René Canuel

[Employment Insurance Act, October 5th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I hope you will show some tolerance because I have a brief comment to make and a brief question to ask.

My comment is that the government opposite is heartless. I said before that the Prime Minister was a son of darkness and I am still saying that.

Here is my question. Does the hon. member think it is reasonable to require 910 hours for young people? Personally, I think it is inhuman and totally unrealistic. I would like my colleague to comment on that.

[Employment Insurance Act, October 4th, 2000]

Let it pay the money back.

[Supply, June 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the hon. member and her arrogance reflects an inferiority complex. That is all there is to it.

She said that members of the Bloc are nervous, but we are not. The hon. member said it about 20 times: we are very calm. Things are going very well for the Bloc, whether the hon. members opposite like it or not.

When a minister comes to my riding of Matapédia—Matane, I am glad if he or she comes to give us information, but the fact is that what they give is not information. As my colleague said, when they do come, ministers meet with mayors and members of the chambers of commerce, who are extraordinary people, I agree. But why do they never meet with seasonal workers?

Why do they not talk about employment insurance, which I call misery insurance? People in my area are almost starving to death. In the Gaspé peninsula, there are 10,000 or 15,000 people who want the minister to visit. But nobody ever comes. The unemployed are not important.

What is important for the Liberals is to misinform the people, not to find solutions. If they were honest, they would have come to announce the cuts in the transfers to provinces. They would have said “We will cut x millions of dollars in health care and so many billion dollars in other areas”. But they did not come to announce it. They should have come to give us the information. Why did they not come at that time to give the information they say they are giving today?

[Transgenic Seeds, May 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in the Canola matter, the government is refusing to even discuss the concept of responsibility. This is unbelievable.

My question is for the Minister of Agriculture. Who is responsible for the problem being experienced in Europe at the present time: Canada, because it has not wanted to pass any legislation, or Advanta, because that company did not do any testing?

[The Criminal Code, May 11th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques. He recommended some intelligent measures which should be implemented as quickly as possible. I call that prevention.

Putting someone in prison and cancelling his driver's licence for years, that is obviously something. Sometimes we may have to do it but nobody can convince me that in the year 2000 we cannot do better than that.

I see young people who are generally more serious than people who are 40 or 45 years old. For many years now, when they go to a tavern for a few drinks, they get someone to drive them home. However, some might forget and let themselves be led by others.

Last week I heard that many accidents happen in Quebec involving bikers. We must also think about this. What means should we take? Should we send someone to prison? Should we suspend his driver's licence for 5, 10 or 20 years? I do not think this is the solution. My colleague told us about an ignition interlock system which prevents the car from starting. When we pass a bill what do we want? We want two things: to protect society and to protect the guy who, after a few drinks, can become a criminal under the code. We should think twice.

I would ask my colleague to explain further what this system is. Should we adopt it as quickly as possible? Has this system been adopted in other countries?

I commend my colleague for his speech and I urge the government to think, to listen and to pay close attention to what my colleague has to say.

[The Late Victor Tremblay, April 7th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, with the death of Victor Tremblay, the valley of the Matapédia and in particular the town of Causapscal are in mourning.

Victor Tremblay died on March 24 at the age of 52 following a brief illness.

He was the youngest president of the Société nationale de l'est du Québec. He also headed the Société d'aide au développement des collectivités. He belonged to a host of organizations focussed essentially on regional development.

An exceptional individual, Victor Tremblay had a passion for the outdoors, and his commitment changed the approach of an entire region toward a vital resource, salmon. This commitment led him to assume a national position, that of director general of the Fédération québécoise pour le saumon atlantique.

To his wife, Françoise and his children and to the friends of this exemplary regional advocate, this proud and courageous man, the Bloc Quebecois offers its sincere condolences.

[Supply, March 22nd, 2000]

There was love too. People who live in isolated areas like his and mine have the impression that the government wants to deprive us of all means of communication. Communications are airports and also wharves.

The question I want to ask my colleague is this: Does he have the impression, like me, that the government does not care about isolated areas? It takes good care of big cities like Toronto, Calgary and, above all, Shawinigan, but it is as if it wanted to cut people off. And the best way to do that is to cut off their communications, closing their airports and their seaports.

[Supply, March 22nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to congratulate my colleague from Charlevoix, who when he spoke in defense of his voters was almost seething with rage. I understand that.

[Supply, March 22nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have two short questions for the minister.

No matter how much money we pour into roads, because of our weather and all kinds of other things, they constantly have to be fixed; also truck traffic is so heavy, it ruins the roads. Why not focus more on rail transportation and shipping?

In Quebec, we have the St. Lawrence River, which is hardly used. We have train going by all the time, but hardly used. It is fine to invest in roads, but why not consider a different approach to transportation, one that would be a lot less expensive and much more adequate?

I have one more question. The minister is familiar with the riding of Matapédia—Matane. He knows that the Matane airport was turned over to the municipality. Business people say about the airport “It does not make sense. It is closed. It is hopeless”.

Since the municipality cannot bear all the airport maintenance and repair costs on its own, could the government provide some assistance to regional airports?

[Supply, March 22nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have one simple question to ask my colleague.

There are small airports—small because of the distances planes have to travel—that have been handed over to the municipalities, among them the airport at Matane. Today, even if the mayor is full of good will, he cannot afford to have the repairs needed done at this airport.

The government is always telling us, basically, that the municipalities have to look after these airports if they agreed to take them over. A city does not necessarily have the funds to look after an airport.

Should the federal government not make a special effort for the airports which formerly belonged to it and which have now been handed over to the municipalities and, even if they have accepted them, should it not still contribute to their maintenance?