Lucien Bouchard

[Canada-Quebec Economic Union, September 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in an apocalyptic speech delivered yesterday in Montreal, the Minister of Finance claimed that Canada could not guarantee its present economic union with Quebec would continue because the Americans would use it as an excuse to renegotiate NAFTA. He also contended that a sovereign Quebec would have to wait a very long time before becoming a member of the World Trade Organization, which recently replaced the GATT.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. Will he acknowledge that the proposal a sovereign Quebec will make to Canada for a new economic and political partnership is entirely within the spirit of the World Trade Organization treaty and of NAFTA and would guarantee American business the same conditions of access to Canadian and Quebec markets they now enjoy?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Second, the reason we have these never ending debates on unemployment insurance reform is that the government does not have the courage to table its reform proposals, and people are concerned because of these documents from the minister's office-and he did not deny that; he admitted it was true-announcing horrendous cuts.

Would the Prime Minister have the courage to tell us today that he will table the reform before the Quebec referendum?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, whether or not the Leader of the Opposition will still be in the House is not up to him.

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I think the Prime Minister and the government are playing down the apprehensions and concerns we are seeing in labour circles across Canada, not just in Quebec. This time, the alarm was sounded by the Canadian Labour Congress which represents all unions in Canada.

I want to ask him whether he would confirm an analysis by the CLC which says that the new cuts in unemployment insurance will come down hard on seasonal and part time workers who will have to work twice as many hours for twice as many weeks to be eligible for reduced benefits. Does the government want to crush them as well?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Human Resources Development tried to play down the existence and importance of a document from his office dealing with his proposals for unemployment insurance reform.

This morning, the official opposition released a letter from the Canadian Labour Congress which shows that Canada's labour unions are taking very seriously the threat to the unemployment insurance system represented by the minister's reform. The CLC sent its members an analysis of the devastating repercussions of the new cuts in unemployment insurance being prepared by the minister.

My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Instead of putting his tape on replay, would he admit that the new cuts his government has decided to postpone after the referendum will have the effect of denying two out of every three unemployed workers access to unemployment insurance?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that the forthcoming reform will affect all workers. First of all, this is an admission that all the unemployed in Canada will be affected. We know that now. Second, we know that unemployed workers outside Quebec will not be asked to vote on their political future at the end of October.

I think he should understand that we now know what he meant, when he promised he would make us face the music. Is it not obvious to him as it now should be to everyone, that Quebec's unemployed workers will be the first to face the music, the kind of music the Prime Minister promised them, to the tune of more than 40 per cent of the new cuts, which represents nearly $600 million?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Quebecers face a fundamental choice, the choice of the kind of society they want. I think they have the right to know what kind of society this government has in mind.

And among other things, I want to ask the Prime Minister whether we are to understand-and why not admit it, everyone knows-that the minister wanted to carry out the reform and that it was constantly postponed because of the referendum in Quebec. Why will the Prime Minister not admit that the reason for these successive postponements is that the government made the deliberate decision to put off announcing the dramatic cuts that will be inflicted on Quebec's unemployed because of the referendum?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government steadfastly refuses to unveil its plans and keeps postponing the tabling of its social program reform. Clearly the government wants to keep these cuts under wraps until the referendum. We know that the federal budget announced additional cuts of more than $1.5 billion in the unemployment insurance plan, but the details are still being kept secret.

My question is directed to the Prime Minister. How can he initiate the most massive cuts ever in our social programs, including unemployment insurance, cuts that are tantamount to repudiating the social equity that millions of Quebecers and Canadians depend on?

[Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

That is not true.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, apart from the fact that Mr. Matthews was under oath and runs the risk of facing very serious consequences for perjury, there is the fact that the Prime Minister can no longer use Mr. LaBarge's testimony as his support, because Mr. LaBarge contradicted him-

self in the tape the Globe and Mail obtained, as it reported this morning, and this is very serious, Mr. Speaker.

So, if the Prime Minister is so sure of the truth of his words, why does he not go and repeat them under oath before the Senate committee of inquiry?