House of Commons Hansard #253 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was federal.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I respect you, but I also respect what I am as well as the truth, unlike the Deputy Prime Minister, and I cannot withdraw my words.
Naming Of MemberOral Question Period
The Speaker
My colleagues, as you know, we must always show respect for each other here in the House. When I ask you to withdraw your words, regardless of what those words are, it is with the full authority of the House of Commons that I ask it of you.
We are in pretty tense times for our nation. If it surprises you that I am going to act as quickly as I am, I do so knowing full well that my primary responsibility in the House of Commons is to see to it that the institution itself is respected by all of us.
I have asked the hon. member for Laurier-Saint-Marie-
-to withdraw his words and he has refused to do so.
Therefore, Mr. Duceppe, I must name you for disregarding the authority of the Chair. Pursuant to the authority vested in me under Standing Order 11, I order you to withdraw from the House for the remainder of today's sitting.
Deborah Grey Reform Beaver River, AB
Mr. Speaker, last night the Prime Minister told Canadians that he understood full well their frustration at having to sit on the sidelines during the referendum and said that he would not let it happen again.
However, in question period yesterday the Prime Minister flatly rejected the idea of consulting Canadians directly through constituent assemblies.
My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. If not through referendum, if not through constituent assemblies, then how does she plan to consult Canadians on the future of their country?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, a few days before the final vote a call went out to Canadians from coast to coast to coast to come to Quebec to show their solidarity with Canada.
Members of Parliament from every political party responded to that call. Unfortunately of 52 Reform members of Parliament, 51 of them were too busy doing other things to respond to the call to Canada.
We have a responsibility as members of Parliament with our constituents to continue to work for a better democracy. Hopefully the next time the Reform Party will be working with us and not against us.
Deborah Grey Reform Beaver River, AB
Mr. Speaker, may I remind the Deputy Prime Minister that Reformers from across the country were at the Montreal rally, the people, not the politicians speaking out.
It was evident from the results of the Charlottetown accord that Canadians do not want to see distinct society status or constitution-
al vetoes brought in. They want to see the federal government decentralizing power, in fact loosening the grip and the stranglehold it has on powers. The west wants it, Ontario wants it, and Quebec Liberal leader Daniel Johnson wants it.
When will the Deputy Prime Minister start living up to this promise of changing the way the federation operates and begin the actual transfer of powers to the provinces?
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, in 1929 the Senate recognized that women politicians were persons. I hope that when we were in Montreal, we the people were there but we the politicians were also there.
Unfortunately it was a calculated decision of Reform Party members to sit on the sidelines. It was a reflection of the decision they made throughout the campaign because frankly they did not support the option of Quebecers staying in Canada.
Speaking of sharing of power, I was in Whitehorse only 10 days ago when we had unanimous-
Sheila Copps Liberal Hamilton East, ON
"Giving it", she says, "not sharing it".
In Whitehorse only 10 days ago we had unanimous agreement of all ministers of the environment, including the minister of the environment for Alberta, of harmonization where we share responsibility, not just a giveaway.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, knowing that the Leader of the Opposition dissociated himself immediately and the day after from Mr. Parizeau's words, I would ask the Deputy Prime Minister through you if she will have the decency to apologize in this House, asking the pardon of the Leader of the Opposition for having put words in his mouth that he never said and for which he apologized publicly. I would ask her to have the decency to withdraw her words.
Sheila Copps LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, it must be kept in mind that the present leader of the Parti Quebecois was not the first to bring up race. In fact, in a speech before the referendum, it was the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean who played the race card, who asked those in the French speaking white race to have babies.
I asked for an apology the next day. I have never, never heard any apology from the member across the floor, and I am still waiting for one.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, the longer the Deputy Prime Minister talks, the more she piles it on, and the more she lies to this House.
The ReferendumOral Question Period
The Speaker
Dear colleagues, this is the second time today.
The ReferendumOral Question Period
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
You can see, my colleagues, the reason why it is not acceptable to use unparliamentary language.
I would remind you with all respect, that we are the parliamentarians of Canada and this is where we have come to debate, with respect and with dignity.
I am asking once that the hon. member for Berthier-Montcalm withdraw his words.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition publicly dissociated himself from the words of Mr. Parizeau. I shall withdraw my words only once the Deputy Prime Minister has retracted-
Naming Of MemberOral Question Period
The Speaker
Mr. Bellehumeur, I must name you for disregarding the authority of the Chair.
Pursuant to the authority vested in me under Standing Order 11, I order you to withdraw from the House for the remainder of today's sitting.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been promising us that big administrative changes are in the works. Under the Constitution, natural resources are the exclusive domain of the provinces, yet the federal government continues to meddle in this area of provincial responsibility. Reform's new confederation proposals would reduce the federal government's role in natural resources to a bare minimum.
What specific changes does the Prime Minister propose to reduce the federal role in natural resources?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.
I can take this opportunity to explain that we are not meddling in the area of provincial jurisdiction. In fact, during program review last year leading up to the February 1995 budget, my department took the opportunity to consult with all the provinces. We have worked co-operatively and collaboratively with the provinces so that we do not have overlapping duplication any longer in the resource sectors.
We have defined our role and the provinces have defined theirs. As far as I know, they are reasonably happy with that.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the provincial ministers of energy and mines have been urging their federal counterpart to harmonize regulations. Over the past two months their letters to the minister have gone unanswered as they have tried to organize a meeting with her, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and the provincial ministers of energy and mines and resources. In fact in a letter the ministers expressed "major concern about the lack of recent progress and the loss of momentum on harmonization efforts".
Will the minister arrange today a meeting with her, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and their provincial counterparts to discuss the harmonization issue?
Marcel Massé LiberalPresident of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Mr. Speaker, the ministers of intergovernmental affairs, both provincial and federal, are always discussing these possible changes. In fact just today I was in contact with one of them in order to try to see whether we could increase the harmonization in terms of questions of natural resources, decentralization, and the efficiency of the federation initiative.
We are working all the time, trying to reach new ways of governing the federation that are less costly to people and that permit the federal and provincial governments to govern where they are most efficient.
Francine Lalonde Bloc Mercier, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Human Resources Development.
The minister will probably be interested to read in today's newspapers that during the first four months of the current fiscal year, from April to July, Quebec was $322 million over budget on welfare payments. This sad state of affairs is due to the fact that more families in Quebec are on welfare than was expected.
Will the minister finally admit that repeated cuts in unemployment insurance are to blame for this sharp increase in welfare costs in Quebec?
Lloyd Axworthy LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification
Mr. Speaker, we have been over this ground several times.
It is important to point out to the hon. member and to members of the House that in fact the rate of increase for social assistance caseloads in the province of Quebec has declined over the past year, from an average rise of about 8 per cent down to 1.5 per cent, which simply does not jibe with the facts she is putting out. Over the last four months, since the month of August, there has been a net decline of about 7,000 in the caseloads. The reason for that, as we know, is that we have been very successful in creating over 125,000 jobs in Quebec over the last two years.
Under the UI changes we brought in last year, we provided a special benefit for those on low income so that those who have dependants or children would be able to receive an additional $1,000 over and above their regular benefits, which meant that over 130,000 Quebecers alone were able to get those additional benefits.
This summer I was able to sign an important agreement with the Government of Quebec to provide $81 million directly to social assistance recipients so they would receive an income supplement that would enable them to go back to work and receive enough income.
Rather than spending her time trying to argue about small minutia of details and figures, what we should be talking about is how do we come together as two levels of government to help the real people who have real needs. That is the real issue.
