House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1997, with 54% of the vote.
Aboriginal Affairs May 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the views of all stakeholders in this question are being considered.
All stakeholders have to be consulted and discussions have to take place with them. We have to be able to assess their views and in the end to render a series of possible policies that will satisfy all stakeholders. This is exactly what we are doing.
Aboriginal Affairs May 3rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, at present we are looking at how the process of inherent rights can be put into place in an efficient way.
We are working on it. We already have a number of very positive results. We will announce any new policy as soon as it is ready.
Supply May 2nd, 1995
Madam Speaker, first I would like to make a few comments about the regional commissions. They have now finished their work and what they have done clearly proves that we had good reason to refuse to take part in those commissions. They were, as we say in Quebec, packed with people who had already made up their mind about sovereignty and unfortunately those commissions only reflected a foregone conclusion. They were absolutely not representative of public opinion in the province and, as all the polls showed, they reached conclusions that were contradicted by the opinion of a majority of the population.
Therefore, regional commissions have clearly been a waste of money for Quebecers and that 100 per cent of Quebecers, including yours truly, have paid for commissions which reflected only forty per cent of the public opinion. This is a waste of money and the wrong way to use provincial taxpayers' money. While poverty continues to increase in Quebec, the Parti Quebecois government, supported by its brother the Bloc Quebecois, continues to waste taxpayers' money.
With regard to the second issue, transfers to provinces, I think it was clearly demonstrated in the last budget that total federal expenses will be reduced from $120 billion in 1994-95 to $114 billion in 1995-96 and $107 billion in 1996-97. The federal government is reducing its spending twice as much as it is reducing transfers to provinces.
The government obviously had to be downsized and the same thing should happen in Quebec. We have faced up to our responsibilities and 69 per cent of the population approved our budget. I would also like the government of Quebec to face up to its responsibilities and start answering the real needs of Quebecers.
Supply May 2nd, 1995
Madam Speaker, with the tabling of their motion today, the separatists continue their propaganda campaign.
The Bloc Quebecois is simply repeating a position that is contrary to fact, contrary to the budget and contrary to reality. Accordingly the government will vote against the Bloc's motion. The budget underscored our desire to give Canadians good government in Ottawa. The budget marked the start of a new era and of a new way of managing the federation that is simpler, more efficient and more mindful of the provincial governments' jurisdiction.
The budget gives the provincial governments all the manoeuvring room they require to meet the needs of their people. We took steps to reform the provincial transfers, and our action plan will lead to a system that operates better and is financially sustainable. We maintained our commitment to equalization payments-one of the pillars of Canadian federalism.
However, in 1996-97, the other major programs-the established program financing for health and post-secondary education and the Canada assistance plan-will be consolidated into a single block transfer: the Canada health and social transfer. It is the block transfer long sought by the provinces, which will enable them to be innovative to suit their priorities. We instituted this block transfer long demanded by the provinces and the members of the Bloc. Why do they oppose it now?
The new Canada social transfer combines three separate transfers into a single transfer, thus reducing administrative problems for the provinces. It ensures maximum flexibility in the design of provincial programs that suit their needs. At the same time, we increased system flexibility by reducing the conditions governing these programs to a minimum. As the Minister of Finance indicated in his speech this morning, he will be proposing amendments to Bill C-76 to the parliamentary committee.
Accordingly, clause 13(1) (b) will read as follows: `` (b) In order to apply the conditions and criteria provided in the Canada Health Act with respect to public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability and accessibility and the provisions on extra billing and user charges''.
In matters of health, it is very clear that the principles of the Canada Health Act valued by Canadians from coast to coast will have to be honoured. We often refer to these five principles, but what exactly are we talking about? Public administration means that the program must be not-for-profit and managed by a public authority; comprehensiveness means that the program must cover all essential health care services provided by hospitals and physicians; universality means that services must be available to the whole population; portability means that the program must cover all health care services provided to residents temporarily outside of the province, territory or country; accessibility means that services must be offered on an equal basis to all residents, under the same conditions, without a fee or any other constraint that might unduly limit access.
Within these principles provinces have the flexibility to tailor services to their population, allowing innovations such as community health centres, les CLSC, in Quebec. With flexibility, innovation and commitment costs can be kept at reasonable levels while ensuring our health care system continues to provide the level of care of which we can be proud.
The bill will be further amended to read as follows under section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d):
"(c) To enforce the national standard outlined in section 19 providing that no minimum residency requirements can be demanded or allowed with regards to social assistance; and
"(d) To promote common principles and objectives developed in accordance with subsection 3, concerning social programs other than the program mentioned in paragraph (b)".
In the area of social assistance, the only thing the federal government demands of the provinces has to do with residency. For example, a Quebecer cannot be refused social assistance in Ontario, or in any other province, because he does not meet the minimum residency requirement. Certain opposition members may be dreaming of depriving Quebecers of this freedom of movement.
The new Canada health and social transfer gives the provinces more freedom to pursue innovation and improve social programs so that they better meet the needs of their people. Because of cost-sharing and its restrictive requirements, the present Canada assistance plan prevented such innovation.
The Quebec government is a leader in the area of innovative social programs such as APPORT-Parental Wage Assistance. However, APPORT and many other innovative programs could not be funded under CAP because of the cost-sharing conditions it sets.
For example, APPORT was deemed ineligible for CAP funding because it was not means tested. Many other Quebec programs, which were not eligible to cost-sharing under CAP, could now be funded by the Canada transfer.
Let us mention, for example, the work income supplement, the Quebec sales tax rebate and the social services provided in schools, including probation services for young offenders. The Canada social transfer will now allow the provinces to test innovative ways to provide social services and assistance.
Post-secondary education, which the opposition talked about, is an area of exclusive provincial jurisdiction. You may, however, be surprised to learn that the federal government contributes 50 per cent of funding for this sector so that Canadians across the country can receive a good education. There are essentially
no conditions attached to post-secondary education, especially in Quebec, which in the past 30 years has been free to do what it wants in this sector with the money from the Canadian government.
All these proposals are aimed at enhancing our social programs. They will be discussed with the provinces and must be approved by mutual agreement before being implemented.
The Minister of Finance will therefore amend clause 13(3) to read as follows: "The Minister of Human Resources Development calls on all provincial officials to consult with one another and work together to come up with a set of common principles and objectives regarding the other social programs referred to in paragraph (1)( d ), which could apply to the transfer''.
We hope that the provinces and the members of the Bloc Quebecois will recognize and share the Liberals' concerns with regard to leadership and compassion and their desire to increase equity and efficiency. This new, more flexible formula allows for much more efficient provision of services to Canadians, without compromising quality.
That is why the introduction of this transfer in 1996-97 will be accompanied by a $2.5 billion cut in the total amount. This represents a reduction of only 1.5 per cent in Quebec's budget. In comparison, federal spending will be cut by 7.3 per cent in other sectors and 18.9 per cent in the sectors included in the program review.
So it is obvious that we treat social transfers to the provinces more favourably than our own expenditures.
In closing, allow me to state that the budget clearly points to a reduction in the conditions attached to social programs. If principles are established, it will be by mutual agreement. I deeply regret the fact that the opposition is giving people in Quebec such misleading information on important issues.
Labour Relations May 1st, 1995
Mr. Speaker, just as we did during the rail strikes, we acted in the national interest. We also think that we must now take the time to consult with the parties and try to reach a compromise.
I know that the opposition would prefer to take immediate action, without taking all necessary measures and without analyzing the situation. This government, however, wants to do the right thing for Canadians and Quebecers and will therefore make every effort required to achieve this goal.
Labour Relations May 1st, 1995
Mr. Speaker, consultations on this issue are under way between the Minister of Labour, the unions and the employers. At the minister's request, the Director General of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is meeting with the parties. We
are not yet in a position to answer this question. We will give the hon. member an answer as soon as it becomes available.
Social Services March 31st, 1995
The propaganda effort continues, Mr. Speaker. The Bloc Quebecois just keeps stating a position contradicted by facts, by the budget and by reality.
I can only repeat what I said earlier, namely that the budget is clear, that the requirements for social assistance have been reduced, that, if any standards are established, they will be established by mutual consent. It is very unfortunate that the opposition informs the people of Quebec so poorly on such major issues.
Social Services March 31st, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I am hearing the exact same argument being put forth again and it is as flawed as it was in the previous question. The budget clearly indicates that the requirements attached to social transfers will be reduced and that, if social assistance programs are subject to standards, these standards will be set by mutual consent.
This is mentioned several times in the budget. There is no mistake about it and I can only conclude that the members opposite are, once again, misrepresenting to the people of Canada and Quebec facts that are clearly stated in the budget.
Social Services March 31st, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is obviously trying to use scare tactics. The budget makes it clear that fewer strings will be attached to the Canada social transfer than was the case for transfer payments previously.
The conditions to be met in the area of health care remain the same, as is explained in the budget. There have never been any conditions tied to post-secondary education, particularly in Quebec, which has opted out since 1964. All the conditions tied to social assistance have been eliminated, excepting the one barring any minimum period of residency to qualify.
Therefore, it is very clear, and the budget states this, that any future federal-provincial agreement will be based on mutual consent and, consequently, contrary to what the hon. member would have us believe, there are fewer conditions to be met than before.
The Outaouais March 29th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, while the Parti Quebecois refuses to invest in western Quebec and only allocates 0.4 per cent of its budget to that region, the National Capital Commission invests 30 per cent of its resources in the Outaouais.
According to a 1993 survey conducted by the magazine L'Actualité , Hull has the second highest standard of living in all of Quebec and ranks first in terms of economic indicators. People who live in Hull or have businesses there will tell you that they are proud of their city, justifiably so. By making such a statement, the hon. member only betrays her own lack of knowledge of the City of Hull and her arrogance towards people
who do not share her political convictions and who believe in Canada.