Antoine Dubé

[Speech From The Throne, February 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague, who is from a riding in Ontario and with whom I have worked on a number of occasions.

However, as a Quebecer and a member of the Bloc Quebecois, I noted, as did other colleagues, that in the Speech from the Throne there is no reference or consideration given to the motion on a distinct society, something he in fact voted for, I believe.

How does he interpret this neglect of a great promise, since it followed the 1997 election and was considered very important at the time? I would like to know what he himself thinks about a distinct society, because he concluded his remarks with the words “a strong, united Canada”. It is all very well to have a united Canada, but when the party in government forgets its own resolution on a distinct society for Quebec, which it introduced into the House, I would like an explanation.

I know he will agree to that, and will answer my question directly drawing on his personal opinions.

[Speech From The Throne, February 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I want to put a question to the new Minister of Industry, whom I congratulate on his appointment.

He alluded to the history of the Canadian model and, as he was a member of parliament back in 1993, I would remind him that during the 1993 election campaign the Liberals had promised a shipbuilding policy.

As a former provincial premier, the minister surely remembers that, on two occasions, he and his counterparts, had asked the federal government to develop a shipbuilding policy. On October 20, he even organized, as a former premier of Newfoundland, a meeting with the other premiers of the Atlantic provinces to deal with shipbuilding. He attended that meeting as the Minister of Industry and, at the time, set up a committee that was to table a report by the end of January, in order to take quick action.

Now that he has been re-elected and is the Minister of Industry, does he remember the commitments that he made in October and will he act quickly to adopt a new policy very soon? This is extremely urgent. The minister is very familiar with the issue, since there are several shipyards in his riding, even though one of them has shut down, if I am not mistaken.

When will the minister announce the true shipbuilding policy that he promised?

[Economic Policy, October 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, on May 12 I asked the Minister of Transport whether he realized that his decision to purchase a used ferry for an additional ferry service between Newfoundland and Nova Scotia instead of buying a new one was wrong and totally unacceptable, and all the more so because it was not in line with the so-called preferential procurement policy of the Canadian government.

Here is what the minister answered:

—perhaps the hon. member knows something more about shipbuilding than most other people in Canada but to say that we could have had a ship designed and constructed within the last 18 months to put in service in the next couple of weeks on the gulf between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland just defies any logic.

Newfoundlanders have been demanding this ferry for years. The minister cannot say he was taken by surprise. The minister has been aware for a long time of the need for this ferry.

It bears repeating that the federal government did the same thing in the case of the ferry between Newfoundland and the Madgalen Islands. The minister hinted that he could implement the procurement policy in the future. He had two opportunities to do so and one more this year but he did not.

In the meantime, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans agrees to have coast guard patrol vessels built from American plans. Quite a recognition for Canadian engineers.

This is not the first time the Liberal government ignores its own policies. It was reminded of that last week by the official languages commissioner. The government does not even comply with the Official Languages Act.

This week, the information commissioner said that the government does not even honour the spirit of the Access to Information Act.

I tried many times to have my bill passed by the House this week, but in vain. On Monday a Liberal member objected to the idea of adding one hour to our sitting even though, in the end, our sitting was 20 minutes shorter than usual that day.

Again today a member could not be here for private members' business. I asked the unanimous consent of the House to replace him, not to extend our sitting, but just to replace him I had his permission. That request was denied.

This leads me to conclude that even though the Liberals voted in favour of the principle of the bill on March 29 of this year and even though in committee all the members including Liberal members, voted unanimously in favour of the bill in the clause by clause study, this is a terribly hypocritical approach. While we had the opportunity to pass this bill before an election is called, it will simply be left to die on the order paper.

I am very frustrated with this situation. Tomorrow I will go to Newfoundland where I was invited by the former premier of that province, who is now our Minister of Industry.

He will be called upon to give advice to the government with regard to shipbuilding. I hope that in his new role he will be consistent with the position he supported as a premier. On two occasions at federal-provincial conferences he and the other premiers asked the federal government to implement a national shipbuilding policy. I hope he will be consistent and tell us before the election what he intends to do to help workers in the shipbuilding industry.

There are only 3,000 of them left compared to more than 10,000 when the Liberals took office in 1993. It is unacceptable and I deplore the fact that—

[Economic Policy, October 18th, 2000]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Since the member in question cannot be here and the time has been set aside, it cannot be said that there is no time. Therefore, I seek unanimous consent to consider Bill C-213 at third reading.

If the bill were to be adopted, it could be done before the election which is very important. I think members on both sides will agree to that.

[Points Of Order, October 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I rise also on a point of order. Since the hon. member for York South—Weston indicated he would be unable to present his motion during private members' business today, I would seek unanimous consent, notwithstanding any standing order, for the House to proceed today at the end of government orders to examination of Bill C-213 at the report stage and, if possible, to move on to third reading of this bill.

[Shipbuilding, October 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, we are seeing the end of the Liberal regime at this time.

The government has had seven years to meet its commitments. Among those it has not met is one it has neglected right from the very beginning of its mandate toward the shipyards.

Has the Prime Minister asked his Minister of Finance to include in the mini-budget he will be bringing down this afternoon the appropriate measures which Canada's shipbuilding industry has been awaiting for years now?

[Supply, October 16th, 2000]

Yes, but if there were unanimous consent—

[Supply, October 16th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to ask for the unanimous consent of the House so that, notwithstanding the standing orders governing private members' business, we can have one more hour tonight, October 16, at the end of government orders, to allow debate on Bill C-213, dealing with shipbuilding, at report stage and, if necessary, at third reading stage. This bill is extremely important, and with all the rumours we hear about an upcoming election, it should be dealt with as soon as possible.

[Shipbuilding, October 5th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have sufficient experience in this House, after seven years, to know that if the government wanted to get this bill through quickly, it had only to use the proposal by my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot this morning, but it refused.

Why does it refuse to pass this bill promptly when it is so important and so urgent for shipbuilding in Canada?

[Shipbuilding, October 5th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government is up to its ears in the greatest of contradictions.

This morning, the Liberal MPs passed my bill on shipbuilding clause by clause. On the opposite side of the coin, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance objected with every ounce of his energy to that bill being passed on third reading.

Can the Minister of Industry tell us on whose behalf the representative of the Minister of Finance is objecting to the prompt passage of my bill?