Mr. Speaker, western society, that some see as an advanced society, maintains certain values on which is based the principle of equality among individuals. These values can be summed up as the right to health, education, work and personal respect.
These values have long been recognized as essential by Quebec society and by Canadian society. People here have agreed to assume their responsibilities by providing everyone with health, social and educational services whose quality we can only be proud of.
In his motion to the House earlier this week, the Minister of Human Resources Development considers broad consultations to modernize and restructure Canada's social security system, "with particular reference to the needs of families with children, youth and working age adults".
In his statement, the minister assures the Canadian population that, far from wanting to make our social security system less efficient, he wants to improve it. The minister could not be more explicit. We must ensure, he said, that the system continues to offer basic security to all those in need.
What worries me is that there are more and more people in need in this country. Where should we draw the line? Can we draw a line without endangering the principles of universality and accessibility?
If I may, I would like to remind the House that one out of five Quebecers lives below the poverty line; it is easier to identify the groups that are not affected than those who are.
In Canada, one child out of six is poor. If the children are poor, it means that their families are poor. They are not able to offer the living conditions essential to the development of children. It
must be pointed out, however, that this situation is not the parents' fault but results for the most part from economic hard times and the current climate of government indifference.
Being poor means being hungry, being cold, being unable to concentrate in class, being sick more often than others; it often means having lost hope, living with violence, addictions and despair.
Some say that the government is on the brink of bankruptcy. Everyone agrees that it is imperative to reduce the deficit. However, the government has a moral obligation to ensure that the measures advocated will have no negative effects on the disadvantaged. These measures should primarily be designed to improve socioeconomic conditions for those in need. To launch a real effort to put its fiscal house in order, the government must concentrate on its operating costs and on defence spending.
It is only during an election campaign that we dare to propose miracle solutions to balance budgets with such large deficits. No one in this House is fooled, let alone the citizens of Quebec. The government must resist the temptation to cut social programs and service delivery.
The minister of human resources tries to reassure us by saying that under the system, basic security will be extended to all those in need. However, the services that are available right now to help those wishing to escape difficult circumstances and improve their lot in life are already inadequate. The government must devise a strategy to beef up social programs and services while bearing in mind the financial ability of the provinces, and of course Quebec, to pay and scrupulously upholding the principle of program accessibility and universality.
Substantial cuts in recent years in federal transfer payments for health care have considerably increased the tax burden of the provinces and of Quebec. Public concern over possible cuts in federal social housing subsidies has left us fearful that this government is no longer seeking the path to reform, but has already found it.
The official opposition will never agree to allowing this government to get a handle on the deficit by strangling society's less fortunate members. Curbing the deficit by cutting social security is unacceptable in a society that for many decades has defined itself as just and fair, a good place to live.
Quebec has long been demanding, and with good reason, an end to overlap, duplication and federal government encroachment on provincial areas of jurisdiction, especially health care and education.
Quebecers and Canadians have long been calling for a healthier, more streamlined government machine. Eliminating the additional expenditures resulting from program overlap would be another step forward in the process of putting our public finances in order.
The consultation process launched this week is important. The stakes are high and this government cannot afford to misdiagnose the problem and, especially, to prescribe the wrong medicine.
I am proud to be a member of the nursing profession and recently, the Association des infirmiers et des infirmières compared the cost of health care in Canada with costs in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan and Sweden. It would appear that health care costs are higher here than anywhere else. But, is our health care system any better for it? Would our services suffer if we were to identify the reason for these cost disparities?
Nurses are in favour of maintaining the quality of health care in this country. By listening to their expertise, perhaps we can come up with ways of using all of our health care system's resources more intelligently.
Like all modern societies, Quebec want to control its growth and confront the future in a dynamic, responsible manner. The outcome of this debate must not impede the attainment of this objective.