Debates of Dec. 12th, 1995

Canadian National

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

We will wait-

[An hon. member]

They do not like the truth.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Laurier-Sainte-Marie may continue with his question.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I therefore ask the Minister of Finance, who is responsible for Montreal's regional development, if he is still responsible for it or if that is only one of his titles? Will he let Montreal lose 6,300 direct and indirect jobs to Winnipeg?

[Douglas Young, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, there has never been any question of the jobs of AMF going anywhere else but where they are.

The question we have been trying to address now for several years, as the hon. member should know, is whether through co-operation between Canadian National, GEC Alsthom and the employees we can keep an operation going in Quebec that has between 600 and 1,300 employees, depending on the level of demand within the shop.

The hon. member would be far better advised if he spent his efforts trying to convince the parties to arrive at an agreement rather than raising the spectre of the jobs going somewhere else. If the jobs are not kept in Montreal at AMF by GEC Alsthom and by CNR they will not be going anywhere else, they will disappear. That would be very unfortunate for Montreal, for Quebec and for Canada.

Quebec Referendum

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last night the Prime Minister talked about another Quebec referendum after saying he would not talk about another Quebec referendum. He went on to say: "The Constitution has a lot of powers for the federal government to act under peace, order and good government. We have powers and we have to use the powers to make sure the question in the next referendum will be fair to Quebecers and will be fair to the rest of the country".

Precisely what powers under peace, order and good government was the Prime Minister referring to? Precisely how does he plan to use those to ensure a clear question in the next referendum?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is very important to have a fair and honest question if there is another referendum.

I do not want to speculate on when there will be another referendum because the leader of the Bloc Quebecois said that when he goes to Quebec his priority will be to run a good government and put the province's finances in order. If he wants to do that we will help because we want Quebec to have a good economy.

However, I said that if there is another referendum the question has to be clear. We will not accept any more ambiguity and we will take the necessary steps to achieve that goal.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard all that. However, my question was what powers under peace, order and good government does the federal government propose to use to affect the question in the next referendum?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, he can consult his lawyers. We know what to do.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister got into this discussion by talking about the uncertainty another Quebec referendum would create. These types of comments, saying the federal government has powers to do something about that referendum, and then refusing to explain how and what powers it will use add to the confusion.

I will ask the Prime Minister again: If he knows what he is talking about, how does he propose to use federal powers to effect the fairness of the next Quebec referendum?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Reform Party had a plan with 20 different points to deal with that.

The question was asked of me and I said that the question of a referendum, if there is another one, is not only for the people of Quebec to vote on, it is a question for all the people of Canada. I

said that very clearly. I said that there are means available to the federal government-

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Saint-Maurice, QC]

Mr. Speaker, they are always asking political questions.

I said that the federal government has the obligation and the duty to the people who are going to vote to ensure that the question is clear. We will use the power we have to achieve that goal. Do not worry about that.

Unemployment Insurance Reform

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Despite the Prime Minister's promise to completely withdraw from manpower training, the UI reform package tabled 10 days ago would introduce five new labour programs. Faced with this announcement, the National Assembly unanimously reaffirmed the Quebec consensus on the need to transfer all federal manpower programs to Quebec.

With the Minister of Human Resources Development scheduled to meet his Quebec counterpart tomorrow to discuss the issue of transferring manpower programs, can the Prime Minister tell us if his minister will have the mandate to discuss the transfer of all manpower matters to Quebec, without conditions or national standards, as provided for in the Quebec National Assembly's unanimous resolution?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that the primary mandate of all government ministers is to help people get back to work, to provide jobs, employment opportunities and to work closely with the provinces, the municipalities, the private sector and all individuals who can be our partners in achieving that mandate.

The Prime Minister made it very clear in his statement that we are withdrawing from the area of manpower training. In the legislation we made it clear that we will be working with the provinces to gain their consent on any measures which would in any way be involved in training. We will work in concert with them as much as possible to develop effective employment measures and partnerships for employment.

I am very pleased to have the initial round of exploratory meetings with Quebec's minister of employment so that we can clarify exactly what is in the bill. Clearly, the Quebec government does not fully understand all the measures, just as the hon. member does not. I look forward to the opportunity to begin a process of good dialogue and good discussion so we can work jointly to help Canadians become employed.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, from the minister's comments, I understand that he will continue to decide which agreements he can sign and negotiate.

Since the distinct society motion tabled by the government is supposed to mean something, can the Prime Minister tell us if his Minister of Human Resources Development has received a mandate to make a distinct proposal to Quebec, which has the largest consensus on the need to transfer responsibility for all manpower issues?

[Lloyd Axworthy, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification]

Mr. Speaker, it is seemingly odd and strange that the hon. member for Mercier would be citing the decision by this Parliament to support distinct society when the hon. member voted against the bill. It seems to me that the hon. member cannot have it both ways. She cannot be telling us that we have to respect distinct society when she does not have the goodwill and the resolution to vote for distinct society for Quebecers.

Quebec Referendum

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that he has the powers and the means to ensure that the next Quebec referendum is fair.

What powers is he talking about? How is he going to use them to ensure the next referendum is fair? If the Prime Minister does not answer those questions, he gives the impression that he does not know what he is talking about or that he is making vague threats. He contributes to the unsettling nature which surrounds this issue.

I ask him again: What powers is he talking about? How does he propose to use them to ensure that the next Quebec referendum is fair?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if anybody is creating confusion in Canada at this time it is the leader of the third party.

There has not been one day since we have been talking about this problem that he has not been in bed with the Quebec separatists. There has not been one day that he does not want to try to make life difficult for a government that is trying to save Canada. There has not been one day that he is not causing some disturbance in Canada because he has no interest in keeping the country together.

He is dreaming. Perhaps he dreams all the time about becoming the leader of the rest of Canada, but there will be only one Canada from sea to sea.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if we are going to keep this country together, it will only occur by providing clear answers to the questions that are being asked. This type of political rhetoric just adds to the uncertainty rather than to the certainty that Canadians desire.

Let me come at it another way. Last month in Toronto the Prime Minister said that he did not want any more referenda and implied that he would use the federal power to prevent future referenda. Last night he conceded that there will be another referendum. He said that he is going to use the federal power to ensure that it is a fair referendum.

Which is it? Is he proposing to use the federal power to prevent another referendum, or is he proposing to use the federal power to ensure that the next referendum is more fair? Which is it, one way or the other?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this is purely a hypothetical question. There is no referendum at the moment. The leader of the Bloc Quebecois said he does not want a referendum for the time being. He wants to run Quebec and try to provide good government.

If they were to provide good governance in Quebec, of course the rest of Canada would be very happy and we would help them. At the moment I repeat, if there is another referendum, the question will be clear, do not worry about that. I will make sure it is very clear.

Advertising Of Tobacco Products

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

Yesterday, the Minister of Health made her intentions known regarding advertising and sponsoring by tobacco companies. Contrary to all expectations, the minister's plan will considerably exceed the scope of the legislation that the Supreme Court invalidated just three months ago.

Does the minister not realize that, with her clumsy measures, she is pushing cigarette manufacturers to put an end to their voluntary moratorium on advertising and to resume advertising tobacco products without any constraints?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, when I met with tobacco company officials not too long ago, before making this announcement, they told me they were preparing to start advertising again as of January. So, there was going to be advertising one way or another.

We definitely want to exercise control over this advertising because, as you know, cigarettes are harmful to the health of Canadians. Companies are always looking for new customers and these are often young people just taking up smoking. We will make every effort to prevent young people from starting to smoke, and this is a step in the right direction.