Mr. Speaker, this is what I call lack of leadership. This government should be the one to propose concrete ground-breaking measures, but it is the opposition that will have to do it since the government seems to lack imagination, but that will come.
House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2006, with 55% of the vote.
International Interests in Mobile Equipment (aircraft equipment) Act November 15th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, this is what I call lack of leadership. This government should be the one to propose concrete ground-breaking measures, but it is the opposition that will have to do it since the government seems to lack imagination, but that will come.
International Interests in Mobile Equipment (aircraft equipment) Act November 15th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I know that I might have offended the parliamentary secretary when I talked about the realities that we have to face in Quebec, particularly regarding this non-existent aerospace policy at the federal level.
He might have found his little visit interesting, but I also invite him to go and meet the people from Bombardier or Pratt & Whitney who face problems daily.
We know that the Brazilian government has financed an average of 80% of Embraer sales. And what is our federal government doing? I think we are now at 37%. We are far from meeting the needs.
We know that investment in the area of industrial research is essentially increasing by about 8% every year, while the money invested by the federal government stays more or less at the same level. There is no increase while the needs are growing.
If the member feels threatened, he can talk to his Minister of Transport, or to the Minister of Industry, to ensure that this government will have some sort of aerospace policy to propose tomorrow. However, as far as I am concerned, this government is not at all giving Pratt & Whitney and Bombardier the help that the industry needs.
International Interests in Mobile Equipment (aircraft equipment) Act November 15th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It is a bit strange that it has been put to me. The government should be asked this question.
We have been waiting for years for an aerospace policy. The Liberals have been in power for a very long time, for too long, actually, and have never introduced any sort of aerospace policy. We have been experiencing problems.
When my colleague was the transport critic, I know he worked on this issue. Since the government does not seem to be doing anything, the Bloc Québécois will soon present an aerospace policy. This government is slowing us down. Is it short of ideas because the aerospace industry is an issue that concerns Quebec? If Ontario had been concerned, would the government have moved more swiftly? I am really wondering.
As to my colleague's question, I think we should invest more in industrial research and research and development. This is a very important foundation. We should also support the industry at the international level. We do know that other companies in the world are subsidized much more heavily than Canadian companies.
We will have to invest through the technology partnerships Canada program. This would be a way to help the industry. We should also encourage exports. This market is essentially an international market, and not necessarily a Canadian market. We should support the industry.
We could discuss this at length, but, personally, I would expect the government to propose something. If it had any leadership and initiative, and if it was the least bit interested, it would come up with concrete measures. But, given this lack of leadership, it is probably the Bloc Québécois that will present an aerospace policy which will meet the industry's needs.
International Interests in Mobile Equipment (aircraft equipment) Act November 15th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I want to say from the outset that the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-4, as we said when the bill was at second reading.
As we know, this bill seeks to implement two international agreements, namely the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment and the Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Aircraft Equipment.
Of course, this was aptly mentioned by some hon. members previously, but these two agreements, negotiated under the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law, in cooperation with the International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO, whose head office is in Montreal, were adopted during a meeting of participating countries held in Cape Town, South Africa, in the fall of 2001.
Currently, 32 countries have signed or ratified the convention and the protocol. While the European Union intends to do so, Canada signed these agreements in March 2004. The purpose of these agreements is to have signatory countries standardize their legislation with respect to the security—or mortgage, in layman's language—lenders take on mobile equipment such as aircraft or trains.
These agreements also provide for the creation of an international aircraft registry that will make it easy for lenders to find out about the state of an aircraft or whether it has been mortgaged, by how much and by whom.
At the present time, there is a great deal of confusion. A carrier can be subject to the law of one country, have loans from lenders in two different countries, owe money to an aircraft engine manufacturer in a fourth country, who has placed a security on one engine in the event of non-payment. Worse still, when lenders decide to execute a seizure, the good itself could be located in a fifth country.
If these countries do not standardize their laws, especially with respect to the order in which creditors are paid, endless legal battles can ensue, leading to long and expensive delays when the airline company is unable to make payments.
Furthermore, contradictory legislation causes a great deal of uncertainty and increases the risk for the lender, who often compensates for this by charging higher interest. Moreover, currently every country keeps its own aircraft registry using its own criteria, which might create a great deal of confusion.
Passing this bill and other similar legislation in other parts of the world will help end the confusion, reduce risks to lenders and, thus, costs to borrowers. It will help improve the capacity of airlines to purchase aircraft. In turn, this will help the aerospace industry which sells the aircraft, not to mention that it will be easier for companies in the industry to deliver the aircraft under lease, if their assets are better protected.
Before ratifying the convention and the related protocol, Canada must first adapt a number of its laws. It has to abolish its national aircraft registry and replace it with the international registry. It also has to amend its Bank Act, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, and Winding-Up and Restructuring Act. That is the purpose of Bill C-4.
Of course, this legislation can deal only with matters of federal jurisdiction. Matters relating to loan guarantees are more matters of civil law, which comes under provincial jurisdiction. Therefore, the implementation of the convention and protocol will be possible only if Quebec and the provinces also amend their own legislation.
All the more reason to involve the provinces closely in any negotiations and in the signing of international agreements. In addition to allowing them to defend the interests of their citizens, such involvement would make the implementation of international treaties much easier.
Let there be no mistake. I hope the government realizes that, while Bill C-4 is a step in the right direction, it does not solve the real problem in the aerospace industry, which is the lack of an aerospace policy.
In case this government has forgotten, especially because of its lack of action, Quebec's aerospace industry, which has sales of $14 billion and which employs more than 40,000 people, accounts for close to half of high-tech jobs in Canada. Of the 250 companies in this sector, 240 are SMEs. It is urgent that the government put in place a real aerospace policy.
The aerospace industry exports 89% of its production and must be competitors, which get much more support.
We know that two of the main employers in Quebec's aerospace industry are Bombardier and Pratt & Whitney. They have facilities in Longueuil in my riding. Both of these jewels of Quebec's industry have condemned the insufficient federal support for an industry which is facing strong competition. If the federal government does not act, the United States or Great Britain or some other country will move in. Endangering these two jewels of the aerospace industry would not only threaten 40,000 jobs; it would also be a hard blow to numerous small and medium-sized enterprises serving that sector.
As the Minister for Transport was saying, the aerospace industry is to Quebec what the automobile industry is to Ontario. I want to say to the minister that it is time to take action and move quickly to implement a real aerospace policy. Ontario has been benefiting for decades, in terms of federal support, from special regulations, substantial grants and even special trade agreements like the Auto Pact.
Ratification of international agreements is one thing, and the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-4 in principle. However, we also must act swiftly on the domestic scene. Besides, Canada has nothing to be proud of, since it is practically the only developed country which has no clear and consistent policy in this area. Everywhere else in the world, it has been acknowledged that this sector must have the support of high technology research and development before it can design its final product. In other words, huge investments must precede marketing. Therefore, this industry is highly research and development intensive. Other countries have understood that, but Canada still has not. This is why the Bloc Québécois has been calling for an aeronautics and aerospace policy for years now.
As far as Bill C-4 is concerned, the convention has a number of advantages for the transportation industry. By clarifying and harmonizing the rules concerning securities and inaugurating a single and readily accessible register, the convention lessens the risks for lenders and for lessors. If the contract is less risky, financing will become easier for airlines to obtain, and the cost of borrowing, that is the interest rate, is also likely to decrease. All of this ought to make things easier for airlines wishing to acquire new aircraft as well as improving prospects for the aircraft construction industry.
The purpose of Bill C-4 is to adapt federal legislation to the requirements of the convention, Among other things, it includes the abolition of the Canadian registry of aircraft and transfer to the international register; amendments to the Bank Act, to replace the references to the national registry with references to the international registry; amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to harmonize the payment order lists for the secured creditors, and amendments to the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act to ensure that a company cannot give as a guarantee something that is already used as an international guarantee, and to the Winding-up and Restructuring Act for the same purpose.
For all these reasons the Bloc Québécois will be supporting Bill C-4.
Canada's Olympic and Paralympic Athletes November 1st, 2004
Mr. Speaker, this summer more than 450 athletes from Quebec and Canada took part in the Olympic and Paralympic Games in Athens. These men and women surpassed themselves in competition with the world's elite athletes in their respective disciplines.
Even more than the medals and the podium finishes, their work and effort must be recognized. Participating in the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games does not just happen. It involves years of patient preparation. It requires enormous sacrifices in order to attain excellence.
I want to salute Nancy Morin, Pierre Joly and Benoît Huot, the latter a swimmer from Longueuil who won six medals, five of them gold, and broke three world records.
Men and women distinguish themselves not only in victory but through honest and intense participation. To all the athletes, I say, bravo.
Transportation October 26th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, given the significant financial involvement of Quebec City's social and economic sector and the major economic and environmental impacts of such a project, could the minister tell this House if he intends to provide an answer quickly, and when he plans to do so?
Transportation October 26th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, all the stakeholders in the Quebec City area are wondering why the Minister of Transport will not fund part of the study to improve passenger transportation between Quebec City and Montreal and, at the same time, the feasibility of a high-speed train in that corridor.
How can the Minister of Transport justify his refusal, when a consensus exists among the stakeholders in the Quebec City area, who are themselves prepared to assume half the costs, and when this connection is crucial for the economic development of both the region and Quebec as a whole?
Joyeux retraités de Longueuil October 20th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, this year a Longueuil seniors' organization, Les Joyeux retraités de Longueuil, turns 25 years old.
The group has organized numerous activities to celebrate their silver jubilee. This past Sunday, I had the pleasure of attending one of these events, a musical evening featuring the group Nos voix, nos visages and singer Michel Louvain.
This organization provides its 1,700 members aged 50 and up with opportunities to socialize through numerous activities, among them volunteering in the organization of major sports activities in the area and visiting homes for the aged with their choir in order to brighten the residents' day.
Since my election in 1997, I have had the opportunity to meet a number of the Joyeux retraités and to attend their activities regularly. I have seen their commitment to and their generosity toward the population of Longueuil, and I can tell you that their motto “Still young at heart” suits them to a T.
Today I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for all the joy they have brought to people over the past 25 years and wish them many more years of doing so.
Air Canada October 19th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. Minister of Transport is prepared to ensure that the maintenance centre remains in Montreal, can he give us the assurance that it will be one as big as the current one, which provides some 2,000 jobs, so that we do not end up with five people left at this centre, while all the others are located outside Montreal?
What assurances can he give us?
Air Canada October 19th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, the minister must know that the restructuring of Air Canada is a source of very serious concern, particularly in the Montreal area, where the company is headquartered, but things could change considerably following this potential restructuring.
What assurances can the Minister of Transport give us that not only will the company's headquarters remain in Montreal but that it will not become another empty shell, its workforce and decision making power having been decentralized to subsidiaries outside Montreal?