Debates of April 15th, 1994

Budget Implementation Act, 1994

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member from the Bloc Quebecois and I have to ask myself whether or not I have been working in the same Chamber, in the same Parliament of Canada, as he has this week.

I must say that even when one is in government there are many days when one shares the opposition's frustration with the speed with which things happen around here. We know that the private sector moves much more quickly than we do. It is just a fact of life.

The rules are different. The systems of checks and balances are not as rigorous as the checks and balances in Parliament but those checks and balances are here for accountability. We do not have the luxury that the private sector has of making decisions arbitrarily and flying them through the system in 24 hours.

I know there are many Canadians who would like to see it happen that way. There are days when I feel that is the way it should happen, but that is not the reality. We have accomplished some things in the last few weeks that were related to the economy of his community, my community, our country.

Look at the work that members of the Bloc, members of the Reform Party and our members have done. Look at the work that we have done in the industry committee on accessing capital to small business. It is important that members tell their constituents that the financial institutions of Canada are beginning to move. They are beginning to respond.

Look at the tremendous announcement that we received this week from the Royal Bank of Canada on its new $125 million venture capital fund for knowledge based industries. That is a first.

I know it is not the be all and end all but our responsibility, and I say this to the Bloc through you, Madam Speaker, is not to just talk about the frustrations that we all go through in this institution. It is also to talk about some of the real meaningful things that we have accomplished here and we have accomplished some good things this week.

I would suggest that access to capital for small and medium sized businesses is beginning to happen and in a better way. We know we have a long way to go but members should tell their constituents about that. Part of our responsibility here is to deal in hope.

There is a second matter that I have to remind the members of the Bloc of because they are always questioning this: "What is in Canada for Quebecers? What is in Canada? Why should we be here? It is not working". I have repeated this message several times, and I am going to say it over and over: I cannot understand why the members of the Bloc refuse to talk about the announcement of the Minister of Finance on January 21, that is how far back it goes, when he announced the terms of the five year equalization renewal.

The minister announced that under the equalization act, an act of Confederation, over the next five years Quebec would receive $70 billion over and above the other basic allocations on programs and services. That additional $70 billion being transferred to the province of Quebec over the next five years is an unfettered, unguided, no strings attached entitlement.

Does that not mean anything to their constituents? Through Confederation, this federation of Canada, in the name of fairness-and in no way, shape or form am I questioning this-there is a $70 billion transfer under equalization from the have provinces to the have not provinces.

By the way, for the previous five years there was about $58 billion. We are talking over the last five years and the next five years about $130 billion being transferred to Quebec under the equalization entitlement.

In my community no one questions that, but they think that is a meaningful amount of money. I have never heard a member of the Bloc say yes, equalization is a good thing, and they do in fact recognize it. They always stand up and say: "We are entitled to that because of the personal and corporate income taxes that we put into the treasury. We are just getting back what we put in". That is not the case. This is $70 billion over and above that.

My point today in responding to the member for Charlevoix is that yes, there are many areas in this government where there is room for improvement and efficiency. There are some duplications that we must figure out and correct.

Of course I take an opposite position from the Bloc. If we want to talk about eliminating duplications, let us take in the area of small business programs. I would not suggest that we eliminate the duplication by just handing over all the small business programs to the province of Quebec and cancelling the national government's small business programs. I would say the reverse. Have the province of Quebec cancel theirs and let the national government operate them.

I am a traditional Trudeau trained centralist and I believe that we must have a strong national government. We must have a strong national government in order to create national programs. National programs are where we create national will. That is where we get the spirit that holds the whole country together.

The standards whether they be in education, environment or health care should be the same whether someone gets sick in Newfoundland, downtown Toronto, Quebec City or northern Saskatchewan.

This whole notion members of the Bloc Quebecois have of wanting to destabilize and dismantle the national government ultimately works against the citizens not only of Quebec but also of every region of our country.

I just wanted to take a moment to try and convince the Bloc Quebecois members that yes, we too are not satisfied with the speed with which things are happening here. We are trying to move as fast and as aggressively as we can. However, they should not forget to tell their constituents about some of the good things we manage to get done in the House and in committees day to day.

[Paul Forseth, Reform, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is the last opportunity I have during these scheduled debates to speak specifically on the budget.

The budget document outlines the Liberal version of national priorities. It certainly has now been widely accepted that this year's budget lacked courage and does not sufficiently respond to the new realities we are facing in international finance, where money and wealth have no loyalties. At the mere touch of a key on a terminal, disgruntled or nervous investors representing large blocks of funds can turn against an economy when the wrong signals are sent.

We must not forget that much of what is done in investing and international finance is in the realm of what is believed may happen in the future, what is being speculated on.

The range of options a government has in order to perform for the international audience is becoming smaller. At this point the Canadian government still has a few choices left but these in themselves may not be available for long.

Specifically, the enactment of this bill implements various parts of the February 22, 1994 budget. It affects persons employed in the public service as well as federally appointed judges, parliamentary agents, the Governor General, Lieutenant Governors, parliamentarians and members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP.

This law extends the freeze for two years, suspends the upward movement within salary scales for a two year period and enables incentive payments to be made to indeterminate employees of National Defence, Emergency Preparedness and the Communications Security Establishment under the civilian reduction program.

It also fixes a maximum on contributions to provinces under the Canada assistance plan. It extends restrictions on the payment to provinces under the Public Utilities Income Tax Transfer Act.

It makes permanent the 10 per cent reduction in payments to railways under the Atlantic Regions Freight Assistance Act. It increases the reduction in the government share of freight rates under the Western Grain Transportation Act.

The act also allows the CBC to borrow money.

The act establishes a two tier benefit rate in unemployment insurance at 60 per cent for low earners and a basic rate of 55 per cent. It reduces employee premiums to 3 per cent of insurable earnings in 1995. There is also a new benefit entitlement schedule which addresses the link between work history and duration of entitlement. The minimum entrance requirement is increased from 10 to 12 weeks of work.

It provides that workers suspended for misconduct, who take a leave of absence or quit their jobs for a few weeks before the end of their employment will no longer be disqualified from receiving benefits for their entire entitlement period. They will not be entitled to benefits while suspended or on leave or while their contract of employment continues. The benefit of the doubt will be given to claimants on these and other issues related to just cause or misconduct where the evidence is equally balanced.

The act also authorizes the establishment and operation of pilot projects to study ways to make unemployment insurance more efficient.

That is the general description of this bill. However, it really falls short of what the country needs. I am sure the finance minister and members of the cabinet are reasonable people who realize what must be done. The problem is they do not have the political courage to do the right thing for the long term benefit of the nation, compared to the leadership it will demand in the short term to get everyone on side, the vested interests, the self-centred thinkers, the politicians who seek to please for the short term at all costs.

That is what is represented by this bill: a government that is only beginning to say it hears what the majority are saying, rather than being prepared to act on what the majority are saying.

The budget in general terms sounded as if it came from the Reform Party book but when one checked the numbers against the rhetoric all credibility was lost. That is why I say this bill before us today falls so short.

I am not opposing just for the sake of opposing. I truly believe that under the guise of being lean and not mean the government is discovered to be weak in what it perceives is the prescription necessary to be a manager of the national economic climate.

Compared with either the experience of other countries or with our own history, the four decades between the end of World War II and the mid-1980s were a period of some measure of economic success for Canada. The Canadian economy grew to be one of the strongest in the world. The lot in life of the average Canadian greatly improved during that period.

The basic reason was the development of our resource base. We traded our way to prosperity. However the traditional advantages that Canada has had are disappearing and we are being eclipsed. The resource sector will always be important but the rate of growth we have known because of it is gone.

We expect to enjoy continued improvement in our standard of living. If we expect to engage in the kind of public programs at home and abroad that we like then we are going to have to find a new economic vocation and vision.

Canadians are beginning to realize what is needed is a vision of a new Canada and that is coming from this corner of the House. The ethical, democratic and economic visions Reformers have developed in close dialogue with communities outline the prescription of required action, not the timid measures in this bill, but bold efficacious governance that leads with courage and compassion.

The very last thing we should do about our situation is nothing. We cannot afford to assume, like this government, that things would work out for themselves in our favour without much adaptation, without much effort or without using our creative minds. Change begins with the recognition that a problem exists.

I am encouraged that government members are increasingly sounding like Reformers. They are getting the talk. We on this side are getting through to many on the other side. Many more know in their hearts that we are right but they are part of a club, a gang that plays the political game as if it were politics as usual in Canada and that if they just talk nice and do lots of opinion polling they will keep power. Others appear to have a sincere desire to do what is right for the nation but have not yet gathered

the courage to make a difference, to say no to what they rationally know is the wrong course for Canada.

I invite them for once in the history of Canada to vote against this bill, vote against their club. Say to history and to all time there were members with courage and principle who acted for the national interests rather than self interests.

We must secure our economic base as a nation. As a trading nation we must be in the international trading game with courage and vigour and not shrink from trading arrangements that foster openness, yet strongly monitor the international rules, and without fear holds other players to account.

We must restructure our income security to ensure that in providing assistance from public funds those who are given priority are those who need assistance the most. We have built a comprehensive set of programs but these efforts do not adequately meet the requirements of those who should have first call on our national resources, those most in need. We will be forced to do it. We will do it ourselves in a compassionate manner or we will have it done for us in blunt terms from outside forces.

Education at all levels must have a greater level of proportion of resources. Our emphasis in education must not be just to train for a specific task but to prepare the workforce to adapt to changing opportunities. A commitment to education goes with a commitment to research. Enhancing the Canadian capacity to do the basic work of discovery and our ability to apply the results in the marketplace will also be keys to future economic success.

We have another basic economic question in Canada that is not solved by the budget. We must address interprovincial and interregional conflict. Canada must become an open market within its borders. The free movement of goods, capital, labour and cultural pursuits is fundamental.

One of the past strengths of Confederation has been that we have found ways in our political system to accommodate regional differences. Indeed Canadians are generous and tolerant of difference, but we bridle and chafe at the prospect of preference. Therefore we need a new set of institutions which can aid in bringing about a better reconciliation of regional differences.

Finally we have come to expect that we will play a positive role in the world. Attempting to help others is not a Canadian service that is new to this generation. Missionaries from Canadian churches began to play a significant role in other countries in the last century and continue to do so, as our soldiers have done in this one.

We have a proud history of making the world a more stable place and we have been prepared to pay the price. The great powers have their role. Because we are not one of them we can more uniquely play a positive role in international economic and political affairs. We can ensure that the interests of the small as well as the great are taken into account within the community of nations.

While we cast our vision afar, we must also do some repairs at home. We must erase the consequences of our misguided political ideologies and economic policies of the last decade.

In closing, for government to be effective we must be open and honest with Canadians. This will be politically hazardous for some but it will be necessary if the Canadian people are to be involved in charting Canada's course. The more we can bring democracy into this House and involve Canadians in the decision making process we will realize our potential for the 21st century.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

Madam Speaker, Bill C-17 is meant to implement several provisions of the budget but the main ones are those concerning unemployment insurance.

Even though several members spoke on the subject, I think that it is worth repeating the three main changes in the House. First is the increase in the number of weeks of work required to qualify for unemployment insurance. I stress this point first because, as the opposition critic for training and youth, it is clear that the future of our young people is my top priority. Now, one of the measures that will hit young Canadians who are excluded from the workforce the hardest is the increase in the number of work weeks needed to qualify for benefits. The first job that those young people can find is often precarious and very temporary and, in my opinion, the government's measure will hit them particularly hard.

The second change is the reduction in the number of benefit weeks according to the regional unemployment rate. That kind of attack began under the Tories, with Minister Valcourt, and continues with the present Minister of Human Resources Development, even though members of the present government condemned the Conservative policy. Today, the government wants to go even further by reducing the number of benefit weeks.

The third change is the decrease in the benefit rate, which once again goes in the same direction as the change brought about by the Conservative government, by lowering the rate from 57 per cent to 55 per cent of the salary previously earned. This will affect over 85 per cent of claimants.

I would now like to mention some statistics published in today's La Presse ; the source is none other than the Department of Human Resources Development. We learn that the changes brought about today will result in 44,000 people being deprived of UI benefits.

Is my time up, Mr. Speaker?

[The Speaker]

You still have about thirty seconds.

[Antoine Dubé, Bloc, Lévis, QC]

So, this concerns every province. For instance, and members from Newfoundland will surely be interested by this, 1,635 people in that province will be affected by the increase in the entrance requirement and 1,370 will be affected by the reduction in the maximum benefit period.

Prince Edward Island is also hit hard. And so is New Brunswick, with particularly striking effects. In that province, 1,155 people will be affected by the first measure and 1,335 by the second. In the case of Quebec, 4,880 people will be affected by the reduction in the maximum benefit period.

You can thus understand that, under the circumstances, I am indignant about these changes we are asked to approve for the unemployment insurance program. I am thinking of the MIL Davie workers, whose numbers dropped from 3,000 to about 1,500 in six months. Six months from now, only 300 will remain employed; all the others will have to live on unemployment insurance benefits, which will have been reduced by these changes.

[The Speaker]

I am not sure if the hon. member has used all the time allowed; if not, he can resume after question period.

It being eleven o'clock, pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House will now proceed to Statements by Members, pursuant to Standing Order 31.

Rail Service

[Harold Culbert, Liberal, Carleton—Charlotte, NB]

Mr. Speaker, rail service, both passenger and freight, has played an important historical role in Canada. It is an integral part of our transportation system.

Most industrialized countries have modern, efficient rail systems. In Canada we appear to be closing them down. Instead we should be modernizing them with new technologies to make them efficient and effective for the future benefit of our transportation system.

Effective and efficient rail systems are most important to the future transportation needs of all Canadians. We must review all opportunities for the future advancement of our rail systems instead of closing rail lines and losing them forever.

This is an important issue in my Carleton-Charlotte constituency and indeed in all of Canada.

Hydro-Quebec

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Anjou—Rivière-Des-Prairies, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that today is the 50th anniversary of Hydro-Quebec, a Quebec company whose skills and expertise are now recognized throughout the world.

Remember that it was René Lévesque who gave Hydro-Quebec the impetus to become an essential tool for Quebec's economic development by providing work for thousands of Quebecers and generating billions of dollars in economic benefits.

Keep in mind as well that the energy produced by Hydro-Quebec is renewable and much cleaner than coal or nuclear power. The new challenges facing society today are soft energies and energy efficiency. We must encourage this option.

In closing, I would like to mention the historic agreement in principle reached yesterday between Hydro-Quebec and the Inuit of northern Quebec. We hope that this agreement marks a new partnership between the government owned corporation and native peoples.

Pearson Airport

[Jim Gouk, Reform, Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Pearson airport development deal I am happy to see the Liberals are honestly attempting to sweep away this tainted plan signed hastily in the dying days of the last Tory government.

The Pearson fiasco was clearly an example of unfair lobbying tactics and shady backroom dealings so typical of the Mulroney era.

I have only one real concern with the government's handling of the aborted airport deal. I believe in no uncertain terms that no compensation whatsoever should be provided to the consortium responsible for whipping up the Pearson privatization plan and then pushing it through the Tory cabinet like a knife through butter.

These people know full well any controversial contract signed during an election campaign would never hold water if the Tories were not re-elected. I ask, compensation for what? For abusing the public trust?

I say tough luck if they lost money putting their shady plan together. I call on the government not to extend a single dime in so-called compensation payments.

Vancouver Museum

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today it is an honour for me to recognize the achievements of one of the great museums of Canada.

The Vancouver Museum, Canada's largest civic museum, celebrates its 100th birthday this Sunday, April 17. To celebrate and commemorate its first century the museum is presenting the exhibition, "100 years, a million stories".

One artefact or set of artefacts from each year of the museum's history will be displayed in chronological order. Viewers will see a wing from Vancouver's first plane crash and the city's first gas pump. They will learn about a medicine woman's outfit and hear the story of outlaw Soapy Smith.

This will be an exhibition of tales untold and mysteries yet unsolved. It will amaze visitors with a century's worth of treasures bestowed by citizens and friends who cared enough to create and sustain the Vancouver Museum.

Cyprus

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Saint-Denis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this year marks the 20th anniversary of the illegal occupation of nearly 40 per cent of the island of Cyprus by Turkish military forces.

Canada has played an important peacekeeping role in helping to bring about a solution to the Cyprus issue. Unfortunately, the problem continues to this day.

This week, I participated with three fellow members of this House in the 5th international conference of PSEKA Cyprus in Washington, D.C. For those three days, we had the opportunity to talk about Cyprus with several senators and members of the U.S. Congress. As we did 20 years ago, we all agreed that the problem of Cyprus has gone unresolved for too long.

To this day, 35,000 Turkish troops continue to occupy the island. Thousands remain displaced from their homes. Over 1,500 people are missing. Rights of free movement and ownership have yet to be re-established on the entire island.

I call upon the government to continue to support the UN resolutions and help to bring about a final resolution to this problem. It is time the human rights and freedoms of all citizens of Cyprus were guaranteed and respected. Enough is enough, thank you.

[The Speaker]

That was a good statement right at the end.

Women's Spirit Of Entrepreneurship

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Saint-Léonard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to draw the attention of the House to the outstanding contribution made by Canadian women to job creation and to the important role they play in the development of our economy.

The Montreal region has been well served by their spirit of entrepreneurship. Women understood the importance and potential of small businesses. The women of Montreal realize that small business are responsible for 85 per cent of the new jobs created in this country and that they need better access to capital.

Last year, 35 per cent of small businesses started in Montreal were headed by women. Furthermore, the five-year survival rate of small businesses headed by women is twice as high as the survival rate of those headed by men.

I want to congratulate these women on their courage and entrepreneurial spirit and wish them every success in the future.

Quebec Culture

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, culture is the living memory of nations. On April 9 this year, Laval, Quebec's second largest city, wanted to draw attention to the exceptional way in which the people of Laval have contributed through their art to Quebec culture.

The entire community joins the Académie des Arts de Laval in congratulating Sylvie Samson, Joanne Pontbriand, Violaine Poirier, Sylvia Daoust, Michel Cailloux and Joël Des Rosiers, as well as the members of the Théâtre d'Art Lyrique in Laval. We also want to thank Bell Quebec for its financial support to the arts community in Laval.

I am proud and delighted to have this opportunity to say thank you for expressing so well what we are.

Gun Control

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the justice minister for responding to the two recent slayings in Ottawa and Toronto by calling for tougher laws for violent young offenders.

It has been far too long in coming but people back home in northern B.C. are gravely concerned over other statements by the minister. He has been quoted as saying that he came to Ottawa with the firm belief that the only people in this country who should have guns are police officers and soldiers.

This is a sobering thought for millions of responsible gun owners in Canada. Why is the focus on disarming citizens because criminals continuously misuse guns?

While people in Ottawa and Toronto mourn the loss of these latest victims, one of our elderly was murdered in Val Belair in yet another senseless home invasion.

Only the criminals would have guns in the minister's city of the future and they would not have to guess, they would know that Canadians would be defenceless in their homes.

Ukrainian Elections

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Ukraine has just completed the first and second rounds of its first democratic elections.

It has been more than 70 years since Ukraine has had democratic elections, but its people are rich in patience and tolerance.

They have waited very long for this day and they have worked hard to ensure the success of their democracy. They are proud to have achieved a Parliament without bloodshed and extremism during the election process.

I would like to extend congratulations to Elections Canada, especially to Andre Bouchard and Ambassador Francois Mathys for their excellent work in assisting the Ukrainian election committee during the past several months.

The Canadian government and the Canadian people have played a very significant role in Ukraine's search for democracy, its search for hope and its search for peace and a better way of life.

I congratulate Ukraine for having earned the respect of people throughout the world. May Canada and Ukraine continue to work together to make both countries prosperous.

Ethanol Industry

[Roger Gallaway, Liberal, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is considerable pressure being mounted within and outside this Chamber to persuade the finance and natural resources departments to grant sizeable tax concessions to artificially create the ethanol facility proposed for southern Ontario.

Certainly the creation of new industry is always welcome news but industry must be based on economics and not agrohysteria. Let us remember that this ethanol project is premised on cash infusions from government, a principle which should be disavowed.

Ethanol in jurisdictions with very high taxation can be a competitively priced fuel in relation to ordinary fossil fuels. However, such is not the case in Canada. Our refining industry provides a quality Canadian product at a competitive price.

If the proposed ethanol industry could compete on a level playing field then it will proceed successfully. Conversely, if the ethanol industry as proposed will only be viable as a result of artificial means, that is, long term tax concessions and cash donations from taxpayers totalling close to 600 million Ontario and federal dollars over 12 years, we could conclude that it is still the fuel of the future, but not that of the present.

The Baha'Is

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

Mr. Speaker, the Baha'is are the largest religious minority in Iran, totalling 350,000 people. Religious beliefs are the only thing that differentiate the Baha'i from the rest of the Iranian population. Iran has classified these people as unprotected infidels and has engaged in their systematic persecution on the basis of religion.

Because of their religion Baha'is are denied basic human rights, including the right of redress or protection against assault, murder or other forms of persecution. Since 1979 there have been 201 Baha'i killed and 15 are missing and presumed dead. Baha'is are denied access to education and employment. Many have also lost their homes and savings. All of this persecution is designed to force the Baha'i to recant their faith.

Canada and the international community must continue to scrutinize the human rights situation in Iran and make every effort to encourage the full recognition of religious and human rights for the Baha'i in that country.

Manpower Training

[Gérard Asselin, Bloc, Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois deplores the fact that the Liberal government is dragging its feet on a number of issues, including MIL Davie, Hyundai and Oerlikon. The government's inertia will be very costly to Quebec in terms of lost jobs. This is happening at a time when Quebec would need an additional 215,000 jobs to bring employment back to pre-recession levels.

Unfortunately, the many instances of federal intrusion in provincial jurisdiction indicate that the government is anxious to extend its influence, thus creating the usual duplication and overlap. We saw this recently in the manpower training question. The federal government's desire to intervene in this field in provincial jurisdiction is a blatant contradiction of the consensus reached by all social and economic partners in Quebec.

In a nutshell, the federal government intervenes where it should not and does not intervene where it should.

Justice

[Randy White, Reform, Fraser Valley West, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the House a deplorable excuse that is being used by murderers in our country in order to receive lighter sentences. It is called cocaine psychosis and has affected yet another court case in British Columbia.

Dale Hicks was convicted for manslaughter, not murder, in the brutal killings of two women in their home. One of his victims was pregnant and was stabbed 17 times.

The judge ruled that the deaths are considered manslaughter because Hicks, who was high on cocaine at the time, was afflicted with cocaine psychosis and was unaware of his actions.

He was sentenced to 10 years but could be out in three and half years if he behaves in prison; three and a half years for taking the lives of two innocent people. To top it off, his lawyers have appealed the sentence, calling it excessive.

By taking an illegal drug this killer has been allowed to get away with murder. It is time justice is served by making criminals accountable for their actions-no excuses any more.

Rail Service

[Murray Calder, Liberal, Wellington—Grey—Dufferin—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's economic and social development as a nation was and is based on the strong west-east link created by our national rail lines. New Canadians and goods travelled on these rails to bring prosperity to our young nation. Now this vital part of our heritage is being ripped from the ground forever.

In my riding of Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Simcoe the NTA is to rule on CN's application for abandonment of the Collingwood to Barrie line. This subdivision could be saved if the premier of Ontario would grant an exemption to Bill 40 so that short line operators would purchase the line.

I implore the premier of Ontario to act now and grant an exemption to Bill 40 to save this important business and historic link.

Peterborough Paper Converters

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Speaker, time was when things like world-wide trading, industrial R and D, and innovation in management-worker relations were entirely in the hands of large multinational corporations.

Today increasingly we have the extraordinary phenomenon of tiny local companies working in the global marketplace living off their own technological innovations and developing creative and productive worker relations programs.

Peterborough Paper Converters is one of those. It has made great technological contributions to the coating of paper used for labels and postage stamps. Its employees are fully involved in company affairs and have developed their own systems software. Their products are exported around the world.

I know members of the House join me in congratulating the 100 or so employees of Peterborough Paper Converters on their 10th anniversary on 10 difficult but productive years. We wish these fine Canadians all the success they have earned in the years ahead.

Social Program Reform

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned that several provinces were joining forces to defeat Ottawa's plans to centralize social program reform.

In light of this revelation and further to the insulting comments of the Prime Minister who, on Wednesday, described traditional demands as whims, the National Assembly passed a unanimous motion yesterday confirming Quebec's position, on which all sides agree, to the effect that exclusive jurisdiction over manpower training should be transferred to Quebec.

Does the Deputy Prime Minister recognize that the decision to cancel the meeting is a step backward and a sign of bad faith as well as a reflection of the serious unease between the provincial and federal governments, all because of Ottawa's centralizing aims?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, what I find somewhat regrettable about the opposition party's stand is that right now,

there are 400,000 unemployed workers in Quebec. The federal government is working with the provinces to find a way that would enable the unemployed to receive training that would lead to employment.

Instead of complaining that we are trying to achieve a consensus, instead of criticizing us for our decision to take some more time in order to make the best possible decisions, the spokesperson for the opposition should be congratulating us for seeking the co-operation of all provinces. That is why we have decided, not to cancel the meeting, but only to postpone it until we are certain that we have achieved this consensus.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the National Assembly unanimously rejected the federal government's package. Maybe the Deputy Prime Minister should take this fact into account.

My supplementary question is directed to her colleague responsible for Human Resources Development. Can the Minister of Human Resources Development give us his assurance that the decision to cancel the meeting is not simply a strategic withdrawal, that he will review his centralizing strategy and take Quebec's demands into account and that he will get back on the right track?