Debates of Sept. 25th, 1995

Excise Tax Act

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this morning we have been listening to presentations from Reform Party members. They have presented us with a large collection of suppositions, perceptions and attributions. Many of them are based on personal feelings, personal perceptions and misguided information. Clearly it is a position which would result in the death knell of the magazine industry in Canada. It would mean the loss of thousands of jobs. Millions of dollars would be taken out of the economy. That is the present position of the Reform Party.

Reformers are slow learners; there is no doubt about it. We know that one of the characteristics of an effective learning model is the use of repetition. My Liberal Party colleagues have clearly pointed out some very hard core facts which support the need for Bill C-103. It is through repetition that I will continue to present the facts. I hope Reform Party members will be able to handle the data in a much more effective and positive manner and will see the need for support by the Canadian people of the Canadian magazine industry.

The key messages in Bill C-103 clearly point out that the commitments of the government made on December 22, 1994 will be supported. This is not a new policy. It is merely an extension of the government's longstanding policy to support the Canadian magazine industry, to channel Canadian advertising revenues to Canadian magazines and not to American magazines. These measures are not intended to restrict foreign magazines from access to the Canadian market. In fact our market is wide open to publications from all over the world.

It is the government's view that the proposed bill is consistent with our international trade obligations. As a result, no one south of the border should be disturbed by the actions of the government.

The hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage has clearly pointed out that the new excise tax is not a new consumer tax. I must repeat some hard core data for this effective learning to take place.

What is a periodical? A periodical is published more than once a year but not more than once a week. It does not have more than 70 per cent advertising content. It is available to the general public.

For the fiscal year 1993-94 a Statistics Canada survey reported on over 1,300 titles. The survey covered six types of periodicals in Canada. The general categories were: general consumer magazines, special interest consumer magazines, business and trade magazines, religious magazines, farm magazines and scholarly magazines. There we have in six categories publications in this country covering the field, tailoring to the needs of every man, woman and child.

Dealing with the hard core data, according to Statistics Canada advertising revenues fell to $485 million in 1993-94, an 8.3 per cent drop from the previous year and a 14.3 per cent decline since 1989-90. From 1985 to 1991 periodicals saw their market share of advertising dollars drop from 6.6 per cent to 5.7 per cent, a clear indication that the Canadian government must do whatever it possibly can do to change that movement.

Advertising revenue is crucial to most magazines. It supports the cost of the editorial content and makes it possible for the publisher to provide the magazine at rates the reader can afford. In some cases, believe it or not, it provides the magazine at no cost to the reader. Approximately two-thirds of all revenues of Canadian magazines come from the advertising area. The main thrust of federal magazine publishing policy has been to direct Canadian advertising revenue to Canadian magazines.

The effect of the recession on advertising revenue has been quite serious for the Canadian magazine industry. However Canadian companies have been very effective in competing even though the recession has taken place.

The magazine industry has demonstrated a remarkable resilience in the face of a decline in advertising revenue. Periodicals have managed to earn profits and to increase them recently by keeping a tight control on costs. Since 1989-90 some cost cutting has been achieved by reducing the number of full time and part time employees. As well the use of contract work has increased. Salaries, wages and fees fell 3.9 per cent in 1993-94. Non-salaried costs fell 6.8 per cent during the same year and dropped 16.5 per cent during the previous four years. Clearly that is action of responsible companies.

During the past five years profits before tax as a percentage of total revenue has ranged from a low of 2.1 per cent in 1990-91 to a high of 5.7 per cent in 1993-94. Profitability varies by category with business and trade periodicals earning the most profits and religious periodicals earning the least.

As reported by Statistics Canada, paper costs will likely have a profound impact on periodicals in the near future. According to the industrial price index, paper prices rose 26 per cent in the first four months of 1995 compared with the same period last year.

It is clear the magazine industry faces challenges on a number of fronts: increasing competition for audience attention, increasing competition for the advertiser's dollar, the need to adjust quickly to rapid price changes, and rapid technological change. The role of government policy has been to provide an environment in which magazines can meet their challenges.

A range of government policy and program instruments have been put in place and will continue to be supported by the industry as well as by the government. These instruments include: section 19 of the Income Tax Act, tariff code 9958, grants through the Canada Council, the postal subsidy for paid circulation Canadian magazines, and the lending programs offered by the cultural industries development fund.

The Canadian magazine industry is an important pipeline between the generators of Canadian information, ideas, views and the Canadian public. As noted by the O'Leary Royal Commission on Publications in 1961, magazines "can protect a nation's values and encourage their practice. They can make democratic government possible and better government probable. They can soften sectional asperities and bring honourable compromises. They can inform and educate in the arts, the sciences and commerce. They can help market a nation's products and promote its material wealth. In these functions it may be claimed, claimed without much challenge, that the communications of a nation are as vital to its life as its defences and should receive at least as great a measure of national protection".

I could not have said it better. The government recognizes the importance of periodicals in Canada for and by Canadians, much as it did over 30 years ago when the O'Leary report was completed. We will continue to support the industry by implementing appropriate structural measures such as the ones proposed by the recent task force on the Canadian magazine industry.

Bill C-103 is a key element in continuing that support. Therefore I urge all members to ensure the bill is quickly passed.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the hon. member's speech he mentioned free trade in cultural industries was to be the death knell of the industry. Is this not exactly the same argument the Liberal Party made in 1988 during the free trade debate? Did it not say the free trade was to be the death knell for all these industries in Canada?

I ask the member if he was on that side. Was he making those same arguments? Will he not admit that many industries did not die but have prospered as a result of free trade? Will he admit that competition and the flow of capital back and forth have actually been good for all kinds of industries, and that ultimately the best way to help Canadian cultural industries is for the government to ensure a level playing field by getting taxes down so these industries can compete against their American counterparts?

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague for Medicine Hat in a sense has misconstrued or has deliberately altered my presentation. I did not state the free trade deal was to destroy the magazine industry in Canada. I said the presentations being made by members of the Reform Party, especially by the member for Medicine Hat, with all the attributes and perceptions that were sort of misguided, would result in the death knell of the magazine industry. I was criticizing, debating and discussing the presentations of the members of the Reform Party versus the stability, sustainability and health of the magazine industry in Canada.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the criticism voiced by the hon. member from the Reform Party. They never see the need to protect the Canadian cultural industry. That is their philosophy. But what surprises me somewhat is that the Liberals are weak not only in this area of culture but in others as

well. Fortunately NAFTA excludes culture. Here again, I would like to ask you the question I asked my colleague previously.

What are your measures for giving a little more support to the ethnic press, the ethnic newspapers, whose circulation figures are low but which are very necessary to the ethnic communities? There is nothing in this bill to confer such protection or support to the ethnic press.

[Stan Dromisky, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the market forces play with the laws that exist on municipal, provincial and especially federal levels. They are all in harmony with each other and the industry will continue to prosper as it is at the present time.

[Charlie Penson, Reform, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak today to back up my colleagues from the Reform Party and to speak against the ill conceived Bill C-103.

The bill will needlessly and rightfully attract retaliation by American trading interests. In my role as the critic for international trade for our party, that is a concern to me. Furthermore, it will cheat Canadian sports readers of the bit of Canadian content they presently enjoy.

I offer some background and a bit of history to put the bill in perspective. Decades ago rules were written to protect Canada's cultural industries. Even though the importation of American magazines was and still is allowed, the government of the day imposed some severe restrictions on advertising. Canadian businesses can only deduct the cost of their Canadian magazine advertisements if they appear in Canadian publications. That is why we see so many American magazines on our news stands. They are strictly aimed at the American market and if Canadians are interested they can buy these magazines.

However the government introduced customs regulations which prohibit the import of split runs. These are essentially American magazines that contain some Canadian content and some Canadian advertising and are trucked across the border.

Furthermore, in the NAFTA regulations Canada did retain the right to protect its cultural industries. However, in so doing, the Americans were saying they at least retained the right to retaliate in kind. That is a very important feature. They are exercising that right to retaliate and we think that will happen.

Furthermore, all these rules were written before any advances in technology could be fully understood or predicted. When it became possible to beam magazines across the border and have them printed in Canada, Sports Illustrated took advantage of this new technology and circumvented the split run border rules.

Since April 1993 it has produced several issues per year that are essentially American versions with some Canadian stories. There is a lot less American advertising but there is a problem. There is some Canadian advertising. The big concern is not that Canadians are being bombarded with American sports stories by trying to get their eager hands on some Canadian sports stories. The concern is that Canadian advertisers will spend their advertising dollars in these largely American publications even though these advertisers will not be able to deduct the cost of doing business.

The fact that Sports Illustrated has not been successful in recruiting many Canadian advertisers does not seem to impress the government. It is bound and determined to enter into a trade war over the Sports Illustrated issue. It is a very serious matter, one the government needs to review.

Therefore, what do we do? We have the Liberal government introducing Bill C-103, largely a protectionist bill. The bill imposes an excise tax on the highest level Canadian participant of split run ventures. The excise tax is 80 per cent of the value of all advertisements contained in such magazines or newspapers. It is assumed this excise tax will never be collected because it will effectively kill the Canadian edition of Sports Illustrated or any ventures that could come on to the drawing board. That is what I call protectionism.

The Liberals in 1988 were opposed to the free trade agreement with the United States, although they have largely been converted since. It is sort of a revival. However, sometimes I wonder what their real commitment is. Are they committed to the free trade principle or not? Here it would indicate they are not.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage is quoted as saying Americans cannot retaliate against this protectionism move because the magazine is printed in Canada. I have news for the minister. There is more than one way to cross a border than by walking across it; planes fly and now we have computer beams from the satellites. We cannot stop progress. The Americans will retaliate against the bill and they have every right to. They can make life miserable for Canadian exporters in all kinds of ways, justified or not. We will not be able to cry foul because our hands will not be entirely clean in this matter. We are introducing a bill which is largely a protectionist bill.

What about our artists, our writers and our publishers? What if they want to take advantage of the American marketplace which is much larger and more lucrative than our own?

Approximately 500 new channels will be available by satellite. How will we control this type of information flow? I say we

control it in the marketplace. If we have a good Canadian cultural industry, it is a business and it will compete. If it is poor it will not.

The government is being hypercritical in that it says it is trying to protect our magazine industry while at the same time crushing it to death with taxes. When we ask businesses in Canada why they are not expanding, the common theme has always been that taxes and the cost of doing business in Canada are too high.

That is where we should be concentrating. We should be trying to balance our budgets and bring our Canadian businesses into a competitive position so they can compete in the international marketplace. I believe they will do very well. We are asking our Canadian industries to compete with one hand tied behind their backs. There is the GST. There is a very high tax level and they simply cannot compete under those circumstances.

Some would have us believe our cultural industries cannot compete effectively on the basis of pure competition. That is nonsense. We have some very good Canadian cultural content. It would be even better if it had to face the true test of the marketplace. That test is whether there is a quality product. There are a number of Canadian cultural industry businesses which pass the test and some which will have to fall by the wayside because they simply are not quality products. The question we have to ask is whether we should be supporting the industry through subsidy and protectionism. I do not believe so and I will be voting against the bill.

[The Speaker]

It being 2 p.m., pursuant to the standing orders, the House will now proceed to Statements by Members.

World Choir

[Paul Devillers, Liberal, Simcoe North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, September 23, members of the Canadian Cottage Country Choir had the extreme honour of participating in the World Choir's annual performance entitled "Voices of the World-A Choral Spectacular".

This year's performance of the World Choir was especially noteworthy because it sang outside Wales for the first time in Dublin, Ireland.

The production included over 6,400 singers from England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Finland, Poland, Ukraine and the only North American representatives, our very own Canadian Cottage Country Choir based in Orillia, Ontario, in my riding of Simcoe North.

The 22 members of the 4 Cs, as they are affectionately known, are from Orillia, Victoria Road, Coboconk, Bracebridge, Barrie, Dalyrymple and Simcoe.

I congratulate the members of the 4 Cs on behalf of all Canadians for their outstanding performance and for proudly representing our country at this world class event.

Social Program Reform

[Christiane Gagnon, Bloc, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for two years now, the federal government has been holding its breath and hiding from the people of Quebec the drastic changes it has in store for them after the referendum has been held. Let us look at this hidden agenda.

Let us look at the UI reform they are hiding from those who have to rely on this assistance not by choice but out of necessity; the old age pension reform they are hiding from our seniors and all those who have contributed to the plan for many years through their taxes to enjoy some peace of mind in their old age; the GST reform that they are hiding from all the businesses tied up in federal and provincial red tape and that they have been promising since October 1993; and the health care reform initiated by the federal government over the heads of the provinces, that they are hiding from users and patients.

The people of Quebec are entitled to know what to expect if they remain in the federal system. Ottawa should announce its reforms before the referendum is held. Show the people of Quebec the true face of the federal government.

The Senate

[Jim Abbott, Reform, Kootenay East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is stifling democracy and taking away legitimate regional representation from the people in Atlantic Canada and all Canadians. That is probably why he used the old-fashioned political trick of making the announcement late Friday afternoon.

Without a doubt, the Prime Minister is running scared from the Reform Party's call for elections to fill all Senate vacancies. He reminds us of his 32 years in this House by insisting on the continuation of an archaic and dying system at a time when we need proper, fair, balanced representation from all regions of Canada.

I condemn the continuing policy of political patronage appointments because they subvert the true democratic process. This kind of political patronage renders the upper house useless and ineffective. When will this Prime Minister recognize that he is out of touch with reality and the wishes of Canadians? The time for old-fashioned political patronage is gone. The time for democracy is now.

Tobacco

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court ruling on tobacco advertising is a wake-up call to Canadians concerned about the state of our democracy.

The court's ruling adds to a jurisprudence that the advertising of large corporations enjoys the same protection as the free speech of individual citizens. The courts are transforming the charter from an instrument that protects the human rights of citizens from an arbitrary state into one that protects powerful corporations from the actions taken by citizens through Parliament to establish the social boundaries of commercial activity.

The court is wrong in determining that corporations have a right to peddle an addictive and deadly substance, a right that overrides the democratic right of citizens to take measures to improve public health by regulating the promotion of dangerous tobacco products.

The government and Parliament, all of us here, should find a way to stand up to the court by invoking the notwithstanding clause to regulate the marketing of tobacco. This is a good example of why the notwithstanding clause was put in the charter in the first place.

Niagara Grape And Wine Festival

[John Maloney, Liberal, Erie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the grape harvest season is well under way in the region of Niagara, bringing with it the renowned Niagara Grape and Wine Festival.

I would like to congratulate Dan and Darlene Haist of the village of Ridgeville in my riding of Erie on their being crowned the 40th Niagara Grape king and queen. The Haists are fourth generation grape growers who have sold their product to Niagara wine makers for over 70 years. Decades of labour by growers like the Haists have contributed to the evolution of our wine industry to world status.

I invite one and all to come to the Niagara Peninsula this fall to enjoy our fine wines and warm hospitality.

Camp Ipperwash

[Rose-Marie Ur, Liberal, Lambton—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there may finally be a breakthrough in the current impasse at Camp Ipperwash, which is located in my riding of Lambton-Middlesex.

Last Thursday, September 21, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Minister of National Defence announced that the Hon. Robert Reid, Q.C., a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, has agreed to serve as a federal representative to resolve the issues surrounding the return of the Camp Ipperwash lands to the Kettle and Stony Point First Nation.

I have every confidence that Justice Reid will put his considerable experience and talents to use in implementing the seven-point memorandum of understanding that was worked out between the government and the Kettle and Stony Point First Nation on September 13.

I am especially pleased and grateful that the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has given me his personal assurance of his request that Justice Reid will also meet with the representatives of the town of Bosanquet to hear their concerns and ideas on resolving the issues surrounding the return of Camp Ipperwash.

West Bank

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Rosedale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Israel and the PLO announced an agreement to extend Palestinian autonomy in the occupied West Bank. This latest agreement took months of difficult negotiations and is an important step in achieving a lasting peace.

The Canadian government has always encouraged peace efforts in that region. Many Canadians have worked for this. Here is a striking example for everyone to see. Even the deepest divisions can be resolved in the public interest when those in charge work at it in a spirit of goodwill.

I am sure that all colleagues in the House join me in congratulating the leaders of the two sides on their latest achievement.

Quebec Referendum

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Laurentides, QC]

Mr. Speaker, "we must not only win, but crush them". That is what Claude Garcia, the president of Mutual Standard Life, told No supporters at the general council of the Quebec Liberal Party. The big names supporting federalism are growing more and more arrogant as the referendum campaign progresses, even resorting to unacceptably strong language.

From the Prime Minister's "we are going to clobber them" to Mr. Garcia's "crush them", it is obvious what the No supporters' line is: We must crush those bothersome Quebecers, and our victory must be overwhelming. To the arrogance of the No side, Quebecers will oppose the determination of a people creating a country for itself.

To the insults cast by those who do not want Quebec to become a country, Quebecers will respond by presenting their blueprint for nationhood to the Prime Minister who wants to "clobber them" and showing the clear-mindedness and serenity of a people looking to the future.

Despite all the opposition from individuals displaying inordinate arrogance, Quebecers are about to say Yes.

Medicare

[Sharon Hayes, Reform, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian medicare system needs an overhaul. We Reformers believe the best way to overhaul a system is through respecting provincial jurisdiction and granting provinces and Canadians choice and flexibility.

With an Ottawa imposed deadline looming over Alberta, it has been reported that the federal government may now be willing to allow private clinics. What happened to the infamous line in the sand the Minister of Health proclaimed in Victoria? Has she decided to erase it? Why the flip-flop?

Last week in this House the minister stated: "To date the Canada Health Act has been extremely flexible in allowing for change within different provinces". If that is true, why the need for deadlines threatening financial penalties? Based on her statement, I would expect the minister to accept Alberta's decision to deinsure tax funding of abortions.

The minister cannot have it both ways. Either she will allow for genuine choice and flexibility in the health care system that works for all Canadians or she will continue to adhere to an outdated piece of legislation.

Canada

[John Harvard, Liberal, Winnipeg—St. James, MB]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk success. Let us talk about the success of Canadians, who are often shy about their accomplishments.

There is no reason why we Canadians cannot and should not be proud of our record. Other nations recognize our worth and value and so should we. Now is not the time to overlook, ignore, or forget just how great Canada really is.

We cannot forget that for two years running Canada has been ranked by the UN as the best place in the world to live. We cannot ignore in calculating a nation's wealth that the World Bank places Canada second in the world.

And let us not overlook the fact that at the Beijing conference on the status of women Canada received the global award for the most improvement in the status of women for progress made in the last decade. This award was given by the International Federation of Business and Professional Women. Canada has demonstrated to the world its commitment to ensuring legislative changes that enhance and guarantee the position of women.

These plateaus have been achieved by Canada for all Canadians. Let us stand up and recognize all that we as Canadians have achieved together.

Quebec Referendum

[Robert Bertrand, Liberal, Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, separatists are inviting Quebecers to vote at the upcoming referendum to decide on their future within Canada.

The question concocted by the separatist leaders includes two very distinct aspects. First, Quebecers are asked if they want to separate from Canada; second, they are asked if they want to be economically and politically associated with the country that they are asked to leave.

The absurdity of all this is not so much in the wording of the question, as in the fact that separatists refuse to let Quebecers know about the details of such an association before the referendum.

A proposal for an economic and political association with Canada simply cannot be implemented the way separatists are suggesting. The public will not be fooled by such trickery and will vote no on October 30.

Salomon Brothers

[Patrick Gagnon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Solicitor General]

Mr. Speaker, during the last election campaign in Quebec, the PQ leader often rejoiced over comments made by Salomon Brothers on the election of a separatist government and an eventual referendum. The firm said: Moreover, contrary to current rhetoric, the end of the debate on Quebec's separation will benefit Canada and Quebec, regardless of whether they remain together or separate.

Mr. Speaker, that same firm, which the PQ leader was so happy to quote back then, just advised its clients to sell their Quebec bonds and to wait until the eve of the referendum before buying them back, so as to take advantage of the better interest rates which will be generated by the political insecurity that will prevail.

Salomon Brothers is doing what it should in trying to ensure that its clients make as much money as possible. As for the Quebec separatist leaders, they are only interested in their separation project and they unfortunately leave it up to the public to pay for

the higher interest rates that will result from the insecurity generated by their separatist obsession.

Bombardier Inc.

[Laurent Lavigne, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last week, Laurent Beaudoin, the president of Bombardier, felt that Quebec was too small for a multinational like his. It is rather ironic to hear those who owe their success to Quebec solidarity treating us as incompetents.

While Switzerland and Sweden, each with about the same population as Quebec, have more than twenty multinationals of this calibre, in their opinion, Quebec will not be up to it.

A sovereign Quebec, which will rank fifteenth as a world economic power, nothing less, will not be up to it-what an idea. Who do they think Quebecers are anyways?

While the No camp, those who advocate the status quo and stand-pattism are shrinking, reducing and crushing Quebec, the Yes camp, the camp for change, believes in Quebec's and Quebecers' potential and is betting on the young and their future.

Organized Crime

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians continue to hear news that causes them to fear for their safety.

It was reported this morning that the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang is claiming that they have rights over certain turf areas. One wonders if the recent weak-kneed response to native occupations has given lawless groups the idea that territory in our country is up for grabs by terrorists.

When an 11-year-old is killed in gang war crossfire, the Liberals' red book promise of "safe homes, safe streets" rings increasingly hollow.

Some 12,000 people from the Montreal area have signed a petition calling on the Solicitor General and the Minister of Justice to enact legislation aimed at breaking the power of organized crime and protecting innocent citizens.

The Reform Party urges the Liberal government to vigorously enforce the existing laws and to take decisive steps to stamp out the growing tyranny of lawlessness in our country.

Conseil Du Patronat Du Québec

[Pierrette Ringuette-Maltais, Liberal, Madawaska—Victoria, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the Conseil du patronat du Québec has just released the results of a major survey it conducted among 418 of its corporate members, including almost all of the one hundred largest private businesses in Quebec.

It reveals that 88 per cent of the respondents will vote no in the referendum and 87 per cent of them are not in favour of Quebec sovereignty. Ninety per cent of the corporate members said that a yes vote in the referendum would result in very significant costs for Quebec. Like the vast majority of Quebecers, business leaders wonder what advantage there is for Quebec in separating from Canada.

For these businesses, which are real job creators, Canada remains unquestionably the best strategic choice for Quebec's economic, social and cultural development.

Studies Commissioned By The Government Of Quebec

[Mark Assad, Liberal, Gatineau—La Lièvre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the daily, Le Soleil , reported in its February 14, 1995 edition that the head of the Quebec public service and secretary general of the Quebec government's executive council, Louis Bernard, had asked all deputy ministers last November to carry out detailed studies on the goods and services the federal government provided Quebec.

The purpose, for Mr. Bernard, was to find out how government functions would have to be reorganized so that the Government of Quebec could take over from the federal government before Quebec became sovereign. An initial draft of the study was to be delivered to Mr. Le Hir by the end of the month. That was in February.

Over seven months after the secretary of the executive council made his remarks, these studies by officials of the Government of Quebec remain shrouded in utter secrecy. Where is the so-called transparency of the-

Capital Punishment

[Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on April 25 the Minister of Justice said in the House: "The Canadian Police Association, representing 35,000 frontline police officers, has now joined with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police in asking

the government to enact legislation including the registration of all firearms. They know what is in the public interest. They know it is consistent with public safety. Let us get behind the police".

Does the minister now stand behind the police, or does he abandon them when they disagree with his own personal and political ideology? The police are now calling for the reinstatement of capital punishment and the repealing of section 745 of the Criminal Code. The minister has rejected this request.

If the justice minister no longer considers the police opinion valid, will he at least listen to the public? Will he listen to the 69 per cent of Canadians who support the return of capital punishment?

Unemployment Insurance

[Lucien Bouchard, Bloc, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government steadfastly refuses to unveil its plans and keeps postponing the tabling of its social program reform. Clearly the government wants to keep these cuts under wraps until the referendum. We know that the federal budget announced additional cuts of more than $1.5 billion in the unemployment insurance plan, but the details are still being kept secret.

My question is directed to the Prime Minister. How can he initiate the most massive cuts ever in our social programs, including unemployment insurance, cuts that are tantamount to repudiating the social equity that millions of Quebecers and Canadians depend on?