Suzanne Tremblay

[Bilingualism, April 13th, 1994]

I wonder how the Prime Minister can expect to maintain his credibility and can sing the praises of bilingualism, when in its latest budget, his government cut financial assistance to all francophone associations outside Quebec.

[Bilingualism, April 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I wish the Prime Minister would read the commissioner's report, because he would see that all this progress is an illusion. We are not getting anywhere.

I want to say to the Prime Minister, who hails from Quebec and who keeps talking about his French Canadians, that he should treat them as well as English-speaking Quebecers are treated. We treat them well in Quebec. When will you start treating French Canadians as we treat English Canadians in Quebec?

[Bilingualism, April 13th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Prime Minister. During his recent visit to Regina, the Prime Minister made an ardent plea for bilingualism to support his particular vision of Canada.

The report of the Commissioner of Official Languages once again pointed to a major decline in access to federal services in French across the country and deplored the fact that French-language education was still not available in many locations in Canada.

Will the Prime Minister admit that despite all the rhetoric we have heard from the Prime Minister, especially today, the implementation of the government's policy on bilingualism has been a failure, a fantasy from the Trudeau era, and that it is false to claim, as he does, that a person can live, work and receive a decent education in French anywhere in Canada?

[Publishing Industry, March 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, since the minister is now aware of the fact that his colleagues have refused to examine this matter in committee, is he prepared to show his good faith and concern for transparency

by reversing his decision and agreeing to order a public inquiry, since the Liberal majority on the Canadian Heritage Committee will not let us investigate the matter in committee?

[Publishing Industry, March 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The minister still refuses to order a public inquiry into the circumstances around the sale of Ginn Publishing to Paramount. The minister would rather refer the matter for consideration to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. However, in this morning's Globe and Mail , we read that the minister's Liberal colleague, the chairman of this committee, has made it clear he does not want to conduct an inquiry into this controversial matter.

Does this mean that the Minister of Canadian Heritage suggested referring the matter to the Commons committee, while he knew perfectly well his colleagues would refuse to consider the matter, probably because they also sensed the government had something to hide?

[Publishing Industry, March 24th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, does the minister agree that the only way to preserve what credibility he may still have regarding this issue is to order a public inquiry, so that we can find out exactly what happened?

[Publishing Industry, March 24th, 1994]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On top of contradicting himself daily regarding the Ginn Publishing transaction, the Minister of Canadian Heritage still refuses to make public all the documents related to this transaction, including the legal opinion on which he relied to approve the transaction.

My question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage. How can the minister seriously claim that a legal opinion from the Department of Justice can include some confidential Cabinet discussions? How can he seriously make such a claim?

[Parks Canada, March 24th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity, as we debate Parks Canada "Guiding Principles and Operating Policies" tabled today in this House, to reaffirm that the Bloc Quebecois will spare no effort to ensure that the beauty of Quebec's and Canada's wilderness is preserved.

The minister was so kind as to remind the people of Quebec and Canada what a key, positive role the Leader of the Opposition has played in protecting our national heritage, and I thank him for that.

But the minister is no doubt aware that the Bloc Quebecois does not intend to just stand by if the government is remiss in preserving the cultural heritage of Quebec and Canada. I am convinced that, now more than ever, he knows that the Bloc Quebecois will be every bit as vigilant with respect to natural heritage.

When the Leader of the Opposition was minister of the environment, he stated and I quote: "One of the areas in which the department is involved that I always find rewarding is the parks system. Parks Canada represents such beauty and positive things and is such a success that it is always encourages me to carry out my duties. It is one of Canada's greatest achievements, one which is recognized throughout the world. People must realize that our parks system is not only a beautiful sight for us. Other countries envy our national parks system".

In fact, Canada with its parks system is considered as a leader by conservation agencies world-wide. It is fitting for Parks Canada to be a source of inspiration for all future Canadian environmental policies.

The Bloc Quebecois will make sure that the government fulfils its commitment to implement the concept of sustainable development, as stated in the final report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, the Brundtland Report, entitled "Our Common Future".

It should be pointed out that, based on the concept of sustainable development, economic development must be compatible with the long-term preservation of unmanaged ecosystems and survival processes. In Quebec and Canada, we have known for over a century that this wilderness must be preserved, not only for its unmistakable aesthetic beauty, but also because of the causal relationship to be made between what we do in that area and the benefits to be derived in terms of the environment.

We therefore had to reconcile tourism and economic development with environmental protection. Parks must be developed to create jobs in tourism, of course, but never at the expense of future generations.

As you know, there is still a lot to do. The national park network must be completed. Canada's 39 ecoregions attest to its riches and diversity. It would therefore be advisable to establish a park representing every ecoregion.

We will improve and extend the national park network and pay particular attention to the protection of the Arctic environment. As you know, some planned park sites in the Arctic had to be given up because of mining concessions. We must take environmental repercussions into account every time a government project or program is undertaken.

Thousands of jobs are tied to the preservation of this natural heritage. We must also ensure that these sites are impeccably managed, that expenditures are justified, and that includes official residences, of course.

Finally, we emphasize the minister's commitment regarding partnership and co-operation with other levels of government. As he probably knows, Quebec did not get its fair share of national parks. The government must step up its efforts to give Quebec its fair share while respecting its prerogatives and priorities.

The government must resolve all jurisdictional conflicts by co-operating with Quebec, the other provinces and the territories, particularly by taking into account the concerns of local communities. It must seek the direct involvement of Natives when it is needed.

In closing, regarding Parks Canada's updated mandate, may I remind you that the Bloc Quebecois is happy that the mandate has been updated and that the ten guidelines on protecting our historic and natural heritage are being tabled today. We will, of course, examine this document carefully.

Finally, let us recall that this work was undertaken at the Department of the Environment under the leadership of the Opposition Leader when he was minister. He put his stamp of quality on it. His successor only has to follow in his footsteps.

[Publishing Industry, March 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I followed this debate, but I have trouble following the minister.

How can the minister keep saying that since the election, no Canadian publishers showed any interest in purchasing Ginn, when in January, the president of Canada Publishing, Mr. Ronald Besse, advised the CDIC for at least the fourth time since 1989 that he intended to acquire Ginn Publishing. How can the minister justify his statement? When is the minister telling the truth? In the House or in the lobby, to the Toronto Star ?

[Publishing Industry, March 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who was clearly nervous, again contradicted himself in comments on the controversial Ginn Publishing transaction. He stated that since the election, no offers had been made by Canadian publishers, and also, that his decision had not been influenced by the possibility of a lawsuit.

My question is directed to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. How can the minister justify his latest about-face on the Ginn Publishing transaction, because after having said that he authorized this transaction because of the risk of being sued, yesterday, he said candidly to the reporter for the Toronto Star , and I read the article, that his decision was in no way affected by the risk of a lawsuit?