Michel Gauthier

[Canada Social Transfer, June 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, a year ago, rumours were flying that the Canada assistance plan was headed for the chopping block. In the last budget, it was announced that the cash payments to the provinces for social programs would be cut by $7 billion within two years, which was the amount previously allocated to social assistance.

Does the Minister of Finance confirm that the Canada social transfer's sole objective is to progressively reduce to zero the federal government's contribution to social assistance funding, while preserving its ability to continue setting national standards?

[Unemployment Insurance, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can make pretty speeches and juggle the figures, but the fact remains that the number of workers who are no

longer entitled to unemployment insurance because of the government's cutbacks and are now on welfare is absolutely shocking.

That being said, how can he justify the fact that the unemployment insurance reform his cabinet, his government, is considering will, according to his own analysis, affect people with incomes of less than $25,000 annually, in other words, workers whose employment status is precarious, who are at the bottom of the wage scale, the neediest in our society, and that these people may be permanently disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits as a result of his cutbacks?

[Unemployment Insurance, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, considering what was indicated in the last federal budget and what was leaked to the newspapers last weekend, the Prime Minister should give us some assurances or confirmation.

Now that for the past six months there has been no net job creation in this country, would the Prime Minister confirm that the plan now before cabinet would oblige young people entering the labour market to work for 26 weeks full time-six full months-before they were protected under the unemployment insurance plan? Is that what he has to offer the people of Shawinigan, which depends even more than other cities in this country on government programs?

[Unemployment Insurance, June 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, at a time when the economy is in low gear, with almost zero growth during the first quarter, the statistics tell us that for the sixth month in a row, there has been no net job creation in Quebec.

Meanwhile, the federal cabinet is looking at a new plan for reducing unemployment insurance benefits. Clearly, Ottawa has decided to reduce its deficit at the expense of the unemployed.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that the federal cabinet is putting the finishing touches on a plan to reduce unemployment insurance benefits that would cut $1.6 billion from the plan?

[Minister Of Canadian Heritage, June 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that one of the functions of Mr. Gervais's firm is to organize meetings between the minister or senior officials of his department and the people it lobbies for, does the Minister of Canadian Heritage realize the situation he puts his senior officials in when they are questioned by a lobbyist who is a friend of the minister, his fundraiser and the recipient of untendered contracts from him? Does he realize that he thus makes it impossible for his officials to say no to anything?

[Minister Of Canadian Heritage, June 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we understand the minister's familiarity with Gervais-Gagnon, because this is the firm that does his fundraising, does him favours and lobbies him.

Would the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell us whether he took the precaution-the question is a simple one-of informing the Prime Minister that this gentleman was not only his friend and his fundraiser, but that he was also a lobbyist representing associations such as the Canadian Tennis Association, which last year received $500,000 in funding from the Minister of Canadian Heritage?

[Minister Of Canadian Heritage, June 8th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister continued to defend his Minister of Canadian Heritage and insisted the opposition provide new facts on the minister's $2,000 supper. The official opposition has learned that Richard Gervais is not only the Minister of Canadian Heritage's political organizer and fundraiser and the recipient of untendered contracts from him, but Mr. Gervais also lobbies for various associations and businesses.

It seems to me that my preamble speaks for itself. I therefore ask my question. Would the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell us whether he informed the Prime Minister that Mr. Gervais was not only his fundraiser and friend and the recipient of his contracts, but that he also lobbied the minister on behalf of a number of associations including the Canadian Tennis Association and Planetary Sports Television?

[Supply, June 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, could the President of the Treasury Board please confirm that this bill is the same in every respect as those passed in previous years?

[Crtc, June 7th, 1995]

Given the absolutely unprecedented attack by the CRTC chairman-not just anyone but the person appointed by the government to head the CRTC-, how can the minister continue to claim that the government followed normal procedures in this matter? How can he make such a claim, when it is quite obvious that all government decisions have directly benefited Power DirecTv, in which the Prime Minister's son-in-law has interests?

[Crtc, June 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I will not take long. Given the kind of answer I am getting, I will try to make my question shorter and clearer. Perhaps then the minister will understand.