Martin Cauchon

[The Budget, March 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly pleased today to rise first as the member for the riding

of Outremont, but also as the secretary of state responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development in Quebec.

I am proud to speak on the third budget of the Minister of Finance, a budget that now allows Canadians as a whole to have hope for the future and to also understand that, when we act together in partnership, when we work together as Canadians, we can accomplish extraordinary things.

When we took office in 1993, the fiscal situation of the country was disastrous. There was no vision for the machinery of government. Management of social programs also was obsolete. But despite that reality and despite the cries of Canadians for reforms, the government of the time refused to go forward, with the result that we inherited in 1993 a less than enviable situation, as Canadians, but also less than enviable when we looked at the issue of the debt and the deficit in terms of the G-7.

Basically, the three budgets of the Minister of Finance revolved around cornerstones and these cornerstones were major reforms. Once again, the budget that was tabled yesterday is a budget that continues in the same direction, a budget that revolves around four main elements.

First, we talk about the fiscal future, about making sure that we can have a better and prosperous future, that we can have a country that is fiscally healthy and that compares favourably with G-7 countries as a whole.

The second element is the role of the government. Again, the Minister of Finance is continuing the major reform of the machinery of government. The third element is making sure that we, as Canadians, who built this country, who based this country on principles and values, can continue to have social programs that meet our expectations and our needs.

The last element is investment in the future, the new generation and the leading sectors, an investment that will build on the progress that has been made on the economic front since this responsible government came to power in 1993.

I am happy to address this House because the budget is fair, it shows some vision and proves that the government reached its objectives on all levels.

We have talked and talked about the red book, but today, I think we can come to this House with a remarkable balance sheet showing real achievements, particularly on the fiscal front.

It will be remembered that we had talked about a deficit at 3 per cent of the GDP. It is now a reality because the deficit is roughly $24 billion, and that is 3 per cent of the GDP. Now we are looking forward to a 2 per cent deficit for 1997-98.

Also, there are no tax increases in this budget. As we reach our objectives of deficit reduction, this budget will make all of us Canadians and Quebecers proud, and much less dependent on foreign loans than we were before.

This budget shows that the government did its best to generate economic activity that would lead to job creation. More than half a million jobs have been created since 1993, and I think we must do even better than that. The budget gives every indication that we will be able to create more jobs in partnership with all stakeholders in the communities and the private sector.

The second element is the role of the government. As you know, we have launched a large operation which will make all government actions more equitable in the sense that programs will be better targeted.

The results speak for themselves. Take the Federal Office of Regional Development for example. Before, it administered some forty different programs, but now there is only one single program, developed and refined in co-operation with business people and much more in tune with their needs and expectations.

With this budget, we are showing that we keep on rethinking the role of the state; for instance, in the area of food inspection, we announced that we were going to better coordinate activities within the national context. With regard to the way we offer services to people, we are creating a special agency called the Parks Canada Agency.

All these measures are aimed at ensuring that the government, even though it is more streamlined, and less costly for the people as a whole, is going to keep on offering them top quality services.

With regard to social programs, the Liberal Party is the political party which provided Canada with a social system, a social safety net which is the envy of the rest of the world. Once again, I am proud to say in this House that the Liberal Party is the one which proved able to meet the true challenges by rethinking the social safety net for the long term, in order to provide security to those who will grow up in this country, to offer people in the 1990s a safety net meeting their expectations, and to ensure that our country is ready for the next century.

We spoke about the famous Canada social transfer. The Minister of Finance announced that, in fact, we now had put in place a five-year plan under which we are stabilizing transfers to the provinces and which makes sure that there is a progression in the transfers to the provinces. It is so true that in its budget forecasts the government of Quebec underestimated these transfers. The transfers that we are going to make are more generous by far than what was expected by the province of Quebec.

There is another issue which, I think, is important because the choices we made in the budget reflect not only the values of Canadian society, but also the principles that we stand for and that we have to defend as Liberals, as militants in a party which has always been generous, has always been able to take up challenges, and I am referring to the equalization question.

You know, many provinces, including Quebec, benefit from equalization payments. The Minister of Finance announced that we are going to continue to pay these sums of money and even increase them. So it is an important element, something like the cornerstone of the values that we share as a society.

Another thing also which shows the vision of the government, which is realistic, which proves that we have a greater vision for the future of our country, is the pension reform. We have announced a reform which will be discussed during the upcoming months and under which 80 per cent of Quebecers will be able to receive the same or greater benefits. The majority of women will benefit from this reform.

Concerning the last item, which is the issue of investing in the future, we, as a government, have made choices that are aimed at creating a prosperous economic net, a viable economic net that will generate jobs, and choices that will ensure our businesses will be able to compete in the era of free trade that we live in and also be able to boldly face, with pride and ability, this era of global markets.

We have centred our action on the economic front on young people, and also on high technology and international trade.

As for young people, we, as the federal government, took action that will show the way. We will double for 1996-97 summer jobs available to students. We also made a considerable financial contribution of $315 million over three years, to ensure that we can take action in a more focussed way to respond to different problems facing young people everywhere in Canada.

We are all familiar with the famous vicious circle: no experience, no job; no job, no experience. Through partnerships with the private sector and by making certain investments, the government will ensure that the next generations can face the future with confidence because steady jobs with a promising future will be available.

High technology is another aspect, as it is essential to Quebec and also to Montreal. As the minister responsible for the Federal Office of Regional Development, I must say that I am quite pleased with the announcements made by the Minister of Finance, particularly as regards the creation of Technology Partnerships Canada, which should be announced shortly by my hon. colleague from Industry Canada. Under this program, $150 million will be invested in 1996-97, and another $250 million in 1997-98, to support the high technology industry. This is excellent news for greater Montreal, considering how dynamic Montreal's economy is in that area. Just think of aircraft manufacturing, pharmaceuticals and the whole environmental issue, which is so close to the heart of the mayor of Montreal, whom we were fortunate enough to meet recently.

In a sense, this budget is a convenient lifeline for Montreal's economy, whose expectations it meets to a T.

The budget also talks about small business. Because regional development goes hand in hand with assistance to small and medium size businesses. As I mentioned on a number of occasions, and I like repeating from time to time, 85 p. cent of all jobs created in Canada are created by small business. The private sector made it clear that they wanted us to set up partnerships with financial institutions, so that additional sources of financing could be made available to high tech businesses. Well, $50 million will be injected into the Business Development Bank, also providing SMBs easier access to sources of financing.

This it what it means to be able to recognize one's role as government, to take action in an intelligent and enlightened way in the interest of the SMBs that are growing in every region in Canada.

There are also tremendous efforts being made on the information highway. I am referring of course to the famous program to connect numerous schools throughout Canada to the information highway.

There is also the famous program to connect all rural communities to the information highway, and we are also seeking a way to connect Canadian SMBs as a whole to that highway. We all know that we are extremely lucky, in the present situation, to enjoy such access, given that we must now compete not only locally, regionally or nationally, but also internationally.

Being in charge of the Federal Office of Regional Development, I was proud, because nowadays, when one hears about SMBs, when one hears of developing markets for the SMBs, one knows that 80 per cent of all new jobs in SMBs are associated with international markets. So, it is important for our businesses gain international recognition and to be competitive, internationally. In that regard, we must praise the finance minister's decision to provide an extra $50 million to the Export Development Corporation, to enable it to study market development opportunities, as well as opportunities to export and gain access to international markets.

That is quite a number of concrete measures and programs which show that the budget is beneficial to small and medium size businesses, while also maintaining the government's objective of creating a stimulating environment to help our economy thrive.

Here is another measure which shows that we also do something for our regions. Let us take only one example: the possibility, as regards mining flow-through shares, of spreading exploration activities over time. Again, this shows that the government is very sensitive to the needs of the regions. These needs may, in turn, generate various types of research, the establishment of new businesses and, ultimately, jobs.

In conclusion, I think that we have eloquently shown that our Liberal government can maintain a balance in the fulfilment of its responsibilities. We can really tackle the debt and the deficit, while continuing to fulfil our obligations toward Canadians and new generations, and also promoting economic development. I am proud to say that, with the Minister of Finance's third budget, Quebecers and Canadians can now have great confidence in the future.

[Mirabel International Airport, March 6th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

As you know, last December, we tabled Bill C-102 to enhance Canada's duty referral program.

This new legislation provides for the creation of so-called free zones, which are actually free trade zones. Businesses and regions looking to implement very innovative projects may request the designation of such zones. Officials of the Federal Office of Regional Development and of Aéroports de Montréal are currently

considering, in collaboration with Revenue Canada, whether or not a free zone could be created under the new legislation to help the Mirabel area.

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, on this day, we are all reminded of the 14 promising young women full of hopes and dreams who were murdered at l'École polytechnique.

We are also reminded that violence is a daily reality for thousands of other women.

Each of us has a duty and a responsibility to stop all forms of violence. That is what our government is doing, especially through the Firearms Act that we just passed.

I wish to thank the families of the victims of l'École polytechnique for being so vigilant and courageous in their efforts to create awareness and their support for gun control. I am sure that they are helping to save lives.

[Department Of Human Resources Development Act, November 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's remarks. First, as regards admiration, I would ask my colleague not to waste any energy in admiring me but rather to use his energy in helping the federal system change, in working to represent objectively and constructively the interests of the whole population of Quebec so that we can continue to make Canadian federalism change.

I talked earlier about remarks that are an insult to people's intelligence. We have to listen. There are people watching us today. Some members said the bill deals with manpower. The bill before the House, Bill C-96, deals-and I point this out to people watching us-essentially with structuring the department, providing the minister and his department with a mandate and the tools needed to be able to work. It is a bill of a general nature that has nothing to do with manpower per se.

As concerns manpower, and again I said it in my main speech, we ought to wait. We are now dealing with a bill of a general nature. I said in my main speech that the minister and his officials did an outstanding job in order to serve and to respond to demands for change made by the population. There are more things to come. What I ask the official opposition to do is to work in co-operation with us, to accept the referendum results and to help bring about changes.

[Department Of Human Resources Development Act, November 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud today to have this opportunity to speak in the House of Commons, this impressive forum of democracy, to support the Minister of Human Resources Development and his parliamentary secretary here on my left, on Bill C-96.

The purpose of this bill is basically to establish and give a clear mandate to a department that, as we know, is fundamentally important to Canadian society and plays an equally important role in the daily lives of our citizens, not only in Quebec but in Canada as well.

In fact, Bill C-96 ensures that the minister and his team can continue to help people in need, both in Quebec and the rest of Canada, and in all the regions, whether we are talking about the Gaspé or Abitibi-Témiscamingue. In fact, it is a tool that allows the federal government to intervene in an intelligent way to provide assistance where needed.

It makes me really sad to see that, even when we are discussing an issue as important as the reform of the human resources department, the official opposition cannot refrain from playing pure party politics.

During the referendum campaign just concluded, we heard all sorts of statements which completely distorted the facts and which, in my opinion, were nothing but an insult to people's intelligence.

Earlier, the member for Lévis concluded his speech by saying something which the official opposition keeps repeating all the time. Alluding to comments presumably made in this House, he said something about facing the music. It is unfortunate for Canadians that the official opposition cannot set aside its partisan attitude and stop trying to distort the facts and the statements made in this democratic place.

I am not surprised to hear members of the official opposition say that the ultimate purpose of Bill C-96 is to make sure that the federal government continues to interfere in fields of provincial jurisdiction. I am not surprised because this is yet another tactic to avoid debating the real issue, as well as an attempt to fool the public.

This is unfortunate, because today, what we are saying on the Liberal side is that the referendum was democratically held, that people voted no, but also voted for change.

In today's context, changes must involve the federal government and all the provinces working hand in hand. Essentially, we are talking about multilateral relations. It is in working together that we will be able to respond to the desire for change expressed by the people in Quebec, a desire which is felt not only in Quebec, but across Canada.

Unfortunately, with the government we have now in Quebec, and with the official opposition we have in Ottawa, it is very difficult to see how we can work towards a common goal, an ultimate goal, which, in the end, is in the best interests of the people, because they do not want the Canadian federation to work.

Indeed, it is not by withdrawing from multilateral discussions, as the Parti Quebecois government did in Quebec, that advances will be made in improving Canadian federalism. It is not by withdrawing from multilateral discussions on the environment that it will be able to better defend Quebecers' interests so that Quebec can continue to be part of the federation, and continue to be an extremely strong province in a prosperous and united Canada.

It is not by refusing to sit down at a conference table with the other provincial premiers that the system will be changed. In the end, it is the people in Quebec who are suffering from this refusal to co-operate.

There is nothing complicated in this bill. It is aimed at giving tools to the federal government, at reorganizing a department, and yet, the official opposition is acting prematurely. The opposition is talking about interference. It is a bit early to start talking about interference. Before talking about interference, one must wait to see the kind of reforms the minister and his team will be able to bring about.

Judging on past experiences, if the past is any indication of the future, I think the minister has every reason to be proud of the changes he is proposing, and I think people in Quebec and Canada have a right to expect promising and positive changes which meet the expectations not only of Quebecers but of all Canadians.

When I speak about changes the minister should be proud of, members will recall that, at the beginning of the year, before the finance minister's budget was tabled, the official opposition said loud and clear that they wanted the Canada Assistance Plan to be eliminated and transformed into a much more flexible plan, giving more leeway to provinces.

Responding to that reality, that legitimate request, the human resources development minister, in co-operation with the finance minister, replaced the Canada Assistance Plan with the Canada social transfer.

What is the Canada social transfer? It is a tool which will allow the federal government to transfer funds to the provinces so that they can operate in the social field and do so with much more flexibility.

Let me read a few lines. It says that the social transfer is mainly designed to help the provinces provide the level of benefits and social assistance that they wanted to provide but could not because of inflexible rules. That is done.

Someone mentioned earlier that the past is an indication of what the future holds. It is clear that the Canada social transfer is far from being the monster that the official opposition has made it out to be. It is essentially a structure in which all the provinces have more leeway.

What is the Canada social transfer about? It makes it possible for instance to fund parental wage assistance programs such as the one known as APPORT in Quebec. This is an exclusively provincial program. So, with the Canada social transfer, the funding of programs like APPORT, a program developed by the Government of Quebec and appreciated by everyone, is made possible, while, under the old system, the Canada Assistance Plan, it could not be funded.

The Canada social transfer, or CST for short, also provides for the provincial sales tax to be refunded to welfare recipients, a measure which could not have been implemented under the Canada Assistance Plan. I read further that it also includes a program to provide food to disadvantaged children, which would not have been possible either under the old system because it was too inflexible.

The Canada social transfer also includes the provision of transportation services to people with disabilities, services that can be provided without having to assessment needs, contrary to the prescribed procedure for qualifying for funding under the old system.

The steps taken by the minister and his department are clearly a reflection of the federal administration's good faith and commitment to keep up with the trends towards change, as requested by the public.

As for trends toward change, as for the Canada Assistance Plan, we keep hearing: "Yes, but that mean beast, the federal machinery, is the only one setting national standards". I have said it in this House and I repeat that we are a country. I think that, whether we are from Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia or Newfoundland, we agree that we, together, as a big family, must have standards that allow for a similar quality of life throughout the country.

But as far as the system is concerned, we kept hearing that national standards were set unilaterally by the federal machinery. Again, in trying to respond to the needs for change, to the demands of the provinces, the Minister of Human Resources Development has ensured that national standards will now be set in co-operation with the provinces, through the Canada social transfer. So, we are not imposing any more; quite the contrary, we are responding to current federalism, evolutionary federalism. We are responding once again to the winds of change and, once again, in a spirit of good faith that demonstrates a will to work in partnership and in co-operation with the provinces.

When talking about a will to change on the part of the federal government and a will to respect the wishes of the people, we can consider the strategic initiatives put forward by the minister to implement a number of programs based on the priorities and needs of the provinces.

Can we still talk about interference by the federal machinery? I think that the action taken by the minister clearly demonstrates that we are following this trend of open federalism, of modern federalism that increasingly respects the objectives and wishes of the provinces as a whole. Furthermore, with respect to reform, we must bear in mind that the people as a whole asked that reform take place not only to decentralize but also to ensure that programs established in the 1960s can be brought into line with the new needs of Canadians in terms of social and labour market programs. That is why the minister and his officials are busy implementing programs that meet the expectations of the members of the Canadian society of the 1990s by making sure that the department can make the leap into the next millennium.

In fact, our goal is to better serve the public and provide it with tools. At this stage, on the basis of Bill C-96, whose purpose is to set out the department's mandate, I think that in the general, public interest, we must try to see our basic role, our ultimate goal and purpose, at the provincial and federal level, as working together, hand in hand, towards change in the federal system.

The department this bill deals with is an important department because of both the role it plays in the field and of what it can achieve with the funds at its disposal.

To show how important this department is, this is the department responsible for unemployment insurance. Changes will soon be made to the UI program. Again, the minister's clear commitment to respecting all the provinces and meeting the needs of the public will show.

This is an important department, whose role in Quebec and Canada cannot be underestimated, a department which people rely on and which has an impact on everyday life, a department which, last year, spent $13.3 billion in the province of Quebec alone.

How does this affect us? This amount of $13.3 billion was used to help more than 164,000 Quebecers find jobs and 44,789 students find summers jobs, to pump $1.5 billion into the Quebec post-secondary education system, to ensure that more than 80,000 Quebecers receive adequate training, while $3 billion went to subsidizing Quebec social assistance programs, which benefited approximately 700,000 people.

We are talking about a department that, on the average, allowed UI benefits to be paid to some 528 unemployed people every month. That is not all. I have a long list in front of me, but unfortunately it would take too long to enumerate all the concrete actions that were taken.

The department also helped develop youth employment. So, we are talking about a department that is having a real effect, that is undergoing changes. Given that reality, instead of always playing politics, the official opposition should rise above partisanship and, just this once, think about the people's interest, try to serve them better and, finally, work in partnership.

We know what can be achieved through partnership and, again in this case, the past gives us an indication of what the future holds. Take for example the Canada social transfer set up because people asked for it. There are also the agreements to improve job opportunities for welfare recipients, which allow us to join forces in order to help them find jobs. There is also the block funding agreement which was concluded with Quebec under the Canada Student Loans Program.

There are many examples showing that if we are ready to co-operate, as Quebecers want, and work hand in hand toward the common goal of helping all the people, so that Quebec can still have its place, we will grow together and allow federalism to grow in the best interests of the people and the provinces.

[Referendum Campaign, October 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the PQ leader found out that not all mayors concerned with the day to day administration of their municipalities will commit lightly to any project without finding out first what the costs and impacts will be.

The mayor of Montmagny, Jean-Claude Croteau, took advantage of the presence of the PQ Premier in his region to invite him to indicate in advance what the offer of partnership to be made to Canada the day after a yes vote would be.

The supporters of separation refuse to make that offer of partnership public, because they know full well that an economic and political union between an independent Quebec and Canada is impossible. The only real option they are pursuing is separation. The rest is just another example of smoke and mirrors to confuse the public.

[Studies By Inrs, September 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec separatists are hiding the truth from the people of Quebec on the real economic impact of separation. This is the conclusion one is led to given the PQ government's attitude, that purposely decided not to release three of the studies conducted by INRS researchers because the findings were not to their liking.

The Institut national de la recherche scientifique du Québec, under which these studies were carried out, issued a release stating that while the secretariat may have perceived the revised version of each report as containing certain deficiencies with regard to the mandate, the INRS is of the opinion that the studies carried out by its researchers are valid.

The separatist coalition has just demonstrated that it is prepared to resort to any trick, including hiding the truth, to get a win for the Yes side in the upcoming referendum.

[Supply, June 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague is confused at this point. He should call the PQ's 1-800 number so he can understand. The member opposite spoke of a very important and very serious matter-that of the unemployed in Quebec, and not only in Quebec, but in Canada as a whole.

Last year, we created 430,000 new jobs. The Minister of Human Resources Development is changing course in response to the wishes of people-be they welfare recipients or receiving some other form of public support-who want access to training without running head on into inflexible programs. This is what we are trying to do with the human resources investment fund.

It is unfortunate, but the truth is that we are working alone at the moment. The federal government is working alone, because the Government of Quebec, instead of working in partnership with the federal government to serve the public interest and develop a labour force in a rapidly changing economy, is talking about separating. It is a shame, and the cost, in the end, will be borne by the people of Quebec.

[Supply, June 7th, 1995]

In conclusion, what is unfortunate about the official opposition-I am trying once again to be heard above the ruckus raised by Bloc members-is that, instead of allowing us to work hand in hand to develop a federation that will reflect the vitality of people in Quebec and throughout Canada, they are trying to ensure that the system will not work. All this, incredibly, just to protect their separatist philosophy instead of serving the public interest.

Our government's goal is to help the people and look after their interests, and we will continue to do so. That is why I am especially proud to support the main estimates.

[Supply, June 7th, 1995]

If I may, I will try to convey, over the shouts of the official opposition, the messages sent to the minister by members of the business community.

The message from small businesses regarding regional development is clear. They told us: "First, cut government spending; second, stop subsidizing businesses; and third, eliminate overlap; reduce the paper burden and the red tape; and give us the

strategic information we need to meet the challenges of technological change and globalization of our markets".

Now that is progressive. That is the new approach to regional development. This is what the Federal Office of Regional Development intends to do. It will work in partnership in order to target promising development sectors. I must point out that the office has already taken action on a number of occasions in Quebec and throughout Canada. We target small and medium high tech business and, when we target high tech in partnership, we are targeting an area of the future. We are targeting an area that will mean the creation of quality, worthwhile and long lasting jobs, which will improve Canada's economy and make us a strong competitor both nationally and internationally. This is basic for small and medium size business.

I was listening to my colleague earlier talking about training. I find it hard to believe today that people can talk about isolating themselves as regards manpower training. In an era of free trade when there is talk of a World Trade Organization, we should be looking to band together to better train our labour force, make it a quality one. This is what Quebecers want. A quality labour force is a dynamic one that puts Canadian business at the peak of competition. As a dynamic labour force, it also attracts investments. This is the plan of the present government and this is what we will continue to do.

We are talking about a dynamic approach attuned to what people want. I was listening to my colleague earlier attacking reforms to social programs by the Department of Human Resources Development. You will permit me to say that I find such comments disgraceful, given that the new direction the Minister of Human Resources Development is taking is fundamental not only for workers, but for Canadian society.

Let us take the example of the human resources investment fund, which will come into effect in April 1996.

This fund, which in my opinion is quite a marvel, meets the very needs of the public. During several months, Canadians told us: "We want training programs that are firmly grounded in reality. We want training programs which are much more flexible". Again, I would point out to the Chair that I am trying to be heard over all the hollering of the Bloc Quebecois members.

Canadians want training programs which are much more flexible and truly in tune with their needs. The Human Resources Investment Fund meets all of their expectations. It really reflects the real situation out there. When I hear the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois telling Quebecers that these parties should have control over manpower training so that they can hide what they are doing, I cannot help but think that they are not realistic and are ignoring what is going on at the international level.

We must train our workers in order to become extremely competent. This requires partnerships, team work and co-operation with the private sector, which is exactly what the Human Resources Investment Fund is all about. Earlier, some members said that the Canada social transfer would lead to decentralization. I do not know which way to turn anymore.

When we were considering social reform, the members of the Bloc Quebecois hailed the Canada social transfer as a miracle. They wanted us to decentralize and transfer everything to the provinces. That is what we did in the finance minister's budget. Through the Canada social transfer, we handed a number of programs over to them. Now that this has come to pass, they are trying to distort the truth by saying that the Canada social transfer is tied to the unilateral setting of national standards by the federal government.

I think that we did not read the same document. We live in a country, and I think it is normal to have national standards across the country. During the consultations on social program reform, people in Quebec and throughout Canada also told us that we should indeed have national standards. The people also told us-in Quebec, too-that they did not want these standards to be set unilaterally by the federal government.

The Canada social transfer is a classic example of progressive federalism, of co-operative federalism, of a federalism that does not represent in any way the status quo advocated by members of the official opposition, members of the Bloc Quebecois.