Madam Speaker, my colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois who spoke before me had an opportunity to express all of their objections to the millennium fund and, since the subject provided lots of fodder, they had lots to say.
To be objective, all of this should be weighed and some acknowledgement made of the fund's positive aspects. The millennium fund to its credit advances the cause of sovereignty. It will bring home the truth to Quebeckers that the federal system, regardless of the party in power, will never change, that it is incorrigible.
We sovereignists know that many Quebeckers are not sovereignist because they still hope that the federal system will change. Now, the pretentious millennium fund, which is infringing provincial rights, has revealed the true colours of the federal government, and we hope that many Quebeckers, who up to now have not understood, will now understand that federalism, regardless of the party in power, will not change.
Such disdain for the people of Quebec to have thought that they would swallow it holus-bolus because it meant money.
Madam Speaker, you are as familiar with the Bible as I am. You know that Esau gave up his birthright for a dish of lentils because he was hungry. We will not do the same for the dish of lentils the millennium fund represents. We in Quebec have not stopped advocating and claiming provincial rights because the federal government is infringing them.
It was wrong to think that we would give up our rights for a dish of lentils. I understand that it is a rude awakening for the Liberals to discover that their proposal did not slip through and that Quebeckers are protesting and indignant at this unfair fund.
The neat thing in all this is that it is not just the sovereignists who are complaining. All the various communities in Quebec are protesting this fund. I have a few examples. First those from the educational community, obviously.
The CEQ stated that the millennium fund was not the way to provide young Quebeckers with improved access to a university education.
Let me give another example among many. The Fédération des étudiants des collèges du Québec said that student debt was a big problem, but that the millennium fund was not the answer. We should not forget that this fund was supposed to lure young Quebeckers, most of whom are sovereignists. Obviously, it did not work.
I could go on and on. We also have the general manager of the Canadian Institute of Adult Education. Here is what he had to say: “The federal government's budget and tax decision over the last few years have contributed to the erosion of the standard of living of students and of the provincial public education systems. The package contained in the last budget may well go against what provincial governments have been trying to do”.
I could give so many examples, but the one that takes the cake comes from a federalist, John Trent, from the University of Ottawa. He told us: “The millennium fund will necessarily be a source of federal-provincial duplication and overlap with existing programs. Bill C-36 which provides for the millennium fund is a direct attack against the principles of federalism.” That is a federalist talking. The millennium fund is an abuse of the very principles of federalism. It shows contempt for the parliamentary resolution, proposed by the Prime Minister, to recognize the distinct nature of Quebec society. One of the advantages of the millennium fund is that it has shown people that this distinct society resolution is pure window dressing.
The educational sector is not the only one putting up a fuss, so is the business sector. This is worth noting. The Finance Canada experts have estimated that the administrative costs for the foundation will be around the 5% mark, or twice what they are in Quebec. The comment by the Alliance des manufacturiers et exportateurs du Québec was “Duplication must be avoided, and the millennium fund is definitely one example of this. Existing provincial structures must be taken advantage of.” That is the reaction of the business sector.
As for the Canadian taxpayer, the comment by Walter Robinson of the Canadian Taxpayers Foundation was that this showed “contempt for accounting standards”. It is unbelievable. Need I go on?
The arrogance of Ottawa's desire to trample over the rights of the provinces is nothing new, but until now Quebec had managed to block it as far as student loans were concerned. Earlier on, one of my colleagues recalled that, back in 1964, the Pearson government proposed student loans for which it would cover the interest. In response, Mr. Lesage, who was not a sovereignist, said that Quebec would have to go to court in order to have its constitutional rights respected in this matter. Mr. Pearson then had to acknowledge that, if a province preferred to have its own loan program, it would be entitled to an equivalent amount in compensation. It seems to me that the federal federalists were brighter than they are now.
This time, the scandal is even greater, because it comes in the wake of cuts to education which have forced the provincial government to slash budgets, particularly those allocated to universities and colleges, which have done them real harm. The Liberals have, therefore, cut provincial education budgets, to then use the money merely to increase their political visibility through the millennium fund, which does not meet any real need in Quebec. This is outrageous. The Liberal motto is “Make political hay while pretending to serve the public”.
This arrogant government, with its contempt for provincial jurisdictions, thought it could once again pass off as a service something that was totally focussed on gaining political popularity. It did not work and, as I have said, it will help show Quebeckers that the federalist cause is no longer sustainable. The arrogant, authoritarian, overbearing federal regime, which is also disrespectful of provincial areas of jurisdiction regardless of which party is in power, is simply hopeless. Thanks to the millennium fund, more Quebeckers than ever now understand that there is but one solution for Quebec, and that is sovereignty.