Lost his last election, in 2006, with 33% of the vote.
Supply February 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question. Indeed, I was saying that the government was doing too little too late. Obviously, at some point, the government has no choice but to get involved. However, if the proposed measures seek to help the textile and clothing industries, and if they reflect what the Bloc Québécois proposed, we will welcome them.
Supply February 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. As we said earlier, there are certain weaknesses that can be seen in the programs. First, the program money has run out. That is an important problem. There were $100,000 ceilings. That has been said. Other programs were used simply to scatter the money around here and there, which did nothing to improve the situation.
As for the $50 million, I believe this morning there was an article in La Presse saying that the Canadian textile industry had been removed from the American market. The president of the Canadian Textiles Institute, Harvey Penner, has written to the Prime Minister asking for a plan B. With regard to the $50 million, he stated that this assistance did not match the needs of the industry. He had suggested many other things than this $50 million. He also explained that lifting the quotas and tariffs on textiles coming from China, India and Pakistan had damaged the industry a great deal.
Supply February 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to say that I will share my time with my friend and colleague, the member for Sherbrooke.
I am very pleased to have heard the minister and to have mentioned the region de l'Amiante. It is true that the region de l'Amiante has developed, but it is mainly thanks to the imagination and ingenuity of citizens and organizations that decided to take their destiny into their own hands, because there were problems.
On this Bloc Québécois opposition day, I find it essential to take part in today's debate on an extremely important issue, the textile and clothing industry. The riding of Mégantic—L'Érable, which I represent, is not exempt from the many difficulties of the textile and clothing industry. We talked about this throughout the day. These difficulties are due mainly to the negligence of the Liberal government. Despite what the minister says, this government made numerous promises during the election campaign, without ever taking the trouble to fulfill them. This is its usual and normal way of doing things.
As for the hundreds of jobs lost, it is a tragedy in my riding, especially in the region of L'Amiante and L'Érable. The minister talked about the Beauce region earlier, but he did not talk about East Broughton, where the factory has closed. Hundreds of jobs are threatened because the government, among others, did not listen to the demands of business people and especially to the pressure of the Bloc Québécois to put transition measures in place.
Everyone was convinced that this was the solution, except the government. What is most shocking is that the federal government knew what was coming, as everyone knew, and did nothing. Today, it is trying to fix the mess. Once again, I repeat that this caused factory closings across Quebec.
In my riding, there are textile plants in Disraeli, Thetford, East Broughton and Saint-Méthode. In every plant the workers feel uneasy and are facing difficulties. Of course, we have talked about the programs. However, these programs are not adequate for the textile industry, and they are not enough. Eventually, the programs run out of money, or they have a $100,000 cap, or they are designed in such a way that a little money is spread here and there, which does not help the companies much. Consequently, the problems are not fixed and the job losses are massive.
The Liberal federal government did not find any solution because it did not look for one when the time was right. The government acted when disaster struck and for strictly political reasons, to try and rake in the votes. Unlike the government, the Bloc Québécois proposes solutions to the crisis facing the textile and apparel industries. I had the chance of welcoming my leader, the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie, in the Amiante region. He toured the textile plants. He knows what he is talking about. He made important suggestions at a time when something could have been salvaged from the wreckage. Indeed, we could have maintained jobs and saved entire plants in Quebec. However, nobody listened. Nobody listened to the recommendations and the requests made by the Bloc Québécois. And now, the industry is in dire straits.
We mentioned earlier the $50 million investment. This morning, we could read the following in La Presse : “Canadian textile industry evicted from US market.” Mr. Harvey Penner from the Canadian Textiles Institute said that this $50 million investment absolutely does not match the needs of the industry and that a Plan B would be required. The government can keep on throwing figures around, that will not solve anything.
The Bloc Québécois has made several recommendations to resolve the problems. In my opinion, it is important to consider them. First, we talk about the use of safeguards provided for in international agreements. International competition is a problem. Tariffs must be maintained on imported clothing. That is one way the government can protect local producers, at least until they adapt to international competition. Again, the current competition is not domestic, but comes from China, India and globalization. Imposing quotas on Chinese imports, for example, would prevent the Canadian market from being inundated with highly competitive Chinese products. This is one measure that can easily be turned into reality. Another solution, we see this often, is simply to implement measures to encourage the use of Quebec--and Canadian--made textiles.
Many more measures could be added to the list. First, we must allow the duty-free entry of clothing made abroad from textiles of Canadian origin thereby assuring local textile producers an additional market outlet for their products, which is important.
In the same vein, we must also create an additional market outlet for Canadian textiles by including raw materials in the definition of local content. It is important. This is the current practice in some countries and we should apply it here as well. Also, we must negotiate Canada's entry in agreements reached between the United States and Latin America. We have to start negotiating instead of settling for rules that penalize Canadian or Quebec markets. Otherwise, problems will arise.
Again, in terms of measures for encouragement, we could also adopt a buy local policy for uniforms and clothing. In our regions, the chambers of commerce often promote buying locally. This measure could be applied nationally.
There is a third item my colleague from Drummond talked about earlier and that is the relocation of industries, which is a major problem. We have to strike a balance between the environment and workers' rights in order to avoid an exodus of companies. Canada should perhaps improve its negotiating position with foreign countries.
Another major solution, which my colleagues spoke about, would be to allocate funds to assist workers where companies close down. I spoke earlier of East Broughton, in my riding, where some 50 workers in their mid-fifties are getting no assistance because POWA has been abolished. Assistance to workers who have lost their job is therefore a necessity. I admit that there is no magic solution and that some companies will inevitably close down. Consequently, middle age employees must be able to re-enter the workforce. In the meantime, they need the financial assistance of a program like POWA as they move from employment insurance to retirement. We have yet to see on the part of this government a firm will to establish such a program or to resume funding for POWA.
On the other hand, some people wish to retrain. Thus the importance of establishing a training program for workers. This comes under Quebec's jurisdiction, but the federal government can act and finance this kind of initiative through employment insurance.
We are identifying the problem and trying to save the industry and the plants with programs adapted to their needs. That way, workers who can re-enter the workforce will do so through training, while those of a certain age who cannot retrain will be allowed to retire and benefit from a generous financial assistance program.
Those are the four priorities to deal with in order to solve or improve the situation. There is also a fifth recommendation, which is inescapable; it deals with research and development. In that regard, we must establish an assistance and modernization program for the clothing and textile industries, in order to promote research and development.
Those are basically the measures we could take to develop those industries. I also wish to invite members of the House to support the motion of the Bloc Quebecois, which underlines the inadequacy of the assistance plan to the clothing and textile industries which was announced, if we really want to do positive things in that area.
Supply February 8th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé on his presentation. In my opinion, he has very clearly demonstrated that the problems we are experiencing in the clothing and textile industry are due to the federal government's failure to act. The situation is the same in my riding of Mégantic—L'Érable, particularly in L'Érable, where we are going through a similar situation with the asbestos industry.
My hon. colleague alluded to the existing program. On three specific points, namely the fact that the program funds have been used up, that there is a ceiling or simply that program money has been sprinkled here and there, which is not resolving anything while preventing plant development, would he agree to say that there is no shortage of solutions?
In fact, we in the Bloc Québécois, and our leader in particular, who travelled to the asbestos region, have proposed solutions. Obviously, all that is missing here is the federal government's will to act on bringing about positive solutions and meeting its commitments.
I would like to hear him on that.
Textile and Clothing Industry December 9th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Finance has considered the difficult situation facing the textile and clothing industry. Its unanimous report makes the following recommendations. First, to maintain the duty remission orders for major clothing manufacturers; second, to eliminate duties on apparel fabrics manufactured outside Canada.
Why, instead of taking an insensitive and passive approach, does the federal government not implement the measures suggested by the committee? It would at least be doing something.
Aerospace Industry December 6th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the government did not hesitate to free up $500 million for the auto industry in Ontario, saying, “If you have plans, we are prepared to listen”, whereas in Quebec, there has to be a plan before a single penny is made available for aerospace. The situation is urgent. There are only two weeks left before Bombardier decides whether it will build this aircraft here or elsewhere.
When will there be a plan for the aerospace industry?
Aerospace Industry December 6th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the federal government remains strangely silent about the future of Bombardier and the construction of its new aircraft. During the election campaign, the government did not hesitate to free up $500 million for the automobile industry in Ontario. Now that it is Bombardier, the federal government is dragging its feet.
How can the Prime Minister defend such a double standard, doing one thing for the auto industry in Ontario and another for the aerospace industry in Quebec?
Department of Social Development Act December 1st, 2004
Madam Speaker, first I would like to thank and congratulate my colleague. I think that she also gets to the heart of the matter when she says “One child in poverty is one child too many”. Unlike her fellow MP and minister, I think that she is really getting into the debate.
I would like to ask her a question though. How can we believe her when she says that child poverty is now a priority for the government? We all know that for many years, in a period of economic prosperity, nothing has been done about it. As I said earlier, the child poverty rate was close to 16%, or one child on six. What changes can we expect then?
Department of Social Development Act December 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate the hon. member on his remarks, but I am not about to congratulate the government member who said that talking about poverty was not relevant.
Poverty, both child and family poverty, is at the heart of any of the bills being introduced now, be it the creation of the economic agency or the social development bill. Poverty will always remain at the heart of our bills. It is embarrassing to hear a government member interrupt another member who is speaking to the debate.
Before asking my question, I have here some statistics. Canada's growth rate has been 3.1% since 1999. It is the best in the G-7. There have also been seven consecutive balanced budgets. Credit rating agencies have increased the government's rating. That is the spectacular side now. On the other side, we have Campaign 2000 and its report on poverty. How can we be as rich as that when the report shows that the child poverty rate is on the rise again in Canada? Even in the middle of an economic boom, it increased to 15.6%, which means nearly one poor child in six in Canada.
What can we say? The solutions are well known, but the political will of the government is lacking. Reference was made to several measures.
I am asking my colleague and he is right on that. How is it that, despite all the economic growth and a positive trade balance, poverty is increasing in Canada? Who is benefiting from the economic poverty? What is happening to wealth redistribution and businesses in all this? There is no commitment whatsoever from the government. They should certainly not be bragging about a bill that does not say anything about poverty.
Chrysotile Asbestos December 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, in response to pressure by the Bloc Québécois, Canada supported the decision in September to exclude chrysotile asbestos from the list of hazardous substances under the Rotterdam convention.
Now that the safe use of chrysotile is recognized internationally, does the government intend to begin the second phase of this initiative and promote the safe use of chrysotile right here in Canada?