Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the word liar.
Lost his last election, in 2004, with 43% of the vote.
Tax Credits May 22nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the word liar.
Tax Credits May 22nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I apologize for shouting the word menteur, because of the prevailing wind, at the leader of the Bloc Quebecois.
Tax Credits May 22nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I did indeed call out menteur while looking at several Bloc members.
If the leader of the Bloc Quebecois felt he was the target of this—I repeat, felt he was the target—then I reckon a strong north wind must have blown directly in his face.
I apologize to the other 21 members present.
Government Contracts May 22nd, 2002
Liar.
Société Radio-Canada May 21st, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I do not understand Radio-Canada. It is refusing to continue negotiations with the communications union, following a very close vote not to accept of 50% plus three votes.
It is now denying the Canadian public its right to news and public affairs broadcasting.
It must not be forgotten that union members were locked out by Radio-Canada on March 23, 2002, moments after they began what was just a 24-hour strike.
Out of respect for its employees and for the public, Radio-Canada's board of directors should take a few moments and decide to return to the bargaining table.
Petitions May 21st, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of presenting a petition signed by 24,804 residents of many communities in Quebec, who are asking the Government of Canada to take the measures required to pay off the national debt, which is the main cause of the tax burden and of the great poverty of peoples.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I listened to the comments made by the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. It is true that he is disappointed. He said that he was disappointed by my comments, but he did not mention any percentage. I thought that he was only disappointed by 1% of my comments. It would not be so bad if it is only 1% of my comments. I would still be doing pretty well.
In the end, the softwood lumber issue is one that is complex. It is easy to get lost in figures. I referred to newspaper articles and that is to be expected. It is in the news these days. The media are watching us.
In any case, with respect to the motion that I moved in the House of Commons, I had said that we needed to come up with a new program. We need to work together.
I appreciate his speech. Whatever happens, we need to be there for forestry workers in Quebec and Canada to find a new solution together with the present government.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the comments from my colleague. I was not talking about agriculture, but about lumber. The member said the government was wimpish. Wimpish as in soft, I guess, because, in the lumber industry, we do have soft wood and hard wood, 2x4s and 4x4s.
The member of the Canadian Alliance said that public money has only been spent on other industries. Let me point out to him that the Department of Natural Resources got $720 million this year compared to $638 million last year. New ministers have just been appointed. The minister responsible is from Vancouver. Forestry is one of his main priorities. He works hard on developing forest policies. The Minister for International Trade does a good job too.
We are talking today on behalf of forest workers. That is what is important. We need to work together to come up with a new program so that Canada is not rapped on the knuckles and told it is subsidizing softwood lumber. We need a social program to help the softwood lumber industry.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra.
Today, we are debating a motion tabled by the Bloc Quebecois member for Joliette and asking that the government set up an assistance program for the softwood lumber industry and its workers, to support them in the face of an unjust decision by the American government.
The hon. member for Joliette is cautious in his use of terms. He is using the word “unjust”, but I would go further. He is right when he says that it is unjust, because this decision attacks the credibility of our forestry workers.
I would go further. I would say that, with this decision, President George W. Bush is engaging in trade terrorism. As we know, Bill Clinton make speeches in Quebec, where he attracts many people, and he will also travel to Toronto and elsewhere in Canada. We know that the former U.S. president is opposed to Canadian softwood lumber. It is the same with his wife, Hillary Clinton, and with Edward Kennedy. They are all opposed to Canadian softwood lumber.
On April 10, I tabled a motion similar to that of the Bloc Quebecois, which read: “That, in the opinion of this House, the government should establish a new housing construction program in Canada for aboriginal and Inuit communities, with a view to keeping Canadian softwood lumber in the country”.
As we know, members of this House, both from the opposition and the government, have been making representations for a number of months now. The minister responsible for this issue has defended the government's position very well so far, but today is today. Cabinet has done a good job for Canada, but today we are faced with a decision, and in two weeks it will be too late. What are we doing to prepare for this?
Today's debate comes at a most appropriate time. Some may claim that our plants were not affected by the situation last year, but it is not true. We know that they were seriously affected, even though there were quotas. We also know that the hon. Jean Charest, the Liberal leader at the Quebec National Assembly, is also asking for help for softwood lumber workers. Recently, the Quebec government, through its premier, asked the same thing from the federal government.
Today, we are in this dilemma. We will be speaking on behalf of forest workers. We have forest workers in the Abitibi area, and throughout Quebec and Canada. I am speaking now for the benefit of those who live in major urban centres. People in the cities, on Wellington Street in Ottawa, St. Catherine Street in Montreal, or Yonge Street in Toronto do not have the same viewpoint as the members of parliament representing resource regions. Forest workers work seven days a week, while their wives look after the accounting at home. The logging equipment very often runs 24 hours a day.
Why do we not take the Bloc Quebecois advice and set up a program to build social housing, housing for the homeless and the aboriginals? We know that we need 20,000 units a year ten years in a row for aboriginal Canadians. The FTQ recently held a meeting in Val-d'Or, and I was a participant, along with the hon. member for Témiscamingue, the unions and the regional council of the FTQ. The provincial members should have been there, but were not, unfortunately. We are now debating this motion, and we are working for forest workers.
It will be too late in two weeks from now and during the summer. Our government should find a way to help the industry while avoiding penalties under the WTO and NAFTA. Maybe we should provide loans, or set up some kind of social program to keep our lumber in Canada. This resource is ours. We do not keep forest companies from selling lumber in the United States. Frank Dottori, of Tembec, is taking the administration of George W. Bush, this trade terrorist, to court for $200 million.
It is quite something that the president of a company with an excellent credibility should resort to that. A story by André Pratte in La Presse this morning tells it all. He talks about a lumber hangover of sorts and comments that the Government of Canada has no choice but to help the lumber industry, which could be hit by a serious downturn as soon as this spring.
We cannot wait. We know that the Prime Minister and the ministers responsible in cabinet are looking for a solution. We know that. Let us not lie about that. They are doing their job.
In the present case, we are facing an emergency. In two weeks from now, the sanctions will be imposed on a firm basis. At this moment, Domtar and other forest products companies are exporting wood at full capacity to the United States, because there are no taxes.
I read a comment dated May 3, 2002 from the former Liberal minister, Sergio Marchi. We know where he is now. He has been appointed for one year as chairman of the General Council of the WTO, responsible for monitoring negotiations on the liberalization of global trade. He declared, “The solution is a political one”.
As a matter of fact, the solution is political. If they can decide in one day to spend $100 million to buy Challengers, they should be able to find in one day a solution for forest workers. That is the truth of the matter. Let us not hide behind our benches, even if we are backbenchers. I am no longer a backbencher, I am a frontbencher. I am going to have to turn around so that the people across the way can call me a backbencher.
What matters is that we find solutions together. I understand that the Prime Minister and the ministers responsible will find solutions with other cabinet ministers. Whatever people may say, this is what matters at this time.
If members read the newspapers of the last year for statistical purposes, this is what they will find, “Taxes on lumber cause more victims”, “Domtar closes three plants until January 7”. This is what is going on. Some people are doing what is necessary.
This is what the Quebec Lumber Manufacturers' Association had to say:
The lumber industry in Quebec represents about 40,000 direct jobs in forests and in plants. The development of more than 250 municipalities in Quebec is based on the wood processing sector. That industry represents 100% of manufacturing jobs in 135 towns and villages.
In the case of Abitibi--Témiscamingue, 68% of our forestry resources are processed in the greater Montreal area. We should not forget that.
We have to look today at the effects, even if the tax is not imposed. The May 4 issue of the Journal des affaires contained the heading “Difficult Quarter for Forestry Industry”. It is not only the tax and sales quotas. The drop in the price of softwood lumber has eaten into profits. Even Tembec has had to make provisions for countervail duties and anti-dumping charges. They have to prepare even now.
What really counts today is that the unions and forestry workers, men and women, and the forestry companies are holding a big meeting here in Ottawa on the sixth floor, not only for lobbying purposes. They want to discuss matters with all the political parties and all the MPs from resource regions.
I call on members from the major urban centres to lend a hand. I want to send a message to the ministers who come from these centres. They must come to the aid of the resource regions. It is not on St. Catherine Street that we are going to cut down three or four trees, but in the resource regions. Forestry workers are worried, really worried. They have been worried for the past two years.
We meet these workers on site. The Bloc, Alliance, NDP, PC and Liberal members meet people in the resource regions. Families talk to us. Women ask us questions. Today, even, children are asking us questions, because they will be taking over.
We need to know exactly what the situation is. The Government of Canada has to find a solution within the next two weeks. I trust the Prime Minister will tell George W. Bush: “Move over. It is our lumber and we will keep it in Canada”.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Hopefully not with a 2x4.