Debates of Nov. 13th, 2007

Opposition Motion—Manufacturing and Forestry

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the member opposite as he ran through 13 years of inaction by the Bloc Québécois on the difficulties that the manufacturing sector has experienced. Those are still just words. I waited in vain for some tangible solutions in my colleague’s speech, but I did not hear any. There were a lot of numbers. I would like to offer him three numbers, and then I will have a question to ask him.

In the last economic statement, a 1% cut in the general tax rate for manufacturing firms was announced. We announced that income tax will drop to 15% from 22%. What this means is that measures have been taken to ensure that the environment for Canadian manufacturing firms will be among the most competitive in the world. Income tax rates will be among the lowest in the major industrialized nations.

My question is this. What is the Bloc Québécois proposing to remedy these problems? Where was it for the last 13 years when we witnessed that list of negative statistics for manufacturing firms? When it had a chance to speak out in this House and support tangible, effective measures to support manufacturing firms in Quebec, why did it not support the economic statement, which is designed precisely to provide our firms with a competitive environment?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the member for Lévis—Bellechasse, I will say the following.

Where was the Bloc Québécois? Fortunately, it has been here since 1993. Not only do we regularly propose solutions, but we have a number of successes to our credit. The evidence is that in every federal election since 1993 the people of Quebec have returned Bloc Québécois members in a majority of seats. So they have done excellent work.

I also thank the member for Trois-Rivières today for raising the subject in this House, because the member for Lévis—Bellechasse would not have done it, since he is wearing his rose-coloured glasses and saying that everything is going fine.

When it comes to solutions, we are proposing a specific plan for the manufacturing industry. We are also talking about a real POWA, a program to assist older workers in the forestry industry. These solutions could be implemented easily, particularly given the surpluses this government has available to it. We are calling for loans for updating production equipment and investments in innovation. Those are tangible solutions.

I did not have time, in the mere 10 minutes I had to speak, to talk about the problems that the ridings represented by government members are experiencing. I will come back to that if the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities asks me questions. I will be happy to come back to that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's speech as I did previously to the speeches from the Liberal side of the House.

I come from a riding that has lost hundreds of jobs since the softwood sellout was rammed through Parliament. Conservatives and Liberals were working together.

Most recently in New Westminster the Canfor mill is closing. There will be another 126 people laid off. In February 300 people in my riding were laid off as a result of the softwood sellout.

Across the country it is now 10,000 Canadian families that have lost a bread winner because the Liberals and Conservatives got together and worked to ram through the softwood sellout. It was not in Canada's interest. We gave away a billion dollars. We were only a few weeks short of the finish line and the government completely capitulated with the support of the Liberals in the international trade committee.

Why are the Liberals trying to distance themselves from the softwood sellout that they rammed through committee and for which they are responsible? Why does the member think that the Liberals are trying to pull the wool over the public's eyes and have them think that the Liberals had nothing to do with the softwood debacle?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question that seemed more directed to the Liberal Party than to me.

However, I must say that I certainly sympathize with the businesses and workers in the softwood lumber industry who find themselves in this situation. We have experienced the same problem.

I know the NDP keeps making this point, saying that it was a mistake. I agree that we lost $1 billion in the process. However, the industry, the unions and the workers in Quebec were asking us and even pressing us to vote in favour of that agreement. It was a matter of survival. The agreement was bad but, at the same time, people in Quebec wanted it. Since our job is to represent these people, we must be attuned to their needs. Therefore, we had to put an end to this dispute with the Americans. We had no choice.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be sharing my time with my colleague from Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, and I would be happy to respond to the motion by the member for Trois-Rivières.

To start, I would like to state that the government shares the concerns about workers adversely affected by current changes currently sweeping through certain sectors of our economy. We share the concerns of our colleagues opposite, but our situation is quite different. The Bloc is in a position to point out problems; as the government, we are in a position to solve them and that is what we are doing.

Although the economy and employment in Canada are experiencing vigorous growth, it is clear that certain sectors, the forestry sector in particular, are under a great deal of pressure.

Last year, 422,000 jobs were created in Canada, with 89,000 in Quebec. However, for various reasons, this is not the trend in the forestry sector. External factors, especially the rapid appreciation of the Canadian dollar on international money markets, rising energy costs, pest infestations and increased overseas competition, have greatly harmed this sector.

Workers in this sector are directly affected by these changes. The Government of Canada is aware of the difficulties faced by workers in the Quebec forestry sector and, of course, throughout Canada, and wants to help these individuals adapt to the upheaval. The throne speech expresses our commitment in this regard.

The government has undertaken to defend the interests of traditional industries in crisis. We have taken concrete measures to follow through on this commitment. For example, the 2006 budget set aside $400 million for the forestry industry to help it deal with difficult situations. We are particularly aware of the plight of workers who have lost their jobs in this sector.

Our contribution to labour adjustment includes, among other things, assistance enabling laid-off workers to acquire skills and find jobs in other sectors, particularly in construction and mining, where there is strong demand in various regions throughout the country and in Quebec.

We are also investing significant resources in order to provide support to laid-off workers, through the employment insurance program, parts 1 and 2, and the targeted initiative for older workers, which was recently put in place.

In all, $350 million will be paid out in regular benefits to Canadian workers who have lost jobs in the forest industry. Close to $60 million go to older workers who have lost their jobs in this particular sector.

The government is also making sure that unemployed workers are being treated fairly as far as income support is concerned. We do, however, also wish to ensure that these people have the opportunity to receive support and assistance in order to remain in the workforce when they lose their jobs. This is particularly the case for older workers who lose their jobs. The knowledge and experience they have accumulated over the years are immeasurable assets.

Despite all they have to offer, older workers run into particular obstacles when they try to find a new job. Some lack the training required to adapt to today's workforce; some have skills that are not a good fit with the new jobs available; employers may be reluctant to hire people who are nearing retirement age.

For these reasons, we have created the targeted initiative for older workers. The federal government has announced a contribution of $70 million, through this initiative, to support the cost-shared programs put in place in conjunction with the provinces and territories in order to help older workers hard hit by this reality to adapt to the new requirements of the job market.

To date, as part of the targeted initiative for older workers, the Government of Canada has signed agreements with nine provinces and territories. Moreover, the funds have now been disbursed in support of new projects. Some 40 cost-shared projects have been approved so far, 20 of those in Quebec.

Out of the current $8.9 million envelope available to Quebec under the targeted initiative for older workers, the equivalent of $7.1 million has been earmarked for the forestry and forest products sectors. In all, approximately 1,400 older unemployed workers are receiving an income supplement through this initiative. They are also entitled to training and other forms of assistance in order to remain productive. We have also struck a group of experts on older workers with a view to assessing what measures the older laid-off worker requires, focusing particularly on improvements to training and income support.

It is evident, therefore, that the government is already providing the unemployed with the type of support the opposition motion addresses. I would stress that we will continue to work in conjunction with our counterparts in the provinces and territories within the targeted initiative for older workers with a view to ensuring the creation of other projects in sectors that are experiencing these difficulties.

We are also contributing to other activities that help workers adjust to changing economic circumstances and new market conditions. The Sector Council Program of Canada is a good example of that. Last month in Jonquière, Quebec, my colleague, the Minister of Labour, announced an investment of over $250,000 to help set up a forestry sector council. As is the case for the other sector councils, this project brings together leaders within the sector to address their human resources issues.

The Minister of Human Resources and Social Development has spoken with members of the mining industry's sector council. The mining industry is growing and is in great need of skilled workers. This council sector recently launched a new project to communicate with the declining sectors, in order to assess the interest the mining industry might generate among workers whose employment is uncertain.

The forestry industry is a good example of a sector where workers might have transferable skills. Our government is well aware of the problems facing workers affected by the changes happening in the global economy. We are working on resolving these problems in a tangible way.

In closing, I believe that our current approach is putting us on the right path to help workers. That is why I will not support the motion of the hon. member for Trois-Rivières.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government has failed on a number of counts that are inexplicable to those of us who want to ensure that we have a productive economy.

The first count deals with research and development, not only in the forestry field but with industry in general. Why on earth has the government not given the support that previous governments have given to research and development in this country?

There are two major areas in which this can be done, as the minister knows. One is through public funds, public institutions, and the second is to use innovative tax policies to enable the private sector to invest more wisely within its companies. The minister knows full well that one of the deficits in our private sector has been the inability of the private sector to invest in the research and development that would allow it to be competitive, not only domestically but also internationally.

The second count I want to address is the issue of Asia-Pacific. Asia-Pacific is an area that I believe, as most of us do, is being ignored by the government. It has not received the attention that the burgeoning economies there deserve.

Lastly, I want to address an issue in my riding of Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca. In Jordan River, there has been a massive sell-off of public lands. These lands are being sold off, which could result in environmental devastation in Jordan River and the area around it.

Will the minister involve himself specifically in ensuring that the areas--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. Minister of Transport.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to address some of the concerns that have been raised by my hon. colleague. I will repeat that 422,000 new jobs have been created in this country over the last year. That is an extraordinarily strong performance given the state of our economy.

One of the things that certainly struck me in my colleague's comments was the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor initiative. I am rather astonished that he is not aware of what is being done there. Cooperation with the province of British Columbia, as well as the western provinces, has been ongoing so we can create a seamlessly integrated network corridor which will allow our businesses in Canada to access those markets in Asia.

We have gone through a number of initiatives. We have committed close to a billion dollars on that initiative alone, which indicates to what extent this government is committed.

The other thing is that a series of measures have been put forward. I am thinking of the port merger in lower B.C. where, in effect, we are getting our act together from what the previous government was not able to do.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the minister that I am happy to see he wants to solve the problems. It is clearly in how to go about it that we have difficulty understanding each other and where we may have different opinions. In my view, labour force training programs are a provincial jurisdiction.

I am told that the $70 million has been transferred to the Quebec government's consolidated fund. There is absolutely nothing, therefore, for our working people. We are told that $127 million has been allocated to fighting the pine beetle, but that is solely for British Columbia and Alberta. There is still nothing, therefore, for the forest industry.

When this community adaptation program was cancelled by the Conservative government, a new program was established, but it is open to all communities and not just the forest industry.

So we still have a series of losses. I would like to draw the minister’s attention to the fact that maybe someone should look at different solutions because the problem is—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member for Trois-Rivières. The hon. Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities has the floor.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to what my hon. colleague had to say. In her criticisms of my response in the debate today, I noticed that she failed to mention the targeted initiative for older workers. About 1,400 older workers come under this program. Already a certain number of projects have been approved in Quebec.

I heard Bloc members denouncing the government’s attitude as heatedly and fervidly as usual. We need to remember, though, that it was this political party that had to be dragged kicking and screaming into seeking a settlement of the softwood lumber issue. It was also this political party that refused just last week to support the Economic Statement providing $12 billion—I repeat, $12 billion—in tax cuts of all kinds for Quebeckers. This was unprecedented tax relief. So what did the Bloc Québécois do? Nothing. As usual, it was opposed.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, allow me to respond in some detail to the motion brought forward by the member for Trois-Rivières calling for the immediate implementation of support measures on behalf of the forestry and manufacturing sectors in Quebec and Canada.

Since the coming into force of the softwood lumber agreement on October 12, 2006, Canadian forestry companies have begun to recover their share of the $5 billion dollars in countervailing duties paid to the United States since 2002. As a result, $1 billion dollars has found its way into the pockets of companies in Quebec. Despite this, recent months have been difficult for the Canadian forestry sector. The Government of Canada is acutely aware of that.

In October 2006, the Government of Canada provided $72.5 million to fund a shared-cost program for older workers who have lost their jobs and who live in vulnerable communities. We announced a series of measures designed to support the competitiveness of Canadian companies and vitality of the regions, especially those dealing with very difficult situations due to the importance of the forest sector to their economies.

In February 2007, the Government of Canada allocated $127.5 million to ensure the competitiveness of the Canadian forestry industry through three initiatives of Natural Resources Canada: $70 million was allocated for promoting innovation and investments in forestry; $40 million was invested in market development; and $12.5 million was provided for development of a national strategy to address forest pests. In addition to these three measures, a forestry sector council has been established with a mandate to focus on issues relating to the forestry workforce. Human Resources and Social Development has invested $5 million in this project.

In July 2007, we announced the introduction of the forest communities program of Natural Resources Canada, which will help forestry communities to develop the tools, techniques and strategies they need to meet the challenges facing the Canadian forestry sector. This program takes into account Canada’s obligations under international agreements that we have signed, including agreements with the World Trade Organization and the softwood lumber agreement.

Economic Development Canada is also contributing to diversification of forest communities by means of the Community Economic Diversification Initiative—Vitality. This program, with a budget of $85 million, will operate until September 2010. It is designed to support economic diversification of regions that are particularly affected by current difficulties in the forestry and manufacturing sectors. CEDI-Vitality covers seven regions, including several resource regions, such as Abitibi-Témiscamingue, the North Shore, northern Quebec, Gaspé—Îles-de-la-Madeleine and 21 other regional municipalities grappling with specific economic problems.

Despite the energetic action of the Government of Canada, rationalization of the forestry industry continues and other losses of jobs are predictable. The difficulties of the forestry sector, just like those of the manufacturing sector, are not solely the result of a weak business climate, but they rather indicate that these sectors are going through a structural transition period affecting the whole world.

It was in this context that the government announced in the Speech from the Throne its firm intention to continue defending key sectors of our economy, such as forestry and the manufacturing industry. I remind you that the Bloc Québécois voted against this acknowledgement of the difficulties in these industries.

Furthermore, when our prime minister commits himself to something, unlike the leader of the Bloc Québécois, he keeps his promises. The role of the government is to create an environment conducive to innovation, investment and productivity, because this is the way to maintain a business climate that will protect jobs and companies in this country. This is the spirit in which the Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec launched new economic measures for the regions of Quebec, and in which our government developed Advantage Canada, a strategic plan designed to improve the prosperity of our country, which necessarily depends on that of our regions.

Regarding taxes, the 2007 Economic Statement proposed an enhanced capital cost allowance rate of 50% for eligible machinery and equipment acquired since March 19, 2007, and before 2009. We have also proposed increasing the capital cost allowance for buildings used for the manufacture and processing of computer equipment and natural gas distribution lines and liquefied gas facilities.

Recently, in the latest economic statement by the Minister of Finance, we announced a major reduction in Canadians’ tax burden. Since our election, Canadians’ income taxes have been reduced by $190 billion, and the GST has dropped from 7% to 5%. Although the leader of the Bloc Québécois voted for the abolition of the GST in 1996, now he is against these measures that are putting taxpayers’ money back into their pockets. These measures, which are designed to improve the investment climate, were welcomed by Canadian exporters and manufacturers, and by many organizations active in various industrial sectors. We are thus meeting one of the main priorities of the manufacturing sector by taking action in the corporate tax environment. Once again, the Bloc Québécois voted against it.

Behind all these questions there is a whiff of panic in the Bloc Québécois. It has conflict trouble. Since the Conservative government was elected, the Bloc has been panicking. It does not know which way to turn, a bit like its leader who took a flying leap into provincial politics for 24 hours a couple months ago.

However, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Saint-Lambert: it is a wise decision that shows he understands how powerless the Bloc is and that he will never be able to do anything for his riding.

The Bloc is panicking because we are delivering concrete results for Quebec, something that the Bloc members could never do. Since we were elected, we have practised open federalism in Ottawa, to the great benefit of Quebec. We recognized the Québécois as a nation and gave Quebec the seat it deserves at UNESCO. We solved the fiscal imbalance, settled the softwood lumber dispute, provided $350 million for the Government of Quebec’s green plan, and much more besides. The unemployment rate has never been so low, just like taxes, which have not been so low in 50 years. It is typical to see the Bloc shouting itself hoarse, as it is doing over the forestry crisis.

I have a question to ask of the Bloc members: where were they in 1993 when the crisis erupted in the forest industry? They were never heard denouncing the Péquiste government of the time for trying to wipe out Quebec forestry. Why their sudden interest now in the working people and families of Quebec?

What results has the Bloc Québécois achieved? It has immobilized Quebec for more than a decade. There was no fiscal imbalance before the Bloc arrived in Ottawa. It was only with a powerless Bloc Québécois facing the old Liberal government that the fiscal imbalance materialized. The Bloc did nothing when a crisis erupted in the forest industry because it did not want to embarrass the Péquistes. It did nothing about the softwood lumber dispute. It did not prevent the Liberals from stealing from taxpayers in the sponsorship scandal, and did nothing to stop the Liberals’ laissez-faire approach to the environment. All that the Bloc does is ask questions, and it sure does that. But in their rush to ask questions, the Bloc members forgot to do their work. That is why Quebeckers now want to unblock their future.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Before we go to questions and comments, it is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for West Nova, Airbus; the hon. member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, Infrastructure; the hon. member for Welland, Passports.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we could read in the comic magazine CROC, which is sadly no longer published, that it is not because we laugh that something is funny. Yet, the hon. member's speech caused a few laughs, even though it was not funny.

In fact, the 20 minutes during which the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities and the member for Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière spoke could have been entitled “The Conservative Government's 20 'Feel-Good' Minutes”. I suggested that they take off their rose-coloured glasses and face reality, but to no avail. According to them, everything is for the best in the best of worlds. We can hear it day in and day out. What matters above all is to bash the Bloc Québécois. Voters have been electing Bloc Québécois members to this place since 1993 because they are very pleased with the work we are doing here.

I would like to know what the member has to say now to the Domtar workers who just lost their jobs here in Gatineau? We are talking about manufacturing companies in difficulty. What does he have to say to the companies on the South Shore, across from Laurierville, in the riding of my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable, where 117 people working in the furniture industry have just lost their jobs?

What will he tell the people of Beauce, the riding of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, those people from the Baronet company, another furniture company, where some 145 jobs were lost? That is to say nothing of all the problems facing the people in the bicycle industry in that same riding. What will he tell them and what will he do as a government member? I for one believe that, where there is no will, there cannot be much of a way. The member should therefore get cracking and tell us what he intends to tell these people.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague seems to be in fine form after his week off. He seems quite peppy today.

Our government provided significant tax relief, including various improvements to write-offs for the amortization of machinery, equipment, buildings and other assets, which will help manufacturers and other processors update their production facilities.

The Bloc voted against all of that by voting against the economic statement. The government recently announced further tax cuts that will relieve the burden on businesses involved in processing, including forestry and manufacturing enterprises, to the tune of $2.6 billion per year. Once again, the Bloc voted against that.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I hope that the people of Quebec heard the previous member's speech. If they did, they would realize that they are being well served by members of the Bloc Québécois, who are smart enough to see past the narrow partisan interests that, as we have just seen, are the Conservatives' stock in trade. That was made very clear just now.

The truth is that things are not going well in Quebec's manufacturing sector or in Ontario's. Instead of pretending this is not happening—my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska suggested that the Conservatives take off their rose-coloured glasses—they should take a good look at the numbers, which do not lie. The manufacturing sector lost over 100,000 jobs between 2002 and 2006, many of them—65,000—since the Conservatives came to power in 2006. Even though jobs have been created in the manufacturing sector, jobs have also been lost. Job losses have been increasing over the past few months because of the combined effects of the surging Canadian dollar and rising energy prices.

Jobs have been created in sectors that depend on the wealth created by the manufacturing sector. This can all be found in the government's economic statement. I do not understand why the Conservatives refuse to read their own document. Page 30 clearly shows that all manufacturing sectors, except oil and coal, have seen a decrease in their real gross domestic product since 2005, including the following industries: machinery, paper, plastic, food and beverage, primary metals, textile, clothing, leather, wood, furniture and automobile. All those sectors have experienced negative growth since 2005. The Conservatives really are turning a blind eye on this reality by refusing to acknowledge the figures they give in their own document.

I forget to mention that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

Even the Conservatives admit, in their document, that there is a crisis in the manufacturing sector. They are hiding—just as the Minister of Finance hid during question period today—behind the fact that we have seen a net increase in job creation. Yes, we saw a net increase in job creation, but in what sectors? This information can be found in that same government document. I doubt the Conservatives will dispute the value of the their own document and the information therein.

Basically, jobs have been created in the public sector, construction and retail. However, those sectors cannot function on their own. When someone has a house built, they can do so because they have an income to pay for the house. Those who do not have a job cannot afford to buy a house. Furthermore, one of the current effects of the manufacturing crisis is a decrease in the number of construction projects in Quebec.

Insofar as commerce is concerned, if there are no consumers because people are not working, business will necessarily tail off. In my riding, or more specifically in Saint-Michel-des-Saints, two factories closed at the same time in August 2006. These were Louisiana Pacific factories. Management in the U.S. decided to close them. Two hundred and fifty good jobs were lost. People are trying to find someone to take over these factories, but it will be hard under a Conservative government that has not announced any measures to come to the assistance of the manufacturing sector.

When these 250 people lost their jobs, it was their livelihoods that they lost. They do not even get employment insurance any more. Some of them get social assistance. It is obvious and all the merchants in Saint-Michel-des-Saints will say that they have suffered steep declines in sales. Retailers cannot survive on their own.

The Conservatives have this magic thinking and are not concerned about manufacturing. This was true of the former industry minister in particular, who is now the foreign affairs minister. He obviously has not improved very much in view of the answer he gave today to a very important question about tortured Afghan prisoners. He gave a lackadaisical answer, a bit like the other member did a little while ago with his stupid attacks on the Bloc Québécois.

It is the same thing in the public sector. If jobs are to be created here, we need people first who have jobs and can pay taxes so that people can be hired. In places where there is some economic growth and increased employment, it is all in sectors that depend on other sectors, especially manufacturing. That is without counting all the services that depend on the manufacturing sector and are affected, the so-called corporate services such as engineering and consulting firms.

Closing our eyes to reality, as the Conservatives do, will just take us closer toward a catastrophe, which is already looking very serious. There is a slowdown in the United States—things are not going well—but they prefer just to close their eyes. As a Créditiste said some years ago, the Liberals led us to the edge of the precipice, the Conservatives will have us take one more step, and we will fall in for sure.

It is therefore important to recognize that reality and, as my hon. colleague said, if the people in the Conservative government took off their rose-coloured glasses, if they could shed that ideological bias which is more than conservative and is indeed ultra-conservative, they would see that measures are necessary and that state intervention is required. This is especially important since the bulk of our exports, to the U.S. in particular, are in the manufacturing sector. It represents between 80% and 85% of our exports. That is why, with the decline of the manufacturing sector, Quebec, which had a positive balance of trade in 2000, 2001 and 2002, has been having negative ones since 2003. In 2003, the value of our imports exceeded that of our exports by $2.2 billion. By 2004, the balance had dropped to minus $4.9 billion, and in 2005 and 2006, it was approximately minus $8.4 billion. Do not come and tell us that all is well; it is not. Because of the Conservatives' lack of action, Quebec is getting poorer.

We can clearly understand why the Conservative government is not particularly interested in helping the manufacturing sector. Its economic development strategy is entirely built on Alberta tar sands and on oil and gas development. Anytime this government announces new measures, they benefit the big oil companies first. The tax cut announced in the economic statement will essentially benefit those who make profits and, as I demonstrated, on average the manufacturing industry—not every company, but the industry on average—is running deficits and, being in the red, does not pay tax. Naturally, one industry stands out: the oil industry. The measure announced by the Conservative government will allow the country's five biggest oil companies to save, within five years, half a billion dollars a year in taxes. They will benefit from that measure, while all the other companies which are in difficulty will not.

We are making an appeal, and the motion brought forward by the member for Trois-Rivières is very clear. There are solutions, but people must open their eyes, end their magical thinking, and forget about laissez-faire. That is not the case; as I have just said: they have a strategy essentially based on hydrocarbons and petroleum. This is harmful to Quebec and also part of Ontario. This strategy is causing extreme harm to the manufacturing sector, as well as to Quebec and its regions. In Montreal and in Quebec City as well, small and medium-sized businesses are now in trouble and they need a great deal more support. I spoke about “magical thinking” and that is exactly how the former Minister of Industry—now the Minister of Foreign Affairs—is thinking when, for example, the government buys aircraft from Boeing and it does not require the company to ensure that the benefits for Quebec will be proportional in terms of Quebec's jobs and production in the Canadian aerospace industry—between 50% and 60% depending on the criteria used—saying that Quebec will eventually feel the benefits some day. The problem is that Boeing is located in Seattle; all the sub-contractors are in the Canadian west. Without action by this government to ensure benefits for Quebec, there will be practically none.

That is what is going on at present. They have caused harm to Quebec with this laissez-faire policy. In her motion, my colleague proposes a series of measures that are absolutely necessary and being called for by manufacturing associations. On the weekend, I listened again to Daniel Charron, the former managing director of the Quebec export manufacturers association, who was calling on the governments to intervene, to come to the aid of the manufacturing sector—in particular, the forestry sector—through support programs, investment and tax measures, but tax measures that help companies that are in trouble, not those who are making profits like the large oil companies, who are assured of being well served with this government, which is not the case for the regions of Quebec and the manufacturing sector.

It is fortunate that the Bloc is here to speak on behalf of the regions, the manufacturing sector, and the workers who make their living there.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Bloc for pointing out some of the industrial strategy challenges in the province of Quebec. We in the maritime region have the exact same problems.

I want to talk about the direction in which the Conservative government is going.

Sunday was Remembrance Day and we all commemorated and honoured our veterans and those who currently serve in our military. The Conservatives made specific promises to veterans in the last campaign. They said that upon forming government they would immediately extend VIP services to all widows of veterans and to all veterans. They also said that they would compensate and look after all people who were sprayed by defoliants from 1956 to 1984, but they only did it for the years 1966 and 1967. The government has said it does not have money for these people, but it gave $7 billion in additional cuts to big oil companies and big banks, which are making record profits under our current tax system, thanks very much. If it were not for our veterans and their families, we would not have the country we have today.

I would like the member to elaborate on what kind of heartless government would do that to the people who served our country and then turn around and ignore them the day after Remembrance Day.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I am not sure about the relevancy of that particular question to the motion, but I will allow the hon. member for Joliette to respond. It looks like he is ready to do so.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, you are right in saying that the subject is not directly related to the crisis in the manufacturing sector, but it is a further example of how heartless this government is. It does not care about people who are going through hard times economically or socially. That is clear from the way the government is currently preventing the House from voting on Bill C-269, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (improvement of the employment insurance system), which was introduced by the Bloc Québécois.

In the regions of Quebec, in every municipality—and this goes for the rest of Canada too—people need financial help when they lose their jobs temporarily so that they can get the training they need to find new jobs. However, this government is completely indifferent to the challenges facing workers who find themselves unemployed, just as it is indifferent to the unfortunate situations in which veterans find themselves, as the member pointed out.

That is how it is with everything. Whenever a sector is going through hard times and workers and their communities are affected by crisis, the government ignores it and chooses to focus on things that are going well. Obviously, what is going well is the oil industry. That is handy because they happen to be friends of the Conservative government, which heartlessly and with complete lack of concern leaves everyone else to fend for themselves.

I think the member illustrated that fact with yet another example. This is government for the rich by the rich.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday of last week, I had the opportunity to visit my dear colleague's constituency on behalf of the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec. We have helped Dessert & Passion through the Economic Development Agency of Canada. We are present in the region. We have helped make this business more competitive. We are present and we are there for companies.

Does my colleague recognize all the efforts that the Economic Development Agency of Canada is making in Quebec and even in his riding? We are in every region of Quebec, even regions represented by the Bloc Québécois.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The hon. member for Joliette has one minute for his reply.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois are working well. In our regions in Quebec, there are entrepreneurs. I would like to make special mention of a cooperative that is doing a wonderful job, which is exceptional for this sort of business.

This company has been able to develop, and it is not because of the Conservatives. It has received a little help from the Economic Development Agency of Canada, just as it did under the Liberals. Gone are the days when the government made policy and established programs to benefit only ridings represented by Conservative members.

The Liberals told us the same thing. The Conservatives' arrogance, after only 20 months in power, is frightening. It took the Liberals nearly 13 years to become as arrogant as the current government is now. Quebeckers do not like this sort of arrogance, and I am certain that when the next election is held, the Conservatives will pay the price.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today on a matter that is of great importance for Quebec and for my riding of Berthier—Maskinongé. I refer to the crises being experienced in all regions of Quebec in the forestry and manufacturing sectors, as well as the precarious situation in which thousands of workers have been thrust as a result.

The motion we introduced today calls upon the Conservative government to establish a series of measures to help the manufacturing and forestry sectors hard hit by the rising dollar and increased competition from new emerging countries, which are, as we know, capable of very low-cost mass production.

Our motion proposes concrete measures aimed at supporting businesses, such as loans to update production facilities, heavy investments, or tax measures to support innovation, research and development.

The Bloc Québécois also calls for a review of the trade laws to better protect our companies against unfair competition, dumping in particular, by bringing Canadian legislation more in line with that of other developed countries.

This is, moreover, what the Bloc Québécois is also proposing in its Bill C-411, soon to be debated in the House.

We are also calling upon the government to provide better financial support to the workers unfortunately affected by this crisis in the manufacturing sector. As a number of my colleagues have already pointed out today, this motion by the hon. member for Trois-Rivières has become necessary because this government has demonstrated, in its recent throne speech and its economic statement, its indifference to the difficult situation of all the men and women working in the manufacturing and forest industries and also the communities dependent on those industries.

In both cases, the Conservatives have demonstrated once again their total disdain for the lot of these thousands of workers who have been so greatly affected. This attitude appears all the more disdainful when we realize that the federal government has huge financial means with which to provide them with assistance. One need only think of the surplus it has amassed.

I am, however, not really surprised by the attitude of this government, which is being true to form. Once again, the Conservatives are choosing to do nothing to help the manufacturing and forestry sectors when they are in such crying need of help.

One must, however, acknowledge its consistency. When this government does decide to act, it tries to help its beloved petroleum industry based in western Canada, by reducing taxes. These companies, with their already huge profits, will be entitled to another hand up by this Conservative government.

However, tax reductions will be of no help to companies in the forestry and manufacturing sector because they are not turning a profit as a result of the crisis they are experiencing, a crisis brought on mainly by the policies of this laissez-faire government.

When the ministers responsible for the economic development of Quebec and for transportation babble on about how tax cuts will help these vulnerable sectors, they are demonstrating that they are actually unable to defend the interests of Quebeckers. Only the Bloc Québécois defends the interests of Quebec, as shown by this motion today.

Tax cuts benefit those who make profits. That is logical. We do not need lengthy economic studies to understand that when you record a loss, you do not pay taxes. Thus, many of the industries that are in trouble will not benefit from the measures announced by this government.

As pointed out today, Baronet, a furniture manufacturer in Sainte-Marie in Beauce—in the riding of one of our Conservative colleagues—announced last Friday that it was permanently shutting down its operations, resulting in the loss of 150 jobs, after attempting to restructure and get back on track for the past two years.

A Conservative member was elected in this riding. But to no avail.

Did tax cuts help this company? I do not believe so. This company was not turning a profit. I am convinced that the type of assistance we are proposing could have helped this company and its employees. By lowering taxes, the Conservatives have chosen to give their oil friends a generous gift just in time for Christmas. Unfortunately, a great number of Quebec workers will experience hard times this Christmas because of job losses in the forestry and manufacturing sectors. In my riding, and throughout Quebec, people have lost their jobs.

It is rather disappointing to note that this government refuses to help these companies in trouble and the workers that depend on them. I would add that it is especially shocking to note that the Conservative members from Quebec are going along with the irresponsible decisions of this government. It is shocking because the lack of action by the Conservatives is jeopardizing important sectors of the Quebec economy.

Let us look at the jobs lost in Quebec's manufacturing sector alone. Some 135,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Quebec—the equivalent of one worker in five—since December 31, 2002, including 65,000 since the Conservatives came to power. This precious government, which currently does not see any economic problems in Quebec or Canada, achieved these results at the economic level. Quebec accounted roughly for half the 275,000 jobs lost in Canada during that period. Quebeckers will remember. While the manufacturing sector represented 17.4% of the jobs in Quebec in 2004, it represented just 15% of the jobs in July 2007.

In my riding of Berthier—Maskinongé, which I have the honour of representing, there is a very significant manufacturing sector and that is the furniture sector. This industry plays an important role in Quebec's economy and has proven in the past to be able to respond to the new challenges of international competition. Now, in light of the new trade reality, this industry needs government support to help adjust. Let us not forget that this furniture industry saw a 22% cut in its labour force. It currently generates roughly 24,000 jobs compared to 25,000 jobs in 2005, 29,000 in 2002, and 30,500 in 2000. This is quite dramatic. We have to do something about this. The government has to take action to help these companies.

I have spoken about this a number of times in this House. In December 2006, I tabled a notice of motion calling on the federal government to implement an aid package to support the furniture industry as it adjusts to the rising Canadian dollar. I also asked for support to help the industry cope with fierce competition from emerging countries, a competition whereby Chinese imports have increased eight-fold, furniture imports six-fold, and bicycle imports five-fold. Unfortunately, the federal government chose not to present any aid package or research support program to help this industry adapt.

We all remember when the Canadian International Trade Tribunal declared that the Quebec bicycle industry was on the brink of being wiped out by Chinese imports. It concluded that the only thing that might limit the impact was the establishment of safeguards. The furniture industry even took an initiative in that regard. However, it backed off knowing that, despite favourable recommendations from the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, the government would not apply them.

For the future of jobs in these sectors and of the communities that depend on them, I ask all members, especially Conservative members from Quebec, who are sensitive to matters involving Quebec, to support the motion of the member for Trois-Rivières.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, over the last decade, the Liberal and Conservative plans for the manufacturing sector have been abysmal. When we look at the record, it was the Liberals, under the member for LaSalle—Émard, who introduced the notion of having a Korea trade agreement, which right now would cost our auto manufacturing sector. Ironically, the Liberal minister who was supposed to actually develop an auto policy, crossed the floor to the Conservatives and is now driving this home at the expense of our auto workers across the country.

Second, there is a connection with the Conservatives policy. The Conservatives have implemented a market policy under Transport Canada that is a feebate system, which is a tax on cars. Interestingly, it was done under the guise of incentivizing eco-efficient vehicles but it has done the exact opposite. The system they put in place is so flawed. Subcompact car sales have not gone down for those feebate vehicles. It is the same with the SUVs and large cars. It has had the exact opposite effect.

What is ironic is that right now auto workers are being laid off in Oshawa, Brantford and other parts of the country where their hard-earned tax-paying dollars are actually going overseas to subsidize those vehicles that are flooding into our market. We do not even have the ability to ship our cars back into places like South Korea. South Korean has put hundreds of thousands of cars into Canada's market while we have only put a few hundred into its market.

I would ask my colleague from the Bloc--

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.