Mr. Speaker, I move:
That the first report of the Standing Committee on Finance, which was presented on Friday, December 10, 1999, be concurred in.
I have moved that the report of the Standing Committee on Finance be concurred in for the following fundamental reasons. We travelled across Canada and heard from many witnesses regarding the use of the surpluses—which do not belong to the minister but to all taxpayers—in the coming years. We in the Bloc Quebecois feel that a number of important consensuses have been completely ignored. I would like to discuss it here and I would like the report to be adopted after this speech. Let us take, for example, the social transfers. The whole issue of social transfers was debated in the finance committee and was raised by some of the witnesses. This question was fully discussed, as the Minister of Finance slashed social transfers.
The committee report does not even mention the possibility of employment insurance reform, even though it now covers only 42% of the unemployed.
They have also turned a blind eye to the recommendations made by my colleague from Québec on the fight against poverty in Canada. As for the issue of taxes, this major issue was minimized, yet the Minister of Finance has surpluses coming out of his ears.
I would like to touch upon these issues in the next few minutes if I may.
As far as social transfers are concerned, since 1994 there has been a drop in federal transfers to the provinces for funding of social assistance, post-secondary education and health to the tune of $22 billion, $6 billion for Quebec alone.
The report by the Liberal majority in the finance committee ignores these cuts and their devastating effects on the poverty level in Canada and the situation in the health system.
I would also like to point out in passing that since 1994 Quebec has absorbed 37% of all cuts to Canadian social transfer funds for post-secondary education, health and income security while accounting for only 24% of the population of Canada.
This has had disastrous results for Quebec. It has had harmful effects on Quebec public finances as well. There is a parallel to be drawn.
By slashing social transfers to the provinces, the Minister of Finance has hurt Quebec. A few years back, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs made a number of statements to the effect that it was necessary to hurt Quebec economically.
That brings me back to the bill recently introduced by the same minister. This is a bill against Quebec and against Quebecers. It is a case of one Quebecer going after Quebecers. This Quebecer can now act in collusion with the Minister of Finance, another Liberal member from Quebec.
We now have a very unusual alliance that really hurts the province of Quebec, an alliance between the Minister of Finance, who fiddles with the figures, and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, who fiddles with democracy.
These two devious individuals can now rely on 24 other Liberal members from Quebec, 24 docile Liberal members who are ready to crawl on their knees in front of English Canada in order to hurt Quebec. It is a sad thing because throughout history there have always been individuals who agreed to fight against their own people, to do the dirty work for their leaders.
There are 26 such individuals in front of the House, 26 Liberal members from Quebec who have agreed to spit on Quebec and to deny Quebecers the freedom to decide their own future. They typify docility at its worst, kow-towing to their masters and conquerors.
It is a good thing we can count on the 45 members of the Bloc Quebecois. It is a good thing that we can count on these members to unconditionally defend Quebec, its national assembly and the freedom of its people and that we are not in the same situation as in 1982 when we had 74 Liberal members from Quebec in this House who supported the unilateral patriation of the constitution initiated by Mr. Trudeau. They ignored the national assembly's near unanimity against the unilateral patriation of the Constitution.
We, in the Bloc Quebecois, will stand up to fight on behalf of Quebecers for their right to freedom, to freedom of choice, and their right to democracy, a healthy democracy the government is trying to tarnish in this House with the complicity of 26 Liberal members from Quebec who are willing to help the English Canadian majority do its dirty work.
The report of the Standing Committee on Finance's Liberal majority is also weak in that it makes no reference to employment insurance, as I said in my introduction.
People came to tell us that EI eligibility requirements have become so restrictive that it is virtually impossible for 58% of unemployed workers, who pay premiums when they are not unemployed, to receive EI benefits.
Some people also came to tell us that as unemployed workers they were considered as abusers and cheaters and that they were harassed day after day and treated as if they were criminals.
This government has become the government of chronic and institutionalized impossibility. Again, I want to make a parallel with the bill introduced by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs to establish a framework for the Quebec democracy.
For example, the bill provides that following a referendum in Quebec the House of Commons, which is made up of a majority of representatives from English Canada, will determine whether there is a clear majority of Quebecers who support secession. To that end, the House of Commons will take into account the “size of the majority”. Will there ever be a majority large enough to be acceptable to this government? No.
The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs even repeated today that, whether the question is clear or not, the federal government will not allow Canada to be broken up.
What is the point of tabling a bill requiring clarity when the government will not recognize the result of a Quebec referendum, even if the result is clear?
The bill also refers to the percentage of voters who will have voted and to any other matters considered to be relevant. This provision really opens the door to a very broad interpretation which will ultimately make it impossible to recognize the result of a Quebec referendum.
The bill also provides that the views of the political parties and the Senate be taken into account. Can you believe it? Senators would be consulted to give their opinion on a democratic process when they are not even elected? This bill is truly Kafkaesque and the end result is that it will be impossible for the House of Commons to recognize the referendum result.
It provides that the House of Commons will take into account any other relevant views on the majority. Are they going to ask Howard Galganov, Keith Anderson, Guy Bertrand and, while they are at it, Youppi, for their opinion on such an important issue, an issue that has to do with the free and democratic choice of Quebecers to create an independent country? This makes no sense.
It bears a strange resemblance to the way the EI system has been run for two years. What we heard in the Standing Committee on Finance was that the government disqualified most people who normally should have received benefits. The government is going after unemployed workers.
Here again the situation is similar. First, the government goes after unemployed workers and then it goes after all voters in Quebec. Their right to choose is being taken away. The exercise of democracy in Quebec's referendums is being devalued. Quebecers are being treated like children, as are unemployed workers when they are monitored day after day and identified, almost as though they were setting out to cheat the system. It is becoming ridiculous.
There is another similarity between what witnesses had to say about the EI system and the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs' bill.
People told the committee that they were viewed by the system and by those enforcing it across Canada, based on decisions made here in the House, as cheaters. This is another big similarity with the bill introduced by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, the member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville.
The Liberal members accuse unemployed workers of defrauding the system and now, with the bill introduced by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, they are assuming and insinuating—and this is serious; members should listen carefully to what I am about to say—that all Quebecers are doing the same thing with democracy. Government members are insinuating that Quebecers are not playing by the democratic rules.