Jean-Guy Chrétien

[1949 Strike Of Asbestos Workers, February 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago, asbestos miners staged one of the most important strikes in Quebec's history. This work stoppage marked a turning point in the province's labour relations.

Although they did not know it, these striking workers laid the groundwork for the sweeping social movement in Quebec known as the Quiet Revolution.

We must pay tribute to all these workers, whose courage, solidarity and determination played such a key role in the development of Quebec's labour movement. They fought for decent wages, of course, but more importantly, they fought to improve the inhumane working conditions in the asbestos mines of that era.

To all these brave miners, from all the workers of Quebec, we say “Thank you” from the bottom of our hearts.

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, speaking of comparisons, I would like to remind my hon. colleague from Chicoutimi that, if one compares the planet to a grapefruit, a single seed would be the equivalent of all the water there is on the planet, just one seed. That is not much, compared to a whole grapefruit.

Of that amount, 98% is salt water, and only 2% fresh. Of that 2% freshwater, 20% is located in Canada, and a very large proportion of that in Quebec.

The hon. member for Chicoutimi said he agrees with the NDP motion, because it is a matter of principle, and because we must take care of our water, which is a vital resource. Everyone agrees with that.

I would, however, ask the hon. member for Chicoutimi whether he would be in agreement to the extent of seeing areas of provincial jurisdiction, including that of Quebec—he being a Quebec MP—encroached upon, in order to comply with the motion by the NDP. I await the response of my colleague and friend from Chicoutimi.

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, in the Minister of the Environment's speech, she spoke of a number of past or present proposals relating to the bulk sale or purchase of freshwater.

Could the minister tell us more about these proposals?

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, Lavoisier, the great 16th century scholar, brought us the principle of the conservation of matter. There is a set amount of water on the planet and this amount does not change.

Earlier, my colleague, the member for Chicoutimi, reminded me of the floods in the Saguenay region and in Manitoba. The fact that it rained heavily in these two places does not mean that there is more water on the planet. If more rain falls in Chicoutimi one year, less will fall in Washington, Tel Aviv or Paris the following year.

The planet's resources in water—or ice, of course—x number of years ago are the same resources it will have x number of years from now. This is known as the water cycle, and we have Lavoisier to thank for our understanding of it.

I have a question for the member for Scarborough East and I will use Newfoundland as an example, rather than Quebec. I am sure the member has seen Churchill Falls. The number of cubic metres of water that go over it per second is mind-boggling. Newfoundland could fill a huge ship with containers of water and sell it somewhere like New York. It is said that, in that city, a litre of water costs more than a litre of gas. Newfoundland could make a lot of money that way. It would be more lucrative to sell water than oil.

If we are to believe what we are hearing, Newfoundland will not have this opportunity. If not just a truckload, but a whole boatload of water is removed from the Churchill River as it flows to the Atlantic Ocean, nothing is lost and the water will eventually return to the Atlantic Ocean via New York, because of the principle of the conservation of matter.

Obviously, I too will object to major changes in the courses of rivers or to draining lakes dry, but when we look at examples as simple as these, I do not see why the sale of water in containers would be prohibited when, in fact, it does not deplete the ecosystem in any way.

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Churchill is firmly opposed to selling freshwater.

In my riding, there are a number of places that sell water. Obviously, it does not mean redirecting a river or emptying a lake, I agree. It is a natural resource. All the parties are satisfied, including the producer, that is, the owner of the farm where the water is drawn, and the companies that buy this water of exceptional quality. Everyone is happy in this market. And I do not think I am exaggerating.

What if the people of Alberta were asked, for example, to stop selling oil because it is not renewable—there is a limited quantity of oil in the subsoil and once that is used up there is no more—what if someone came up with a similar motion, whereby the sale or extraction of oil would be banned, and the oil would be kept for domestic use? I do not think that would be so intelligent, because we in the east import oil.

Some countries do not have enough water. We, it appears, have over 20% of the world's drinking water and we say “We are going to keep it just for us, regardless of what you might offer us”. I remind you that while there is one extreme, there is another extreme too.

I wonder whether the member for Churchill could tell us how far we could go with her motion.

[Supply, February 9th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, in addition to living things, our ecosystem is made up of four non-living things, and these four must be shared by all of the living things on this planet.

These are, of course, the air, the water, the earth, and the sunlight. As far as air and sunlight are concerned, members will agree that there is not much we can do to control them. As proof of this, a disaster can occur in Russia, and we bear the consequences three or six months later here. That is what happened after the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl. The radioactivity spread to the Canadian north, where the animals were the victims of the disaster in the food chain.

We can, however, control the water and the earth. When my distinguished colleague says that Canada is the sole manager of its water, I beg to disagree. In the Chicoutimi region, ground water is part of a natural resource.

Natural resources, whether you like it or not, are a matter of provincial jurisdiction. They are not going to seize on today's motion and use the need to manage and share water as an excuse to appropriate another area of provincial jurisdiction.

I would like the member who sits on the Standing Committee on the Environment to be more specific on the management of the water table.

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 8th, 1999]

With respect to Ms. Manon Lecours, who worked as a special assistant in the office of the Hon. Martin Cauchon: ( a ) on what date did she begin working in this position; ( b ) on what date did she leave this position; ( c ) what was her salary throughout the time she worked in the Minister's office; ( d ) what was the exact lenght of her leave without pay in April-May 1997; and ( e ) what is her current status within the federal government?

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 1st, 1999]

With respect to Ms. Nathalie Lecours, Chair of the Board of Referees at Human Resources Development Canada's employment insurance office in Thetford Mines: ( a ) on what date was she appointed to this position; ( b ) over how many cases has she presided; ( c ) how many of these cases were resolved in favour of the employment-insurance beneficiary; and ( d ) what remuneration has she received since her appointment?

[Petitions, December 7th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, 12,000 people in my riding of Frontenac—Mégantic have asked me to table this important petition on their behalf, calling for abolition of the Canadian Senate.

They state that the Senate is an undemocratic institution that costs the taxpayer $50 million annually, duplicates efforts to protect minority rights and encroaches upon the role of members of the House, and that our parliamentary institutions need modernizing.

For these reasons, the people of Frontenac—Mégantic are calling for abolition of the Senate.

[Canada Small Business Financing Act, November 17th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we are debating Bill C-53, an act to increase the availability of financing for the establishment, expansion, modernization and improvement of small businesses.

In the mind of the minister, it is just another version of the previous legislation. Several members from various parties, mainly opposition parties, have proposed amendments. Among these members, my colleague from Mercier proposed several amendments, one of which I find particularly interesting. I am talking about Motion No. 1, which was moved today, November 17, and which reads as follows:

“2.1 The purpose of this Act is to increase the availability of financing of small businesses, which would not otherwise have access to financing”.

Right now, the banks are not really interested in providing financing or lending money to small businesses that are not absolutely viable. In other words, it is a lot easier for a financial institution to lend money to Bombardier, for example, or to General Electric or to another big company like Loblaws, than to do so to a small business with assets of three quarters of a million or a million dollars. This small business often creates proportionally 10 to 20 times more jobs than these large multinationals that think more about money than about creating jobs.

In this context, I took part, with my colleague from Mercier, in a large poll in my riding. I polled more than 1,300 small businesses about the financing offered to them. I was amazed at the response rate I got and I realized that financing is essential and that it is also a concern for the vast majority of our small businesses. For example, when there is the slightest doubt, the interest rate on a loan goes up 1 to 3%.

Obviously, if a business must pay maximum interest, its survival becomes even more problematic. But there is worse. Someone phoned me last week, when the House was not sitting, and invited me to meet him and visit his small business. That person showed me a letter from a banking institution asking for additional guarantees or the institution would demand full payment of its loan within 48 hours.

The bank is putting a gun to the head of this business owner, who employs 10 people in a small rural community. This is a major cause for concern. He turned to another lender who agreed to provide financing, but at a much higher rate than was to be expected at this time.

Our small and medium size businesses have the right to expect provisions that will increase access to financing for them, both in Quebec and in the rest of Canada. They are also entitled to expect a program that makes financing available to small and medium size businesses that would otherwise have a much harder time getting financing elsewhere. Such provisions would also provide entrepreneurs with the means to fund their working capital—and that is important too—to ensure the growth and development of their small and medium size businesses. These comments were made when I polled 1,300 of these businesses in my riding of Frontenac—Mégantic.

Bill C-53, as introduced by the minister, does nothing to increase the availability of financing for small and medium size businesses. It simply changes how the government's total commitment is calculated, but there is no increase. The underlying principle that guided this review of the SBLA does nothing to meet the needs of small and medium size businesses. The government is much more concerned about figures. Bill C-53 does not help provide financing to businesses that would not otherwise have access to such financing elsewhere.

Let us not forget that small and medium size businesses currently create many more jobs than large businesses employing 500 or 1,000 people. There are fewer and fewer of these large companies, with the result that, overall, small and medium size businesses generate many more jobs.

For example, in 1994, businesses with less than 100 employees accounted for 41.2% of all jobs in Quebec. I imagine the situation is essentially the same in the rest of Canada. In Ontario, that percentage is a little lower, at 34.7%.

Over the past 20 years or so, in Quebec and many other countries, employment in small business has increased significantly, rising from 36% in 1978 to 45% in 1993. Everyone agrees, and the figures are there to prove it beyond any doubt, small business is number one in creating jobs.

Small business plays the most significant role in job creation, especially in agriculture, fisheries and forestry. We must recognize also that it adds value to regional production. The expectation is that the jobs will remain in the region.

Take hog houses for instance. What good is it to have hog houses in a given region if, once hogs have reached their ideal weight for human consumption, they are shipped by truck or train over hundreds of kilometres to facilities where they will be slaughtered, processed and shipped overseas or sold for domestic consumption in Canada?

People in the rural region where these hogs were raised, who had to live with the smell of the manure spread on the land, are not happy with just a few jobs. If the hogs could be slaughtered locally and if the carcasses could be processed locally, hundreds of direct jobs on the farm and in the hog industry could be created.

The same thing goes for the maple syrup industry, where we could do some processing locally. Instead of selling the syrup in 45-gallon barrels, we could sell maple candies in beautiful gift-wrapped boxes, and things like that.

So, throughout the country, small businesses have been the main source of job creation locally. For more small businesses to be established, they need to be able to obtain the necessary support and financing.

This morning, before I came to the House, I got a call from Lac-Mégantic, where preparations are underway to set up Place aux jeunes. As you know, we raise and educate our children. They often choose to get some training or go to university in some of Quebec's larger cities and many of them never come back to the Lac-Mégantic area.

So, Nathalie Labrecque is working with the CFDC and the Comité jeunesse de la région de Lac-Mégantic, in the Granite regional county municipality, to set up a group called Place aux jeunes. With appropriate financing, we could provide our young people with the support they need to start up their own business.