Debates of Nov. 5th, 2004

(Bill C-333. On the Order: Private Members' Bills:)

Bill C-333, an act to recognize the injustices done to Chinese immigrants by head taxes and exclusion legislation, to provide for recognition of the extraordinary contribution they made to Canada, and to provide for restitution which is to be applied to education on Chinese Canadian history and the promotion of racial harmony.

Chinese Canadian Recognition and Restitution Act

[Dave Chatters, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations between all parties and I believe if you seek it you would find unanimous consent of the House to withdraw Bill C-333 from the order paper.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

(Order discharged and bill withdrawn)

Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec Act

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie]

moved that Bill C-9, an act to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, this is my first speech in the House as Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie. I will therefore begin, if I may, with a few words to the people of my riding. I would like to thank the people of Brossard—La Prairie for their confidence in me. These are people who know how to build bridges and work together for the common good. I am very proud of them.

I am very pleased to mention how proud I am of my own people in Brossard—La Prairie on this occasion of my first rising in the House after being appointed Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie.

I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak to the members of this House on the occasion of second reading of Bill C-9 to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, which the Prime Minister did me the honour of entrusting to me on July 20.

This bill defines the framework within which the government intends to address the regional economic development of Quebec. Why have such a bill? First of all, because the agency as we know it operates under the terms of a series of orders in council under the Department of Industry Act. By providing a legislative framework governing the operations of the department and confirming its status, prerogatives, powers and authorities, we hope to make the minister responsible more directly accountable. There is also a requirement for the agency to submit to Parliament a comprehensive report of activities by December 31, 2006 and every five years thereafter.

The second purpose of this bill is to establish consistency in the status of the federal departments responsible for regional development. It provides the agency with a legal basis on its own right, modelled after the Atlantic Opportunities Agency, ACOA, which of course looks after the Atlantic provinces, and the Department of Western Economic Diversification for the west, both of which have had that status for several years.

Last, the bill is a testimony to the commitment of the Government of Canada to support regional development in our country through regional economic development agencies, in cooperation and in sync with our provincial counterparts.

The bill before the House today establishes the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, commonly known as Canada Economic Development or CED, since the use of acronyms is so widespread in Ottawa. The bill confirms its role as a federal agency whose mandate is to foster economic development opportunities for the regions of Quebec.

That being said, this bill does not make any change to the agency's mandate or goals as set by my department. So, how can we describe our mandate in simple terms? In order to become or remain competitive, our businesses, and especially our small and medium size businesses, often need some help, and they can count on us. To compete against the best, businesses must benefit from unconditional support in terms of research and development, and they can count on us. To revitalize or preserve the vitality of our regions, they can count on us. To help create a climate that would persuade our youth to stay in or to come back to their region, career opportunities have to be provided, and they can count on us. To stimulate the economy in our regions whose main towns are single-industry based, and therefore, of course, more vulnerable, the economy needs to be diversified, and they can count on us. To help communities move away from dependency and stand on their own feet, they can count on us. To grow, businesses have to export and rely on some support and networking, and they can count on us. They can count on us for everything that brings dignity to workers, confidence in the future, some comfort and a certain enthusiasm. We are there for the families. That is the beauty of our department.

As far as I am concerned, the economy is not an end in itself. It is only an instrument to enhance individual and collective well-being. That is how I see the mandate of my department.

To fulfill this mandate in the past few years, Canada Economic Development has focused its efforts on achieving three strategic results, that is, SME development, improvement of the environment of regional economic development and development or renewal of collective infrastructure. Our development strategies are tailored and adapted to regional and even local needs.

It is precisely to ensure that our strategies respond to the needs of the people that the bill gives the agency the responsibility of directing and coordinating federal policies and programs in relation to the development and diversification of the economy of Quebec regions.

The bill confirms the role of the agency and its minister in the coordination of federal policies and programs, the achievement of an integrated federal strategy, with the cooperation of other relevant federal departments and agencies, and the promotion—I did not say defence, but promotion—of Quebec's interests in the development of national policies and programs in its area of activity.

This ability to listen, this very fine synchronization, this intimate knowledge of the field and the players are the trademarks of this department that I am honoured to head.

All members—I repeat all members—who, at some time or another, have been interested in regional development recognize this quality over and above any political partisanship.

Thus, it will be incumbent on the agency to establish and maintain close partnerships to properly play the role of unifier and coordinator with other federal departments. Equally important, it is incumbent on the Canada Economic Development to work closely with the Government of Quebec, throughout the province and in all regions. This has been a common practice for a long time. This bill confirms this desire.

Still, complementary does not necessarily mean identical. Sometimes Quebec City and Ottawa do not have identical goals. Complementary means, for example, that Quebec City is able to work with certain businesses because they share similar goals, while Ottawa can support other businesses for the same reason.

In the end, it benefits everyone. The bill also recognizes the importance of working in close collaboration with all actors in the field—Economic Development Canada, entrepreneurs, development agencies, research centres and so on.

Here I want to pay tribute most emphatically to all the employees in our 14 regional offices and head office, who enhance our reputation through the quality of their work, their knowledge of the environment and their professionalism.

I would also like to remind the House that the Government of Canada created its first regional development policy in the 1960s, thus recognizing that the needs and realities of the country's various regions sometimes required interventions to ensure equality of opportunity for all citizens. This principle has even been recognized in the Constitution, in section 36.1.

And let this be perfectly clear: ensuring equality of opportunity does not mean giving everyone, everywhere, the same thing. Rather, it means to make sure that everyone, everywhere is treated fairly. Today, the needs that once justified our regional development activities in Quebec have not disappeared, but they have evolved a great deal. In order to meet these changing conditions and take advantage of them, since 2001, the agency has been emphasizing innovation and the knowledge economy.

In the last five years, the relative share of financial assistance granted by the agency to innovation projects has increased considerably, from 24% of total financial assistance in 1999-2000 to 61% in 2003-04.

With respect to the knowledge economy, we have provided support for a number of research centre projects. For example, there is our support for the plan to acquire highly specialized equipment for ISMER, the ocean sciences institute of the Université du Québec à Rimouski. I could also mention the Aluminium Technology Centre in the Saguenay. Here I should thank our former colleague, André Harvey, who worked very hard on this project for his region.

I could also mention the Aerospace Manufacturing Technology Centre in Montreal. Of course, this one is of particular interest to me, because such firms as Pratt & Whitney, Héroux-Devtek and others, which are very significant in the aerospace and aeronautical field, are located in my region.

Our communities are our greatest assets. Our recent throne speech said what makes our communities strong is the willingness of men and women from allwalks of life to take responsibility for their future and for one another.

The solution to the problems in the regions is not to be found in the ivory towers of our capital cities, but in the regions themselves. Communities are in a better position to find local solutions to local problems, to meet the challenges, and to achieve their potential.

The agency's role is to support regional entrepreneurship with all the resources available and help the regions channel their energy toward strategic projects for their development.

For over 20 years, the Canadian government has been active in the communities and regions through the community futures program, the goal of which is to encourage communities to take charge of their own future. In the context of this program, the Canadian government is cooperating with 57 community futures development corporations, or CFDCs, and 9 business development centres, or BDCs.

The youth strategy which CED is implementing is an example of action by CFDCs. Its main goal is to help young men and women in rural areas of Quebec fulfill their dream of having their own business in their area.

From November 1997 to March 31, 2003, the youth strategy helped fund 2,731 entrepreneurs, promoting the creation, growth and modernization of 2,250 business in rural regions of Quebec. That is why it should be emphasized that, for each dollar invested by CED, a total of $7 was invested. This is a remarkable performance.

Better yet, the youth strategy helps young people who migrated to urban centres to study or work, to come back to their region and start their own business.

Through the Community Futures Program, Canada Economic Development supports 13 CEDC, community economic development corporations, which provide services and support to community organizations and SMEs in disadvantaged urban areas in Montreal, Quebec City, Sherbrooke and Gatineau.

We also contribute to the maintenance and development of community infrastructures in close cooperation with the Quebec Government. I am referring of course to the Canada-Quebec infrastructure agreement. This program is a resounding success. Allow me to pay a tribute to my counterpart, Jean-Marc Fournier, the Quebec minister, for his cooperation, hard work and professionalism.

Financial support provided through this program should help in the short term to improve Quebec community and transportation infrastructures, develop new technologies, and improve the management of drinking water, waste water and solid waste.

The agency intends to develop the social economy sector to better meet the needs expressed by the communities.

In Quebec alone, there are over 7,000 social economy businesses . With annual sales of over $17 billion, they employ more than 125,000 people. These businesses are rooted in the community and play an essential role in regional and rural development.

As of March 31, 2004, there were over 2,100 projects across Quebec receiving support from the agency overall. These projects represent a contribution of close to $4 billion to Quebec regional economies. The agency is involved to the tune of $1 billion.

These numbers speak for themselves. They show how much the various projects help strengthen the economy in our regions. Of course, since the good economic health of Canada depends in part on a vigorous Quebec economy, good results in Quebec can only have a beneficial impact on the Canadian economy as a whole, where Quebec continues to make a difference.

These numbers are impressive, of course, but the reality they represent is even more so. Whenever the Economic Development Agency becomes involved in a project, our fellow citizens benefit, jobs are created and thousands of lives take a turn for the better.

Take for example the quartz production plant in Cap-Chat, Gaspésie, where 60 new high technology jobs will not only help families to earn a living but to develop expertise in job intensive areas.

The cooperative La Relève in the Asbestos RCM is another good example. We have decided to support it because it has chosen to tackle the exodus of young people to urban centres.

Another example would be Renyco, a company that specializes in manufacturing hardwood flooring in Thurso. The Outaouais regional office has invested a total of $342,000, but thanks to the developer's know-how, finished products are of a better quality, productivity has increased by 15%, sales have tripled and the company has created about thirty jobs in rural areas.

Since we wanted the development to be part of the surrounding realities, we have adopted regional intervention strategies. These strategies were based on consultations, joint actions and mobilization of regional economic stakeholders. While enhancing local expertise, these strategies allow every region to define how each one of them can use the Agency's programs and services to maximum benefit.

Regional development is a complex issue. You cannot talk about it without taking environmental, social and cultural issues into account. It is thus essential to focus on the synergy of expertise provided by various departments.

I am not sure that I will have time to say everything I wanted to say, but I would like to come back to two elements. The first is the quality of the cooperation and the complementarity that exists between my department and the Quebec government in order to better serve the public, which expects nothing less. This regional development is in keeping with the desire expressed in the Speech from the Throne. We are being true to that mandate.

This mandate should have a broad humanistic vision. In this regard, if you allow me, I would like to conclude with an experience I had not so long ago, in one of my very first events as Minister of Economic Development Canada. I referred to that activity a bit earlier. I am talking about Sural, in Cap-Chat.

You know as well as I do that, when an announcement is made somewhere, generally, one meets with a few elected officials, some local stakeholders, perhaps the heads of organizations and members who deign to have an interest in those matters that come up. In general, that is the case.

In Cap-Chat, the room was full. The people were there, along with local elected officials. All the officials had mobilized to show how important this was. I saw people who, after long despairing, felt renewed hope for the first time in the Gaspé Peninsula. In their small municipality of 7,000, a plant was opening, which, when fully operational, would create 100 jobs. This is the aim of human dignity, which comes of the collective work which we, Economic Development Canada, have done in partnership with the Government of Quebec.

Local authorities got involved. Why would a business from Venezuela set up a plant in Cap-Chat? It looked totally incredible in the beginning. The community brought it about. It did it through its strength and its resolve. We were there to support that project, just as the Quebec Government was, and I am very proud of it.

The atmosphere in the room was electrifying. To me, the hope that the Sural project generated in the eyes of these people from the Gaspe is worth the recognition and the tributes.

I thank the people from Cap-Chat for giving me such a taste for my department.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech on Bill C-9. We hear that this bill will create a department of regional development in Quebec. This is the only time I heard the word “Quebec” in this broad definition that the minister has just given.

Obviously partnership is involved. Agencies are mentioned. However, I still feel that Bill C-9 shows one again that the federal government is interfering where it has no business. In addition, I also think that the government is trying to convince the Quebec regions, which where depopulated because of this government's employment insurance policies, that they will be repopulated.

You cannot imagine all the political decisions that have been made by this government. There is employment insurance. There is also the present crisis in the textile industry as well as the situation in agriculture and in the manufacturing industry, which is a soft sector. All these are international responsibilities, responsibilities that fall to the Government of Canada.

In my opinion, this is where the federal government should focus its actions, instead of once again creating regional duplication in Quebec.

Therefore, I ask the minister if he is ready to announce that he will work in close cooperation with the Quebec government on the project, meaning that he will hand over the federal funds to the Quebec department responsible for the regions and that the Province of Quebec will manage the funds because it is Quebec that is responsible for its regions.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this statement was quite interesting.

First of all, I would remind the hon. member that this is simply an administrative bill. I talked about the mandate. However, the bill itself does not change a thing in the mandate. Therefore, I suggest that he read the bill before asking questions.

Second, he talked about jurisdictions. I will remind him that section 36.1 of the Constitution is extremely clear about the role of the federal government:

(a) promoting equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians;

(b) furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities.

There is absolutely no mention of “regional development” in the Constitution. What gives them the right to usurp power that simply does not exist under the Canadian Constitution?

Third, the member deplores the fact that the word “Québec” occurs only once. I remind him that the agency's name is Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec. If that is not enough, there must be some comprehension problem.

In conclusion, if I may, he referred to textiles, among other things. He said it involves an international responsibility and, therefore, it has to be addressed. I remind him that Economic Development Canada is managing softwood lumber support programs. The member contradicts himself for reasons that have nothing to do with the substance but a lot to do with a regrettable political bias.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am having a hard time understanding how the minister, who says he is responsible for regional development, can say that that responsibility is conferred to him by the Canadian Constitution.

I am surprised also that the Liberals know their Canadian Constitution. Indeed, judging by their behaviour in the House, one can conclude that they are constantly at odds with the Canadian Constitution, because they are always invading provincial fields of jurisdiction.

I find that reassuring, because a Liberal member has finally started to read his Constitution. In my opinion, this is good news today. That said, I hope he will also ask his colleagues to do the same, particularly all those who, since we came back on October 4, presented bills that fall under provincial jurisdiction.

Last week, the eloquent member for Outremont said that it was high time for his government to take care of federal jurisdictions. I also hope that the eloquent member for Outremont, who seems to have some control over Quebec, will ask his colleagues to read the Constitution. Indeed, at the present time, they do not respect the Constitution. They not only force it on us in 1982, but they do not even respect it.

When there are international and economic conflicts—and I call bilateral agreements that do not work conflict—it is not the textile industries that asked to be in trouble. It is this government which made the decision to remove import quotas two years in advance. When an economic situation is caused by a bilateral agreement or is about international trade, it is federal jurisdiction.

I am asking him if, instead of invading Quebec's fields of jurisdiction, he could look in his own yard and deal with the problems the regions of Quebec are facing because of his government.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as a Quebecker, I claim that Quebec is my backyard too.

With regard to the negative comments that the hon. member has made in relation to the interpretation of the Constitution, it is interesting to note that, had he read it, he would not have asked his first question. He would then have fully understood that regional development is not covered by the Constitution; therefore, the jurisdiction is shared.

Thirdly, he talks about textiles. Why doesn't he mention the fact that we have earmarked $26.7 million to maintain a program that we had already undertaken to help textile workers improve their performance and their ability to compete and find more profitable markets? They talk, we act.

There is one last thing I am quite interested in. These people live in the past. There is nothing I can do about that, I accept it, I have no alternative. We can choose between brooding over old quarrels and looking to what will be useful for the future of Gaspe, the Lower St. Lawrence, Sherbrooke, Montreal, research, the return of young people to their region of origin; all these are exciting plans for the future, plans that give hope.

Instead of confining myself to the nonsense of a misinterpreted past, I would rather focus on hope for the future of our youth and people in the regions. I will do it, with or without them.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I did not really intend to address the issue at this time, but what I heard really made me sit up straight. It woke me up, but not in a positive way.

I would like to ask the minister a question about the record of the agency, especially in the region of Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine. Just before the election, they announced that about $35 million would be spent over three years. Those three years were stretched to five years, and by March 31, 2004, only $11 million had been spent. Is that a good record? I do not think so.

What goes around comes around, so we are not about to be told what to do by a department whose goal is simply to become more visible, not more efficient. We should talk about efficiency. In terms of efficiency, Bernard Landry and his Parti Québécois government get top marks for what they did in the region of Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let me say that seeing a Bloc member come to the defence of Mr. Landry makes me smile a little. I thought that he had been elected to the federal level to work on the federal scene, for the good of Quebec, and not to defend his big Péquiste brother on the other side of the street.

There is one thing that interests me. I do not believe that the member opposite quite gets it that, when we intervene for the softwood lumber industry, we have to intervene in a way that does not open the door to justifying the Americans' misinterpretation of this problem. We cannot help the softwood lumber industry directly so that it is perceived as a subsidy and have the Americans come after us on this. We have to help in a smart way to diversify, to seek niches that will allow for the development of regions.

There is a third thing that I would like to focus on a little. I would like the Bloc to explain its reasoning. It tells Quebec that it will defend its interests. Now we create an agency that will be totally at arm's length from industry and that will focus exclusively on Quebec. The first thing that members want to do is vote against this to abdicate their responsibilities.

They want to be elected to not take responsibilities. If this is what they want, the people will make a judgment. Certainly, we, on this side, will not abdicate our responsibilities. We are the government and we will be there to help the regions of Quebec.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

This is my first speech in this House as a member of the Official Opposition and of the Conservative Party with you in the chair, Mr. Speaker. I want to congratulate you on your new duties as Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons.

I am pleased to rise on behalf of my party to speak to Bill C-9, an act to establish the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

The Conservative Party supports this bill whose intent stems directly from paragraph 28 of the Policy Statement of the Conservative Party of Canada.

—regional development policies are an important part of any comprehensive strategy to assist the regions of Canada to meet the opportunities of the new global economy.

In fact, Bill C-9 is very straightforward and uncontroversial. It creates the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec out of a program in the Industry Canada portfolio.

Basically, a program in the Industry Canada portfolio is being transformed into an agency. The staff from the former program will be maintained; their responsibilities will remain the same and their activities will continue. All that will change is the letterhead and business cards to reflect the agency's new legal status.

This will more or less place the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec on an equal footing with the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.

Bill C-9 will establish for Quebec an economic development agency reporting to Parliament through its own minister. We can see how its legal status is similar to that of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, which was established un 1985 under the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Act.

While the purpose of the bill is mainly a name change, Bill C-9 also allows the government to say it is committed to regional development without spending a cent of new money. In this respect, Bill C-9 is brilliant and allows the Liberal government to do what it likes best: be all talk and no action. This way, a visionless government enjoys another day of doing nothing.

The regions need development, and the government's response is to change the business cards. That is all this bill is really about.

However, we are in favour of regional development and we believe that the responsibilities and structures of regional development agencies should be the same across the country.

That being said, I will now turn to the creation of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

As we all know, Bill C-9 was given first reading on October 8. Clause 8 of Bill C-9 says:

An Agency of the Government of Canada to be known as the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec is established.

From that we conclude that the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec will come into being when Bill C-9 comes into force.

However, that is not so. In the summary of Bill C-9, we are told that the transformation from a former industry program under Industry Canada to a development agency answering to Parliament through its own minister has already happened. I quote the summary:

This bill is pursuant to the July 20, 2004, decision by the Prime Minister of Canada to effect a change to the governmental structure by appointing a Minister responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec. This Minister is fully accountable for regional economic development in Quebec.

In the Speech from the Throne, Her Excellency The Governor General, speaking on behalf of the federal government, said:

The Government...will examine the need and options for reform of our democratic institutions—

The Government invites members from both Chambers to join with it in the same democratic spirit: committed to unity and the inclusion of all regions and all voices—

The very next day, the Prime Minister said:

—in a minority Commons, we all have a responsibility to make Parliament work for the people. We will fulfil that responsibility if we embrace and build on the democratic reforms initiated during the last session, and if we are prepared to allow the partisan to give way to progress.

We have a minority government, which means there are more opposition members than government members. In light of this situation, we presume there is a commitment to a spirit of democracy and to listening to all the voices from all the regions. We also presume that backbenchers will have a say in the establishment of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

Unfortunately, in this debate, my opinion and the opinion of members from the other parties, particularly Liberal backbenchers, does not mean anything, because the agency, which is the focus of Bill C-9, already exists, and the changes affecting its legal status have already been implemented. Therefore, this debate is strictly an academic exercise without any concrete impact.

It is sad to see that this government, which promised us that it would look at the needs and options relating to the reform of our democratic institutions, is asking us to debate a bill to create an agency that already exists. We must learn to judge this Prime Minister, based not on his words, but on his actions.

Since we support the establishment of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, I propose that all regional development agencies be on the same footing. We should promote regional development agencies that have similar responsibilities and structures right across the country.

At the national level, there are three different models of regional development. Bill C-9 will create, for Quebec, a development agency that will be accountable to Parliament, through its own department. The Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency is a development agency that is accountable to the Minister of Industry. As for the Department of Western Economic Diversification, it is not an agency, but a real department with its own minister.

Even the agencies' objectives are slightly different. In the Maritimes and in Newfoundland and Labrador, the role of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency is to promote Atlantic Canada's economic development opportunities, particularly income growth and job creation in that region.

In western Canada, the Department of Western Economic Diversification is responsible for promoting economic development and diversification in that region, and the interests of that region during the development and implementation of policies, programs and operations under the national economic policy.

In Quebec, the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec need only promote the development and diversification of the economy of the regions of Quebec.

In Quebec, the federal government is proposing an agency to promote the development and diversification of the economy of the regions. In Atlantic Canada, there is a responsibility to increase revenues and create jobs.

In western Canada, there is a department that promotes the interests of this region within the national economic policy.

It is nice to know that the Gaspé does not need an agency to develop the growth of revenues and to create jobs. It is also encouraging to know that Quebeckers do not want a department in charge of promoting their interests within the national economic policy.

The government may have consulted Quebeckers and been convinced that they did not need an agency to create jobs or grow revenues, or a department to promote their interests within the national economic policy.

However, it is also possible that the government tried to get Quebeckers' opinion in the same spirit with which it presented this bill to Parliament. In other words, without too much consultation or attention to the response.

In any event, this is a case of asymmetrical federalism. The Conservatives are in favour of regional development and thus, we will vote in favour of Bill C-9. However, we believe that the regional development agencies, such as the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, have to be depoliticized and focus on drawing new investment from the private sector.

In light of the sponsorship scandal, it is very important that all agencies be depoliticized. In committee, Conservatives will do what they can to ensure that this agency is on equal footing with the other agencies, that it is free from any political influence and that it will serve Quebeckers, not just the Liberal Party of Canada.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the speech my hon. Conservative colleague just made. I would have thought that the Conservative Party, who is usually steadfast in its defence of provincial jurisdictions, would have--

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I'm not speaking to the minister at the moment. This is disturbing me when I speak--I can't concentrate on what I have to say.

I would have liked to ask the hon. Conservative member, whose party always defends the provinces' jurisdictions, including Quebec's, if it would not have been preferable for this bill to let the Quebec government manage the region's money instead of an agency that is only looking to increase its visibility in Quebec?

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in the Conservative Party, what we support in Canada really is equality in all regions of the country, from one end to the other. What we want to see is a federal government which respects the jurisdictions of provinces in an equal fashion in every region of this land.

That is not really what we are talking about right now. What we are deciding today, and this will be decided upon through a vote on this bill, is whether we support for Quebec what we already have for the Atlantic region and for the West.

I thought that the Bloc Québécois would support a bill which would put Quebec on an equal footing with other regions of Canada in terms of national finances. That is why we support Bill C-9.

We do not agree with the current program of the federal government concerning regional economic development. We do not agree with the program and with the theory underlying the Liberal government's ideas.

However, the reality is that bill would, in our opinion, be in the interest of Quebeckers. It would improve the life of economic regions and their development. That is why we support this bill.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec and Minister responsible for the Francophonie]

Mr. Speaker, I paid particular attention to two elements in the comments of my colleague. I understood from what he said that there could be wording differences between this bill and the act governing the western and the Atlantic regions.

Here is my first question: Would the hon. member be prepared to discuss this issue with me when it is debated in committee? I am quite ready to look at where and why there are differences, and to explain them, if necessary. I am open-minded.

My second question is this: When I appear before the parliamentary committee on budgets, would the hon. member agree that we take this opportunity to have a substantive debate on regional development? I would be quite ready to do so. Would he also be ready?

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Party is always ready to discuss new ideas in order to get more economic benefits for regions in Quebec and elsewhere in the country. If the minister really is ready to talk with us in order to come up with new ideas or to consider new approaches, we are ready to introduce amendments to this bill in committee and in the House. We can talk about ways to improve this bill. If he is ready to make compromises, so are we.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to come back to the arguments I presented earlier on to my Conservative colleague.

I know that his federalist perspective inclines him to give some weight to the principle according to which each region of Canada should get its fair share. But that is a federalist principle. For members of a party such as ours, advocating the interests of Quebec exclusively, there is the conviction that it is not the job of the federal government to allocate money in Quebec. The federal government should give the money to Quebec and Quebec, much more attuned to regional needs, should allocate it.

Would his party be ready, within the framework of the amendments it wishes to put forward, to see money available at the federal level handed over to Quebec to administer on its own for the regions of Quebec?

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying to the minister responsible for this bill, if the Bloc Québécois really has new ideas about this bill, and if that would be a better way to represent Quebec, then we would certainly be willing to consider that. I think we should support this bill, as should the Bloc Québécois.

Also, the way that money should be allocated is open for debate. However, it would be a regrettable error for the Bloc Québecois to oppose this bill intended to enhance economic development in the Province of Quebec and the situation of Quebeckers.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the member to clarify his position on Bill C-9.

There could be some contradiction as to the creation of a department, because in his speech, he seemed to say that it would not change a whole lot with regard to regional socio-economic problems compared with what an effective agency could do.

We also understand that he is in favour of the bill. It is something different and I would like him to explain how on the one hand we can be supportive, since it will not change much or not even anything, while saying that what is needed is not necessarily a department, but some action.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in fact this bill will promote the development of a department answering to Parliament. There would thus be a minister whom we could question on this program in the House, something we could not do before.

I agree with the member that there is really a problem, that there is an imbalance as far as the regional programs are concerned. This is, in my opinion, where we disagree with the Liberal government. We need a balanced national program, a program that would cover the whole country. This is part of the political program that our party presented to Quebeckers and to Canadians in the last electoral campaign. This is what we support and this is what we want.

The minister just told us that he would be willing to look at these propositions so there would be a balance to reflect the reality of our country in the economic development area. We would be willing to support this program and this approach. I do believe the minister when he says that he would be willing to discuss this proposition. We would be willing to discuss it too in order to make things better for Quebec within Canada.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of my colleague, concerning the interventions that were made and the questions that were just asked.

My colleague opposite started his intervention by saying, “From his federalist point of view” when speaking about my colleague. Does it mean that, essentially, to him, the dogma of separation must prevail, no matter what is contained in the bills that we have to consider? Does he not think, like me, that when one hides behind dogmas, it is the best way not to face reality and that, essentially, what concerns these members more than anything else is not the interest of Quebec, but rather the interest of their option, which they pretend to be the interest of Quebec, which has never been demonstrated?

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I partly agree with what the minister just said. However, I must frankly tell the House and Canadians that I listen to everything that the Bloc Québécois tells us, because its agenda is to destroy our country and to use its money for a Quebec freed from Canada. All its agenda and its ideas are geared toward destroying our country.

From time to time, we agree with its approach and its ideas on different things. However, finally—and this is why I look closely at its ideas and I really examine everything it says—, in every step that it wants to undertake here, in Ottawa, in relation to its agenda, its every move is to destroy our country. We should not ignore this reality.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will just take a few seconds.

Unfortunately, when I look at the record, I feel we would need a fiscal imbalance department rather than a regional development department.

Actually, Quebeckers can easily take care of the development of Quebec. The funds allocated to the agency could just as easily go into the Quebec treasury or be administered by Quebeckers who know what the problems and the solutions are.

That is why I would encourage the Conservative member to examine this issue a little more closely. Given the results, people in the regions, and I am one of them, since I am from the area of Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands, doubt that establishing a new department will be a really effective solution.