Pierre Pettigrew

[Singer Company, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, precisely because I wanted to spend some time on this case, on the substance of the case.

It has now been seven weeks since I became Minister of Human Resources Development. We are busy with negotiations on the transfer of manpower programs, as well as with the social union and the ministerial council. So when people say I waste my time talking, they are wrong. When I do say something, it has to be to the point. That is probably what bothers them. They do not like it when I talk, because we are working on co-operation.

We have a lot of compassion for the Singer employees, and because these workers deserve more than pretty speeches, we will examine the substance of the case.

[Singer Company, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was given a report on the Singer company which I have not had time to read yet. In fact, what I spent too much time doing was discussing child poverty with the provinces all day yesterday in the council of federal and provincial ministers, all of which took place in a great spirit of co-operation.

I can assure you that was the situation I talked about all day. Our department is very active, since the recommendation is on my desk, and I will look at it within the next few hours.

[Official Languages, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am well aware of the concerns about official languages generated by the Government of Canada's proposal for an expanded role for the provinces in the design and delivery of labour market programs.

I am very confident that the necessary safeguards have been put in place to ensure the linguistic needs of Canadians will be met

under the new arrangement. Actually, the Employment Insurance Act provides for: "the availability of assistance under the benefit and measures in either official language, where there is significant demand for that assistance in that language, no matter who delivers the program".

So I am fully confident that the current round of negotiations with the provinces will be a unique opportunity to improve employment services for Canadians and to deliver labour market development programs targeted to the needs of Canadians in this new economy.

[Program For Older Worker Adjustment, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, would the Government of Quebec like to continue the program? It would be interesting to find out. What I can say is that up to now only the more populous provinces have agreed to take part and that the less populous regions have been put at a disadvantage by the system.

The Government of Canada is trying to find another way to help older workers, which will be fairer to all regions, because too many of them are not participating in the system at the moment.

[Program For Older Worker Adjustment, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, allow me to first reject the totally inappropriate introduction by the opposition member on my lack of compassion for children. I can tell you that yesterday was a great day for children in Canada and I am delighted to have been part of it, despite the rhetoric the other side takes such pleasure in.

The federal-provincial program you mention was so successful that its budget was used up much more quickly than planned. It is also a fact that not all provinces participated and that certain provinces do not want us to continue.

I too am concerned about the future of POWA. It is however a program that will have to be terminated. In the coming years, the less populous provinces-

[Poverty, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate this somewhat offensive rhetoric, considering the great importance of child poverty, but this is no laughing matter.

What took place yesterday was a remarkable consensus between the provinces and the federal government. What we have done today is serious work, not petty rhetoric. The Government of Canada has doubled the income supplement for low income families. We have introduced an employment insurance program which includes measures to put Canadians back to work faster and to protect low income recipients with children.

Our government spends $5 billion a year on Canada's children. That is what we are doing.

[Poverty, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would most certainly like to thank the opposition for its question, since it will give me the chance to reassure Canadians and to tell them that the first meeting of federal and provincial social affairs ministers, which was touted this morning as the most harmonious federal-provincial meeting in years, specifically addressed the priority we wished to give to children.

That is what we discussed all day yesterday, and we reached a certain consensus on solutions. In fact, yesterday the council of ministers asked some of our officials to prepare options on a system which would specifically benefit children over the next few years.

More than ever before, this federation will be making a very great effort for children in a spirit of co-operation between the provinces and the Government of Canada.

[Employment Insurance, November 28th, 1996]

The system will take effect at the beginning of January. Interpretation measures have already been communicated to our main offices, and I can assure you that things will go very well.

[Employment Insurance, November 28th, 1996]

But I am perfectly serious. I do not understand why the opposition does not want to hear the answer. They are asking me questions-

[Employment Insurance, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have already explained on a number of occasions in the House that the system was of course going to come into effect at the beginning of January, as scheduled. Certain workers will, of course, receive less coverage, but those working under 15 hours will now be covered.

There are people who, until now, were caught in a cycle-