Madam Chairman, all the impacts the events of September 11 will have on our lives and particularly on our economy are not known yet.
The very first impact, besides the horror and the bitter taste we were left with, is certainly that we have come to realize that things will never be the same on our planet.
Every serious political and financial pundit in this world agrees that things will never be the same as before this awful day. Democracies and their economies have all been tremendously affected.
These events have led countries to collectively reflect on the situation, like they never had before. Every state had to stop and rethink, if not reconsider, their relations with other countries.
It would be great if all this rethinking would lead us to sustainable peace, the redistribution of wealth, shared values, mutual respect and especially respect for life and freedom.
These last few days, a great many people made almost the same statement. The world is going through a crisis. The economies are in crisis, and the various countries have to do something about it.
Some observers even go as far as to question the way globalization has taken place or is taking place. The great states of the north, of which we are part, have not really listened to the wishes expressed by poorer countries that wanted free trade to be more respectful of people and of local and regional economies.
One of the lessons we must learn from the events of September 11 is that the concentration of decision-making centres in one place make us most vulnerable to this new form of war, terrorism.
Many large corporations operating at the international level lost their senior executives on September 11. It will take years before they can rebound from that.
Closer to us, thousands of people find themselves unemployed. Thousands of families will see their income reduced by nearly 50%. Thousands of families will suffer from this new kind of insecurity, which inevitably brings with it a host of social problems.
I think that what we see in the media reflects a form of insensitivity that we have felt in the words of our political leaders. The first page of major newspapers and the news on major television networks all say the same thing “Air Canada cuts 9,000 jobs; another carrier, 1,200; another business, 200; another one, 600”. It looks a lot like a list of statistics which, like any other statistics, will soon be forgotten.
We are not only talking about lost jobs here. We are talking about human beings who find themselves unemployed. We should not be reading that 9,000 jobs were cut, but rather that 9,000 people are now unemployed.
Moreover, I think this is just the tip of the iceberg. As I was saying earlier, we have not yet felt the full impact of the events of September 11.
There will likely be more layoffs announced over the course of the next days, weeks, and months. Of course, these people will be eligible for employment insurance, as a government member mentioned, as though employment insurance were some sort of magic solution to all of the pain caused by the events of September 11, as though employment insurance could solve the problem of all of the Air Canada employees and allow them to continue living.
What kind of employment insurance are we offering them? An employment insurance that has been slashed, virtually destroyed by a government whose sole objective was to pay off a deficit and debt caused by years of waste, of shameless spending, which continues in some sectors, particularly by overlap that could easily be fixed if the political will existed.
To deal with the situation in which we currently find ourselves, we need more than today's employment insurance, that is to say, in its current form. For years, we in the Bloc Quebecois have been asking for a return to a real employment insurance program, which would protect workers adequately in difficult times such as those we are currently experiencing.
Our message then and now is glaringly relevant, especially today, unfortunately. The events of September 11 have led us to reflect, collectively, on the role of the state. This is the specific issue that tonight's motion deals with.
Why do we elect governments in so-called democratic societies? What good does a government do if, in hard times, it answers stupidly that we have to wait and see? Do we really need to wait until the ship has sunk before launching the life rafts? Does the economy need to be rock bottom before we take action?
I personally believe that the government has a role to play as regulator, particularly with respect to Air Canada and the airline industry. To support the economy and employment during hard times, a government must shed its conservative ways and wait and see attitude and show some creativity.
For years, the government's attitude has led to abandonment of the regions. This is particularly the case for air transportation. This government has done everything possible to unload the few infrastructures it did have in the regions. From the state as provider, we have moved to the state as non-presence. One might even think that there was an avowed wish to close down the regions, to leave them so little leeway that they would disappear through attrition.
As I said earlier, air transportation is a good example. It had virtually ceased to exist in the regions, and I trust that, despite the cuts announced at Air Canada, the regions will not again have to pay for what has occurred. In our regions, we are already in an extremely difficult situation. Services have been cut back. We are poorly serviced, if at all, and at ridiculous cost.
Great care must therefore be taken when addressing the difficulties being faced by the Canadian airline industry. Vigilance and prudence are necessary to avoid having this difficult and serious situation not simply put an end to a fundamental service, our air service, which is already in a precarious position.
This leads me to make the point that the cuts announced by Air Canada involved 9,000 job cuts, and apparently 1,000 of those are in regional airports.
For all these reasons and given the current situation, it is imperative that services be maintained. I say maintained, but I should really be talking about development and improvement in the regions.
I hope that the regions will not have to pay a high price. Considering what limited services we were getting, the state has a responsibility to take action so as to ensure that we will at least keep what little we had.
The government must be proactive and it must speed up the review of all the investment projects submitted by regional companies. It must adopt more flexible criteria, because its criteria often do not reflect the realities and needs of the regions. It must also co-operate with the Quebec government and with the other provincial governments. This is no time for pointless squabbles. Democracy must be respected.
The Quebec government has already begun a process that is giving excellent results in so-called remote areas. Whether in the Gaspé Peninsula or in the Matapédia Valley, people are beginning to hold their heads high, and it would be tragic if the events of September 11 were to stop this new momentum. It would also be tragic if these events were to prevent us from developing and expanding because, among other things, of a lack of transportation services.
I am asking this government to work with the Quebec government and with the other provincial governments to help our regions make it once and for all. This is a necessary and urgent change of attitude.
I remain convinced that we will be less vulnerable when our regions are stronger and when our decision making centres are not all concentrated in the same location.
As a Bloc Quebecois member, I am asking the government to take action and to do so to help the regions.