Mr. Speaker, I have a comment and a question for the hon. member for Anjou-Rivière-des-Prairies.
My comments concerns the GST. As the hon. member indicated, the GST has been harmonized in Quebec; the federal government and the Quebec government had agreed to phase in harmonization over a six-year period. What the member did not tell this House however it that Quebec would not have qualified for adjustment assistance since revenues resulting from harmonization alone have increased in Quebec. Harmonization has generated additional revenue for Quebec, while Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia do not qualify.
We will recall that the premier of Quebec, the hon. Lucien Bouchard, was a member of the cabinet that instituted the GST and that he was the one who advocated harmonizing Quebec's sales tax without any financial compensation.
It is also important to note that the federal government is still paying Quebec for administering the tax on its behalf. In recent years, payments averaging $100 million a year were made. Also, Quebec like the other provinces regularly receives adjustment assistance from Ottawa, including stabilization payments, supply management envelopes and regional development funding. In many cases, Quebec receives much more than the other provinces.
My question is as follows. In his remarks, the hon. member for Anjou-Rivière-des-Prairies mentioned Bill C-12, which he described as regressive legislation. He used the word regressive. I would like to know if it is regressive to move from a system based on the number of weeks worked to one based on the number of worked hours in a bill on employment. Let me explain. Who works 15 hours or less in Quebec and Canada? The most disadvantaged members of our society, those who cannot find permanent employment, generally women. Under the old system, people could hold two jobs and work 30 or 40 hours per week during 30 years without ever qualifying for employment benefits.
If the hon. member could give me an answer, I would like to know if legislation that gives 500,000 workers, including 125,000 in Quebec alone, access to employment insurance can be called regressive.
I would also like to know if raising employment benefits by 18 per cent for every family household in Quebec and Canada earning less than $26,000 and helping the most disadvantaged members of our society can be called restrictive or regressive measures?