Mr. Speaker, this debate is proving to be about how the different parties in the House see the future.
It shows this government is putting even more tools in place to help Canadians get the jobs of today's economy as part of its commitment to a productive jobs strategy.
It shows we have found an appropriate middle course in this key labour market area between the unrealistic claims of the official opposition, and the narrow policies of the third party.
It shows this government is committed to a respect for, and partnerships with, other governments that will work far better than the old top-down solutions. We are determined to work with others to do more to put unemployed people back to work.
In my comments in this debate, I want to focus on what these factors mean in Quebec. There are two main issues: training and employment benefits and measures. I will address both.
The federal government understands that its strategy to foster economic growth and job creation depends on having a highly skilled, mobile and adaptable workforce. Employment insurance provides, through partnership with provinces and the private sector, a range of active employment measures to help unemployed Canadians find and keep work.
We want them to have access to effective re-employment measures-ones that get people jobs quickly. Ones that reduce future demands on income benefits under employment insurance.
The goal is to provide practical, proven measures that will help Canadians get back to work quickly, and keep working. The old system is not good enough in today's economy. Quebec shares these interests. On November 27, 1995, the Prime Minister stated our intention with complete clarity.
Let me remind the House of his words when he spoke about employment insurance. "The Government of Canada will propose an approach that respects provincial jurisdiction and responsibilities in the fields of education and labour market training. Accordingly, the government of Canada will withdraw from labour market training, apprenticeship programs, co-operative education programs and workplace based training. It will no longer purchase training courses, either directly or indirectly, from provincial establishments, either public or private".
Our government repeated this commitment in the throne speech of February 27. It promised once more that it would gradually withdraw from this sector within three years, so that there will be a smooth transition for all those involved. I fact, we will bring that process to a conclusion much sooner if this is what the provinces want.
This was not a hollow commitment. It is backed up by the approach to active employment benefits in Bill C-12. To hear some hon. members talk, one would think they still do not know this. One would think they had not read the bill. Let me help them.
For example, this bill expressly limits the federal capacity to implement the skills loans and grants employment benefits to those provinces in which that government agrees. If Quebec says no, then there would be no such activity for employment insurance clients in Quebec.
Part II of Bill C-12 also commits the government of Canada to work in concert with Quebec and other provincial governments on the design, implementation and evaluation of employment measures for employment insurance clients. Those measures include wage subsidies, earnings supplements, self employment assistance and job creation partnerships. We want to develop flexible new arrangements for the delivery of employment benefits.
That flexibility extends to the use of provincial programs to assist employment insurance clients. What does this mean? Quite simply, it means that the Quebec government could deliver any or all of these employment benefits to employment insurance clients. It could do so through its own existing programs, with support from the federal government, as long as those programs meet the objectives set out in part II of this bill and are broadly similar to the measures outlined in the legislation.
Federal guidelines will be followed in the deveopment and implementation of the employment measures: harmonization of programs to prevent overlap and duplication, programs that reduce dependency on income benefits, and emphasis on personal responsibility, co-operation and partnership, flexibility to allow local decision-making, and a framework for evaluating results.
The key, of course, is results, that is getting Canadians back to work quickly.
We believe that our approach based on partnership with provinces will ensure that every dollar spent, is spent in a way that is linked to local labour market priorities. We believe it will ensure value for the money we spend to help our clients improve their employability.
In Quebec, as elsewhere, we are determined to translate these commitments and objectives into results. This government is doing so by negotiating a series of labour market agreements with provincial governments. These arrangements could vary from province to province to meet local circumstances and needs.
We are putting turf wars behind us-and concentrating on getting Canadians back to work. And, let us be very clear about this, the federal government has responsibilities. It cannot ignore them.
It has a responsibility to the millions of workers and employers accross Canada who fund the employment insurance program and who share the risks of unemployment in a way that works for Quebecers' advantage.
It has a responsibility to manage this program in the best interests of the Canadian economy and a labour market with national elements and needs. It has a responsibility to this House to be able to track and provide it the information it needs on activities under this act.
It has a responsibility to ensure that every dollar that is earmarked for the employment benefits of employment insurance clients is used for precisely that purpose and used effectively.
In general, the conditions that I have mentioned are simply ones that recognize that EI contributors from across this country are entitled to expect results and to get their money's worth.
New agreements would ensure more effective help for the unemployed, reduce overlap and duplication and promote coherence and harmonization in federal and provincial programs.
Let me quote Mr. Ghislain Dufour on this issue: "In this regard, our federation of employers welcomes the reform proposals to harmonize federal and provincial programs and to allow provinces to make administrative arrangements with the federal government in order to administer these programs fully".
Mr. Dufour recognizes this is a good opportunity for both levels of government. Part II respects the legitimate constitutional jurisdictions of each government, and is fair and reasonable.
The door is open to an agreement that can move both governments closer to our shared goal of better employment opportunities for people in Quebec. Bill C-12 will put that process fully in motion. I urge the members of the official opposition to support this opportunity.