Yves Rocheleau

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague from Lotbinière for his speech on Bill C-46. I would also like to comment on the remarks of my Reform colleague whose question seems very relevant in the political and economic debate Quebecers and Canadians are now engaged in, because he presents the problem in appropriate terms.

Regional development is one of the main reasons why there are sovereignists in Quebec. Some Quebecers want Quebec to take its destiny into its own hands because the federal government's priorities will never coincide with those of Quebecers and their government. That is not necessarily the case in the rest of Canada as such. Given Canadians' sense of belonging compared with that of Quebecers, we know that Canada can develop its own internal logic in terms of development because there seems to be a strong consensus.

As my colleague just said, the federal government can set Canadian standards from the Pacific to some point in the East, but the Government of Quebec and Quebecers themselves will always be opposed to Canadian standards that would apply to Quebec.

Therefore, I congratulate the hon. member for asking a relevant question that is at the heart of the constitutional debate that concerns us and keeps us busy, Mr. Speaker.

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Superman. Yes, the parliamentary secretary has taken the words out of my mouth. It takes a superman and the voters will have to decide in due course whether the minister is superman.

Mr. Speaker, one aspect of the bill that I read particularly interested me. With respect to the minister's powers, clause 5 says, "The Minister shall exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions assigned by clause 4", as we saw before, "in a manner that will ( a ) strengthen the national economy and promote sustainable development; ( c ) increase''-and this is very important-``the international competitiveness of Canadian industry, goods and services and assist in the adjustment to changing domestic and international conditions.''

When I read this section, I immediately think of two Quebec industries affected by the defence industry conversion which show the government's negligence immediately-and there are certainly more in other parts of Canada. On paper, this government has every power to take action, but it lacks the political will to deal with the very harrowing issue of defence industry conversion, thus letting the situation get worse from week to week.

Take the case of Expro where, in the last few weeks, the situation has become dramatic. Indeed, the workers, the union and the management are faced with the unbearable choice of having to decide who and how many, will be laid off. I can understand why union leaders opposed this measure since there is no alternative.

There is no alternative of course because the global situation is difficult. As we know, now that the cold war is a thing of the past, everything that has to do with military production is being reevaluated. In fact, the military industry worldwide is conducting such an exercise. But what distinguishes Canada is the government's negligence compared, for example, to the American government's initiatives to concretely support that industry and make sure that it will improve. The situation of Expro is getting worse, while MIL Davie, in Lévis, has still not received any support from this totally apathetic government-in spite of strong public and political pressure.

Thankfully, we heard some good news for the Quebec City region when the leader of the Parti Quebecois, who is being sworn in today as the province's new premier, pledged-and we hope that he will have the means and the political will to fulfill that commitment-to find a solution in the case of MIL Davie, with or without the help of the federal government. Mr. Parizeau must be congratulated for displaying this kind of political courage to ensure that the problems of the number one private company in the Quebec City region are resolved-indeed, this is no small venture: it is the largest company in the region. The projects regarding the ferry to the Madgalen islands and the smart ship, which have been the subject of much discussion and which the federal government is very familiar with, should get the green light so as to at least give some time to MIL Davie.

I want to take this opportunity to congratulate all our elected colleagues from the Parti Quebecois, and particularly Mr. Parizeau. I also want to congratulate the PQ members who were elected in my region, namely Mr. Guy Julien and Mr. Rémi Désilets, who will respectively represent Trois-Rivières and Maskinongé at the legislative assembly. Some may find those results strange but the fact is that, for the first time ever, Maskinongé voted for the Parti Quebecois, and so did the riding of Charlevoix if I am not mistaken. This is a sign of the times and it shows how coherent Quebecers have been in their thinking since the failure of Meech. Indeed, Quebecers first said "no"to the Charlottetown accord, then "yes" to the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois, and they will say "yes" to sovereignty in a few months.

We are pleased that the Parti Quebecois is now in office and we were glad to see that Quebec's premier, Mr. Parizeau, wasted no time in announcing at his first press conference a policy which will better anything ever done by the federal government regarding regional housing-even if those federal measures were not necessarily constitutional-by setting up a new structure whereby parliamentary assistants, who will be directly accountable to the premier, will each be responsible for one region of Quebec.

I think Quebec has scored some major points as far as its future is concerned, and we can only commend the Government of Quebec, and encourage and support it in its new approach to regional development, which is entirely in line with the findings of the Bélanger-Campeau Commission on the concerns of the regions.

Earlier, I read to the House what the department's responsibilities were, but there is more. That was only Part I. The powers, duties and functions of the minister also extend and include all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction, not by law assigned to any other department, board or agency of the

Government of Canada, relating to regional economic development in Ontario and Quebec. This brings us to the Federal Office of Regional Development which comes under the Department of Industry but, politically, is the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.

Incidentally, the office, and this is perhaps something many people were unaware of, was established by order in council, while its counterparts the Department of Western Economic Diversification and ACOA, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency-were legislated into existence. The fact that western Canada has a department, the Maritimes an agency and Quebec an office probably says much about the federal government's perception of Quebec's economic development. It may be symbolic that besides having an office that is the responsibility of the Minister of Finance, we have an order in council instead of legislation.

If we take a closer look at all this, we should realize that the institution itself, which is called the Federal Office of Regional Development, merely duplicates what already exists, even at the federal level. I know what I am talking about. I live in a region where we have regional development, and I can tell you that federally, the office is competing with the NRC, which has its own regional branches staffed by one or two that get in touch with small businesses, inquire about their technological requirements and are then able to meet those requirements, which is not the case with the office. The Federal Office of Regional Development is therefore competing with at least one federal agency and, in Quebec, with the Quebec Department of Industry and Commerce, which promotes regional development for the benefit of small businesses, and with the entire network of industrial commissioners Quebec has established with municipal funding plus the support of the provincial government.

The Federal Office of Regional Development merely creates a lot of overlap and duplication, and that is its sole mandate. When we take a good look at the section on regional economic development, we see in section 8 (c) : ``focus on small and medium-sized enterprises and the development and enhancement of entrepreneurial talent''.

There are already quite a few players in the field. In Quebec; they are talking quite openly about streamlining all this, and now the federal government gets involved, for historical reasons, as we all know. This Parliament has always wanted to do the right thing. It has always wanted to do what is best for Quebec, but Quebecers are pretty smart, and we can expect some action on this issue very shortly. Furthermore, the federal government has made cuts in the Federal Office of Regional Development, so that any potential it had for being effective is about to disappear altogether.

From what I have heard recently throughout my riding and also from other sources, cuts amounting to $70 million over the next three years will make an empty shell out of the Federal Office of Regional Development. It is an empty shell which meets the needs of small and medium-sized businesses only when they are involved in high-tech projects. But unfortunately, this is not often the case-herein lies the problem-and one must remember that, by and large, the office is of very little assistance to small and medium-sized businesses.

As for its involvement in tourism mentioned earlier by the parliamentary secretary, it seems to me that we are talking about provincial jurisdiction and, in this particular case, Quebec jurisdiction. The federal government must thread very carefully if it wants to get involved in this area. We have seen examples of such involvement in remote areas where the federal government stepped in to support projects sometimes turned down by Quebec resulting in a lot of confusion, duplication and overlapping, and a tremendous waste of money and efforts. Unfortunately, this lack of cohesion is too often the rule instead of jointly planned regional development.

We believe that regional development is, first and foremost, a provincial matter and that Quebec should have exclusive authority in this area, especially now that we have the resources and the structure to do it. With the new government, we will be in an even better position to take matters into our own hands. We cannot allow the federal government to continue interfering in such a field of competence, especially since we know that the Quebec government is working in co-operation with the various stakeholders and elected representatives in every municipality and region of the province. Regional municipalities and unified regional municipalities provide Quebec with the appropriate structure to meet people's needs in an increasingly articulated manner.

We cannot support such an empty bill. It is just window-dressing. It comes after the fact to sanction a decision made by this government hopefully with a view to streamlining its operation. It is only skin deep. As a consequence, we cannot support this bill and for this reason I move, seconded by the member for Charlesbourg, the following amendment:

That all the words following "that" be deleted and replaced by:

"this House refuse to give second reading to Bill C-46, an Act to establish the Department of Industry and to amend and repeal certain other Acts, because the principle of the bill does not put an end to duplication and overlapping by not recognizing that Quebec has exclusive authority over regional economic development".

[Department Of Industry Act, September 26th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I will comment on-not to say respond to-the speech by my colleague from Broadview-Greenwood, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry, who rose today on behalf of the Minister of Industry to present Bill C-46, an Act to establish the Department of Industry, not to say the new Department of Industry, because it must be said that this bill simply confirms after the fact what was planned by the former government then led by Ms. Campbell. Under this bill, certain institutions such as Investment Canada, Consumer and Corporate Affairs, part of the Department of Communications and Science and Technology will now come under the same concept, the same minister and the same department, namely Industry Canada.

Briefing sessions, to use the federal public service's new terminology, can be very enlightening in that we meet with public servants who can fill us in on the government's approach. That is how we learned, for example, the guidelines behind Bill C-46, which can be found in a government document prepared by the minister's officials. The guidelines are as follows: Bill C-46 is aimed at, among other things, maintaining the status quo between the mandates of the departments affected; preserving the provisions in the old laws as much as possible; and finally, making the minor amendments that are needed but not substantial.

That is characteristic of how this government elected on October 25, 1993 has operated since the beginning of the session on January 19. It is there but not making any headway. It is simply marking time. It holds debates without making any real progress, without promoting advances in science-since we are talking about science and technology.

It is simply marking time, and that is becoming more and more obvious as weeks and months go by without any real savings recorded as a result of their amendments. Three or four structures are combined under one head; they are now headed by one person instead of two or three, but nothing is really saved in the day-to-day running of things; we think it is purely a cosmetic operation, it is grandstanding, it is a way to say that instead of 30 or 32 ministers as before, there are now 20, but with the same responsibilities.

I refer to a government document given out at another briefing session we had for people in the Official Opposition who are concerned with the Department of Industry; it is contrary to the action needed, in their words, to make the machinery of government simpler and more efficient and to provide better services to users. So nothing is being simplified and nothing is more efficient with this change in structure, which is purely cosmetic.

These are not just words; this is the mandate of the minister of the newly structured Department of Industry. It is worth reading it.

My colleague, the parliamentary secretary, read it in English; I shall read it in French: "Powers, Duties and Functions of the Minister. The powers, duties and functions of the Minister extend to and include all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction, not by law assigned to any other department, board or agency of the Government of Canada, relating to industry and technology in Canada; trade and commerce in Canada; science in Canada; consumer affairs; corporations and corporate securities; competition and restraint of trade, including mergers and monopolies; bankruptcy and insolvency; patents, copyrights, trade-marks, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies; standards of identity, packaging and performance in relation to consumer products and services, except in relation to the safety of consumer goods; legal metrology; telecommunications, except in relation to the planning and coordination of telecommunication services for departments, boards and agencies of the Government of Canada, and broadcasting, other than in relation to spectrum management and the technical aspects of broadcasting; the development and utilization generally of communication undertakings, facilities, systems and services for Canada; investment; small businesses; and tourism."

So, Mr. Speaker, 15 fields of action, 15 fields of responsibility, which make the Department of Industry today a huge giant. We may wonder how one individual, as well supported as he may be by the bureaucracy, can really do an effective job! I for one, anyway, am very sceptical that anyone can really govern with such a broad mandate, when you realize that the industry minister's responsibility, in addition to what I just read, extends from Statistics Canada, for example, to the Canadian Space Agency to the Competition Tribunal and includes the Federal Business Development Bank, to name only these.

So I think that this excessively large field, which on the very face of it leaves us sceptical-

[Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, June 13th, 1994]

Just like houseguests.

[Quebec Federation Of Senior Citizens, June 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, since Tuesday, the city of Trois-Rivières has been the host of some 2,500 people from all parts of Quebec, who are attending the convention of the Quebec Federation of Senior Citizens.

The year 1994 also marks the 25th anniversary of the council of senior citizens from the Mauricie region.

The theme of the convention, "The necessary social involvement of seniors", recognizes not only their past contribution but also their current role and dynamism, in particular through their numerous volunteer activities.

It is not by cutting services to seniors, by closing departmental offices in our regions and by replacing staff with answering machines that this government will provide an adequate response to the needs of these people.

I am proud to salute all convention participants and assure them that the Bloc Quebecois supports their demands, keeping in mind that, above all, the government should show them the greatest respect.

[Credit Card Interest Calculation Act, June 7th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, as industry critic, I am pleased to address this bill. First, I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Simcoe North for introducing Bill C-233, an act to provide for the limitation of interest rates, of the application of interest and of fees in relation to credit card accounts.

The main purpose of this bill is to limit interest rates on credit cards. According to this bill, an oil company or a retail store could not charge annual interest rates exceeding by more than 9.5 and 11.5 per cent respectively the Bank of Canada discount rate. A card issued by a financial institution could not bear interest rates exceeding by more than 6.5 or 8.5 per cent the Bank of Canada discount rate, depending on whether the institution charges a fee for getting, renewing or using one.

At this point, I would like to commend, as the member for Simcoe North briefly did before me, the Service d'aide au consommateur in Shawinigan, which has been brilliantly managed for many years by Mrs. Madeleine Plamondon of the Saint-Maurice riding. That organisation has been defending consumers for many years. Last March, it published a document on credit cards and it just published another one on life insurance. For many years now, it has been quite successful in it's advocacy of consumers' interests.

To give you an idea of the importance of this phenomenon, which is increasingly present in our lives and our economy, let me mention some statistical data which depict it very well.

The number of credit cards in circulation in Canada is estimated at 55 million according to an Industry Canada study published in December 1993, so it is recent enough. This means 2.7 cards for each adult aged 18 or more. Of this number, 25 million are Visa or MasterCard, compared to only 12 million in 1981. The number has therefore doubled in a little over 10 years. Then, there are 17 million cards issued by department stores and 3.3 million by gas companies.

Between 1992 and 1993, the number of Visa and MasterCard credit cards increased to 25 million from 24.4 million. This is 600,000 cards more in circulation in a single year.

Visa and MasterCard generated more than 695 million transactions in 1993. The volume of sales reached $47.9 billion compared to $43.1 billion in 1992.

Finally, at the end of October 1993, the total outstanding balance on Visa and MasterCard accounts was $13.2 billion, a very large and very distressing amount. This is an increase compared to 1992, with $11.4 billion dollars. This outstanding balance is three times higher than in 1981.

To have a better idea of the problem, you have to know that, according to the same document, in 1993, interest rates paid by consumers using a MasterCard or Visa credit card were around 15 per cent. Those who had a credit card from a petroleum company, such as Petro Canada, Imperial Oil and Irving Oil, paid 24 per cent. Big department stores always want consumers, and we can understand why when we know they charged 28 per cent, again according to the Industry Canada document. I want to name each one, it is worth it: Canadian Tire, Eaton, Home Card, The Bay, Sears, Simpsons and Zellers. These stores charged 28.8 per cent interest on outstanding balances. Now we can understand the whole problem.

As for our evolution as a nation-again I want to thank the member for Simcoe North for giving us this opportunity-we should also note how consumer credit evolved over the last thirty years or so. In 1960, the consumer credit was at $3.5 billion. In 1981, it was at $46.6 billion and in 1992, it was up to $99.5 billion.

It is interesting to compare these figures to personal bankruptcy statistics. You do not have to be a genius to see the relationship between consumer credit, or indebtedness, and a potential personal bankruptcy. The number of personal bankruptcies in Canada went from 2,700 in 1970 to 23,000 in 1981 to 61,882 in 1992.

Between 1986 to 1992, the ratio of debt to disposable personal income rose from 48.4 per cent to 66.2 per cent. What we must remember is that credit cards went from being a method of payment to facilitate transactions to a credit mechanism. That is how serious the situation has become.

Credit equals debt. Credit cards enabled consumers to make major purchases easily and quickly-these are the key words-to travel, buy presents for themselves and others, cover unexpected expenditures and spread out payments over the rest of the year by paying a lot of money in interest.

This overconsumption-because we live in a society of mass consumption-often became synonymous with debt. This excessive debt results in large part-when we look at the consumers' assistance service like the people in Shawinigan did-from the large number of credit cards on the market and the vast amount of credit extended to consumers. Each credit card has a credit limit but for multiple card holders, the credit limits add up. That is, as the studies show, where consumers get all tangled up and lose control of their personal finances.

The situation is quite serious-as is pointed out-as only 50 per cent of credit card holders pay the full amount by the due date. Analyses show that of the 50 per cent who, statistics tell us, pay by the due date, 20 per cent settle their bills by borrowing on their personal line of credit. That is when debts start piling up as consumers use different credit cards and borrow from their personal line of credit to pay off their credit card debts. They get deeper and deeper into debt and end up having to declare bankruptcy, which becomes a kind of vicious circle.

According to the analyses, this phenomenon is due to three major causes. First, consumers' lack of information and education concerning methods of payment. People do not have enough information. Lenders make credit too easy and too accessible without exercising sufficient control or caution, which leads to excessive debt. There are also the factors on which people have

no control, serious events in life such as job losses, separations, divorces, accidents and health problems.

Certain stakeholders have a responsibility to correct the situation starting, of course, with the consumers themselves who are responsible for their own actions. Consumers' associations must pursue their commendable education efforts. It is, of course, very important that the institutions that issue credit cards be better monitored. Finally, governments must continue to encourage education and information efforts but they must also regulate, and one way to regulate is to limit interest rates, as proposed in the bill before us today, and that is why we support it.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

No, I am talking about the sovereigntist movement that has been evolving for the past 30 years. I myself have been a sovereigntist since 1961. I was a member of the Rassemblement pour l'indépendance nationale, or union for national independence. The Laurendeau-Dunton report, which referred to the two solitudes, was published in 1963. We are not inventing anything, Mr. Speaker.

Four other royal commissions examined the patient and all came to more or less lame conclusions that promoted the growth of the sovereigntist movement. Why? Because first of all, we are a nation and now that we are better educated, we want to become a member of the United Nations. On the other hand, in this Canada we are condemned to always remain a minority if we stay in Confederation.

So, in my opinion as a long-time sovereigntist, these are the two main points underlying all our arguments. The sovereigntist movement is not, as has recently been suggested on French-language television, "a burst of pressure from the Quebec people" but, on the contrary, a fire that has been stoked up for a long time. The ashes are smoldering, the fire is hot, and Quebecers will soon decide on their future in a democratic fashion, Mr. Speaker.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking my colleague from Broadview-Greenwood for his nice comments on my role on the committee but it shows a little my mentality and probably that of many of my colleagues with respect to the relations that will have to be maintained in the future between two sovereign peoples. I think that the courteous and the civil thing to do would be to deal with each other on an equal footing without hate or prejudice. That is what I am used to. The quality and experience of the membership of the committee my colleague sits on also helped.

In response to the question, I think that with every passing year it becomes more obvious that this country has reached a dead end. What I have noticed in recent weeks, perhaps during the opposition leader's international travels, is that English Canadians seem to have discovered the sovereigntist movement, as though it started with Mr. Parizeau, leader of the Opposition in Quebec, and the member for Lac-Saint-Jean, Leader of the Opposition in this House. In fact, the sovereigntist movement has been around in Quebec since Confederation and as you know, there was no referendum before Quebec became a Canadian province. If I remember correctly, it passed by one vote among the Quebec representatives here in Canada's Parliament.

What strikes me is that we may have to question the role of the media in the evolution of the debate. Incidentally, 30 years ago here in Ottawa, there was the Laurendeau-Dunton Royal Commission.

[Supply, June 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in this debate which, understandably, arouses passions. First of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup for his motion which reads:

That this House condemn the federal government's ineffective regional development interventions, which create overlappings and inconsistencies, resulting in an administrative chaos that hampers regional economic growth.

As we have seen, the debate can easily become acrimonious because it illustrates perfectly the problems of the federal system. As I said, it arouses passions because it reveals the intrinsic adversarial elements associated with the operations of two governments in the same field. Frankly, what interests us in regional development is the way the federal is involved in Quebec. We have conflicting interests; the Quebec government requests overall control of programs because it is responsible for development within its territory, while the federal government justifies its involvement by saying that one of its roles is to lessen regional disparities and uses its spending power, at times improperly.

It intervenes in various ways in regional development, through institutions which duplicate the work of similar Quebec institutions, thereby creating duplications, frictions, waste and confusion. I can give you a few examples.

The Federal Office of Regional Development is in direct competition with the regional secretariat for development and the regional development councils which have a program called business assistance fund. There is competition between the two institutions which have the same clients.

In the area of technological development, the National Research Council, which targets small businesses, is in competition with the Quebec department of industry and trade and its program Innovation PME. So we have two structures and two budgets and we therefore expend twice the energy.

In the area of training seminars for small businesses we have on the one hand the Federal Business Development Bank and on the other the Quebec department of industry. These are two structures which invite the same persons to the same kind of courses.

Then, there is the well-known area of vocational training. Everybody in Quebec agrees that this area is a mess. On one side we have the pretensions and the budgets of Employment and Immigration, and on the other the Société québécoise de la main-d'oeuvre, which has become an almost empty shell because of the federal-provincial conflict in the area of vocational training.

In a blatant disregard for the federal government, there is in Quebec a strong consensus among employers and employees, and all the parties involved, both at the public and para-public levels, to make vocational training the exclusive jurisdiction of the province.

As long as we remain part of it, we would like the federal structure to abolish all its training programs and to transfer their budgets to Quebec or, at the very least, to put these programs at the disposal of the Quebec structure already in place in every region.

I should add that when we talk about regional development, we do not mean just administrative structures or federal-provincial agreements.

It is also something much larger, something which includes activities as well as institutions having, through their operation, a direct influence on regional development.

There are sectors which interest me particularly. The whole area of industrial conversion has an influence on regional development. The same applies to transportation, all the transportation policies-and I could give you in a moment some examples which affect directly my riding of Trois-Rivières-whether they apply to marine, air or rail transportation.

There are direct implications for regional development. We will see that recent decisions and government inaction have also had a direct impact on regional development.

When it comes to industrial conversion, it is very sad, not to say deplorable, to see, week after week, the lack of political will on the part of the present Liberal government. The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Industry, who is directly concerned, is here. He can hear me. He knows what our position is in this matter.

It is an issue of the highest priority, and yet the minister seems to want to wash his hands of it. The situation is critical. Since 1987, in Quebec alone, 11,000 high-tech jobs have been lost. We cannot repeat it enough, it is totally unacceptable. It is nothing short of a large scale brain drain. People who deserve to work and should work, are no longer needed. The resulting higher unemployment is going to drive them away. The government must act now.

It cannot stand on the side line as it is doing now, claiming that it is waiting for boards of directors to submit their business plans to it. It must summon them, act as a catalyst, shame them in the public interest and ask them what they intend to do, given the geopolitical changes which are sweeping the world, and the fact that all over the western world, defence budgets are being cut. What does the private sector intend to do? We believe that it is up to the government to find out.

I forgot to mention that as far as R & D is concerned, the federal government has a leading role to play in terms of regional development. It must ensure that R & D funding is evenly distributed throughout Quebec, especially among university research centres and researchers. This will attract scientists who will improve the quality of life of people in each region and contribute to a richer and more articulate community life.

I will now raise the issue of transportation, starting with water transport. It is common knowledge that the federal Department of Transport is entertaining serious thoughts about privatizing all Coast Guard operations in the St. Lawrence or even about making shipowners pick up the tab for Coast Guard services in the near future.

If ever shipowners were required to pay for these services, it is not difficult to imagine the impact such a decision would have on all St. Lawrence ports, especially the port of Trois-Rivières. What is to become of Quebec ports and how will be they fare compared to ports where there is no Coast Guard, with ports in Eastern Canada or with U.S. ports?

If ever this decision was carried out, we would no longer be talking about regional development, but rather about regional anti-development. This decision could have some serious repercussions and all stakeholders must be very vigilant and oppose any such action.

With respect to air transportation, another issue which directly concerns my riding of Trois-Rivières in which a regional airport is located, Transport Canada's policy has been to divest itself of its airport assets. In a riding like my own, this issue has been under consideration for ten years. During the Liberal Trudeau era, the question was being reviewed and the repercussions are still being weighed today. Yet, a regional corporation is willing to take over the running of the airport and it is waiting for the two levels of government, federal and provincial, to agree on the fate of this facility. In the meantime, equipment is not being properly maintained and the situation is extremely dangerous.

I have been told that the electrical wiring is outdated and that the cracks are getting bigger every year. This could prove hazardous to the member for Saint-Maurice who occasionally flies in to visit his constituents and stops by in my riding. In any case, the Minister of Transport would simply be showing some common sense by taking steps to ensure that the Trois-Rivières airport is in good condition.

Lastly, with respect to rail transportation, we sense that there is no political will on the part of the government to proceed with the high-speed train project. The conditions in our regions, including mine where the unemployment rate stands at 12.2 per cent, a ridiculously high level for 1994, are unacceptable. This illustrates the complexity of the federal system and the lack of political will. It also shows how the federal government's focus is more on centralization and maintaining a unitarian system. Quebecers will have to choose. Either they will choose to remain a province much like any other province, smaller and more regionalized than ever before within the post-referendum, unitarian Canada of the future, or they will choose to become the masters of their own destiny and become a sovereign nation, as others before them have done.

[Aerospace, June 1st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, could the minister still tell us whether the reduction in Canada's contribution to this project will have consequences on Canada's ability to conduct experiments in space and what impact this decision will have on scientific progress in Canada in areas such as pharmaceuticals and materials engineering?