Mr. Speaker, I will try not to go beyond my speaking time in order to allow my colleagues to speak in turn.
There are two points I want to underline in the budget of the Minister of Finance. First off, fishermen, be they from Canada or Quebec, are again the ones who have to bear the brunt of the federal's bad management. Secondly, the Maritimes are also penalized by a way of management which is ignoring the people. I will deal with these two points.
My first comment is about the fishermen of Canada and Quebec. They are among the most affected by this budget. Minister Crosbie had allocated a billion dollars to support fishermen over the last two years. The Liberal government reduced that amount to 340 million a year over five years, a cut close to 30 per cent. Under the Conservative government, we witnessed a drop in fish stocks and it seems that, under the Liberal government, we will witness a drop in the financial support offered to the fishing industry's victims.
The cut in the fishermen's support envelope should have come about naturally, through the industry's reorganization or the redeployment of workers in other lines of business, not as a consequence of Liberal cutbacks. Will the government give to fishermen the means to adapt to their new reality or will it go on reducing their financial support without giving them any means on which to build their future?
If no financial envelope is created for the purpose of opening new avenues to the fishermen, the relief measures, such as the $1.7 billion that will be invested, will necessarily have to be recurrent ones. They will have to be repeated over and over until the government puts an end to it without ever solving the problem.
The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans must tell the fishermen exactly what financial measures he intends to implement in order to reorganize the industry and reassign workers to other areas of activity. Will the minister put some money into that program or can we conclude, as the budget seems to indicate, that he has abdicated and that fishermen will be left to fend for themselves? The minister must let us know what he intends to do after the May 15 deadline. He owes that to the thousands of people who are now living in doubt. It is even more pressing for him to act now that his colleague, the Minister of Finance, has presented his budget.
We have not yet said it enough. This budget is an outright attack on the far regions and the poorest regions of Quebec and Canada. The maritimes are among the hardest hit by the Martin budget. There are three examples.
The Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency received cuts of $90 million over three years. The federal government created this agency to stimulate and diversify the economy of the region. It pretends now that it will restart the economy by cutting this agency's budget.
The government goes even further. The Department of Industry which finances the larger projects not handled by ACOA has also received drastic cuts. What is the good of having development instruments if they are not given the means to succeed?
The second example is the military. Following the federal election the government promised to re-evaluate its role in defence. We were pleased by its sensitivity as the world changed significantly even from what it was five years ago. The role and
the budget of the military have to be reviewed. The government has to be sure to study the ministry to make all the necessary modifications and cuts.
The government's mistake is in proceeding with the cuts without the smallest concern for the people it will be affecting. The Bloc believes in the government cutting military spending. However, it believes in converting the military industry. We cannot tell thousands of people that one day or the next they will lose their jobs without giving them other alternatives. The extent of the cuts requires that we proceed while simultaneously proceeding with a plan to convert the private sector. The government has not done this. It has not taken responsibility for the people of the maritimes.
The third example: unemployment insurance. The extending of the eligibility period from 10 to 12 weeks is an extremely hard blow for the Maritimes and, I should say, for all eastern Canada. For instance, only in the areas of Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands, there are about 11,000 seasonal workers who will be affected by that decision. In the middle of an economic crisis, the government will take $725 million next year only and more than $6 billion in the next three years in the pockets of the unemployed, the victims of the lack of jobs. In the meantime, it reduces its spending by only $400 million. Big deal!
Moreover, the Minister of Finance announces that the regional rate of unemployment will have less impact on the level of benefits. The Minister has found yet another way of attacking the people who already have trouble getting by. Raising the number of weeks required to be eligible to unemployment insurance without proposing a catalyst to restore the economy is utopian. Besides, as some renowned economists mentioned this morning in La Presse , the federal budget is like, and I quote: shovelling the snow into the provincial yards''. Effectively, since a lot of people will go directly from unemployment to welfare, the provinces will have to pay at least $1 billion more in welfare. I call thatshovelling''.
In conclusion, I will draw a parallel between the situation of fishermen and that of the Maritimes in general. People who fish see their income shrink, but the government is not proposing anything to revitalize fishing. For their part, the Maritimes see their defence installations close, their unemployed under attack, but the government is not proposing anything to diversify the economy in general or transform the defence industry into a civilian industry. There are people behind all those moves. The Chrétien government had set for itself the goal of giving hope to people, but hope is what is sadly lacking in this budget.
I do not know how long I still have-three minutes, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to add that during the week of Parliamentary recess, I met with some of my constituents. I have one of the largest ridings in the country. There may be larger ones, but mine covers three county regional municipalities. So, in a riding where unemployment in December was 27 per cent and where employment is highly seasonal, the big question that the mayors of the three municipalities were asking was: What are we going to do? What can the government do for us? We want to work for the longest possible periods, but they prevent us from doing so. Mr. Speaker, the great question in this financial balance the Minister of Finance, Mr. Martin, tried to achieve is what came first, the hen or the egg? I have the feeling though that at the present time he is eating both. How can we make it? I will work and form a committee with these people; we are thinking about the issue. However, we will need some financial assistance. When you are out of gas at the bottom of a steep hill, you need gas if you want your car to climb. Right now we have none.
I hope we will find other ways, Mr. Speaker; I hope we will succeed in influencing this government and make them listen to the people in my riding, the people of Gaspé, because I know the problem will be the same all over Eastern Canada: seasonal jobs. I am not asking for charity; all I am asking is that they give us the financial means of reaching our goals. All I personally want is for the Gaspé Peninsula not to be a burden anymore. And we will not be a burden; just give us the proper means and we will say goodbye to you and your social programs.
