Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak on this Bloc Quebecois motion respecting regional development. It condemns the federal government's ineffective regional development interventions.
In fact, according to the April 13, 1994, newsletter of the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec, or FORD, in Quebec, the employment level was still 73,000 jobs short of its pre-recession level. Major disparities have been reported in documents from the Federal Office of Regional Development-Quebec.
For the 1980-1992 time frame, Montreal ranked 19th out of 25 metropolitan areas in Canada in terms of job creation. Montreal has the fifth highest unemployment rate of all these metropolitan areas.
As far as poverty is concerned, there were 674,000 people living in poverty in Montreal, that is to say 370,000 more than in all of Atlantic Canada. And when I say this, I am by no means minimizing the impact of poverty on Atlantic provinces. In fact, I will take this opportunity to say that regional development programs are not hand-outs but a responsibility that all of us must share.
In a speech delivered on March 8, 1994, the Minister of Industry stated: "Our party and our government are clearly committed to economic development and job creation in the Montreal area".
How many specific measures and clear commitments regarding regional development in Montreal were included in the Minister of Finance's budget? None, not one.
The people of Montreal will have to make do with whatever will trickle down to them from the $150 million fund, the Montreal development fund, announced in 1992 by the Conservative government. I did not know the Liberals were this happy with what the Conservatives had done.
Not only will the FORD-Quebec be affected by departmental operating budget reductions, but its own transfers to business will be cut by $70 million, or 25 per cent of its total budget, over the next three years.
Let us take a brief look at the problem in Montreal. According to the Federal Office, Montreal's growth is curbed by its many slow growth sunset industries, with few high technology industries which still depend mainly on military contracts.
The Lachine Canal region, the cradle of Canadian industrialization, and east-end Montreal are two areas of chronic underemployment.
The Island of Montreal was also left a heritage that seriously hampers its development: contaminated soils. According to experts in this field, over 5,000 hectares show environmental damage. In addition, the unchecked suburban development of Montreal has led to an urban sprawl out of proportion to its population.
This urban sprawl has increased the burden on Montreal's road system and shrunk its municipal tax base.
The City of Montreal has estimated it needs $2 billion to modernize its basic infrastructure. The scant $200 million promised under the tripartite infrastructure program will not go very far in resolving a problem of this magnitude. The Liberal government could have focused its infrastructure program on renovating the basic infrastructure, as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities initially proposed.
The federal Liberals thus abandoned an important initiative in the City of Montreal, the engine of Quebec, in favour of the shortsighted election requirements of a provincial Liberal government in distress.
The regional transportation network still shows obvious deficiencies: chronic congestion of several road segments, advanced deterioration of the road infrastructure, which compromises the network's efficiency and safety, as well as discontinuity of the road network.
Let me also mention the underutilization of the aging rail infrastructure. This situation seriously complicates the transportation of passengers and freight throughout the territory, thus affecting people's quality of life and the economic competitiveness of local businesses.
The major transportation infrastructures, namely the two airports, the port and the railways, which confirm the economic vitality of the Montreal region on the global markets, are faced with a quickly and deeply changing environment.
Practically all of these major facilities come under federal jurisdiction. Most of the measures that could help are the responsibility of this government; this is no doubt its most dismal record.
But Montreal also has strengths. The first and the most important one by far is its people. Indeed, as the bad news kept hitting our people, they became more resilient. A spirit of solidarity developed in the neighbourhoods, and local political and socio-economic elites joined forces.
In fact, a number of regional exercises were undertaken, including the Pichette report, as well as the 1992 conference of Greater Montreal mayors, whose theme referred to the Greater Montreal as a strong entity asserting itself. Moreover, the need for interregional solidarity is being recognized in every regional discussion and meeting in Quebec.
In that regard, the FTQ stated this, during its 1992 congress: "To revitalize Quebec's economy, the development of Montreal must not be opposed to that of the regions. Regional development in Quebec will have to take into account the regions' complementarity and promote interregional development".
The task force chaired by Mr. Claude Pichette held a vast consultation exercise with Montreal stakeholders, and a clear wish for autonomy emerged. We must particularly point out regional development initiatives in urban districts by CDECs, which are the Corporations de développement économique communautaire. In this regard, it is more than desirable to extend agreements between the different levels of government, the City of Montreal, and CDECs.
The Pichette report also pointed out that Greater Montreal's strategic plan had recognized the importance of the role played by CDECs, and in fact proposed to strengthen their means of action to promote job development. Indeed, the stimulation of employment is the primary goal of CDECs. However, these corporations were painfully trying to find their way around through the current duplicating and mess in the occupational training programs of the federal and the provincial governments. New corporations are being created in Ahuntsic and Côte-des-Neiges, or are in the development stage, as is the case in Montréal-Nord.
Business assistance is the second sector of activity of CDECs. It seems however that such partnerships between the various levels of government, the city of Montreal and community organizations must be based on longer-term agreements, because they deal with structural problems, social as well as economic issues that are linked to the de-industrialization of the Montreal area, as was mentioned in the Pichette Report. Provincial and federal civil servants still have some serious reservations about this kind of partnership.
In the areas of local control, development, decentralization and priority planning, our communities have done their share. The city of Montreal has actively supported them and has often acted on their behalf with the higher authorities. At best, resource allocation to the CDECs is more like a redistribution of old money. That means less money for everyone when resources are scarce. There is no will to act. Consultations with the people and the community organizations, interregional initiatives and local control must all be supported. The people in Montreal have learned to rely only on themselves and have shown how dynamic they can be.
It is also important that the regions be in charge of their economic development. The federal government should yield to this evidence. What the regions really want is some support from other levels of government, and not more government intervention and so-called national standards. By definition, regions have their very own identity, they are not merely a part of the country. They have special features and special needs.
Therefore, it is important that we recognize, for example, that the Montreal census metropolitan area is a region in its own right. This metropolitan area has a core city, that is Montreal, whose regional and international characteristics must be recognized and supported by its regional partners as well as by the higher levels of government. It is important also that the federal
government be committed to respecting the development of this greater area.
In fact, the federal government must recognize Greater Montreal as the "representative of the metropolitan area" in economic matters and it must coordinate its economic development action at the regional level. The lack of efficiency of the Liberal government in matters of regional development results in an administrative chaos and sterile overlappings which are harmful to the economic growth of all regions.
I would indeed like to quote the recent figures of the Economic and Regional Development Agreement, or ERDA. In the last stages of the agreement and only a few months before it expired, on March 31, 1993, the two governments had spent only $281 million, that is just 34 per cent of the planned $820 million. Quebec and Ottawa are equally bad in this case. The first has spent only $126 million out of $380 million, that is 33 per cent and the other, which is the federal government, has spent only $155 million out of the planned $440 million, that is 35 per cent.
Montreal has so far paid dearly for the federal government's lack of efficiency in matters of regional development.