Jean H. Leroux

[Quebec Agri-Food Industry, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture.

Information provided by the federal Department of Agriculture confirms that this department has been particularly remiss in its treatment of Quebec. In 1994-95, the agri-food industry in Quebec received only 10 per cent of Agriculture Canada's budget, although Quebec has more than 21 per cent of Canada's agri-food industry.

Does the minister agree, as confirmed by information provided by the federal department of agriculture, that the way his department's expenditures are budgeted is unfair to Quebec's agri-food industry?

[Canada-Quebec Economic Union, October 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, if we choose sovereignty, we shall be able to make choices in keeping with our own values and priorities. By offering to associate ourselves with the rest of Canada in a partnership, we shall be able also to make shared decisions with our neighbours. The proposed partnership agreement with the rest of Canada is a winning combination.

It is a happy combination of autonomy and co-operation. It enables us to take advantage of the elements we have built together-the Canadian currency, the Canadian economic space-and to finally give up squabbling over areas in which our interests are divergent. A vote for change means a vote for ourselves, for the people of Quebec, above and beyond party lines. A Yes vote means finally standing up for our convictions, voting for what we are and what we want to be.

[Peacekeepers In Former Yugoslavia, October 5th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this debate on Bosnia this morning on behalf of the Bloc Quebecois.

I would like to point out however that, as the minister indicated, we received a copy of the ministerial statement only half an hour ago. I think this is unreasonably short notice.

This rather high handed approach speaks volumes about the government's lack of respect for even the most fundamental parliamentary procedures. It is customary in Parliament for the minister to send out a copy of his statement at least one day ahead. This is typical of the foreign affairs minister.

In 1990, this very minister had the gall to claim that federalism acts as a shield to protect individual freedoms. There is cause for concern when we hear this kind of falsehood. It was the Liberal government that did not hesitate to implement the War Measures Act in 1970, using an alleged danger of insurrection in Quebec to trample the rights and freedoms of several hundreds of Quebecers.

One can rightly be outraged to hear such the remarks from this minister, who told the Bélanger-Campeau commission that abuse of fundamental rights by the government is more likely in countries with a single level of government. This is the same man who made outrageous remarks during a recent trip to New York, drawing a parallel between the former Yugoslavia and the highly democratic process under way in Quebec to achieve sovereignty.

What did the minister mean when he said: "We have not started killing another yet, and I hope that what is going on in the former Yugoslavia will never happen in Canada"? The Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Government of Canada should be ashamed of making such insinuations. This kind of irresponsible behaviour on the part of the minister says a lot about the No side: intolerance, abuse, insults.

At any rate, it is with a feeling of having done our duty that we learned this morning that the Canadian battalion deployed in Bosnia will not be replaced when its mandate ends in November. If the work done by our peacekeepers is starting to pay off, it is precisely because we steadfastly took our responsibilities as the official opposition the whole time.

When there was strong pressure to withdraw our troops, abandoning the civilian population over there in a state of destitution and insecurity, as the Reform Party suggested for instance, we, Bloc members, felt that it was our humanitarian duty to stay on location.

As the Leader of the Opposition said as earlier as in January 1994, we had to bear in mind that we had to take on, to the best of our abilities, our fair share of the tasks that arise out of our belief in the democratic values of peace and justice. Today, we can see the concrete result of this. There is every indication that the conflict in Bosnia can be resolved through negotiations instead of violence and massacres. On behalf of the Bloc Quebecois, I wish to pay tribute to the courage and sacrifice of all our military personnel, some of whom gave their lives so that peace could prevail.

[Military Spending, September 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, by awarding to GM, in Ontario, the $2 billion armoured vehicle acquisition contract, the federal government is once again making it clear that Quebec does not get its fair share of defence contracts.

In addition, with total disregard for correct procedure, Chatham, New Brunswick, was awarded the contract to refurbish old tanks as compensation for the closure of the base.

On the other hand, in Saint-Jean, base operations were reduced and the college was shut down. Why was Oerlikon not even considered as a potential supplier of turrets for the new armoured vehicles? Talk about a double standard!

It is clear now why the Minister of Defence stated, referring to Quebec, that they could not afford the luxury of being totally fair. That is what Canadian federalism is all about: while jobs are created and R and D funds invested in Ontario, Quebec is left with measly maintenance contracts.

[Bosnia, June 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we were relieved to learn yesterday about the release of the last 26 UN peacekeepers and observers, including 12 Canadians, detained by Bosnian Serbs.

This further hostage-taking incident, which shows incredible defiance, followed three years of ethnic cleansing, mass destruction and carnage by Bosnian Serbs that have claimed more than 200,000 victims.

Although today we salute the release of the Canadian peacekeepers and observers, we must still vigorously condemn the Bosnian Serbs' ruthless behaviour.

We also remain deeply concerned about the fate of some 700 other Canadian peacekeepers deployed in Visoko and Kiseljak, as the Bosnian government forces are mounting a vast offensive against the Bosnian Serbs to break the siege of Sarajevo.

[Quebec Sovereignty, June 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Quebecers are not taken in by federalists' criticism of the extraordinary historical agreement reached this week by the Action démocratique du Québec, the Quebec government and the Bloc Quebecois.

The sincere offer made by sovereignists to form an economic and political partnership is a concrete and solid proposal, particularly when compared to the about-face by the Minister of Labour and member for Outremont, who has had such changes of heart in the past.

By calling this offer an unacceptable proposal, the new passionaria of the status quo, as she is rightly called today by Lise Bissonnette, is displaying intellectual dishonesty. Not only does the minister reject the offer contained in the Allaire report, which she supported, she also thinks Quebecers are stupid.

Sadly, federalism has nothing to offer Quebecers but resignation and resistance to change.

[Singer Employees, June 15th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the question was asked over three weeks ago.

My supplementary is also for the Minister of Labour, who was elected to answer questions in this House. How can the Minister of Labour, by refusing to intervene quickly in the matter, allow herself to be an accomplice in this injustice to the former employees of Singer, whose average age is 80 and who are hoping to finally achieve justice after so many years of struggle?

[Singer Employees, June 15th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Labour.

Former employees of Singer in St. John say that the federal government failed to meet its contractual obligations toward them by paying the surplus that is part of their pension fund to the employer rather than the workers.

Further to the question by the Bloc on June 1, which has yet to be answered, will the Minister of Labour once and for all correct the federal government's error in connection with the Singer employees?

[Agusta, June 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is again for the Deputy Prime Minister, who is responsible, as I said earlier, for enforcing the government's code of ethics in this House when the Prime Minister is away.

Given that Agusta just hired the Liberal Party of Canada's former communications director, Daniel Despins, to lobby for the sale of new helicopters to the Canadian government, and given that all cabinet members know him well, how can the Deputy Prime Minister not commit to launching an investigation into the awarding of the EH-101 contract to Agusta before the government does any more business with the company, which is, as I already said, currently facing corruption charges in Europe?

[Agusta, June 2nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Defence and Industry officials confirmed yesterday that the government is preparing to spend $2.6 billion on the purchase of 47 new helicopters. The main supplier of this equipment vying for the contract is no other than Agusta, the very company facing accusations of bribery in Europe.

My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister, who is responsible for enforcing the government's code of ethics in this House. Will the government commit to excluding Agusta from all new contracts until we get to the bottom of the circumstances surrounding the EH-101 contract, as demanded by her colleague, the Minister of Human Resources Development, in 1993?