Michel Gauthier

[Liberal Government, June 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, rising to boast of the fact that there are now one and a half million children living in poverty in Canada, that 60% of unemployed workers are now ineligible for EI, and that hepatitis C victims are being ignored by this government, shows a lack of compassion that is truly scandalous.

Is the Prime Minister not proving to us that not only his entire government but he himself have run out of ideas?

[Liberal Government, June 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, one year later, this government, which was supposed to be launching us into the third millennium, is stagnating, marking time, bogged down, and has apparently run out of ideas.

Will the Prime Minister admit that his government is so unable to take advantage of the favourable economic context, which makes its life easier, that even its members, when questioned by journalists, cannot come up with anything significant this government has done?

[Liberal Government, June 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, one year later, this government, which was supposed to be launching us into the third millennium, is stagnating—

[Alliance Quebec, June 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's answer is far from satisfactory. I will give the minister another chance.

Does the minister think the Government of Canada should provide up to 90% of the funding of an organization that is proposing civil disobedience and the partition of Quebec? Does he think that a 90% funding level is appropriate?

[Alliance Quebec, June 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, despite what the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs has just said, the new president of Alliance Quebec says he was assured by a Treasury Board official on the weekend that there would be no problem for the grant from Ottawa.

Given this assurance, are we to understand that the case has in fact already been heard and that, regardless of Alliance Quebec's activities—including partition, which the minister did not mention, civil disobedience, and a court challenge of Bill 101—the grant is in the bag?

[Employment Insurance, May 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to understand that these young people have worked, paid premiums and are thus entitled to employment insurance benefits, whether he likes it or not.

Does the minister not find it unacceptable that young people who decide to enter the job market and who unfortunately lose their jobs are forced to go back to school because the minister says so? If these young people are not entitled to employment insurance benefits, why does the minister make them pay premiums?

[Employment Insurance, May 27th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Human Resources Development recognized that his government had deliberately made it harder for young people to qualify for employment insurance, so that they will stay in school.

The minister claims in all seriousness that the government made cuts to the employment insurance program for the good of young people.

My question to the Minister of Human Resources Development is this: Is it truly his government's intention, through its employment insurance reform, to deny benefits to three out of four young people, so as to force them to go back to school?

[Points Of Order, May 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to be disrespectful, quite the contrary.

I will simply say that I have reviewed the House of Commons Debates , and nowhere are these words attributed to the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot. I do not see why he should have to give an explanation for words that are not attributed to him.

[Points Of Order, May 26th, 1998]

Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

[Employment Insurance, May 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, such comments make no sense.

Will the minister admit that his system is ridiculous and is much too hard on young Canadians, given that only one in four is eligible for employment insurance? Can he not admit and understand that?