Patrick Gagnon

[Supply, June 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party member has raised a number of points, and I find very interesting his claim that the francophone community can survive without the necessary support or assistance of the Canadian government. I think the hon. member is mistaken.

It must not be forgotten that francophones represent only one per cent of the total population of North America, if Mexico is included. Clearly, it is therefore to our advantage to make sure that we have good ties with and, of course, the unconditional support of the anglophone and bilingual provinces of the country.

There was also a reference to the case of Alberta, which, to some extent, resisted the efforts of the federal government in a procedure back in the eighties. Admittedly the whole thing had the support of the Quebec government at the time.

I would like to hear the member's thoughts on this territorial responsibility. He spoke to us about the Reformers' almost electoral promise to encourage and promote the French fact and, in particular, bilingualism, throughout the country. How could they encourage French throughout the country when they are prepared to support a policy of territorial management?

He proudly told us about the existence of 163 schools, or educational establishments, offering French immersion courses. He also boasted-and I am very glad to hear it this morning-that there are over 27,000 anglophone school children in French immersion in Alberta this year.

How does he think they could maintain or increase the number of these French immersion schools if they followed his political logic? How could a government headed by the leader of the third party guarantee us the presence of French in that province and, of course, in the other anglophone provinces? I would certainly like to hear his comments on this subject.

[Supply, June 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, since we are talking about discrimination, I am surprised with the statements made by an hon. member of the House who spoke about Canadian history in a biased manner, in my opinion, an opinion that is certainly shared by the vast majority of Canadians, and indeed, historians.

The hon. member talks about defending the interests of francophones, but I would like to point out to you that he spoke to us exclusively in English. He should at least have made an effort by outlining this situation in French.

Having said that, I find the Canada the hon. member has described to us is a Canada that no longer exists. I believe the hon. member has forgotten to tell us about the real Canadian history. If we go back to the conquest, when France, as you know, gave New France to England, we must not forget that it is the French administration that left us, that abandoned us. We must not forget either that, at some point, we thought we could reconquer New France, since England was in a position to give it back to France, but, unfortunately, the French did not accept that. That is not well known, but is worth debating and telling the people about.

In fact, when I sawthe premier of Quebec, accompanied by several of his ministers, giving the Order of Quebec to Prime Minister Juppé of France, I recall that the existence of Canada was all but denied and that the Maple Leaf was nowhere to be seen. We saw, for example, how the agency dealing with the Quebec government protocol behaved.

It did everything to hide the Maple Leaf. I find that rather repugnant and, in my opinion, inappropriate in the current context. I sometimes wonder, because I somehow have the feeling that these separatists are behaving like mere colonials.

It is also interesting to hear them talk about Canadian history. You know, 100 years ago this month, Wilfrid Laurier was elected Prime Minister of Canada, the first Prime Minister of French Canadian origin. I think we should not be surprised that so much progress has been made since that period.

The hon. member did not even talk about the fact, for example-I want to conclude on this, as it will certainly make for a very lively debate-that, today, 350,000 young anglophones are studying French full time in immersion classes throughout Canada, while, only 15 years ago, there were barely 30,000 of them doing so. I believe anglophones have made considerable progress, but the hon. member does not talk about that. And I think that, today, we will go back over the points that were raised by the hon. member, we will debate them and we will certainly correct his version of Canadian history.

[Committees Of The House, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the first report of the Joint Standing Committee on Official Languages regarding its order of reference of March 7, 1996 concerning the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1997.

[Fisheries, May 17th, 1996]

Go fish for groundfish.

[Supply, May 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully to the slanderous things and the misinformation that were mentioned about the referendum results this afternoon, as did, I am sure, a huge segment of the population.

I want to point out to the opposition members, to the Bloc Quebecois, that they were elected with 48 per cent of the votes in Quebec. We know full well that the no side, the federalist side, won the last referendum. Since they call themselves true democrats, I would urge them to recognize our victory and the wish of Quebecers to remain in the Canadian federation.

I know I do not have much time, however, I want to stress the fact that they do not speak on behalf of all Quebecers. Quebecers are proud Canadians and, believe me, they have no lesson to receive from the Bloc members and the opposition who maintain that we do not protect the interests of Quebecers within the Canadian federation.

Canada without Quebec is unthinkable, which is why we, the Quebec members of the Liberal Party-

[Forestry Sector, May 6th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the hon. members to the fact that this is National Forest Week. Forests and the jobs they create are a matter of vital importance to my riding.

In addition to being a place of leisure and relaxation, forests play a leading role in Canada's economy and represent a source of direct and indirect employment for over 850,000 Canadians.

The Canadian forestry sector generates over $49 billion worth of activity annually. Of this amount, over $22 billion make a welcome contribution to the country's balance of trade.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate all those who work directly or indirectly at forestry related activities. Thanks to them, we benefit from the important resource that forests represent.

[Youth, April 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the ministerial task force on youth, I am pleased to announce the launch of youth week '96, which begins today and continues until May 5.

Youth week 1996 recognizes and highlights the many contributions young people have made to building Canada. Some 50 events will be held throughout the country to celebrate their many achievements. More than 60 youth organizations will co-ordinate activities to encourage young people to come up with new ideas for the betterment of their generation.

In the coming weeks, the task force will ask young Canadians and employers what can be done to do help young people make the transition between home, school and the working world. We are keen to hear what the young people have to say, because investing in youth, that is, in the future, is a priority for the Government of Canada.

[Francophones Outside Quebec, March 22nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage.

I would like to know her intentions with respect to the negotiations with the Franco-Columbians, who are anxious to know what stage the negotiations affecting their future have reached. I am well aware of the importance the minister attaches to francophones, particularly those outside Quebec. As we know very well, there are very nearly one million francophones outside Quebec, and some people at least are concerned about their future.

The Franco-Columbian community is anxiously awaiting the outcome of the negotiations with the federal government. Is the Minister in a position to inform us of the status of these negotiations?

[Borrowing Authority Act, 1996-97, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member of the opposition that I naturally prefer work shirts to ties. I think that might answer his question. The hon. member across the way seems strangely interested in the riding of Bonaventure-«les-de-la-Madeleine, to the point where it almost sounds like he is considering running against me. It is, of course, a lovely area.

However, it will take a lot to kickstart the economy. Take unemployment insurance reform. I have had the privilege of meeting with my constituents, who had a number of very interesting and constructive ideas to pass on. I also offered my opinion to the minister. I implore him to make major changes to this bill. We are, in fact, going to invite opposition members and a number of Liberal MPs to suggest constructive changes to this bill.

Quebecers, and particularly the people of my riding, are no longer satisfied with the status quo, with an unemployment rate of 20 per cent and higher, with a dropout rate of over 40 per cent. This is why we want to introduce incentives to give young people a chance, to give them some hope in the region I come from. This is what is important.

Furthermore, I was the first to rise, as a member from Quebec I would add, when I told the minister that we had to re-examine the method used to calculate unemployment insurance benefits, that the 410 hours is unacceptable in my region. That is what I said. I also said that we must take a second look at this idea of penalizing

seasonal workers, of dropping from 55 per cent to 50 per cent of income after five years of benefits. I took a stand.

I have confidence in the minister, I have confidence in this government, and I want my constituents to know that it was the Canadian government, a Liberal government, that established this country's social safety net. It is to the great credit of my party and I have not forgotten it. But I can tell you that it was the former Leader of the Opposition who cut the budget in Quebec by 20 per cent in 1982-83. There are tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of Quebecers who have not forgotten that yet.

We want equity and with the amounts, the $300 million we will be transferring to remote areas, the programs to promote the employability of people in a number of sectors, particularly aquaculture and the high tech field, in order to give the young and the not so young a chance, a hope that they will be able to find suitable employment.

In conclusion, our government is an equitable one which seeks social justice above all and that is why I am here as the member for Bonaventure-Îles-de-la-Madeleine, so that we will be heard loud and clear, listened to here in the House of Commons, and to ensure that these programs meet our needs.

[Borrowing Authority Act, 1996-97, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I, of course, wish to speak to this bill to provide borrowing authority so that the federal government can service its debt. This debate deals with the last budget speech delivered by the Minister of Finance, the hon. member for LaSalle-Émard.

I think it is important to remind our listeners that the 1996 budget contains no tax increases. There is no increase in individual income tax, corporate tax or the excise tax. In fact, there were no tax increases in this budget, which was very well received by the media in general, by the national and international financial community, of course, and by groups of young and not so young people, including seniors.

In its third budget, the government intends to continue keeping the federal deficit under control. Since the last two budgets, we have saved $21.5 billion. This is a significant cut in the present circumstances.

The government's third budget cuts another $1.9 billion. In 1992, Canada's debt amounted to 6 per cent of our gross domestic product. It was a very large debt, one of the largest in the western world.

This year, however, the debt has fallen from 6 to 3 per cent of GDP, and our goal is to reduce this figure to less than 2 per cent. Should we reach this goal, Canada's deficit would rank among the lowest in the western world.

I am also proud to tell you that, of all western countries, Canada is the one that borrows the least, so that it can service its debt and stimulate the economy.

This, I think, is serious evidence that highlights the government's competence and, of course, the finance minister's determination to help and especially to ensure-repeat, ensure-that the Canadian government remains fiscally responsible.

The budget touched on several issues. I especially want to tell Canadian seniors that they can rest assured that those over 65 years of age will continue to receive benefits. The only changes that were made concern people who have single status or earn $52,000 or more. As far as couples are concerned, the program will still apply to those who earn $78,000 or less.

As for young people, it has been announced that nearly $300 million will be invested over the next three years to encourage young people to re-enter the workforce as well as to set up apprenticeship programs. Also, the federal government intends to make sure that twice as many summer jobs are available for students.

I think the government is headed in the right direction. Much attention is paid to independent workers as well as to new technologies and new incentives for business to invest in various areas, including in the rural area.

The past year, the federal government invested in the information highway to make so-called remote areas more competitive and, of course, up to date as regards new technology and the new marketplace, as we know it.

I should also say a word about what has been going on in Quebec, especially over the last few days, as the Quebec government, through its premier, Mr. Bouchard-a former member of this House, as you know-is hosting a socio-economic conference bringing together union leaders, industry and Quebec government members of course.

I am rather surprised to see that the premier has the intention of bringing down a balanced budget within four years. But I think that what is important is to realize why the premier is aiming for the year 2000 with his plans to balance the budget, and that is because, at one time, this man was notorious for his cuts affecting the Quebec government and its employees, who suffered wage cuts in excess of 20 per cent during the 80s.

I think that Quebec will have it hard in the next few years, for two reasons: because of the size of the accumulated debt in Quebec and because Quebec is the Canadian province whose per capita indebtedness is the highest. I must also add that the signal sent to Mr. Bouchard on October 30 last by the people-by the industry, small business and the public in general-is the following: "Put your fiscal house in order and work toward economic growth. This is all we want and this is how we will pull Quebec out of its economic slump".

Unfortunately, the premier still seeks to achieve sovereignty, that is Quebec's independence.

Let me remind you that, as a cornerstone of the Canadian federation, Quebec is very much a winner. This year alone, Quebec will receive close to $11.634 billion in federal transfers, including $3.8 billion in equalization payments.

As regards the issue of equalization, opposition members often tell us that Quebec is the big loser in Confederation, but that is simply not true. Since 1993-94, federal equalization payments to Quebec went from $3.7 billion-again that was for 1993-94-to $3.8 billion the following year and $3.8 billion this year. In

1996-97, they will go up to almost $4 billion. It is obvious that Quebec benefits from being a member of the Canadian federation.

However, in spite of these federal transfers, Quebec is about to make drastic cuts affecting welfare recipients. It will reduce the schools' budgets. I feel, as do several other people, that Quebec will experience lasting difficulties if the political issue, which is a real threat, is not settled.

We are simply asking the premier of Quebec, and I believe I am speaking on behalf of a large percentage of Quebecers who want to remain in the Canadian federation, to sit down with the federal government to find solutions that will ensure jobs and a future for all. This is what we want.

Quebecers voted no for several reasons, the first one being of course that they want to stay in the Canadian federation. But I believe that the political maturity of Quebecers made them realize that, to move forward and reach the objectives that they had as a society, including getting the Quebec and Canadian economies back on track, we must work together.

Time is running out, but let me tell you that Quebec's economic growth will be dependent on political stability. Quebec's debt will certainly decrease, provided we believe in economic growth, which is the key to getting rid of the debt in Quebec and Canada within the next few years.