Mr. Speaker, as you know, Quebecers care a great deal about the environment. It is part of their culture and of what they are.
Some of them have dedicated their life to protecting the environment, raising their fellow citizens' awareness, as well as studying nature and its interaction with man. Some even called on the courts to prevent the federal government from going ahead with projects which were potentially harmful for human health and the marine ecosystem.
Local initiatives to clean up riverbanks, reforest urban spaces or even organize carpools are often taken on by individuals convinced they can and must preserve a safe environment for their children. They deserve our grateful thanks.
Clearly, I share the minister's vision regarding the appropriateness of helping initiatives aimed at reducing man's impact on nature.
However, there is a major flaw in the minister's argument. The program she announced today is obviously the kind of measure which upsets programs and priorities established by provincial governments, creates new expectations, and constitutes dubious management practice.
Action 21 is a perfect example of what Quebecers, sovereignists as well as federalists, have been fighting against for decades. The environment minister seems to have trouble understanding that. And yet, it is rather clear: Quebec no longer wants to see the federal government clumsily step in and negate its efforts. Many provinces share the same feeling.
The only purpose of Action 21 is for the federal government to use its spending power in areas of provincial jurisdiction.
The Quebecers have heard this song before. Its intent is laudable, and just about everybody recognizes how important it is. The federal government is setting itself up as a saviour generously handing out mana.
What the minister does not realize is that Quebecers know that government funding will be reduced, even stopped, within a few months or a few years. Budget constraints will then be blamed, as is already the case now.
Groups who have initiated projects will then turn to Quebec for the kind of assistance they really need, at which time the province will be faced with the following choice: either completing ongoing projects or putting an end to them. In one case, the federal government will have shifted to the province responsibility for part of its expenditures and, in the other, responsibility for quashing the projects.
This is something Quebecers have experienced over and over in many areas. Take for example the contaminated sites rehabilitation program and the greater Montreal greening program.
By being very careful not to mention in her speech the amounts earmarked for and actual duration of Agenda 21, the minister confirmed the misgivings we had.
Action taken under Agenda 21 is based on a fifteen year old philosophy aimed at giving the federal government the sole initiative on environmental issues. Relying on the authority of the Supreme Court and on its own spending power, the federal government is gradually taking over this area of responsibility, establishing new national standards which, in many cases, add to existing provincial standards.
In closing, I wish to thank the hon. minister for just proving to us that her government never intended to change the federal system in any way and that all it has to offer Quebecers is the good old Trudeau-style centralization. As long as it is able to get away with it, the federal government will use its spending power in areas of provincial responsibility, disregard priorities set by Quebec minis-
ters and attempt to gain legitimacy by going over the heads of the provinces. The only way to stop this is to opt for sovereignty for Quebec, even for the fishermen of the Gaspe Peninsula.