Mr. Speaker, as I was saying before question period in connection with Bill C-100, I find this bill unfortunate for Quebec, because it is an attempt to set up institutions that already exist in Quebec and work very well there.
I said that the great misfortune of the Canadian federal system is this business of duplication and that a policy of decentralization had to be implemented as quickly as possible. The people of Quebec, like elsewhere across the country, have spoken in favour of more decentralization.
Here is the government introducing Bill C-100, which goes against the trend and the wish expressed by so many people. Common sense itself dictates the need for more decentralization in Canada. Quebec has already suffered considerably from the wastage caused by departmental duplication. I was saying that, according to certain studies submitted to the Bélanger-Campeau commission, including the one done by Pierre Fortin, duplication cost Quebec alone some $3 billion a year. This money is wasted. This is pure and simple loss. Not only is it money lost, but it means departments and governments are unable to function and to provide people with quality services.
It seems to me that, if I were in government, and I wanted to save this great and fine country of Canada, I would undertake to decentralize. It seems that it is just good common sense for the government to decentralize; it is obvious. If only the people in government would listen, it could be done. They would understand that, in fact, decentralization is the only way to save the country. I repeat: centralization, the federal government's tendency to take over powers and to duplicate services already available provincially, is costing the Government of Quebec $3 billion. Studies have proven this; these are not groundless allegations.
Just in the area of transport and communications, there has been much talk-call it dispute if you want-much debate about the distribution of powers between the federal and provincial governments. It is estimated that, in the area of transport and communications alone, the shortfall is about $233 million. If the responsibility for transport and communications came under only one level of government instead of being shared by two governments, hence duplication, the Government of Quebec would end up with $233 million more in its pocket. So, there is a shortfall in that regard.
It is the same thing with taxes. If there were only one government collecting taxes in Quebec, this would generate $299 million in savings. In other words, this much, $299 million, is lost, squandered, because of duplication and overlap between our respective departments.
I could give you more examples, with respect to regional development and business assistance for instance. In fact, Bill C-100 is brought forward under the pretext of providing assistance to businesses, when there are well established new business start-up services in Quebec to assist small business. Why more duplication? Why establish more agencies and institutions that we already have at the provincial level?
Same thing with health and culture. The worst of all, of course, is manpower training, an area where the federal government is essentially copying the services provided by the province, duplicating programs. This duplication is apparently responsible for a $250 million shortfall in Quebec and, again, not only is money being lost, squandered, but manpower training is not being conducted.
We are told that, in Quebec, thousands of jobs may have remained vacant because this training was not provided. In many cases, these jobs require special technological training. Since this training was not provided because of intergovernmental duplication, the people who should be holding these jobs end up either on unemployment or on welfare because of the government, again, because of this duplication.
This creates not only deplorable waste but also a great deal of poverty. In fact, this keeps a number of people unemployed and on social assistance. Of course, the federal government does not have a good reputation in this area so far. You know as well as I do, Mr. Speaker, that since the last budget the federal government has introduced a whole series of measures to make cuts in unemployment insurance, in the health sector, in education, and even in old age pensions, which all amount to rather virulent attacks against the most vulnerable in our society.
Allow me to quote from an article by Jean-Robert Sansfaçon that appeared in the May 2 edition of Le Devoir : ``To this day, the only result of the federal government's social reforms has been to move people from unemployment to welfare rolls. Yet, one does not have to be a separatist to know that the provinces are in a better position than the central government to find the solutions that can best meet the needs of their people''.
In fact, we should all learn this lesson, which is constantly repeated in this House. The lesson is that the provincial government is often in a better position to fulfil certain functions, as in the case of financial institutions. Unfortunately, Bill C-100 would put in place institutions that already exist at the provincial level. What a waste.