve Canadians. Why did the Minister not learn of this before? Did he expect the Council to shut down its operations and wait for him to wake up and name replacements? I would hope that members of the Government, and the Minister, would start reading the correspondence that they are receiving from Canadians and that these harmful cuts are reversed in the shortest time.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Howard McCurdy (Windsor-Walkerville):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Member for Spadina (Mr. Heap) questioned the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney) about the Government's inconsistency in voting in the UN to condemn U.S. support for Contra terrorism in Nicaragua while at the same time providing aid to Honduras and El Salvador where Contra bases are located. The Prime Minister answered that our alliances and friendships are not in doubt.
We believe that the Prime Minister's refusal to meet VicePresident Ramirez does cast considerable doubt on where this country stands and its degree of independence. That is also true of the Nicaraguan Government, which has recalled its ambassador because of the snub that country's Vice-President received from our Prime Minister. If the Prime Minister wants to show his Government's independence of policy and principle, it should extend an invitation to the Vice-President of Nicaragua.



NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL


Mr. Barry Turner (Ottawa-Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks considerable concern has been expressed in this House and throughout the country with respect to program cuts at the National Research Council. The facts surrounding these cuts have been seriously distorted, and the rationale for some of them is weak, at best.
The Minister of State for Science and Technology (Mr. Oberle) will announce today the formation of a three-person task group to undertake consultations on behalf of the Government with the President and members of the National Research Council in respect of programs, management, and budgetary considerations at the NRC. My colleagues and I in the Conservative Party strongly applaud this initiative. Our lobbying efforts and our strong voices have been heard again as responsible recognition that the intellectual wealth and


Oral Questions
long-term economic importance of the NRC must be maintained and enhanced.



SUPPLY AND SERVICES


Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Winnipeg-Fort Garry):: Mr. Speaker, the Council of the City of Winnipeg passed this resolution unanimously:
That the Council of the City of Winnipeg convey to the Prime Minister and Government of Canada this city's profound anger and regret over the Government's decision respecting the CF-18 maintenance contract, and its dismay at the undermining of both the public tendering proctas and the principle of orderly and equitable regional economic development.
That sense of betrayal has only been compounded by the revelation yesterday by the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (Mr. Masse) that it was a sheer political choice made last August. At the same time the people of Manitoba and the Bristol contractors were being misled by Conservative Members of Parliament for Manitoba that everything was all right.
People from Winnipeg are part of Canada too. They are part of the national interest. They want a number of questions answered. They want to know why that crass political choice is not being revealed, together with the documents, so that we know exactly what is going on with this Government, and the people in Winnipeg can feel that they share in the proper development of this country.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Right Hon. John N. Turner (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. I had the honour of bringing in the current drug price legislation in 1968. At that time we had among the highest drug prices in the world. Since that date we have had among the lowest drug prices in the world.
The independent inquiry appointed by the previous Government recommended that, in order to encourage more research and jobs in Canada, the patent protection be extended for four years. The Government has extended that period from four to ten years. Why did the Government choose to give two and a half times more protection to the pharmaceutical companies in order to get those jobs in research than the independent
inquiry suggested? Was it not because there was pressure from the United States as one of the prices for free trade negotiations?


Hon. Harvie Andre (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. gentleman is correct that in the 1960s drug prices in Canada were above the United States. In the 1980s they are below the United States, even where there is no generic competition. The Patent Act has nothing to do with that fact. The market has changed.


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Harvie Andre: A great many things have changed since 1968 of which the Hon. Member should be aware. If the Opposition would be so gracious as to allow Parliament to examine this Bill and look at the clauses it will be amply demonstrated that the benefits of what we are proposing are of an overwhelming nature. They will restore to this country vigour in the research and development area, which apparently every Party wants in general but not in specific.
[ Translation]


INQUIRY WHETHER UNINSURED WILL BE PROTECTED
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister stated that the price of drugs would not increase as a result of this Bill. At the same time, however, he had earmarked $100 million for the provinces to protect them against price increases.
Does he really think Canadians are so naive they don't know realize what the real reason is? And didn't the Minister protect sick Canadians who are not protected by drug insurance plans?


Harvie Andre: Mr. Speaker, it is not the naivete of the Canadian public about which I am concerned; it is the naivete of the Opposition. Every drug now on the market, brand name and generic, will remain on the market. Whatever market forces are establishing price will continue. That simple, elementary economic lesson should be comprehensible even to the Leader of the Opposition. There will be no increases in those drugs. In terms of the drugs in the so-called pipeline in the future, time in Question Period does not permit an answer to that.


Lloyd Axworthy: You can't answer it.


Harvie Andre: Let us introduce the Bill. Let us look at that in committee. Let us examine it. I am sure, if the hon. gentleman is fair minded, he will find out that in fact the prices will be very reasonable and the benefits will overwhelm any minor costs that might be there.


CANADIAN PATENT SYSTEM-REPORTED EXAMINATION BY UNITED STATES
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Minister compared American and Canadian drug prices. Canadian drug prices are appreciably lower than American drug prices, so much so that is he aware that the United States Department of Health has been examining our current patent system in order to try to give lower drug prices to Americans? Why, in this instance, would the Government attempt to adopt an American-styled system when the American Government itself is looking at ours?


Harvie Andre: Mr. Speaker, I will try again. Ninety-three per cent of drugs do not have generic competition. For those 93 per cent of drugs the prices in Canada, without generic competition, are cheaper than they are in the United States. The reason is that it is a different market. It is a different country. We have a different way of selling drugs. The provinces are the big buyers.


Lloyd Axworthy: That is right. Let's keep it that way.


Harvie Andre: That will remain in place. We are going to keep it there. In exchange for granting patent protection to inventors or creators, we will gain at least 3,000 high-tech jobs in an area from which it is unforgiveable that Canada should be excluded.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
[Stage Direction]
Hon. Warren Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine
East): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. While the national rate of unemployment has declined to 9.4 per cent-
Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Allmand:: -I want to remind the Government that there are still 1.2 million Canadians unemployed. That rate is still far above the pre-recession rate of 7.5 per cent in 1981. However, most disturbing is the continual deterioration in the regions of Canada-in Quebec, Alberta, and especially the Atlantic provinces. The rate of unemployment increased in every Atlantic province. When will the Government recognize that reliance upon a free market economy will not cure these regional problems? When will it recognize the growing gulf between the rich and poor regions in the country; change direction; and bring in policies which will stimulate growth in these regions and create new jobs?


Hon. Michael Wilson (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, the Hon. Member is quite right that the level of unemployment today is higher than it was compared with the pre-
Oral Questions
recession lows. However, it is an awful lot lower than it was in September, 1984. It is down from 11.7 per cent to 9.4 per cent. The youth unemployment rate went down three percentage points during that same period. I agree with the Hon. Member that the rate is still too high. We are doing everything we can to get it down.
The Hon. Member pointed out the problems which have been felt in the regions of the country. Yes, we are acting there as well. We have acted in the Province of Alberta, as he knows. He referred to the Province of Alberta. We have introduced the Atlantic Enterprise Program, the Atlantic Opportunities Program, and the Cape Breton tax credit. We have maintained the investment tax credit-


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


RESULT OF GOVERNMENT POLICY
[Stage Direction]
Hon. Warren Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine
East): Mr. Speaker, whatever they have done has not had much effect in Atlantic Canada and the regions of the country. Does the Minister not realize that if he sticks with the laissez-faire approach of the Government, the comparison made by the Minister of Transport of Atlantic Canada with the Third World will become a reality? That is what is happening in Canada, with the division between the rich and the poor.
Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, there is no question that 610,000 jobs have been created since September, 1984. The Hon. Member should admit that a number of those jobs have been created in Atlantic Canada, Quebec, and regions of western Canada. If the Hon. Member had a sense of fairness he would be repeating that as well.
We have stated quite clearly that more must be done about the problems of regional disparity, particularly in the Atlantic provinces and the Province of Quebec. More is being done, and we are continuing to work on that. If the Hon. Member would give us credit for what is being done he would know that a tremendous amount of progress has been made.


PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
Mr. Neil Young (Beaches):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. In defence of the Government's move to amend the Patent Act for pharmaceutical products, he stated that this policy will not cost Canadian consumers any additional money and will not cause drug prices to rise. Will he not agree with a critic of this policy that Canadians in fact will end up paying anywhere from $100 million to $250 million more on the cost of prescription drugs because of this policy?


Oral Questions


Harvie Andre: Mr. Speaker, I have indicated that every drug now on the market, generic and brand name, will remain on the market. There will be no change. Therefore, what will cause this tremendous price increase that the Member is projecting?
In terms of drugs not yet discovered, one has to make assumptions about what will happen to price. If you assume today is Tuesday, you can prove that tomorrow will be Wednesday. But what does that prove?


Mr. Gray (Windsor West):: Today is Friday.


Harvie Andre: The assumption can give you any number that one wants.


REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION OF STUDIES
Neil Young: Mr. Speaker, the Minister should understand that the critic I referred to was the Conser-ative Member for Hamilton-Wentworth who, on April 11, 1983, said exactly what I just said in the House.
The Minister has just told us that he cannot determine what the cost impact will be. 1 made an application under Access to Information to get that information and the Minister said that cost impact studies of the proposed policy are cabinet confidences. Will he not come clean with Canadians and release these cost impact studies so that we can see very clearly how much this policy will cost the average Canadian consumer?


Harvie Andre: Mr. Speaker, if the New Democratic Party would allow this Bill to go to committee-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Harvie Andre: -we could have those discussions and he would know the facts. Let me quote a statement made by the Consumer and Corporate Affairs critic of the New Democratic Party, the Member for Winnipeg North, who said: "If the higher prices went into a fund which would really be used for research and development, I think that consumers could live with that". That is what we are doing.


REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Dave Dingwall (Cape Breton-East Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion. The orgy of expenditures to improve the political standing of the Conservative Party in Quebec and Ontario has taken place at the expense of the poorer regions of the country.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Absolute nonsense.


David Charles Dingwall: Will the Minister explain to the House and Canadians why his Department, the lead Department for regional economic development, has intentionally gone out and cut adrift the people of Manitoba, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and the other poor regions of the country? Why?
Hon. Michel Cote (Minister of Regional Industrial
Expansion): Mr. Speaker, obviously the Member is not aware of the assistance that has been given to all the regions. I will point out to him some of the most important ones. For instance, there is the $1 billion in assistance we have given to farmers in the west. There is the $580 million for the stabilization program. I could go on to the removal of the PGRT. There is the Atlantic Enterprise Program that cost $600 million, as well as the Atlantic Accord. These are examples of assistance to the regions.


REGIONAL DISPARITIES-REQUEST FOR NEW POLICY
David Charles Dingwall: Mr. Speaker, I tell the Minister sincerely that by 1984 the number of jobless in Nova Scotia increased by 4,000. Per capita income in 1984 was 81 per cent of the national average. In 1986 it is less than 78 per cent. Will the Minister introduce a policy to address regional disparities instead of pork-barrelling his friends in Quebec and Ontario?


Hon. Michel Cote (Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, no Government has helped the regions more than this Government has since 1984.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Michel Côté: Just to help my friend so that he is aware, I invite him to read the record of our accomplishments since 1984. It is available for him.


CANADA-UNITED STATES NEGOTIATIONS-AUTO PACT
Hon. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister responsible for trade my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. I have here a secret cabinet document-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Edward Broadbent: -dated October 27. The subject matter-


Mr. Siddon:: Sticky fingers again.


John Edward Broadbent: -is Canada-U.S. trade negotiations and the automotive agreement. Will the Acting Prime Minister now confirm that the Canadian team negotiating a deal with


the U.S. now believe that the Auto Pact safeguards, crucial to investment in Canada, are obsolete? Will he also confirm that they are acting on that assumption in conducting negotiations on the Auto Pact?


Mr. John McDermid (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister I will take that question as notice. However, I think it has been said many, many times that, if it is working, don't fix it.


John Edward Broadbent: That is precisely the view of the NDP and every Canadian and every one of our automotive communities. We are saying do not touch it, and this document says the Conservatives are about to abandon those safeguards.


METHOD OF APPLYING PROVISIONS OF AUTO PACT-GOVERNMENT POSITION
John Edward Broadbent: My question is directed to the Minister of Regional Industrial Expansion, because his name is on this paper. The Minister knows perfectly well that General Motors is considering new investments at Boisbriand in the Province of Quebec. This corporation accepts the principle of the Auto Pact safeguards. My question is quite straightforward. Does the Minister agree the Auto Pact safeguards should be maintained, yes or no?


Michel Côté: Mr. Speaker, I think the Government has an abiding concern for ensuring that the automobile industry conforms to the provisions of the Auto Pact, and we discuss these matters with the companies that maintain trading relations with us in this respect.
[ English]


AUTO PACT-GOVERNMENT POSITION
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, as Canadians will know, particularly those in automotive communities, this matter affects quite literally thousands of Canadian jobs. 1 want to get something clear from the Acting Prime Minister or the Minister of Finance, someone with authority and responsibility in this domain. Will the Government support what the Secretary of State for External Affairs has said unequivocally in the past, that the Auto Pact safeguards will remain and are non-negotiable?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, as the Hon. Member knows from his own personal experience, the Auto Pact has been a very important part of the economic development of our country. We are committed to maintaining the impact and benefits of the Auto Pact in the fullest way possible. The Hon. Member well knows that General Motors announced an expansion project in his own riding, I think something like $2 billion or $2.5 billion. That is well above any commitments they need make in the city of Oshawa. Why? Because the productivity of the company in Canada is good and that is something we are committed-
Oral Questions


John Edward Broadbent: What about other communities?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: I am sorry, if the Hon. Member would let me continue? We are committed to maintaining that.


SUPPLY AND SERVICES
Lloyd Axworthy: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. In an interview given to La Presse yesterday the Minister of Energy blew the Government's cover on the awarding of the CF-18 contract. He said it was a strictly political choice designed to give the economy of Montreal sectors of hope within the strategy designed for telecommunications, aeronautics, and high technology.
I ask the Minister where are the strategies for the other cities whose economies are also dependent upon aeronautics, high technology, and telecommunications? Can they no longer expect to receive federal investment? Can they no longer make bids on federal jobs contracts? When is the Government going to establish strategies for other cities? When is it going to restore hope to the city of Winnipeg whose economy it is destroying right now?


Hon. Don Mazankowski (Deputy Prime Minister and President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, first with respect to the report which the Hon. Member has referred to, I think he is referring to a headline which appeared in yesterday's edition of La Presse. I think upon reading the full text of that interview he will find there was some inaccuracy in the way in which that interview was reported. Perhaps he may want to check into that.
On the other part of the question, I do not think there is any question about this Government's commitment to Manitoba, western Canada or any other part of the country. The unemployment rate in Manitoba is the lowest in Canada at 6.9 per cent. The Government can certainly take some credit for that.
In so far as the aerospace industry is concerned, he and his colleagues violently opposed the acquisition of de Havilland by Boeing. That company is now generating some 250 jobs in Winnipeg as a result of the manufacturing of the wing of the Boeing 747. Clearly Manitoba has and will continue to have a leadership role in the aerospace industry.


CF-5 CONTRACT-CLAIM MADE FOR BRISTOL AIRCRAFT
Lloyd Axworthy: Mr. Speaker, I am going to be very interested to see how the Deputy Prime Minister explains that in Winnipeg on Saturday, and whether people will really believe him.
1182


Oral Questions
If he is talking about the aerospace industry, and we now have it clearly in the words of the Minister of Energy that these choices are made by the Prime Minister according to his strategy, will the Government clearly target Bristol Aircraft for the awarding of the contract for the CF-5 so we can restore the aerospace industry in that city?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, the decisions this Government takes are Government decisions, not decisions by the Prime Minister. This was a Government decision. The President of the Treasury Board explained the rationale very clearly in this House on many occasions. I wish the Hon. Member would listen to that carefully because in it he will find his answer.


AUTO PACT-CABINET COMMITTEE MEETING INQUIRY
Mr. Steven W. Langdon (Essex-Windsor):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Finance. I want to quote from this secret memo which-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Steven W. Langdon: -which reached us-


An Hon. Member:: In a brown envelope.


Steven W. Langdon: -and which indicates that "the trade negotiator's office continue in its fact-finding exercise with the U.S." with respect to the free trade discussions with the U.S. Does the Minister deny that the P and P subcommittee of Cabinet met on October 27 to consider precisely the recommendations coming from the free trade negotiator's office and that, in those recommendations, there were precisely these reports that discussions with the U.S. on the Auto Pact have been taking place?


Some Hon. Members:: Great speech!
[DOT] (U40)


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, I was not at that meeting and I cannot comment specifically on that. However, I will repeat what I said to his Leader. The Government fully recognizes the importance of the automotive industry to his community, the community of his Leader, and to the entire country. We will not do anything which will undermine the capacity of that industry to create jobs, economic growth or exports, in any part of the country where it is possible to do that. That is the objective which the Government is following and will continue to follow.


GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT
Steven W. Langdon: Mr. Speaker, how is it possible for the Government do justify its Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde approach? The Government tells the House of Commons one thing with respect to this issue and tells the negotiators from the United States precisely the opposite. This memo proves that. I ask the Government to admit how wrongheaded it has been in its approach.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, I totally reject that. During the past two years the Government has achieved a record level of new investment activity in the automotive industry. Surely that is a sign of the commitment of the Government to the automotive industry.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Steven W. Langdon: The Auto Pact.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: The Hon. Member yells, "the Auto Pact". Yes, the Auto Pact got this all started, but he knows full well that the commitment of General Motors is way above the requirements of the Auto Pact.


Steven W. Langdon: That's one firm.


John Edward Broadbent: What about Chrysler and Ford?


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Mr. Bob Pennock (Etobicoke North):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Communications. Last night during the Adjournment Debate, in response to queries about the $57 million which were unaccounted for in the CBC, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister stated that these entries have now been reallocated into their proper expense accounts. Is the Minister satisfied that the reallocation of the $57 million has been completed and entered into the proper expense accounts? Although the Auditor Genera! found no evidence of misappropriation of resources, how can the Government be assured, without an independent audit, that there are no losses and that it was only an administration problem as was stated last night?


Hon. Flora MacDonald (Minister of Communications):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Hon. Member for his question. I am informed that the CBC has indeed now made a specific allocation of these accounts under its new financial management system. As a result of that, the staff of the Auditor General has gone back into the CBC to verify whether this allocation is correct resulting from last year's accounts, and whether it forms the basis for a proper allocation in the future.


It must be understood that, as long as that investigation is going on, the concerns of the Auditor General will not have been fully resolved. As long as those concerns still exist with the Auditor General, they exist with me.


NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
David Berger: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of State for Science and Technology. The Minister has announced that he will be appointing a committee to review the cuts at the National Research Council which he himself told the Council to make.


John Napier Turner: Unbelievable.


David Berger: He is saying that he does not like their judgment, that he does not trust the members of the Council. Why is the Minister questioning the judgment of the members of a Council which he himself has undermined with his own ill-advised cuts?


Hon. Frank Oberle (Minister of State for Science and Technology):: Mr. Speaker, this morning I announced the formation of a three-person task group which will examine the reallocations of the Council's resources, to ensure that programs which would have a significant impact on public health and safety and are consistent with Government priorities are not cut.


David Berger: You have a Council. That's its job.


MINISTER'S POSITION
David Berger: Mr. Speaker, this amounts to a form of trusteeship that is absolutely unconscionable and unacceptable. The Minister also says he is amazed that members of the NRC continue to sit after their mandate has expired, when he should be thanking them for their dedication to the people of Canada. I want to ask him: Does he think the NRC should close its doors until the Minister wakes up and gets around to his appointments? Is that what he has against the NRC?


Frank Oberle: Mr. Speaker, for the last two months the Hon. Member has insisted that I should be responsible for everything the Council does. The Council is not some kind of a private club.


David Berger: You're right. It's not a private club.
Oral Questions


Frank Oberle: From time to time Governments establish certain priorities which the Council has historically consistently respected and taken into account in the allocation of public resources and the formation of programs. That is what has been and is presently happening. The task group which I have announced will ensure that I and Members of the House will understand the rationale which was behind the so-called cuts.


David Berger: You had committee hearings. You're ignoring the committee hearings.


Frank Oberle: It will also ensure that the Council understands the new priority which the Government has established in line with its national strategy.


PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. The report of the Eastman Commission said in part, "that profitability in the pharmaceutical industry in Canada is relatively high and has remained so over the entire period from 1968 to 1982. The profitability of pharmaceuticals clearly exceeds that for all manufacturing industries".
In view of that, what rational explanation can there be for giving companies which are already at the highest rate of profitability the monopoly protection which they have demanded and to which the Minister has cravenly agreed?


Harvie Andre: Mr. Speaker, I have just announced $100 million of investment in new research and development as a result of our plans.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Harvie Andre: That figure will reach $1 billion by the end of this decade. I find it passing strange that, on the same day that that Party suggests it wants more taxpayers' money spent on research in such things as radio astronomy, it totally objects to the creation of 3,000 research jobs through the measure we are introducing which will not impact on consumers in any detrimental fashion.


Neil Young: Prove it.


David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, the $150 million the Minister is talking about is one-fifteenth of what they promised.


ACCOUNTING FIRM'S FORECAST OF DRUG PRICES
David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, Coopers & Lybrand, one of the biggest chartered accountant companies in Canada, has estimated that by 1995 Canadians will be paying $650 million more per year for prescription


Oral Questions
drugs than they have until now. How much more does the Government think those multinational corporations need to induce them to stay in Canada?
Hon. Harvie Andre (Minister of Consumer and Corporate
Affairs): Mr. Speaker, the industry of which the Hon. Member speaks is indeed profitable. Through this move some of those profits will be invested in research in Canada which will employ Canadian scientists. That is what this is all about.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Harvie Andre: With regard to projections of future costs, I remind the Member of the National Energy Program prediction of $80 a barrel oil.


David Orlikow: And you believed that.


Harvie Andre: Bear that in mind when you predict the future. Let us take this Bill to committee where we can consider the assumptions made in those projections. Hopefully we will come up with a more rational and reasonable evaluation. That is all I am asking.


NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Mr. Len Hopkins (Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of State for Science and Technology. The group of eminent persons to which he has referred, the Associate Committee on Astronomy, voted 11 to 0 in favour of upgrading the Algonquin Radio Observatory in addition to keeping it open. Will the Minister inform Members of this House why the recommendations of this group of dedicated professionals have been so totally disregarded?


Frank Oberle: Mr. Speaker, I will naturally be in a much better position to answer that question when I receive the report of the task group I appointed this morning to look into these questions.


REQUEST THAT MINISTER CANCEL CUTS
Leonard Donald Hopkins: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is directed to the same Minister. It is quite obvious that the Minister has not listened to this group. It is also obvious that he has not listened to recommendations of the National Research Council or to Canadians. Will the Minister now do the honourable thing and admit his mistake in not listening to these people, cancel the cuts to the NRC, and let this country go ahead in science and technology
and research and development as the Conservatives promised in 1984?


Frank Oberle: Mr. Speaker, we are very anxious to let the country go ahead with important research and science and technology efforts.


Mr. Gauthier:: Then leave it alone.


Frank Oberle: It is a strange twist of logic that both the Liberal Party and its socialist friends will do everything they can to prevent the introduction of a Bill-


An Hon. Member:: You are the one that's doing the cutting.


Frank Oberle: -that would create 3,000 research jobs-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION
Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. I am sure the Deputy Prime Minister is aware that since the Conservative Party took office in September, 1984, employment growth in Atlantic Canada has gone up by only 3 per cent, while in Ontario it has risen by some 7 per cent. Despite those figures, the overwhelming majority of moneys of the Department of Regional Industrial Expansion has gone to Ontario and Quebec. Does the Government have any plans at all to increase the budget of the Department so that the smaller provinces receive their fair share of money for regional expansion programs?


Michel Côté: Mr. Speaker, I have already answered this question. I said earlier today that since 1984 this Government has helped the regions more than any other previous administration ever did.
I referred as well to some of the initiatives taken by our Government, and I should like to remind my colleague that he need only read the Speech from the Throne to see that again we are committed to continue helping the regions. We have already announced the establishment of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and made it clear we intend to diversify the western economy.
In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, we are making a sustained effort to help various regions of Canada.


SUPPLY AND SERVICES
Lorne Edmund Nystrom: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. Now I understand why the Manitoba Conservatives feel awkward about his speech this weekend. The Department of Supply and Services in 1985 and 1986 let out over half its contracts in the Province of Ontario. Is the Deputy Prime Minister satisfied that one province should receive over half the contracts from that Department? Can he tell us what special effort is being made so there will be more fairness in the future for smaller provinces?


Hon. Monique Vezina (Minister of Supply and Services):: As my colleague as just pointed out Mr. Speaker, this Government has shown deep concern for regional development.
Hon. Members should keep in mind that purchases by the Department of Supply and Services went up by 105 per cent in the first quarter of this year, and that the purchasing program is cyclical, in the sense that some programs expire while others begin. We have amply demonstrated our intention to help the regions wherever they may be.


INDUSTRY
Mr. Raymond Garneau (Laval-des-Rapides):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Prime Minister, my question is directed to the Minister of Finance.
This morning, the newspapers reported some bad news for Quebec. The unemployment rate in Quebec has gone up to 10.8 per cent, Electrolux is going to close its doors and 372 jobs will be lost. General Motors has announced it is laying off
29,000	workers in North America, which may be bad news for the GM plant in Sainte-Therese.
My question for the Minister of Finance is as follows: What kind of action does the Government intend to take to persuade Electrolux to continue manufacturing appliances in Canada that are purchased by Canadians, and what does it intend to do to ensure that the plant in Sainte-Therese will remain open?


Michel Côté: Mr. Speaker, as far as Electrolux is concerned, of course we have been kept informed of the company's problems. In recent years, the company has suffered major losses. As a result, it will have to rationalize its entire operations. Actually, it has invested up to $15 million since 1980.
Oral Questions
Mr. Speaker, we are doing everything we can, through exhaustive job severance programs and the like, to provide training programs for the workers who, unfortunately, will lose their jobs.


CONSEQUENCES FOR FREE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH UNITED STATES
Raymond Garneau: Mr. Speaker,
I would like to get back to the Minister of Finance.
Could the Minister give the House and all Canadians the assurance that what is happening at Electrolux and General Motors is not related to our free trade negotiations with the United States? In other words, are large U.S. corporations getting ready to transfer their production to the United States and serve the Canadian market from their American plants, since free trade will open the door wide to this possibility?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, I think the Hon. Member is out of touch with reality.


An Hon. Member:: It wouldn't be the first time.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: We have seen 610,000 jobs-


An Hon. Member:: That's not reality.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Yes, it is reality that
610,000	jobs have been created in Canada since September, 1984. The unemployment rate in the Province of Quebec is down 2 percentage points during this same period. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been created. What is happening with industry in Canada is because of the uncertainty as to whether or not we are going ahead with the trade negotiations. Because of the ferment caused by questions such as the Hon. Member asks, Canadian companies are uncertain as to whether-


Some Hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Michael Holcombe Wilson: That is why we have to get on with these negotiations.


NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
John Barry Turner: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Minister of State for Science and Technology. In light of the Minister's announcement this morning that he is creating a task group to review the NRC program cuts, does he anticipate that some of these cuts may be over-ruled by the group or by the Government?


Oral Questions


Frank Oberle: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to anticipate anything. I have appointed three eminent persons to consult with the management of the NRC and the Council with regard to its budgetary allocations and other matters. I would prefer to await the outcome of this exercise and for the report.


John Barry Turner: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: The Hon. Member for Ottawa-Carleton on a supplementary question.


Some Hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


TIMEFRAME FOR CONDUCTING REVIEW
John Barry Turner: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister indicate to the House the timeframe for the group to report to him?


Frank Oberle: Again, Mr. Speaker, I will be bringing the group together immediately. I would not wish to put undue pressure on it in terms of time, or indeed in its terms of reference.


David Berger: By next April, I would hope.


Frank Oberle: It would be my wish to proceed swiftly since these cuts would not come into effect until the next fiscal year after April. I would expect this exercise to be concluded before the end of the year.


PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
Ms. Margaret Mitchell (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister. It concerns the Government's policy regarding equality for women in the workplace. The Prime Minister will know by now that there have been additional complaints from a number of women reporters concerning the unprofessional sexist conduct of his Press Secretary. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that if the Prime Minister believes in equality, and I think he does, he should take this matter seriously and investigate these allegations which really question the integrity of his office?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice responded to that question a couple of days ago and indicated at the time that the Press Secretary was acquiring legal counsel to deal with this issue. I think that has been done. I feel it would be inappropriate to comment any further on this particular issue at this time.


REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION
Margaret Anne Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, this does not prevent the Prime Minister from taking action within his own office. The question is much broader-


Mr. Speaker:: I ask the Hon. Member to put her question.


Margaret Anne Mitchell: Since women across the country-not just women on Parliament Hill-face sexual harassment in the workplace every day but are afraid to make complaints, why does the Prime Minister not set an example for other employers by investigating this matter and by setting a higher standard? Or does he, like some Members of this House, think it's just a big joke?


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Hon. Member, for whom I have a great deal of respect, will reflect on the last part of her statement. The Minister of Justice has pointed out very clearly that-


Ms. Jewett:: It's not sub judice.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: -in the interest of fairness in a matter concerning these types of allegations, in Canada one is usually considered innocent until proven guilty.


Margaret Anne Mitchell: I am talking about allegations.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: The Press Secretary has obtained legal counsel. I suspect the matter will be handled in that manner.


Margaret Anne Mitchell: That's not good enough for the women of Canada.


CANADA-UNITED STATES NEGOTIATIONS-AUTO PACT
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, in light of the ambiguous reply of the Minister of Finance to the Hon. Member for Oshawa, will the Deputy Prime Minister give us a categorical undertaking that the Auto Pact, particularly the Canadian production and contents safeguards, is not negotiable and is not on the table in the current talks with the United States?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, I believe the Hon. Member was a member of Cabinet when the Auto Pact was negotiated. He knows full well that on one year's notice the Americans can drop out of the Auto Pact.


John Napier Turner: That's not the question!


Michael Holcombe Wilson: What we have to do is ensure that we keep our automotive industry as competitive
November 7, 1986________________________COMMONS DEBATES________________________________________1187
and as productive as possible in order that the safeguards of the Auto Pact never come into play. That is the case with General Motors right now.


John Edward Broadbent: What about Chrysler and Ford?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: It is way above the safeguard level, which is why it is investing $2.5 billion in Canada.


AUTOMOTIVE AND STEEL INDUSTRIES
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, that reply scares me to death.


Some Hon. Members:: Good!


John Napier Turner: My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. The Government has knuckled under in lumber as a result of pressure from American Senators and Congressmen. After the American elections will we knuckle under on automobiles and steel and open up those situations, too?


Michael Holcombe Wilson: Mr. Speaker, there was no suggestion whatsoever in my response that the Government is knuckling under in any way to the Americans on anything. The important point I made was that we continue to encourage and assist the automotive industry in Canada to continue to do the great job it is doing now so that it does not have to worry about the safeguards. Members of the industry are way above the safeguards now. The Hon. Member knows it and is just sowing a lot of seeds of discontent.


SUPPLY AND SERVICES
Mr. Cyril Keeper (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Will the Minister respond to the confirmation given this morning in a telephone call by Bristol Aerospace that the price-tag placed on its bid for the CF-18 contract was inflated because of a lack of recognition that Bristol already had in hand much of the technology that was needed, technology not available to Canadair?


Hon. Robert de Cotret (President of the Treasury Board):: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no, I will not acknowledge that fact.


Mr. Benjamin:: It's a fact but you won't acknowledge it.


Robert René de Cotret: The technical team evaluated the bids. The Bristol consortium had some technology, as did Canadair, technology that the evaluation team did not consider necessarily applicable to the contract itself. All three consortia were
Committee Reports
evaluated on the basis that the cost of technology would be similar if not equal.