Johanne Deschamps

[150th Anniversary of the Town of Saint-Sauveur, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity recently to take part in an evening launching the festivities marking the 150th anniversary of Saint-Sauveur, a town known for its exceptional quality of life and joie de vivre.

At this event, the organizing committee paid tribute to six women who have made a remarkable contribution to their community in recent years. As architects of economic and social development, these six women make Saint-Sauveur the dynamic town it is.

These committed women are Annick Cazin, Huguette Chartier, Lise Foisy, Micheline Barbe, Johanne Martel and Annie Dagenais. They have the well-being of the community of Saint-Sauveur at heart.

The Bloc Québécois pays tribute to these six women. I am convinced that their efforts will produce results. More committed women can only be good for our society. I congratulate and thank them.

[Festival international de théâtre de Mont-Laurier, June 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it was with great pride that I attended the official launch of the second Festival international de théâtre de Mont-Laurier on May 16, in my riding.

This cultural event, unique in North America, will run from September 4 to 10, 2005. A big multi-purpose stage will host 17 troupes from various countries around the world. Over seven days, the people of the Upper Laurentians will have an opportunity to come in contact with vibrant and moving cultures.

A tip of the hat to all those working flat out to make this festival an international success. I offer special thanks to my colleague from Saint-Lambert, who has agreed to be the honorary chair of the event.

I invite one and all not to miss the double rendez-vous my region is offering with nature and culture.

[The Budget, May 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, in a few hours, Quebeckers will send a message to the rest of Canada when the Bloc Québécois members vote. It is not our style to hold our nose and vote. We will vote as we always have, by defending, above all, the interests of Quebec.

Bloc Québécois members, like everyone else in Quebec, are people of principle and cannot be bought with billions of dollars in election promises, or with dirty money.

The Liberal budget is bad for Quebec. It does not recognize the fiscal imbalance. It proposes a plan for Kyoto that puts Quebec at a disadvantage. It does nothing for our workers.

This government has no regard for democracy, does not have our confidence and does not deserve to be in power. This evening, we will remind it of that. Above all, for the people of Quebec, tonight's vote will be one more step in building our country.

[Taxation, March 21st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, last week, Statistics Canada reported that Canadian investment in tax havens increased from $11 billion to $88 billion in 13 years. The Auditor General has already denounced the use of these tax loopholes that erode the government tax base a little more each day.

Since Canadian investment in tax havens has increased eightfold since 1990, why is the government refusing to put an immediate end to this tax evasion? Is it because the Prime Minister himself is very—

[Canadian Commercial Corporation, March 8th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Amélia Salehabadi, formerly on the board of directors of the Canadian Commercial Corporation, claims she was the victim of intimidation by board chair Alan Curleigh. She says that her term was not renewed because she had asked too many questions and had opposed a partisan appointment to the corporation.

Since she maintains that she wrote to the Minister of International Trade, could that minister tell us what follow-up he gave her letter and if he intends to verify whether those allegations of intimidation are founded?

[Supply, February 8th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for sharing her time with me.

It took me only a few weeks here in the House of Commons to realize, with great disappointment, that the government is a lot better at creating crisis than at managing them. The current crisis in the Quebec's apparel and textile industry is a testament to the federal government's inertia and incompetence.

Unfortunately, several Quebec textile and apparel plants recently had to close their doors and we can be sure that the minister's inability to take the necessary actions will cause several others to go under.

It took time for the federal government to act and the few measures it took are clearly insufficient to solve the problem. None of these measures could prevent a massive job loss like we saw in Huntingdon, for example.

For several months now, the Bloc has been warning the Liberal government about the serious threat that would represent the loss of thousands of jobs in the textile industry in Quebec. For several months now, the Bloc has been asking for transition measures to alleviate the negative impacts of the elimination of quotas on Canadian imports of clothing and textile material.

A number of businesses had already been hit by fierce competition in that field. The elimination of quotas will inevitably force more workers into unemployment.

In spite of our numerous reminders, the Liberal government has been dragging its feet on that issue and has not reacted to the job losses and the economic downturns in the regions in Quebec.

The Canadian Apparel and Textiles Industries Program, CATIP in short, was put in place in January 2003 and is being offered to businesses until September 30, 2005. However, all the assistance made available under that program has been distributed already.

That program could subsidize up to 50% of all eligible costs to a maximum amount of $100,000. The ceiling was strongly criticized by the members of the Bloc Québécois when it was put in place, because it greatly restricted the ability of larger businesses to adapt.

Another similar initiative, the Canadian Textiles Program, CANtex in short, was put in place by the Liberal government in 2004 in order to help the Canadian businesses involved in textile production to become more competitive. That program is similar to the Canadian Apparel and Textiles Industries Program, but only the textile sector is eligible. It is a poor plan, and so stingy that it does not even enable the industry to improve its lot in a significant way.

There have been many closures and layoffs despite the existence of these two programs. It is high time that the minister took action to help workers in this industry.

The government is the one responsible for negotiating international trade agreements and it chose to have open borders in this industry. It is also this same government that terminated the Program for Older Worker Adjustment, or POWA. It is also this government that, through its inaction, accumulates huge budget surpluses, over $9 billion last year alone, at the expense of workers and of the provinces.

This government needs to act responsibly once and for all by putting in place transition measures and providing assistance so the industry can adapt.

On December 14, 2004, as a result of constant pressure by the Bloc Québécois, the Liberal government announced precipitously various measures to help the clothing and textile industry.

The motion brought forward today by the Bloc Québécois calls upon the House to acknowledge the inadequacy of the assistance plan and the need for the government to further elaborate with regard to the following elements.

First, it is imperative to use the safeguards provided for in trade agreements by ensuring that import duties on clothing and textile not made in Canada are maintained.

It is necessary to impose quotas on Chinese imports under China's WTO accession protocol. Such a measure would protect the industry while it is adjusting to the new reality of international competition. Moreover, the government would then prevent the Canadian market from being flooded with clothing and textiles made by the Chinese industry at a very low cost.

Second, we should have incentives to use Quebec and Canadian textiles.

Third, we should earmark funds to help the workers of those mills that are shutting down, by facilitating quick access to employment insurance and by restoring the Program for Older Worker Adjustment, or POWA.

The closure of the Huntingdon mills, just before Christmas last year, is a graphic example. These sad events clearly demonstrated the urgent need to set up a program that is geared to the reality of that industry, where a large number of the workers who are laid off are 50 years old or more and will have a hard time getting back into the workforce. A show of compassion towards these workers could help give them pride and hope.

I will conclude by saying that the Bloc Québécois is asking the government to act. The Bloc is proposing solutions to this issue. We cannot do too much to help an industry that has survived NAFTA and that will survive the WTO, provided the minister can convince his government to help that industry and to do so right now.

What does the government intend to do to help the textile and clothing industries? Is it because of a lack of political will that it is taking so long to help affected communities?

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his concern for dairy producers, but if he had listened to me, he would have understood that I was talking, among other things, about the farm income stabilization program.

I will not get into a debate and ramble on about this. The facts are quite simple. We are talking about a government with a year-end budgetary surplus of $9 billion. If this government were acting in good faith, we would have all the resources needed to meet the demands of every agricultural organization, including the UPA and the Canadian Federation of Agriculture.

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, to answer or to continue along the same lines as my Conservative Party of Canada colleague, I want to quote from the last UPA brief, which suggested four priorities to the federal government.

The brief proposed substantially increasing the safety net program budget, thereby giving Quebec and the provinces greater flexibility in managing funds allocated to the safety net program; decompartmentalizing federal and provincial aid in order to meet the specific needs of each region and each type of production; restructuring to reduce program bureaucracy, particularly with regard to the establishment of reference margins; and finally, conducting an annual international subsidy impact assessment before making fair and equitable adjustments to the reference margins.

I think that, with these four priorities, all the pieces should be in place to move things forward and get producers out of the crisis they are currently facing.

[Supply, February 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, allow me first of all to salute the entire agricultural community of my riding of Laurentides—Labelle. It is on its behalf and in a spirit of solidarity that I join with my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois in denouncing the inertia and insensitivity of this government. I would also like to take this opportunity to denounce the minister's incompetence vis-à-vis the alarming crisis that Quebec farmers tragically are going through.

We are deeply distressed to learn that two farms disappear every week in Quebec because of the minister's failure to do anything. Between 1996 and 2001, the number of farms in Quebec fell by 10% to 32,000.

Farmers are facing a major income crisis. According to Statistics Canada, farm income fell in 2003 to its lowest level in 25 years. Net cash income, i.e. the difference between a farmer's revenues and operating expenses, fell by 39.1% in 2003 from the figure for 2002. According to the UPA, farm debt has increased on average 207% since 1993.

I am ashamed and saddened to see how farmers are being left on their own by Ottawa. Few countries neglected their agricultural sector as much as Canada did while the current Prime Minister was Minister of Finance.

Farmers have even less support today than ever, and this in the midst of the mad cow crisis caused by collapsing prices. We cannot say it enough: agriculture in Quebec and agriculture in Canada are different, they are organized differently, and they do not have the same needs. When Ottawa takes action and adopts Canada-wide measures, it is frustrating to see that they fail to meet the needs of Quebec producers.

We are told that the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Agriculture is consulting in order to discover the challenges facing farmers. It is obvious that some people in this government have problems tuning in to the real world, because farmers and people in the agricultural sector have been aware of the problems and the solutions for a long time now.

The government accumulated a surplus of more than $9 billion last year. The money is there; all that is needed is political will.

A motion tabled by our colleagues in the Conservative Party, and which the Bloc Québécois views more than favourably, asks:

That, in light of the numerous recent disasters affecting agricultural communities across Canada and the government's failure to deliver timely financial relief to struggling farmers, whether by the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program or other programs, the House call on the government to immediately drop the CAIS deposit requirement and honour the commitments it has already made to [Quebec] producers.

In order to participate in this program, the deposit in question is obligatory and therefore a major irritant for farmers. Farmers who are struggling to survive should not be forced to borrow as well in order to make this deposit.

In addition, the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program is poorly suited to the needs and realities of the agricultural sector. It is also not very popular with farmers. I would like, in this regard, to quote the president of the Union des producteurs agricoles du Québec, who said on January 22, 2004 in the magazine La terre de chez nous : “The Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program, you will remember, was imposed on us by the federal government, which threatened to cut Quebec off if it did not sign.”

Here is another fine example of the federal government's incompetence. The problem with this program is that it provides only basic minimal coverage, which does not include all types of risks, which vary can considerably from one farm to another or one region to another.

The Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program was useless for the cull cattle problem. Let me quote again from the president of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec:

I also want to point out that dairy producers are not eligible for the CAIS program... To be eligible, a producer has to incur at least a 30% loss over the three years in the reference period. Even if all our cull was sold for zero dollars, we could not qualify for the disaster protection component of the CAIS program, which is the only one available to us.—

We will agree that the program has become a bureaucratic nightmare. Let me give just one example. According to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the administrative costs of managing the deposits may be as high as $14 million, when the return on these is only $34 million, based on a 6% interest rate.

On February 8, the agriculture ministers will be meeting to discuss, among other things, the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program. We do hope that the federal government will not come to that meeting empty-handed, as it would have had it deigned to show up at the last UPA convention.

This week, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture once again asked that mandatory deposits be abolished. The UPA and various farm organizations support this initiative. Will the government continue to be insensitive and to turn a deaf ear to these demands? My colleagues from the Bloc Québécois and I support this initiative, which should be fully funded by the federal government.

In closing, my main concern is undoubtedly with the attitude of the government, its lack of will and inability to act on this issue. My question is simple: Who is the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program intended to help? The producers or the bankers?

[The Governor General, December 13th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising in this House today to condemn the remarks made by the Governor General of Canada, Adrienne Clarkson.

The Governor General reacted with arrogance to the democratic vote taken in this House to reduce her budget.

Ms. Clarkson stated that the reduction of over $400,000 imposed on her by members of Parliament will result in the elimination of events such as the ceremonies for the Order of Canada, and will have an even greater impact on winter events organized especially for children.

These comments are unworthy of the office held by Ms. Clarkson. She should cut her expenditures relating to official trips and lavish banquets, rather than targeting children. Not all children have the chance to enjoy the luxury to which she is entitled. In fact, more than one million children in Canada are living below the poverty line.

On behalf of children and their families, the Bloc Québécois asks for an apology from the Governor General.