Debates of March 9th, 1994

Unemployment Insurance

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

I talked with Premier McKenna about this and other problems. He knows as everyone else knows that we have to have some discipline in the expenditures by this government.

We have discussed ways and means of ensuring our program of job creation moves forward so that people will not have to rely on unemployment insurance but will have the dignity of having a job.

We are collaborating to develop new ways of making sure people have jobs rather than having to rely on unemployment insurance benefits.

[The Speaker]

As hon. colleagues can see we have gone a few minutes over the time limit. I would ask all hon. colleagues in question periods to follow if perhaps they could make the introduction of a question a little shorter and with all respect if they could perhaps see that the answers are a little more concise.

The reason I am mentioning this is to ensure that both sides have a chance to put questions and to have answers to the questions. It is a request I hope hon. members will consider and keep in mind in future question periods.

Presence In Gallery

[The Speaker]

May I also draw to the attention of hon. members the presence in the gallery of the Hon. Ross Bragg, Minister of Economic Development and Tourism for the Legislative Assembly of Nova Scotia.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Points Of Order

[Elwin Hermanson, Reform, Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Prime Minister in answering a question made mention of the fact that a member was not present in the House. I wonder if he would retract and apologize for that statement.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk of the truth because there is some hypocrisy on the other side about this. There are many people who are double dipping and getting pensions from the military, or who have received bilingual bonuses before, and so on. Now that they are in retirement they try to attack other members of Parliament who have no other income but from being members of Parliament.

I am not in the mood to retract anything about the work of members of Parliament.

[The Speaker]

The practice of this House, of course, is not to bring attention to the absence of any member. If the hon. member would let me review the statement then we could take this up perhaps tomorrow when we return to the House. I thank the hon. member for bringing it to my attention.

Canarctic Shipping Company Ltd.

[Joe Fontana, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, as Parliamentary Secretary to the

Minister of Transport, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the 1992 annual report of the Canarctic Shipping Company Ltd.

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), the government's response to two petitions.

Committees Of The House

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to the House the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding associate membership in committees.

I also have the honour to present the ninth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs which changes the name of the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

I propose if the House gives its consent to move concurrence in these two reports on motions in a few moments. I would also ask the unanimous consent of the House to dispense with reading of the reports which is normal in these particular cases.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move that the eighth and ninth reports of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled in the House today be concurred in.

(Motion agreed to.)

Petitions

[Daphne Jennings, Reform, Mission—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour and privilege to present, pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions with regard to assuring access rights for grandparents to their grandchildren in the case of divorce or separation of the parents.

As the petition states, the relationship that exists between grandparents and grandchildren is a natural and fundamental one. The denial of access can constitute elder abuse and can have a serious and detrimental emotional impact on both the grandparents and the grandchildren.

Therefore the 3,120 people who have signed this petition request that Parliament amend the Divorce Act to allow the courts to grant grandparents access to grandchildren in the case of divorce, and further to amend the act to give a grandparent who is granted access to a child the right to make inquiries and to be given information as to the health, education and welfare of that child.

I support this petition.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my duty to present a petition, duly certified by the clerk of petitions, from 151 concerned citizens of the constituency of Fraser Valley East.

The petitioners ask Parliament to enact legislation providing for a referendum to accept or reject two official languages.

[John Finlay, Liberal, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present another petition. This petition has been signed by constituents of mine and of another member.

These petitioners are opposed to profiteering at the expense of the victims of violent crime. I too stand on the side of the victims.

These petitioners want tougher measures taken against those who perpetrate violent crimes against women, children and the disabled, in short, the weakest and most vulnerable in our society.

As this is International Women's Week it is imperative we as legislators stand in unison regardless of political affiliation against those elements in our society which condone violent crime by profiting from the sale of killer cards. Such inducements to violence must be controlled and eliminated.

(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Questions On The Order Paper

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Shall all questions stand?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Motions For Papers

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the notice of motion for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Shall the notice of motion stand?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed from March 8 consideration of the motion that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government, and of the amendment.

The Budget

[Gilbert Fillion, Bloc, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the Chair that members of the Bloc Quebecois who will now speak in the debate on the budget will each take ten minutes to express their views.

I think it is important to compare the government's intentions as expressed in the speech from the throne with what the government is actually doing in the budget. I would like to quote a short passage from the speech from the throne: "It will be the policy of the government to seek to clarify the federal government's responsibilities in relation to those of other orders of government, to eliminate overlap and duplication, and to find better ways to provide services so that they represent the best value for taxpayers' dollars and respond to the real needs of the people".

Could anyone tell me where in the budget we can find the government's response to these good intentions expressed in the speech from the throne?

Again, the budget brought down by the Liberal government is a centralist one, and the burden of reducing the deficit has been laid squarely on the shoulders of the taxpayers and the provinces.

That is not the kind of equity Canadians expected. This is one more instance of the government's inertia. Once again, we have ample proof that Quebec is stifled by federalism, which tends to neutralize any constructive and innovative policy that would be useful to Quebec society.

The Minister of Finance keeps repeating to anyone who is willing to listen that his budget followed an unprecedented series of consultations with Canadians, and a costly one at that. Yes, he consulted, but he picked and chose his consultants. Did he go to the middle class and the neediest in our society to hear their views and concerns? Did he go to the Lac-Saint-Jean area, to which the Prime Minister referred as a small community?

I represent the riding of Chicoutimi, where unemployment is particularly high. The unemployment rate for the metropolitan area of Chicoutimi-Jonquière, according to Statistics Canada, was 15.7 per cent for January 1994, not seasonally adjusted.

The average annual unemployment rate for 1992 was 13.9 per cent, while in 1993, the average rate was 16.1 per cent. These figures are unacceptable. In January 1994, the Chicoutimi-Jonquière metropolitan area had 9,000 unemployed workers out of a total labour force of 60,000. When we speak of 9,000 unemployed persons, we are really talking about thousands of other people who are affected, families, children and households in dire straits. Furthermore, the rate of 15.7 per cent does not include those who are no longer looking for work, those who have grown discouraged. This figure of 15.7 per cent does not include seasonal workers either. It is a conservative figure which masks a reality that is far bleaker.

Did the Minister of Finance consult with the people on the streets? This budget contains all kinds of recipes to fight the unemployed, instead of unemployment. The maximum period during which a person can collect benefits will be reduced. The number of weeks of work required to qualify for UI is being increased from 10 to 12 weeks. The benefit rate has been reduced to 55 per cent, a drop of 3.5 per cent. The overall feeling of certain well-known economists is that more than 50 per cent of the projected drop in the federal deficit will be borne by unemployed Quebecers and Canadians. This is the government's recipe for fighting unemployment.

People's privacy will not be spared. Various factors, such as family status, common law relationships and economic circumstances, will be checked. One inquiry after another will be made before a person can qualify for the program. Moreover, the government has also called for a review of the country's social security programs, including unemployment insurance, the Canada Assistance Plan, the child tax credit program, employment and training programs, established programs financing in the education field and social development. What is the government planning for the future?

After raising some hope among the people by talking about job creation, this budget disillusions workers; even worse, it attacks the poorest in our society. The Liberals' pseudo-strategy for employment is based mainly on consultations, studies and committee work.

There is less and less food in Canadians' refrigerators. Let us not wait for the fridge to be empty; otherwise the people will rise up and we will have to bear the blame. On October 25, 1993, Canadians forcefully said that they want change. The government side seems to have already forgotten that because it is now following in the previous government's footsteps, it is repeating the same scenarios.

Furthermore, it is the first government since Confederation to forecast such a large deficit, $39.7 billion, just under the psychological level of $40 billion. No economist and no tax expert would have dared to make such a forecast.

Surely an infrastructure program where the costs are shared with the provinces and the municipalities will not solve all problems by itself. Cities and towns will have to go into debt to participate in the program.

To reduce the deficit to 3 per cent of GDP in 1996-97, it would have to be brought down to about $25 billion. The government's budgetary objectives are hit or miss. The proposed measures do not announce what was promised, namely jobs. The budget presented by the Minister of Finance is deficient and misleading.

In its speech from the throne, the government announced its intentions. Today, with its budget, the government is showing its colour, the same as the colour of its book. Canada is in the red and nothing is being done to fight the underground economy, black-market employment.

[John Bryden, Liberal, Hamilton—Wentworth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his remarks which I enjoyed very much.

I have travelled in the area of Chicoutimi and Jonquière and it is a lovely part of the country.

I do have one question in the context of his remarks about federalism. I want to ask him whether he feels the unemployed people of Chicoutimi and Jonquière, of whom he spoke so graphically, would be better off, whether they would have better job prospects in the reduced economy of a separate Quebec.

[Gilbert Fillion, Bloc, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question and I must answer in the affirmative, since a sovereign Quebec will eliminate overlapping and duplication, and the money saved will be used to create jobs and to invest in our province, so that young people can get appropriate training based on their needs.

Need-related training means training which will lead to secure and well-paid jobs. The savings made by eliminating this overlapping alone would be enough to revitalize the economy of the region.

[Ian McClelland, Reform, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the hon. member, one which has been perplexing me for some time.

In many parts of Canada it is perceived that Quebec has been a net beneficiary in terms of transfer payments from the federal treasury.

In the hon. member's opinion, if these transfers of moneys were to be suspended in an independent Quebec would the offset in duplication be more or less than the transfer payments being sent to the province at this time?