Ghislain Fournier

[Employment Insurance, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the 125 workers at the shellfish plant in Baie-Trinité will not be able to work the 420 hours required to qualify for employment insurance. It would cost approximately $120,000 to put in place a program similar to the one on the Lower North Shore to save these workers from living off welfare for the next few years.

Will the government extend the temporary income support program to the plant workers and fishers affected by the drastic drop in shellfish landings?

[Mining, May 13th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, as the Bloc Quebecois' mining critic, and given that it is national mining week, I am pleased to talk about the effect of mining on our economy and our lives.

Mining is extremely important to keeping our economy strong. The construction, shipping and aviation industries, for example, would not have flourished to the same extent without the numerous resources our mines produce.

It is important to recognize the wealth and the majorimpact of the mining industry and ensure that this industry receives the tax measures and investments it needs for its development, for exploration, mining or research, and thus guarantee years of prosperity to miners.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2003, May 13th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, last night, when I had the floor, I was going to talk about softwood lumber, but unfortunately, I ran out of time.

What I wanted to say about the softwood lumber issue is that the budget contained nothing to deal with the crisis. HRDC's plan for workers affected by the softwood lumber crisis has been condemned by everyone. The measures that have been announced to help these workers are utterly inadequate, as you know.

Certain ministers promised a second stage for the softwood lumber assistance program. The budget contains no funding for this stage, as though the government had forgotten its promises. Are there many people who are surprised that the federal government is forgetting its promises?

Many people are disappointed. Their needs are still not being met because the provinces are not receiving the resources they need from the federal government to meet these needs.

The list of significant measures not mentioned in this budget is a long one. There is no reduction in the excise tax on gasoline; no reduction of the GST per litre of gasoline; no further decrease in income taxes; no appreciable short-term improvement in the RRSP contribution ceiling; no increase in the pension adjustment amount; nothing in the budget for senior citizens; no substantial reduction in employment insurance contributions; no improvement in old age security pensions; no provision to recover taxes on hidden salaries; no tax deduction for volunteer work; and no additional deduction for charitable donations.

The federal government has no respect for the elected representatives in Quebec and the provinces, who are making their constituents' needs known loud and clear. And it has no respect for municipal representatives, nor the citizens who are living in a state of crisis the government itself has created, such as the fishers, for example.

At present, the fishers of the Lower North Shore are occupying the offices of MAPAQ, which is the department of agriculture, fisheries and nutrition, and of Economic Development Canada, since the government has plunged these workers, these fishers, into an unprecedented crisis. It is not their fault; it is the fault of the government and of the Minister of Fisheries, who did not plan ahead. In the five years the seal population has been left unmanaged, it has risen from 1.8 million to 7 million.

I will close by saying that we are very disappointed. Decisions must be made, and they must be made now.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2003, May 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, it is not enough to be aware of the situation and of its urgency. The time has come to act.

This is a very real problem. The company is ready to hire 50 people for seal processing. For that, it must be guaranteed at least 35,000 seals. Therefore, it is waiting for an answer. Even though the seal quota has been raised to 350,000, it is useless for the Lower North Shore. With the unprecedented quantities of ice we had last winter, it was impossible for the boats to go out. On a first-come, first-served basis, when the Lower North Shore fishers are able to hunt, there will be no more seals. The quota will have been reached.

The situation is simple. A proponent is ready and is waiting for an answer. The minister says one thing to me and the public servants say something else. The minister is completely overwhelmed. I call on the Prime Minister to take steps. The situation is urgent. Now is the time to act.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2003, May 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I regret to announce that I am very unsatisfied with the answers that were given to me by the fisheries and oceans minister. I have been told the same thing over and over since April 8, and the answer never applies to my riding. In other words, there is never a solution for my riding.

As a member of Parliament, I have the right to get clear and precise answers from the government. On April 8, not only did the fisheries and oceans minister not answer my question, but he questioned the needs of the people of my riding, particularly the people of the Lower North Shore, for whom I have been requesting assistance since December 11, 2002.

We burned nothing down. The citizens of my riding tried, by civilized means, to get their point across. To no avail. Today, 75 fishers are occupying the offices of MAPAQ and of Canada Economic Development. Must we destroy something to get the government's attention? I think it is time for the government to wake up.

I have been saying this for weeks. I am asking for an exclusive quota of seals for the fishers because they have no other expected source of revenue.

The moratorium on crab and on cod penalizes them twice over. Since the last fishery crisis, they have been encouraged to convert their fleet to snow crab fishing. This was only two years ago. And now, after we have pushed them to convert their boats into a crab fishing fleet, the government completely bans crab fishing. This is complete nonsense.

They keep talking about the $14 million for Quebec. However, it does not apply to the Lower North Shore. This area has been completely ignored.

To receive EI benefits, fishermen have to prove cod catches of at least 25%. They do not catch any cod. We are told that there is no more. They do not catch cod anymore. There is a full moratorium on cod and a full moratorium on crab. There are no measures for the zone allocated to them. It is very clear. None whatsoever.

Does the Secretary of State responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec realize this? I ask that the quotas formerly granted to the crab fishers in zone 16A be extended for one year until the studies separating zones 16A and 16B are completed.

If access to zone 16A, one of the best zones for snow crab fishing, were allowed this year, this would save the 43 businesses on Quebec's Lower North Shore. If an exclusive and specific regional quota for seals were set over several years, this would enable the stakeholders interested in the economic development of the region to work on a recovery project based on the plan submitted on April 1. The developers could work on the implementation of a first, second and third processing plant. Clearly, a guaranteed supply is needed.

The proposals are realistic, objective and fair. Is this approach not better than inadequate employment insurance benefits? Is it not better than going through the same thing all over next year?

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and his department are actingin bad faith on this issue. The seal skin processing project was brought to his attention in an e-mail dated February 14. Yet, in his answer in the House, on May 1, and I conclude by quoting his own words, the minister said:

These quotas are being apportioned within the various regions through regional discussions.

Then, on May 8, at a meeting, the minister assured me that there was a quota and that he was keen in seeing this business plan succeed. However, it will not work with half-measures.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2003, May 12th, 2003]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The amendment moved by my colleague reads as follows:

That Bill C-28 be amended by deleting Clause 64.

With this amendment, we want to eliminate the retroactive aspect of this provision, which deals with the GST rebate for transportation services provided by Quebec and Ontario school boards and which would have the effect of retroactively striking down decisions handed down by the courts in favour of the school boards, not to mention that the federal government is also reneging on commitments made previously.

With this kind of attitude, the federal government is not complying with these decisions and not honouring its commitments. It is going way too far in acting this way, and it is not the only time it has done so. What about the historic surplus in the employment insurance fund, and the fiscal imbalance, where Quebec and the provinces are feeling the consequences of questionable management decisions. The House must show transparency.

For the 2003-04 fiscal year alone, the budget announces a record increase of 11.5% in spending, which will go up by $25.3 billion in 2002-03 and 2004-05. If there is one thing that stands out in the 2003 budget, it is the fact that the federal government has a lot of money at its disposal, compared to it needs. It is raking in the money, and piling up surpluses. It is collecting way too much tax.

Despite an 11% increase in spending—which is enormous—the Bloc Quebecois estimates that Ottawa will have a massive surplus of $14.7 billion over the next two years. This illustrates the size of the fiscal imbalance. Most of the provinces, on the other hand, will have deficits.

Is there anyone who still believes that the federal debt is higher than that of the provinces? From the way the Minister of Finance has decided to loosen the purse strings, he is sending a clear message: there is money; there will be more.

But how can anyone dare to spend public money this way? How can the fiscal imbalance still be denied? We asked the federal government to transfer additional fiscal capacity to the Government of Quebec and the provincial governments, so that they could intervene where needs are greatest. We asked for a tax point transfer, or additional fiscal capacity, of $4.5 billion in 2002-03 and $5 billion in 2003-04. The various measures in the 2003 budget will have no effect on reducing the financial pressure that is smothering the provinces. On the contrary, in the health sector, expenses are increasing faster than provincial sources of revenue, and part of that revenue comes in the form of transfer payments from the federal government to the provinces.

Quebec would have to have a surplus of $1.6 billion in order to provide services. Now, after the argument has been repeatedly made, despite the huge accumulated surplus, Ottawa gives Quebec a meagre $800 million. This proves that health is not a priority of the federal government. The figures speak for themselves. The federal government has announced an investment of $6 billion over three years, while it is hoarding a $30 billion surplus.

The first ministers asked that federal transfer payments for health be increased by 1% per year, until a 25% partnership level was attained, by the end of this decade. So, what happened to this realistic suggestion? Health is in the provincial jurisdiction. One day, the Liberals must understand and transfer the necessary funds the provinces are demanding.

The employment insurance situation is the best example of frustration one can find. Unions and employers are utterly frustrated with this diversion of the money in the EI fund. They support the Bloc Quebecois demand that this fund become a separate fund, so that the federal government will stop raiding it and contributors will set the contribution rates themselves.

The Bloc Quebecois was hoping the Government of Canada would create a separate fund before a new Prime Minister took up office. But, lo and behold, there will be a new round of consultations while billions continue to accumulate in the fund. Back in 1989, 93% of workers were entitled to EI benefits. We are down to 40%. It is unbelievable. Instead of lowering the premiums, the government should improve the plan so that 90% of workers qualify for benefits.

The unions and citizens' groups are in as good a position as you are to assess the needs. Why not listen to them? Your tendency to control everything is shocking.

What about the infrastructure program? The Bloc Quebecois has asked for the release of the money needed for the infrastructures that are necessary in Quebec. We asked for a substantial and long-term commitment. The increase in infrastructure spending is inadequate. On top of that, the government is in no hurry to transfer the money.

The Bloc Quebecois is asking for a massive reinvestment. There are still some communities in this country without roads and some of them are in my riding. In the easternmost region of my riding, from Kegaska to Blanc-Sablon, there is a 400-km stretch without roads. We know that region because it was hard hit by the fishery crisis. Of the additional three billion dollars announced in this budget, only 100 million dollars were allocated for the 2003-04 financial year.

That amount is totally inadequate given the huge needs; the health sector in Quebec should receive at least a fair share of the investment for 2003-04, and that means at least 300 million dollars more. After the next two financial years, of the three billion dollar total, only 250 million dollars will have been invested. Does the government not agree with Quebec and the other provinces that those infrastructures are badly needed?

We also ask that Quebec be in charge of all projects and resource allocation.

Since the period set aside for Government Orders is over, I will finish my speech tomorrow.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2003, May 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, will I have the other three minutes tomorrow?

[Employment Insurance, May 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, on October 11, transitional measures for employment insurance in the Lower St. Lawrence, along the North Shore and in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean will come to an end.

Is the government aware that not only is it refusing to help softwood lumber and fisheries workers, but what is worse, with the end of the transitional measures, the program will be even harder on them?

[Petitions, May 9th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I would like to table a petition signed by 240 of my constituents. They are asking Parliament to keep the disability tax credit and to oppose any plan to restrict access to the disability tax credit and to ensure that the government holds off on passing any measures in the House without prior discussions and consultations with disability organizations and health care professionals.

[Fisheries, May 9th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am returning to my riding, and I have people waiting for me there. Can the government understand that I will not repeat its insensitive line about not being able to do anything? Will it be a little compassionate and announce specific measures instead of having the people in our region wait until the fall?