Pauline Picard

[Raw Milk Cheese, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. The Canadian government has just banned cheese made from raw milk. In Quebec, producers, importers, retailers, restaurant owners, consumers, veterinarians and the provincial government disagree with this decision. The Quebec Liberal Party and even the Liberal Party of Canada also disagree.

Since cheese made from raw milk is already strictly regulated in Canada and nobody is complaining, why do the minister and his officials want to annoy us by prohibiting the sale of this cheese here?

[Textiles Monterey, April 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the announcement that the Textiles Monterey mill will reopen is another indication of the vitality and entrepreneurship of the people of Drummond. Last September, 270 jobs were lost after the company declared bankruptcy. In just six months, a group of former employees, both managers and workers, came up with a business proposal to acquire the company's assets and to specialize the new company's production.

The reopening of Textiles Monterey is the fruit of the collaborative efforts and great determination of all stakeholders: the employees, the union, the financial institutions, the FTQ solidarity fund, and the three levels of government. The success of this operation stems from the establishment of a financial network and, above all, a dialogue between local resources.

On behalf of all my fellow citizens of Drummond, I wish every success to the shareholders of the new Textiles Monterey company.

[Bloc Quebecois, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker,yesterday's byelections in the ridings of Lac-Saint-Jean,Papineau-Saint-Michel and Saint-Laurent-Cartierville confirmed Quebecers' support for the Bloc Quebecois.

In Papineau-Saint-Michel and in Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, which, as we know, remain two Liberal strongholds, candidates from the Bloc performed well. Our party is grateful to them.

As for Lac-Saint-Jean, the unequivocal choice of the people in that riding will bring among us the youngest member of this 35th Parliament. The election of that member confirmed the status of the Bloc Quebecois as official opposition.

Thanks to all voters who supported the Bloc. Congratulations to Michel Sarra-Bournet, Daniel Turp and Stéphan Tremblay. Welcome to the new member for Lac-Saint-Jean, who will join us in defending Quebec's interests and our sovereignist option.

[Petitions, March 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition with over 1,500 names from the riding of Drummond. The petitioners call on Parliament to withdraw bills C-11 and C-12, and return to Quebec full responsibility for measures to protect and maintain employment and manpower training, including unemployment insurance and the associated budgets. They criticize the employment insurance reform and call on the government to establish real job creation programs.

[Socio-Economic Summit In Quebec City, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the socio-economic summit in Quebec City ended yesterday. The Bloc Quebecois wishes to salute this event, which was successful in getting groups in Quebec to work together toward a common goal. This summit is another demonstration of Quebec's own way of addressing the problems facing our societies. It raises great hopes.

The Quebec model builds on union instead of division, on active participation instead of strict individualism, on putting public finances in order in an orderly and equitable fasion instead of through savage cuts.

As Lucien Bouchard, the premier, said, Quebec is the winner in this summit. Together, the people of Quebec have achieved great things. Together, they will keep on achieving great things. Quebec is really on the move.

[Health Care System, March 11th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the government has already spent $12 million on the national forum on health. And it is now setting aside $65 million for a research fund.

Does the minister realize that he could have used this $77 million in public funds in a different way, if only the federal government agreed to withdraw from this area, which comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces and in which it is interfering through its spending powers?

[Health Care System, March 11th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The minister proposes to establish a health services research fund, on which he will spend $65 million over five years, and whose mandate is to identify, and I quote: "what works best in our medical system" and "what does not".

How can the minister, on the one hand, threaten the quality of health care by cutting transfer payments to the provinces and, on the other hand, spend $65 million on a committee to find out what does not work in the system?

[Reproductive Technologies, March 8th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, what is the government waiting for before it legislates? Is it waiting for another crisis like the contaminated blood scandal?

Will the secretary of state recognize at least that the voluntary moratorium implemented last July is a total failure and that the situation is getting out of control and will he assure us today that he will take his responsibilities and legislate immediately?

[Reproductive Technologies, March 8th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

In November 1993, the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies, which cost more than $28 million, underlined the need to legislate against the marketing of human embryos.

How can he explain the fact that, two years after the tabling of the Baird report which strongly recommended the criminalization of egg trafficking, nothing has yet been done by this government to follow up on the commission's recommendation?

[Speech From The Throne, March 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for Longueuil for his comments. I totally agree with what he just said.

First of all, I prepared a list of all the commitments from the first throne speech which have been reheated, as we say, and reintroduced in the new throne speech, to make us believe that they are new commitments. This is a replay of the first speech. These are promises which were made and not kept.

The government promised to improve integrity, appoint an ethics counsellor, introduce a bill on lobbyists and institute free votes.

The ethics counsellor is normally appointed by the Prime Minister, not the House. His or her advice is secret and nothing guarantees that the government will take it into account.

The bill on lobbyists which was passed, was a very watered down version of Liberal promises.

As to free votes, there have not been any. There have even been sanctions against those who stepped out of line, as we have seen when the firearm control bill was put to a vote.

Then we were promised support for education and research. Instead we had cuts in established programs financing and in transfers for education. As I told you a while ago, the result is that universities must cut, including in the area of research support.

The social security system was to be reformed in close co-operation with the provinces; this was another promise. What we had was the Canada social transfer and a $7 billion cut over two years in the areas of health, education and social security, without any consultation with the provinces.

The replacement of the GST is something we are still waiting for.

We were promised that health would be protected. A national forum on health was put into place. We had been told: "in co-operation with the provinces". We ended up with a $4.5 billion cut over two years under the new Canada social transfer, and the national health forum was criticized by all the provinces. It is still going around somewhere and no one knows what it is doing and what results it will produce. At the present time, all the provinces have taken steps on their own to make their own health reform, because health management is a provincial jurisdiction. So what is the federal government doing with a national health forum?

I have nothing against the people who sit on that forum. They are certainly qualified people, but what has it got to do with the provinces? It is our reform. Health ministers in each province are taking care of our needs. The federal government is spending billions of dollars on window dressing. It says it is taking care of the health system.

I would like to tell people who are watching us, Quebecers and Canadians alike: Please do not let yourselves be fooled by big programs, big forums like the one on health care.