Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Drummond.
A number of my colleagues have addressed different facets of the budget. Some have spoken of the fiscal imbalance. In this regard, the budget speech provides an excellent schedule. Others have spoken about measures pertaining to day care costs, which are not really measures but rather a cheque for a maximum of $1,200, which is taxable on top of it. It strikes me more as a vote getting measure than one intended to swell the coffers of parents facing day care charges. I will not be looking at this.
As the labour critic, I looked more at what workers' associations and employers' or professional groups think. This is what I will look at. This is what I want to talk about today. I will in fact report to you what workers' and employers' associations have said.
Ken Georgetti, the president of the Canadian Labour Congress, which has a membership of three million workers, said there was neither vision nor hope for working families. Mr. Georgetti feels that the federal Minister of Finance has let down working families in his first budget. He feels that “it shows no vision of the country and offers no sense of hope to working Canadians”.
The government squanders huge surpluses while workers can’t find child care for their kids, can’t get training to do their jobs better, can’t protect their pensions when companies go bankrupt or can’t get the money promised for pay equity.
That was the opinion of the CLC, the Canadian Labour Congress.
The CSN, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, as everyone knows, moreover, headed by Claudette Carbonneau, considers that the budget does not contain any big surprises, but a series of vote-buying, election-minded measures.
With regard to the fiscal imbalance, the only real commitment, according to the CSN, is one of scheduling.
Regarding health, the CSN says that this budget does no more than maintain the previous agreement with the Liberal government, even though the needs are obvious.
The CSN’s big disappointment comes from the lack of a first gesture towards post-secondary education. The CSN also notes that this budget sanctions the end of the agreement between Quebec and Ottawa on the funding of child care. “There is nothing in this budget, except for a bunch of sweetened measures designed to assuage the difficulties of the manufacturing sector”.
The CSN also says:
There is no concrete response to the problem of older workers who are victims of mass layoffs.
There is nothing for the unemployed, although the Conservative Party made a commitment in the election campaign in favour of an independent employment insurance fund.
There is nothing for the immediate implementation of the Kyoto protocol. Still, the CSN is happy about the measures respecting public transit.
The CSQ, the Centrale des syndicats du Québec, headed by Réjean Parent, is disappointed with the stingy announcements concerning post-secondary education. Concerning the fiscal imbalance, the CSQ notes that there is no real solution and the government is acting very cautiously. The universal child care benefit, the much talked about cheque worth a taxable maximum of $1,200, remains inequitable for the families who need it most.
The CSQ considers that Quebec will be penalized by the Conservative government’s decision to invest exclusively in the development and not in the operation of child care services. It is concerned about the fact that the budget seems to confirm Canada's abandonment of the measures defined in the Kyoto accord and existing climate change programs.
The CSQ hails the tax credit for purchasing a monthly public transit pass, which as we know was a bill presented by my Bloc Québécois colleague for the riding of Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher.
The FTQ, the Fédération des travailleurs du Québec, is extremely disappointed by the government’s indifference towards the manufacturing sector. “For example,” it says, the government could have had recourse to the transitional measures provided by the WTO for textiles”.
There is not anything for setting up a genuine income support program for older workers.
The steelworkers' union is very disappointed that the national child care program has been abolished and replaced by a $1,200 election promise. The union feels that this is unfair, and it is also disappointed because “it comes at a time of comfortable surpluses that should be used to build a solid, supportive public policy, not a quick payout and tax breaks”.
The budget “also does nothing to address the crisis in Canada's manufacturing sector...The $400 million supposedly earmarked for encouraging forest industry competitiveness and fighting the mountain pine beetle is a drop in the bucket to an industry that is already in crisis”. The union also criticizes the government for not taking action in the budget to improve protection for workers' pensions.
The Public Service Alliance of Canada feels that the Conservative government’s budget will limit the rise in expenditures at a time when the economy is growing rapidly.
I would just like to take advantage of this opportunity to say that, until last Friday, Nycole Turmel was the president of the PSAC, and I now welcome the election of its new president, John Gordon.
“If the government is planning to institute these cuts….there will be a serious impact on the provision of federal public services,” the PSAC continued, speaking through Ms. Turmel.
Instead of taking advantage of the growing economy to spend tax dollars investing in public infrastructure, child care and other programs Canadians say they want, the Conservatives are unnecessarily speeding up the federal debt reduction plan.
The Canadian Union of Public Employees believes that this government’s “fixation with tax cuts is driving the federal government to abandon its role in providing quality public services” and it adds:
The 1 per cent reduction in the Goods and Services Tax will cost Ottawa over $5 billion a year in lower revenue, creating pressure to cut program spending
So as we can see, unions and working people’s associations are very or even extremely disappointed with this government’s budget.
And yet a different tune is heard from the associations representing employers and professionals.
The Certified General Accountants' Association of Canada is pleased. The Investment Dealers Association of Canada gives this government a good grade. The Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal welcomes the budget. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce says that it is happy. The Conseil du patronat du Québec is very much in favour of this budget.
When we see that working people’s groups are disappointed and employers’ and professional associations are happy, we do not need a lot of studies to understand that this budget favours employers over working people. We see as well that this government is not at all sensitive toward working people.
The only times that this government mentioned working people in the budget speech or the throne speech, it was to talk about the 1% reduction in the GST.
Working people are not just “taxpayers”; they are important participants in the social and economic development of our society, and they should be considered as such.
In conclusion, I would like to say a few words about the aeronautics industry.
The south shore is an aeronautics region. Half of Canada's aeronautics jobs are in Quebec, the Montreal area in particular and even closer to my riding on the south shore. We call it the aerospace region. The Saint Hubert airport is there. The Canadian Space Agency is in Saint Hubert. The ENA or national institute of aeronautics, two of the largest aeronautics companies and a number of aerospace research councils are in the immediate area. It is a science and technology park like no other in Quebec or Canada.
So, what is in this budget? What is in the Speech from the Throne? Not a word on aeronautics; nothing but vague allusions to research and development.
What became of the funding for the aeronautics policy tabled in this House last November?
It was a good policy. It had been copied from a Bloc Québécois proposal developed in consultation with aeronautics companies. The previous government had cut and pasted parts of the Bloc Québécois proposal, but did not present any funding for the policy.
We truly expected this Conservative government to propose funding in its budget.
As you can see, the aeronautics industry is extremely important. This industry creates meaningful, high-tech jobs, which are enriching for everyone, if my meaning is clear.
That is all I wanted to say. I would add on behalf of myself, all workers and the aeronautics industry that this budget is extremely disappointing.