From the House of Commons - February 10, 1999:

Mr. Bill Blaikie (Winnipeg-Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the New Democratic Party sees the social union as a potentially positive development in the kind of co-operative federalism New Democrats have long advocated.

The NDP has long supported the principle of co-operative federalism. Most recently, an NDP panel of party members presented a report to our federal council endorsing a social union based on the co-operative development and enforcement of standards for nationwide social programs.

To the extent that the social union framework is an attempt to establish such a framework of co-decision with governments working together in building programs that meet the needs of Canadians, it is a first step in the right direction.

The NDP welcomes the fact that the development of new and better social policy appears to be front and centre on the public agenda. We hope this agreement will break the impasse that has blocked the introduction of urgently needed national programs such as the national child care program and the national home care program, not to mention a national pharmacare program, all of which have been promised at one time or another by the party in power at the moment.

We believe therefore that the social union is a first step in the right direction toward a co-operative and less conflictual federalism where governments work together to meet the needs of Canadians in a context that affirms national standards and the continuing relevance of the federal spending power.

One of the biggest threats to Canada-wide social programs in recent years has been the federal government's unilateral withdrawal of funding. For instance, the federal share of health costs has fallen from 50% when medicare began to less than 15% now.

The social union framework comes with no specific offer of federal money nor a firm mechanism to ensure that the federal government will maintain its fair share of contributions to social programs over time.

The social union will only work if the federal government comes through with that commitment and if at the same time the agreement is amended to prevent unilateral action, particularly when it comes to unilateral reductions in federal contributions.

We believe therefore that the social union will only work if the federal government pays its fair share, is committed to do so in future years and is willing to forswear unilateral reductions in transfer payments.

New Democrats are pleased that the social union framework and the exchange of letters between the premiers and the Prime Minister have reaffirmed the principles of the Canada Health Act which protect publicly provided universal health care.

The social union framework must therefore be used to stop the trend in some provinces toward American style two tier health care.

The framework agreement contains numerous references to transparency, public accountability and the involvement of third parties. This is to be welcomed but the language is very vague.

Indeed the process of negotiating the social union was seriously lacking in transparency. We would like to register our own criticism and the criticism of many other Canadians about the way this agreement was arrived at in spite of whatever virtues it may contain. The process was seen by a great many Canadians, and rightly so, to be terribly lacking.

The federal NDP will therefore be watchful to see if governments follow through on these promises with effective measures on transparency and accountability.

On the important issue of having a watchdog to allow Canadians to assess whether both levels of government are meeting their obligations under the social union, the framework agreement is incomplete.

The accountability framework for new social initiatives has not yet been agreed on. The agreement provides for individuals to be able to "appeal unfair administrative practices" but the mechanism is to be provided by the government providing the service itself, not an independent agency as proposed by the NDP panel report to our federal council a couple of weeks ago.

Canadians want to have a say about how well their social programs like health care are serving them. New Democrats will be watching carefully to make sure the social union develops in a way that allows them that kind of input.

Canada is a signatory to the United Nations Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights and other international covenants that set out Canadian social rights. The social union framework makes no reference to Canadian social rights, nor does it establish any mechanism to ensure that both levels of government are respecting them. In our view this is a serious shortcoming and something that perhaps could be remedied in future amendments or changes to the social union.

New Democrats want to see a social union that recognizes the social rights of Canadians and we will work toward this goal.

The framework agreement does declare with respect to aboriginal peoples that nothing in the agreement will take away from aboriginal rights and the signatory governments do commit themselves to work with aboriginal peoples "to find practical solutions to address their pressing needs". We will insist that these consultations are meaningful and that they result in concrete action.

Finally, the Government of Quebec has not agreed to this social union framework and the social union will not be complete until all the provinces agree.

We do see in the social union a form of asymmetrical federalism by default. We do not find this to be as disturbing as others in the sense that we have always seen a form of asymmetrical federalism as that which is needed in order to address Canada's national unity problems. We have shared the concern of others in the past about having to decentralize at the level of 10 provinces in order to meet this distinctive special needs of one province.

We see in the social union more by default that by design an aspect of asymmetrical federalism which at the same time creates a situation in which the needs of Quebecers as citizens of Canada will be met and they will not be left out of the benefits of the social union.

Perhaps federalism is working in mysterious ways. We see here the seeds of a new beginning. We hope they will come to fruition.