Nick Discepola

[Taxation, May 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Quebec minister responsible for restructuring released a new study, this time on taxation.

In his press release, the minister claims that merging the two tax systems would permit Quebec to, I quote: "-reap many benefits". The minister stressed that taxpayers would have only one tax return to fill out, that they would have fewer officials to deal with, and that taxation measures would be harmonized and streamlined.

What is surprising is that the authors of this study made the conscious decision not to mention that Quebecers could already be reaping all of these benefits if the Quebec government would only agree to the changes already proposed by our government.

All of these changes could be made very easily within the current federal system and at a much lower cost to Quebecers

than those that would result from breaking away from Canada. But these are the kinds of things that separatists avoid mentioning.

[Canadian Dairy Commission Act, May 16th, 1995]

The hon. member for Frontenac might as well know this is a time for more than questions, this is a time for questions and comments. He never had the intestinal fortitude to tell the House how Quebec and its farmers would be better off in an independent Quebec.

The hon. member also said that, in an independent Quebec, Quebecers would have the assurance that their new country would be a party to all trade agreements.

He says again that it is in the interest of Ontario and all other provinces to continue a lateral trade relationship with Quebec.

We are talking about a divorce; we are talking about the destruction of a country. They cannot stand in the House day after day and pretend that in a separate Quebec people would be able to keep the monetary policy, the Canadian dollar, and to have dual citizenship. Imagine people in Quebec being able to vote in the rest of Canada because they have dual citizenship and people from the rest of Canada not being able to vote in Quebec.

There is never a campaign of fear mongering in this party. We will reach a decision diplomatically and democratically. I would like them once and for all to stand and say there may be a risk but they do not. They continually tell Quebecers that it will be business as usual.

How can they guarantee that? They have said they want to take the good things Canada has to offer. They want the same dollar, the same passport, the same everything. Pretty soon they will be telling us: "We will keep Canada; find your own Quebec".

[Canadian Dairy Commission Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, marriage is not on the agenda in the current political situation in Quebec. Divorce is. And I never knew people to be better off after a divorce than they were before. Never. They keep talking about threats and scare tactics when we disagree with them. The real scare tactics started when the budget was brought down in Quebec. Although six or as many as eight provinces brought down a balanced budget, the Quebec minister of finance opted for genuine scaremongering. Vote no or vote yes, depending on the question, otherwise we raise taxes.

The hon. member also said everything would be just fine after separation.

They are dreaming in Technicolor. They stand in the House day after day and state everything will be rosy after separation. I challenge them.

[Canadian Dairy Commission Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I listened attentively to the hon. member's representations, and, I must say, it sounded to me like a rerun of all of the debates which have taken place in this past year, or even in the past 30 years. They always come back to how our federalist system has mistreated Quebec.

But, recently, the debate shifted to how Quebec can retain the benefits of a federalist system even after declaring its independence. For almost a year now, they have been discussing how Quebec could keep the same currency as Canada, the same passport and citizenship, and how it could remain a member of all of the trade agreements.

I will ask my question now because I would like to give them ample time to answer. How can they dare say to Quebecers today, in this House, that if Quebec were to separate, they would guarantee them-? Under the federal system, dairy producers get 47 per cent of overall production. We heard the Reform member say-

How happy the rest of Canada would be, if Quebec ever decided to separate, to take up the slack in milk production in the rest of Canada. They would be happy. He stated that they did not want the separation of Quebec.

Therefore, I am going to ask my hon. colleague how he can dare, first, to tell Quebecers today that they will be a signing party not only with the rest of Canada, but that they will also remain part of NAFTA, GATT and other trade agreements? But, more importantly, how does he intend to guarantee that the production quotas of dairy producers will remain at their current levels?

[Canadian Dairy Commission Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, first, the hon. member for Frontenac will surely agree that the bill was drafted in consultation with Quebec's dairy industry, which is very supportive of this legislation.

I do not want to get into a debate as to which agreement takes precedence over the other. Rather, I want to congratulate the hon. member for Frontenac, who is the opposition's critic on agriculture, for his very positive comments, in this House, on April 4, 1995, regarding the development of the memorandum of understanding which integrates the marketing of industrial milk. Indeed, the hon. member was very pleased with this change.

Consequently, I wonder what the opposition is now up to. The fact is that, if the amendments to the act do not come into effect by August 1, 1995, there is a risk that producers' contributions could no longer be used to finance exports to the U.S.

Considering that Quebec accounts for over 47 per cent of the industrial milk production, and that most of this production is exported to the U.S., it only makes sense to pass this bill as quickly as possible, so that producers in Quebec and in the rest of Canada can benefit from it.

[Canadian Dairy Commission Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure today to speak in favour of Bill C-86, an act to amend the Canadian Dairy Commission Act. The proposed amendments will permit the strengthening of the partnership between the commission, provincial milk marketing authorities and the dairy industry, through the joint administration of the new pricing system and the pooling of market returns.

This approach will allow Canada to comply with the new trade conditions under the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization agreement. Milk used for exported products or for products on domestic competitive markets will continue to be made available to processors at competitive prices. At the same time, we will maintain the producer equity that is so essential to the current milk marketing system.

Even though Bill C-86 gives new powers to the Canadian Dairy Commission, it has no effect on provincial jurisdiction. An interface between current provincial and federal powers on pricing is necessary so that all milk marketing can be regulated, whether the milk is sold beyond provincial borders or on export markets.

The pricing and pooling approach, authorized by the amendments in Bill C-86, was proposed by the dairy industry itself and represents only administrative changes to the mandate already given to the Canadian Dairy Commission and the provincial milk marketing authorities.

Since its creation as a Crown corporation in 1966, the commission has assumed a key role in the development and implementation of the federal dairy policy. It is working in close collaboration with important national organizations such as the Dairy Farmers of Canada, the National Dairy Council of Canada and others working under them.

The Canadian Dairy Commission is also facilitating the essential work of the Canadian Milk Supply Management Committee through the chairman of this committee responsible for controlling the implementation of the national milk marketing

plan, the federal-provincial agreement governing the management of milk supplies in Canada.

After detailed consultation with the industry, the commission sets the target price of industrial milk-the milk used in dairy products such as cheese and yogurt-and the support price of butter and skim milk powder.

The Canadian Dairy Commission is also authorized to collect levies from producers remitted by the provincial milk marketing authorities. This is to cover exportation costs and finance special programs aimed at increasing domestic consumption of dairy products.

Provincial milk marketing authorities are authorized to set the prices and pool market returns within their respective borders. The new legal provisions contained in Bill C-86 will place the commission on equal footing with provincial authorities as far as price setting is concerned and authorize it to operate the pooling system agreed on by the provinces for milk earmarked for interprovincial or international trade.

In order for the Canadian Dairy Commission to be able to manage this new price setting and pooling approach in the interest of producers, legislation must give certain powers to provincial dairy authorities and, as required, provide that they give up certain responsibilities. In the new system, provincial authorities will grade milk for export or sale on competitive domestic markets and set prices depending on end use.

Under the terms of the amendments before us, the Canadian Dairy Commission would be able to delegate to provincial authorities its present responsibility with respect to the pricing of milk traded interprovincially while being granted the power to pool revenues from the sale of milk sold interprovincially by provincial authorities.

On a regular basis, boards and milk marketing boards would report to the commission the sales volumes and going prices for each grade of milk sold during a given month. The Canadian Dairy Commission would then be asked by provincial authorities to average nationally the price for each component included in the pool. Sufficient amounts would be included from each province to ensure fair distribution of the proceeds from the sale of milk for the lowest priced classes.

We must bear in mind that not all provinces contribute to the same degree to processing activities. The quantity of milk for special classes of products, that is to say, dairy products for export such as cheese, or further processed products such as chocolate and pizza, varies widely across the country.

Most of the inexpensive milk in these classes will be sold to processors in the most industrialized provinces, namely Ontario and Quebec. Some smaller provinces, however, are greatly affected as to their proportion of the total volume of milk sold at reduced prices.

To ensure that the cost of maintaining these industries and the essential export markets is shared equitably among producers, each province will be required to inject a minimum percentage of its total monthly sales of milk into the pooled fund.

This is how national average prices for the different classes of milk products would be calculated. This percentage is being negotiated by provincial authorities.

Returns from the agreed upon percentage of milk sales would then be pooled and redistributed to producers through provincial authorities on an equitable basis negotiated by the industry and provincial authorities and set out in official federal-provincial agreements.

The industry has concluded that creating special classes of milk sold at competitive prices on the destination market would be a good way of maintaining our share of the dairy export market without resorting to production levies.

The importance of finding an equitable way of maintaining our share of the export market in dairy products and products with dairy ingredients was the main force behind the intense negotiations and hard work undertaken by the provinces through the various committees and working groups in the past year.

Just before Christmas, the hon. Ralph Goodale and his provincial and territorial counterparts responsible for agriculture and agri-food confirmed their support of the industry's consensus that some pooling of market returns from dairy products was urgently needed so that the industry could meet Canada's international obligations and maintain an orderly marketing system.

By passing Bill C-86, the House can finally take an active part in the development of this essential sector of the Canadian economy, which successfully faces the modern challenges of the emerging global market.

[Job Creation, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, once again, total confusion prevails in the separatist camp. The Quebec Premier has made more contradictory statements.

Last March, he told us that, since September, 58,000 jobs, or 78 per cent of all new jobs in Canada, had been created in Quebec. However, on May Day, he boasted about the 43,000 new jobs created in Quebec since September, a number equal to half of all jobs created in Canada.

Either Mr. Parizeau does not know how to count or else he is very proud to tell us that Quebec has lost 15,000 jobs in less than two months. What good news for the 800,000 welfare recipients in Montreal and elsewhere.

No wonder the Bloc Quebecois and the PQ are once again looking for a scapegoat in Ottawa.

[Supply, May 2nd, 1995]

Yes, Mr. Speaker, Rome is burning. They used to talk about the "beau risque". Now it is a "beau virage", and today, we have this separatist mirage Quebecers are being asked to embrace, but no one is really interested.

That is why I said that Rome is burning, or rather that Nero is fiddling instead of dealing with the real problems in our society.

The hon. member said that the federal government just happened to leave out equalization, because equalization always benefits Quebec. But if we include equalization, the tax burden on the province of Quebec represents only 1.4 per cent of their total revenue. That is their tax burden: $350 million. But when we talk about money, it is always the same money and the same taxpayer.

The municipal government takes it out of your left-hand pocket, the federal government takes it out of both pockets and the provincial government takes it out of your right-hand pocket, but the pockets all belong to the same taxpayer. Yes, some responsibilities have been passed on to the provinces, but they were also allowed some flexibility. Flexibility in how they manage their programs and structure them according to their needs.

This is not a burden on the provinces. In fact, six provinces have already brought down balanced budgets. It is now up to the Province of Quebec to do likewise before the referendum.

[Supply, May 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, when Rome burned, Nero fiddled. He was out of touch with the day's reality. Similarly, I find this motion out of touch with reality.

The members of the opposition try at all cost, take every opportunity, to discredit the federal government, particularly with regard to interprovincial and government jurisdictions.

The only thing Canadians and Quebecers want from their government, be it provincial or federal, is action. Let us stop this stupid business about jurisdiction of power.

Canada is undergoing nothing short of a revolution. Our economy is being transformed from a traditional resource based and labour intensive one to one that is globalized, information based and knowledge intensive. The effects are being felt by business and industry. They are certainly being felt often painfully by workers, be they loggers, farmers, fishermen, miners or even assembly line workers. They are being felt by our teachers and students and they are being felt by governments at all levels.

Nowadays we warn young people preparing to enter the workforce that they will probably change careers several times during their working lives; I am talking about not just jobs but careers.

We have engaged once again in a sterile debate on jurisdiction while our constituents, including those of the Bloc Quebecois, are looking to their governments to create the environment to guarantee continuing jobs and ensure the training to match the skills needed for tomorrow's jobs.

The Government of Canada is determined to remain steadfast to that goal. The government was swept to power with a resounding victory and a vote of confidence by Canadians and Quebecers who were clearly ready for change. They believed in our commitment to create jobs and to prepare people for those new jobs.

While the members of the Bloc Quebecois contemplate their navel and get lost in jurisdictional discussions, the government, fortunately, is not letting Canadians down.

Since the government came into office no less than 454,000 full time jobs have been created; strong evidence of enough employer confidence in the economy to offer stable full time employment rather than part time jobs. This job creation performance has surpassed even the most optimistic predictions including those of the OECD.

The OECD predicted Canadian employment growth of 1.2 per cent last year. It was almost double the rate, growing at 2.1 per cent.

I remember a former prime minister said we would have to wait until the year 2002 to see unemployment fall below 10 per cent. Fortunately she did not get elected and today we are enjoying an employment rate of 9.7 per cent. We hope to do better. We must do better.

The OECD estimates Canada's employment growth for 1995-96 will be the highest among all G-7 countries, even surpassing the United States. Given our track record so far there is every reason to suspect these predictions will once again prove to be modest.

The members of the Bloc Quebecois should also recognize that Quebec has benefitted by Canada's efforts.

In the employment figures for the last two months of this year Quebec has experienced strong employment growth with a gain

of 14,000 jobs in February alone. The employment rate in Quebec declined from 11.5 per cent, the lowest since 1991.

Job creation initiatives by the government directly and in co-operation with the province have contributed a significant share. Since October 1993 some 120,000 jobs have been created and almost 36,000 Canadians were provided with training through initiatives of their government such as the infrastructure program, youth internship and strategic initiatives, to name a few.

Statistics are very cold. They do not tell us the human stories behind the job creation figures. They do not describe how so many Canadians have regained their self-respect knowing they are no longer dependants but contributors to this fine country.

Statistics do not show the efforts of determined people and co-operative government action and how they can be made to work for the good of all Canadians.

Statistics do not tell us, for example, about Le relais des jeunes adultes du Sud-Ouest de Montréal. It is a job search training organization funded by the federal government in partnership with two Quebec departments. Human Resources Development Canada provided nearly $800,000 last year. Sixty-five per cent of the participants in this program have found work.

Statistics also do not tell us how 250 people are participating in entrepreneurship development jointly funded by Quebec and Canada, where 21 entrepreneurs have set up their own businesses.

Statistics also do not tell us of the federal-Quebec effort that arose from the closing of the Hyundai plant in Bromont. Some $8 million federal funds helped 556 participants, 80 per cent of whom have found work or gone on to further vocational training.

I could go on citing such projects. None of them are earth shaking in themselves, however they constitute the real story behind Canada's good fortune in terms of job creation.

The other straight fact to which members opposite have turned a blind eye to time and time again is that co-operative action among governments, including the federal government and Quebec, does succeed in helping Canadians help themselves.

Canada's economic prospects have not looked this good in a very long time. Productivity has surged. Canada's cost competitiveness is at the highest level in more than 40 years. Our trade surplus is up. All of this is not by accident.

From the speech from the throne which formed the government's agenda, through to the most recent speech by the Minister of Finance, the Government of Canada has introduced cohesive and concerted strategies aimed at advancing the agenda for jobs and growth.

Last October the Minister of Finance tabled "A New Framework for Economic Policy" which proposed a broad framework for policies for economic growth. Then "Creating a Healthy Fiscal Climate" takes steady aim at the deficit. Equally, the Minister of Industry released "Building a More Innovative Economy", a series of measures and strategies to create a climate of economic growth and job opportunities throughout the country.

In February the budget delivered on the government's pledge to get the country's fiscal house in order, restoring investor confidence and clearing the way for further employment growth.

Taken together, these efforts are radically reshaping government involvement in the economy. They are already producing results. The policy initiatives, coupled with strategic partnerships with the provinces, territories, business, labour, educators, community workers and committed individuals are creating jobs for Canadians.

There is a message for all of us in this. Healthy economies in today's highly competitive and internationalized world are not made without consistent, concerted efforts on the part of all citizens, all businesses, all institutions and all levels of governments.

If Canadians are not up to the competition, job creation will simply not continue. We are a small market in global terms. It takes the strength of united effort to ensure competitiveness. The workers of many nations are quite ready and, in today's global economy, quite able to jump into the breech should Canadians flag in their efforts.

It is the job of governments to do everything in their power to ensure the best possible tools are in place in order to develop an effective program to create quality jobs and to equip our workers to find and, more importantly, keep jobs.

It does not serve our constituents well in any part of Quebec or Canada to fiddle while Rome burns with petty jurisdictional concerns. The Government of Canada is prepared to challenge conventional wisdom, to adopt new policies and fresh approaches.

We have made it clear that the government is willing to work closely and co-operate with the provinces and the territories.

A number of new measures from strategic initiatives of the human resources investment fund have already been outlined to address problems with labour market development. We recognize the need for flexibility. Labour market demands vary from province to province. Each region of the country has its own vision and its own agenda. We understand that and local people best respond to local needs.

I suggest to members opposite that their constituents do not care what logo is on the letterhead as long as efficient, quality service is provided and prospective employment income can improve.

The federal government must clearly work with the provinces to maintain national standards, ensuring that the skills people develop are recognized and portable throughout the country and keep us competitive with the world.

The federal government is ready to go to work. It is confident that we can perform this role in a complementary fashion that will support and reinforce the labour force development efforts of all provinces and territorial governments.

In conclusion, I take as proof of our ability to succeed Canada's recent record of growth and job creation, the envy of every G-7 member. It demonstrates the soundness of the course charted for Canada by the government. With less bickering it would undoubtedly have been much better.

Now is the time for co-operation. Canadians demand it. Our task is to explore how we can work together to reform, restructure and rebuild our communities and our country to ensure that each and every Quebecer, each and every Canadian has the opportunity to share in our future prosperity.

[Adm Agri-Industries Ltd. Operations Act, April 26th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent to withdraw Bill C-312, a private member's bill, because my colleague for Verdun-Saint-Paul will shortly be presenting Bill C-313, which is essentially the same as mine.