Jean-Guy Chrétien

[Supply, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, according to the speaker who came before my hon. colleague from Lakeland, the member for Erie—Lincoln, 10 out of 100 prisoners obtaining early release could commit a repeat offence afterward.

On the other hand, my colleague from Lakeland focussed mainly on immigrants.

There are very few immigrants in my rural riding, in the eastern townships, in Beauce, in the area around Quebec City. Among those we have welcomed is Dominico Staniscia, an Italian gentleman who has been responsible for creating twenty or so jobs, and who is known pretty well all over Quebec.

Then there is Catherine Ballas, who employs more than 30 people. In Milan, there is Jacques Benoît, a VIP in that municipality. Disraëli owes a number of jobs to Denis Spiratos.

In Lac-Mégantic, there are 18 Serbian families helping out their community. They are putting their culture and training to use, at minimum wage, to help others and to help themselves adapt to life here.

All of these people have managed to master French, while retaining their mother tongue.

I would ask the hon. member for Lakeland if he is not getting a bit carried away. Is he not laying too much blame at the feet of the immigrants, when he refers to the trade in illegal immigrants to this country? He has even suggested a figure of 16,000. It is all very fine to bandy numbers about, but there is no need for scaremongering.

[Supply, March 16th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the speech by my colleague, the member for Erie—Lincoln.

He says that 10% of the 5,000 inmates released each year reoffend. There are therefore 500 of them who will commit an offence in the months or years following their release.

If our communities are not affected by these 500 individuals, we can easily turn a blind eye. But when we see the terrible crimes they commit, we would be entitled to ask the following question, which I am going to put to the member for Erie—Lincoln: Could he tell us what specifically his government is doing to prepare inmates who will be released before serving their full sentence?

[Division No. 334, March 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I just wish to make sure that my name was included among those who voted in favour of the Reform Party motion. I was present.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, March 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, at the beginning of his speech, the member for Broadview—Greenwood said that it was up to the government to defend society's weakest members, those without a voice.

He said that over 12,000 families in Toronto were forced to live in motel rooms. Last summer on Toronto's Yonge Street it was impossible to walk 30 metres without running into one or two homeless people begging for money.

Since the Liberal Party to which the member for Broadview—Greenwood belongs took office in 1993, this number has steadily risen. The member said he wanted to defend the homeless, the neediest members of society, those who do not have a voice. Yet his government has slashed provincial transfer payments for health, education and social services by $42 billion. Obviously, the provinces made cuts in turn, with the result that these people must beg for money to provide for their daily needs, or live in motels.

It is easy for the member to say, and I quote “As we know, most of those people living on the streets in sleeping bags are there more through a mental health condition than anything else”. I would agree that some of them have mental health problems, but I would not go so far as to say that all the homeless are so afflicted.

The current federal government, his government, a Liberal government, has slashed the funding available for the neediest members of society. One example is employment insurance. There was a time when 92% of those who paid EI premiums qualified for benefits. Today, four years after the EI reform, a little over 40% of those who pay premiums qualify; 60% are paying into the plan for nothing.

I wonder whether my colleague, the member for Broadview—Greenwood, would urge his colleagues, the ministers in various departments, to have cabinet amend various pieces of legislation so that the first scenario in his speech would hold, and more importantly, be respected, so that it would not just be idle talk to impress the voters.

[Petitions, March 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of constituents of Frontenac—Mégantic, who believe sincerely in male-female equality and in justice, I have the honour to table a petition demanding that the federal government withdraw its appeal against the public service pay equity decision and give effect to the court ruling that it pay its employees what it owes them.

This petition goes with the ones presented by my colleagues from Longueuil and Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

[The Budget, March 2nd, 1999]

Madam Speaker, the member for Oxford's usual lack of courage is clearly in evidence here when he says he will vote for the Minister of Finance's budget. He is not as brave as the member for York South—Weston who voted against the Minister of Finance's budget because his party refused to keep its promise to abolish the GST. He was kicked out of the party and his constituents rewarded him in 1997 by re-electing him to office.

What the member for Oxford failed to point out is that, of the 100% of workers who pay EI premiums, only 41% qualify for benefits. The $20 billion surplus was used to balance the budget, and that is the fact of the matter.

In addition, his government will have cut health care by $33 billion by 2003. He does not tell us that. The government says that it will add a few billion dollars, but it has already cut $42 billion. The member for Oxford lacks courage and will fall to his knees and vote for the budget.

[The Budget, March 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, a little under a year ago, during a question period in the House, the then leader of the Conservative Party, Jean Charest, today the ally of the member for Broadview—Greenwood, said that any problems in health care and in Canada's hospitals were the fault of the Prime Minister of Canada.

Does the member for Broadview—Greenwood realize that, since the Liberal Party has been in office, it has cut $41 million in health care alone in the Chaudière—Appalaches? The Eastern Townships region, where the riding of my colleague, the member for Sherbrooke, is located, has also been cut $41 million.

For the Lac-Mégantic hospital, this represents $1.8 million; for the Asbestos Region hospital, it represents $8.7 million; and for Bernierville's Saint-Julien hospital, it represents $5.6 million. The Liberals are the ones responsible for the mess in the health care system.

Since the Liberal Party came to office, it has cut no less than $33 billion in health care, up to the year 2003. Is that cause for hope?

[The Budget, March 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, we have known for a number of years that the federal government is making surpluses. A round of extravagant spending has begun.

Thus, The Minister of Human Resources Development, with the help of the enforcement assistance fund, provided $35,000 for a study on the establishment of a technological company in the Asbestos RCM. This financial assistance to one person represents and will always represent structural duplication, because there existed and still exists a federally funded CFDC, a community futures development corporation and a Government of Quebec funded CLD.

How can the member for Winnipeg North—St. Paul justify his government's use of the surplus in the employment insurance fund, which, by the way, should be set aside solely for future users, that is, the unemployed? How can he justify his government's spending $35,000 to duplicate structures?

Why, for example, did he not give this money to the very responsible diversification committee in the Asbestos RCM, chaired by Jacques Lussier? Or why did he not give it to the community futures development corporation, chaired by Raymond Simon, the mayor of Pontbriand, a corporation governed by the federal government, or to the CLD, headed by Rivard Beaudoin?

The awarding of this $35,000 to a single individual, who spent barely five months on his study, represents high class social assistance.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, February 15th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I would appreciate your asking the member for Bourassa to withdraw his statement that we are stuck with the government of Lucien Bouchard in Quebec City. What we are stuck with is the member's Prime Minister but we have not said so.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, February 15th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order.