Martin Cauchon

[Hollinger Inc., May 31st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

In fact, the director of the bureau of competition is aware of the buyout the hon. member has just mentioned. He has already made some representations and done a number of analyses, and I want to say that, in the past, every time there has been a deal involving newspapers, the government has taken action by introducing relevant legislation if necessary.

In this case, the director informed us that the deal was legitimate. I would point out to my colleague that Canada's Competition Act ensures that fair competition can be maintained across the country, and that all Canadians can take advantage of it through a mechanism provided for in the act.

[Laval Space Camp, May 9th, 1996]

The answer is no,Mr. Speaker. The City of Laval did, of course, contemplate the possibility of submitting an application for the space camp under the infrastructure program. But its application would not have met program requirements, since it would have been essentially an application for refinancing.

However, the City of Laval made changes to the proposed multipurpose complex before the infrastructure program's March 31 deadline-

[Canadian Human Rights Act, May 9th, 1996]

moved that Bill C-33, an act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, be read the third time and passed.

[Kenworth Plant In Sainte-Thérèse, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as I said already, the Canadian government is currently working on it. In fact, the minister responsible for Quebec has sent a letter to PACCAR. We are waiting for the company's response. Once we have all the facts, we will let this House know what the Canadian government's position is.

[Kenworth Plant In Sainte-Thérèse, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, you will understand that the government is extremely concerned about the announcement made by PACCAR. A substantial number of jobs are at stake, and my hon. friend across the way should know that the Canadian government has been involved in this matter from the very beginning, after PACCAR made its decision known. The Government of Quebec got involved and we immediately got on board; we were represented by my colleague, the Minister of Labour, who met with the president of the FTQ and also with his provincial counterpart.

We have been in contact; members of my staff got in touch with the minister responsible for the province of Quebec.

Last Saturday, my colleague, the Minister of Labour, and myself sat down with representatives of the union at the Sainte-Thérèse plant. I must say that, as matters stand, we will consult with each other. We will examine the matter on its merit and come back to the House with the Canadian government's position on this matter.

[Supply, March 19th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the comments of the hon. member. Permit me to point out a few things with regard to the matter of the banking community. As you know, it is currently subject to a surtax. The banking community too must live according to the ebb and flow of the economy and not only the national economy, but the international economy and therefore must make the same economic shift as the G-7 countries around the world are obliged to. It involves a shift from a banking system that capably handles what is known as the tangible-real

estate and securities-to a banking system that will work much better with the intangible.

During this time, the federal office of regional development-Quebec, which I head, is working with financial institutions to set up funds providing financing on a patient capital basis to enable an SMB in high tech operations to obtain funding quickly, during the time it will take the regular financial institutions to make the change.

Secondly, I think the banks definitely pull their weight in working with the federal office. Even better, I realize, after a two week tour of Quebec, that there are agencies throughout Quebec that look after regional economic development and that take the time to target the priorities of the individual regions. This shows a taste for partnership and also what a partnership can do when the partners believe in it and really want to work together.

Allow me to conclude by mentioning an organization the hon. member is very familiar with, the Prouesse organization, which I recently came into contact with, which is looking after economic development in the east end of Montreal and which has targeted certain priority sectors, including the petro-chemical, plastics and rubber sectors. They are building on these economic realities and strengths, which have grown up over the years in the east end of Montreal.

[The Budget, March 18th, 1996]

Just read the budget.

[The Budget, March 18th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, you will understand that, having listened to such ridiculous remarks, remarks that have nothing to do with the reality and are in fact an insult to the intelligence of Canadians, I just had to respond.

The subject of transfer payments was raised earlier; I will just touch on it because I know that we are short on time. In discussing this issue of federal transfers to the provinces, the people opposite fail to mention that the Quebec finance minister had made forecasts regarding transfer payments and that those announced in the budget speech are $600 million higher than anticipated by the Quebec government.

They fail to mention that, for the very first time, a Canadian government has had the courage to develop a five-year plan to ensure stable, and not just stable, but progressively higher transfer payments by establishing a cash transfer threshold.

They also fail to mention, which is unfortunate, that equalization payments keep growing from year to year and that the province of Quebec greatly benefits from these payments. The subject of employment was also raised, to complain about the lack of employment measures.

You will understand how staggering it is for me to hear such a thing, given the fact that the federal government's role is to form partnerships and create a climate conducive to good investment. Deficit reduction fosters job creation. Technology Partnerships Canada, the program announced by my colleague from Industry Canada, is much appreciated by Canadian industry and small business. And so is the program geared toward young people; $315 million are allocated to this program. There is also the export financing program involving the Export Development Corporation.

These are measures which prove that the government is headed in a direction leading to the development of a sustainable economic safety net that will foster the creation of steady jobs.

To conclude, regarding the employment insurance, the amounts that will be set aside as a result of the proposed reform will be invested in this employment insurance, to maintain stable contributions and build a reserve to sustain this stability even through an economic recession. It should also be pointed out also that this

government is the first government to hit its 3 per cent of GDP deficit reduction target. Those are the real figures.

[The Budget, March 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is amazing. The budget of the Minister of Finance is so good that opposition members are starting to switch from the question of the deficit per se to the human deficit.

Members of the Reform Party are very displeased with the result. They are displeased because we said in 1993 we would meet the target of deficit reduction and we did so. We did so in making sure we reached 3 per cent of GDP.

With respect to taking care of people, three years ago we launched the reform of the social safety net to ensure that once people have access to the benefits of the social safety net they will be able to access a very active program in order to ensure Canadians will return to the workplace as soon as possible.

Since 1993 we have created more than 500,000 new jobs. I must tell the Reform members that we will keep on working with the private sector and people in the communities at the local level to create more jobs. We will make sure that our small enterprises have the same access to the international market all over the world. We will then be able to create jobs with a responsible government.

[The Budget, March 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the comments made by my hon. colleague. Either the hon. member is not taking a very responsible attitude in this House or he has been out of this great democratic forum, which is the House of Commons, for the last two years.

We talk about making major changes in the best interest of Canada and of the whole population, and that is basically what we have been doing since 1993. About the huge deficits we have, I would like to remind the hon. member that it was under the Conservative government, of which he was a member at the time, that Canada had its most outrageous deficits and went through the worst political situation ever in our country.

When the hon. member talks about how much our social programs are costing the Canadian population, his comments seem anachronistic, to say the least. You know, we are talking about social programs which were implemented decades ago. Today, basically, we are acting as the responsible government that we are. We want to review the social safety net we have developed as a

society, and which we are very proud of, to ensure that it is more responsive to the needs of Canadian society.

That is what we are doing and we are going even further by taking action on the economic front and working with the small businesses. We have to increase the competitiveness of our small businesses and use a modern approach to do so. In saying that, I am reminded of course of the Federal Office of Regional Development, which has created a partnership and is working with all of the communities throughout the province of Quebec and providing what is called the SMB access centre, so that our small businesses can have access to world markets, which they did not have before, and can use the federal government's expertise in international development to gain access to a network open to the whole wide world.

The Liberal Party has always had the courage to make the appropriate changes, always keeping Canada's best interests in mind. We avoid partisanship, unlike the opposition parties, and we also avoid a doctrinaire approach, unlike the opposition parties. We always act in the best interests of all Canadians.