Stéphane Dion

[Health Care, December 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the member for Argenteuil—Papineau was kind enough to quote from a statement I made on July 10 and ask me if I stood by it. I told him that he had a good imagination if he thought otherwise.

Today I wish to quote to him from a statement the Prime Minister made yesterday in Vancouver. I will do so in English, because it was delivered in that language.

“The acute care system is the provinces' main preoccupation. In some provinces home care is weaker than in others and pharmacare too, but it is all part of the health care system and all that is run by the provincial government. We don't want to get involved in running a program by the provincial governments”.

I hope that is clear.

[National Home Care Program, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my previous words. The hon. member has no imagination.

[National Home Care Program, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a good imagination.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is not unusual for one level of government to be rightly or wrongly under the impression that it was not sufficiently consulted by the other.

That is why negotiations are under way regarding the Canadian social union. One area we want to improve is the two way consultation process. This is under negotiation, and we hope to improve matters.

If the Premier of Quebec is indeed acting in good faith, as we hope he is, I guess he will agree with the other premiers that there is currently a basis for negotiations and will be willing to negotiate with a great deal of flexibility and openness.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of Canada did not say that the Premier of Quebec was acting in bad faith. He said that he hoped he would act in good faith.

But if you want us to list all the instances where the Premier of Quebec accused the Prime Minister of acting in bad faith, it will take us all afternoon.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, consultations were held and we even had a major meeting on May 13. The Government of Quebec did not sign, but that is not unusual.

There is a lot of unemployment among the youth. It seems to me that all governments must work together, and that is what we are doing.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, no one is trying to isolate anyone.

What is all this sudden paranoia about? We are negotiating together. The Quebec premier joined a little late, in August, but he is welcome, and if there is a way to improve the social union for all Canadians, it would be a good thing. We hope he will negotiate in good faith.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, why is the Leader of the Opposition attacking the Prime Minister when the provinces are pleased with the way we have been progressing in these negotiations?

Why is he unable to tell Canadians if he will sign the provincial proposal as is, yes or no, when the provinces themselves said that this was a basis for negotiation?

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Premier of Alberta just said that the Prime Minister was negotiating in good faith with the provinces.

The problem is not the Prime Minister. The problem is the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Conservative Party. They are unable to tell Canadians if they will sign the provincial proposal as is. Yes or no.

[Social Union, December 8th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, this is what the Premier of Alberta said:

The Prime Minister has indicated that we want to make progress on this particular issue (the social union). He indicated also that we might not agree on all the issues but certainly there are some areas where we can agree and hopefully we will have some resolve on these issues in the very near future.

We are working with the provinces, but I ask again whether the Leader of the Opposition again would sign the provincial proposal as is? Yes or no.