Stéphane Dion

[Bill C-54, June 3rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in his letter to the Government of Quebec, the Minister of Industry clearly explained how his bill respects Canada's Constitution.

I defy the Bloc—

[Asbestos, June 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing I would say is that yesterday the deputy Premier of Quebec accused the Government of Canada of being fanatical on this issue.

I would suggest that the Government of Quebec and the Bloc Quebecois drop all of this verbal bombast, which only proves in the end that they are out to get winning conditions.

Second, in the WTO all member states, without exception, jealously protect their ability to speak with a single voice in negotiations in order to be in a winning position.

[Asbestos, June 1st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, winning a round against the WTO means playing by the WTO's rules. That is very important. There can be no question of the loot politics the Bloc Quebecois usually relies on in trying to achieve winning conditions. This is too important.

The rule is that, if one of Quebec's regulations were involved, the Government of Quebec would be an observer at the table. But a regulation of the French government is at issue. We want to win, and we are going to play by the rules and do just that.

[Asbestos, June 1st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, backroom boy is the nicest thing the member has ever called me, and I thank him.

Second, Quebec will be present at the table, because Quebecers are Canadians, and the Government of Quebec has been extensively consulted. There have been no fewer than 23 meetings between October 6, 1998 and April 29, 1999. The Government of Quebec helped draft the Canadian submission and will be briefed every evening of these important negotiations with respect to asbestos.

[Canada Travelling Exhibitions Indemnification Act, May 28th, 1999]

moved:

Motion No. 1

That Bill C-64, in Clause 5.1, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 28 and 29 on page 3 with the following:

“Act, be reviewed by the parliamentary committee that may be designated or”

(b) by replacing lines 36 and 37 on page 3 with the following:

“within any further time that may be authorized, submit a report to”

[Universities, May 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in 1993 the federal government deficit was $42 billion, and all the provinces had deficits.

Today the Government of Canada is in the position of having a surplus, as are all provinces, with the exception of Ontario, which has opted for lowering taxes more quickly.

We have the possibility of helping our universities. The future of the country depends on it. This is a very important issue, as everyone realizes.

Last year it was important to do something for health, and now it will be important to look at what we can do for the universities. A fair bit has already been done, particularly in the field of research, and particularly in Quebec, which receives 28% of R and D spending for universities.

[Carriage By Air Act, May 14th, 1999]

moved that Bill S-23, an act to amend the Carriage by Air Act to give effect to a protocol to amend the convention for the unification of certain rules relating to international carriage by air and to give effect to the convention, supplementary to the Warsaw convention, for the unification of certain rules relating to international carriage by air performed by a person other than the contracting carrier, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Poverty, May 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, it has been the same story for 30 years.

In 1967, Jacques Parizeau, the Bloc Quebecois' senior adviser, or maybe its crypto-leader, warned people that, although Canada was amazingly decentralized, centralization was in the offing. Barely two months ago, Mr. Parizeau repeated this warning.

In Canada, the provinces and the federal government work in partnership, and that will continue to be the case.

[Poverty, May 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, one excellent example of federalism has to be the national child tax benefit. It was designed to allow each province to set up its own programs, while the federal government focuses on helping the children of poor families within its own constitutional area of jurisdiction. This has provided most of the funding for Quebec's five-dollar day care program.

[Aboriginal Affairs, May 6th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, is it possible to stop this kind of demagoguery and to stop portraying a change within the constitutional framework to mean the splitting up of Canada, the end of our country? Is that possible?