Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise in this House to comment on this government's second speech from the throne that was delivered in the House last week.
In having this speech delivered, the Prime Minister's did something rather unusual that clearly reflects the disarray of the Liberal government. This speech comes at a very particular time, that is, a few months after the victory of the no side, which will be short-lived. After the October 30th referendum, English Canada suddenly realized the scope of the changes demanded by Quebecers, That realization has given rise to two completely opposite trends among Canadians from the rest of the country and their leaders.
On one side, there are those who favoured reflection and careful analysis, which is normal after such an event. These people have already begun to consider what will happen after Quebec achieves sovereignty and are now trying to define a new Canada with a new partner: Quebec.
On the other side, there is the federal government, which is gripped by panic. It is sad to see that the members of cabinet, who claim to be able to lead the country, are the ones most reluctant to act responsibly. Instead of taking note of the referendum results and drawing the necessary conclusions rather than the ones they would like to impose, they reacted in an immature and inconsistent fashion.
The speech that was delivered last Tuesday has three themes: the economy, social security for Canadians and national unity.
First, let us deal with what the speech has to say about the economy. The speech announces with fanfare that the government will do everything possible in order to help young people find jobs. It contains a proposal to double the number of summer jobs for students in the federal public service. The irony is that at the very same moment the government is laying off 45,000 public servants.
And yet, this government has committed already to help young people. That was supposed to be done through better support for research and education. The fact is, however, that the Canada social transfer will be cut by seven billion dollars over two years. Universities are being forced to cut research, tuition fees will increase, which will have an adverse effect on access to university for young people. On the one hand, they are singing the virtues of a strong economy for the future, and on the other they are jeopardizing that future by loading university graduates down with debt. What a difference between words and actions.
To boost the economy, the government committed to eliminating the GST and replacing it with another tax that dovetailed more smoothly with the provincial tax. The Bloc Quebecois had suggested that it be scrapped entirely and this area of taxation be transferred to the provinces. We are still awaiting action from the government, and we hear not a word about the GST.
The same applies to sound public finances. The government made a commitment to make better use of the taxpayers' money in order to control its deficit. In reality, far from tightening up its administration, the federal government is laying its hands on the workers' money by appropriating the unemployment fund surplus, although it has not contributed to that fund for some years now. Once again they will dump on someone else, praising themselves to the Canadian public by saying: "See what a good government we are. We have cut the deficit by five billion dollars". What they have done is dip into the unemployment insurance fund, to which they no longer contribute. It is the taxpayers, both workers and employers, who are helping reduce the deficit from their own
pockets, whereas those funds ought to have been used to really provide us with job creation measures as promised in the last red book.
The Liberal government got itself elected with its slogan of "jobs, jobs, jobs". So where are those jobs? Now, instead of giving us jobs, they are taking away money, five billion dollars from the most needy in our society. Instead of using it to help them find jobs and create measures for that purpose, they are putting it toward the deficit. They are dumping the problem onto the provinces and the poor. That is what is so offensive. Unfortunately, once again, there is a wide gap between words and action.
Now, to address the notion of social security contained in the throne speech. The government has tried in vain to disguise the fact that it has been engaged in dismantling the social security safety net for the past two years, particularly in the areas of health and unemployment insurance. I can tell you something about health, because it is part of my responsibility.
A few months ago, the Minister of Human Resources Development tabled a reform proposal entitled employment insurance. It seems to me that we take out insurance to help us, in the event a disaster or a mishap, to rebuild or start afresh. Here we are talking about employment insurance. What is employment insurance. It amounts to taking $5 billion from taxpayers and putting it towards the $600 billion deficit.
Taxpayers are not being provided with jobs, they are having their money taken away from them. No one is creating jobs for them, they are being driven to welfare. When they are no longer getting social assistance or anything at all, where can they go knocking? They will go and get welfare. They have to eat. They get no help finding jobs. You know, it costs money to look for a job too. How are we going to help them find a job when we take their last nickel?
This proposal has elicited a lot of criticism and led to many demonstrations. I do not understand. We in the Bloc see people every week, who come to tell us that the reform makes no sense. I imagine the Liberal members must have the same sort of reaction in their ridings.
We should join together and tell the new Minister of Human Resources Development that it makes no sense, that we have to go back to the drawing board. Nobody wants anything to do with this reform; it penalizes everyone. It even puts women back 40 years. Something must be done. The people are protesting against this regressive anti-job reform that will create poverty.
Allow me to quote a short excerpt from page 80 of the red book, which deals with health care reform: "A comprehensive re-examination of Canada's health care spending is required. Without doubt, part of the immediate pressure on the program has arisen from the decision of the Conservative government to steadily withdraw from health care funding, thus passing costs onto the provinces. Economic conditions may change, but the health care requirements of Canadians will continue. It is essential to provide financial certainty and predictability for our health care planning".
What nice promises. Those who claimed they wanted to revamp medicare are now launching a full-scale attack against the health care system as a whole. The Canada social transfer will lead to additional cuts in the order of $4.5 billion over two years in the health care sector alone. In Quebec, the shortfall will amount to more than $650 million this year and almost $2 billion in 1997-98.
Is this what this government calls providing financial certainty and predictability for our health care planning? In the recent throne speech, the government claims to be open to new methods and directions in order to preserve national values. In this case, it is high time the federal government considered transferring total health care funding to Quebec and the provinces. This would eliminate duplication and considerably reduce the size of the bureaucracy.
The health department employs 8,000 people and spends more than $1 billion every year on bureaucratic organization and administration of all sorts.
If the entire health budget were transferred to Quebec and the provinces, decisions could be made closer to the people and implemented so as to meet their needs. In the end, the health of Canadians and Quebecers would benefit.
Concerning national unity and what was said on the subject in the speech from the throne, you must admit that it is not normal for a country 130 years old, a country that boasts about being the best in the world, to have to put the national unity issue on its priority list, along with the economy and social security. Yet, this is what this country has been doing for many years.
To conclude, I would like to say that we in the Bloc Quebecois have this to say to the Liberal Party: The right of Quebecers to decide on their future is not debatable, period.