Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak about the reform of the Canadian social security system. Earlier I heard the hon. member say: "We have difficult choices to make". It seems to me that the choices are not so difficult.
I also often heard the other side ask us to propose something. I have a proposal for you. I realize how difficult it is for the other side to make choices. When a bill aimed at changing the rules of political party financing was introduced 15 days ago, some members on the other side voted with us but most voted against us because their very wealthy friends put money in their coffers. It is easy to understand how subsequent choices can be extremely difficult to make.
True, there are two choices. But why did we have to choose? In Mr. Trudeau's time, the government got this country into debt by going on a spending spree that continued under the Conservatives. It was not the fault of the opposition parties, not the Reform Party's, not ours and not the NDP's. They were not in power. Who got Canada into debt during the past 30 years? The two parties that were in power. We have a debt of $530 billion, with $40 billion worth of interest payments, and as a result there are some choices we must make.
Which option do we choose? Are we going to take money from the haves or are we going to empty the pockets of the have-nots? We say get it where it is to be found. Let us do it, let us raise billions of dollars from family trusts, people who do not pay income tax and the multinationals in this country. That is where we should get those billions of dollars. Not the pennies in the pockets of the poor.
That is what I would do. And now, a look at the other side. Last week, the Canadian Council on Social Development again sounded the alarm when it noted the distressing fact that more than one million children do not get enough to eat. One million children! In the schools where I taught, many children went without lunch. Fortunately, there were some Good Samaritans who paid for their meals. Why did these children go without food?
Their parents were in debt. They had three or four children, and they bought a car, chain saw and boat on credit, and when school started, they also had to buy books and exercise books. They had to pay the student association membership. There was no money left for food. I am convinced that the purpose of social security reform in this country should be to fight poverty, not the poor. So far, the trend has been to take money away from the poorest in our society, and that is how I see this reform.
The objective should be,in this supposedly great and beautiful country, to create more social justice, not to come down harder on the neediest, the disenfranchised and the weakest members of our society. The objective should be to ensure a better distribution of wealth, which is not the case today. The rich are getting richer, while the poor have for years and years been getting poorer.
I am not convinced that this is what the minister responsible had in mind, and I am not convinced that what he had in mind is right for this government. The unstated objective of this reform, as I see it, is solely and entirely to reduce government spending by penalizing more and more the disadvantaged, those who cannot speak for themselves.
Conservative policies of this sort have the effect of causing a dramatic rise in unemployment and poverty levels in this country. Conservative policies are directly responsible for the systematic impoverishment of the middle class and lower-income taxpayers.
This government acts like a producer who would stop feeding his cattle. Do you think that is the way to increase production? Do you think he would achieve better results by cutting rations? Do you think he would get a better yield if he stopped cultivating his land? To get results, investments must be made in the right places and cuts must also be made in the right places.
Cutting in postsecondary education will make it impossible for a large number of people to get adequate training. Because, as I have pointed out repeatedly, there are still no general and vocational colleges in my region-there is one in Matane- and no universities-you have to go to Rimouski, Quebec, Laval, Montreal- cuts in postsecondary education will mean that hundreds of students will not be able to further their education.
If the costs double or triple, we will no longer be able to afford sending our young people to university. The university in Rimouski is great, except that it does not offer all programs. That is why we have to go to Laval or some other university. Cutting in postsecondary education certainly is not a good way to help the labour force adjust to the present conditions of the future labour market.
Literally crushing seasonal workers and the poorest of the poor by creating two categories of UI recipients certainly is not the best way to restore hope in our society. In our region, forestry workers have work for only four or five months each year; those who get to work five months are considered extremely lucky. During this period, because it is a very short period, they start work very early in the morning and finish very late at night. Many totally wreck their health in the process. If they undergo any more conditioning, this will increase their stress load.
A few years ago, a family man had to keep chopping down trees even if he was very sick because he had to collect enough stamps, not because he did not want to work. Quebecers, especially the people in my riding, want to work. The unemployment rate in my riding is among the highest. The people want to work. They want the jobs that were promised by the Prime Minister during the election campaign. That is all we heard during the election campaign: jobs, jobs and more jobs.
The lack of jobs makes these people feel insecure and helpless. They appear to be almost ashamed, even when they are working.
This government has waited much too long, even if it has been a year-just as previous governments waited too long-to find decent jobs for the people in the regions, especially rural regions. If this government wants respect, it should start by respecting the poor. Only then will it command our respect.