Douglas Young

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 19th, 1996]

Further to the federal government's mandate to reduce space and accommodation costs, Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) is proposing to combine and relocate the Trois-Rivières and Shawinigan Human Resource Centres, the Reseau Office, the InfoCentre and Unemployment Insurance Telecentre to the Shawinigan-Sud Fiscal Centre on April 1, 1997. The relocation provides the opportunity to share space and services with Revenue Canada which is currently located in the Fiscal Centre.

The relocation to Shawinigan-Sud results in a requirement for reduced space at a combined annual rent of $490,451.00 (a saving of $386,279.42 per year over the current rental costs). All fit-up, moving and renovation costs are estimated to be $633,180.00; however, the long-term savings will offset these costs to the Government of Canada. Please see chart shown below for breakdown of costs and savings.

Question No. 38-

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 19th, 1996]

In the organization of the Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) service delivery network, the important element was maintaining high quality service for clients. The committee recommended four Human Resource Centres of Canada (HRCC) be located in various areas of the Mauricie region-Trois-Rivières, Shawinigan, Louiseville and La Tuque.

The location of the administrative centre had to be put in a place that was accessible to all offices and that offered the best opportunity for realizing savings in overhead.

The taxation data centre in South Shawinigan met these requirements as it is centrally located in the region and is a federally owned building. In addition to maximizing utilization of Government of Canada space, this choice enables the department to continue the reduction of costs by sharing services, systems and resources with other departments. The Mauricie region has no other Government of Canada sites that offer similar advantages.

The committee also discussed establishing the administrative centre in Trois-Rivières, primarily because of the department's existing lease commitments in the area. Given the lease expiry date (1999) and the need to plan for longer term reductions that were set for the Quebec region, it was obvious that administrative resources had to be concentrated, as soon as possible, in sites that were owned by Government of Canada. The location of the administrative centre for the Mauricie region in Shawinigan will enable the department to save a minimum of $3.7 million over the next 10 years.

Question No. 23-

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 19th, 1996]

To the best of the department's knowledge, no representations were made to officials of the department by political staff from the Prime Minister's office or personnel from the Privy Council.

Question No. 22-

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 19th, 1996]

All Department of Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) points of service were studied during 1994 and 1995 as part of the review of government spending announced in the 1994 and 1995 budgets. A committee was established in each of HRDC's 10 regions to review all points of service and recommend a new service delivery structure.

The committees considered all relevant factors in forming their recommendations, and all recommendations were subsequently approved by the Minister of Human Resources Development.

As a result of the committees' recommendations, HRDC's new service delivery structure will have 308 offices across Canada, some of which will be administrative centres. Quebec will have a total of 78 offices, of which 28 will be administrative centres.

The Quebec regional committee recommended that HRDC's administrative centre for the Mauricie be situated in Shawinigan. The committee chose Shawinigan because this location provided the opportunity to share space and services with Revenue Canada, thus meeting the government's objective of reducing costs and ensuring the least possible effect on HRDC client service resources.

The committee used the same approach for the Saguenay-Lac St-Jean area, where it chose Jonquière as the site for HRDC's administrative centre because the regional taxation data centre was already there.

Question No. 21-

[Employment Insurance, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has raised a couple of questions.

With respect to the nature of the obligations of the Government of Canada, it is one thing to have a separate fund when it is in a surplus, and it is another thing to have it separate when it is in a deficit.

If the hon. member is suggesting that when the fund is in a deficit position which would ordinarily occur in a recession, premiums would have to rise to make it self-sustaining. I think that would be very counterproductive.

As far as the upper limit amount of the surplus, I think everyone recognizes it is a question which has to be addressed. We have historical data demonstrating what happens when there is a downturn in the economy. We have only had a situation for the past few months where the fund has been a real surplus position.

I have no doubt that the Minister of Finance, myself and other members of the government will deal with this problem in an appropriate way at an appropriate time.

[Child Poverty, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is undoubtedly aware that the government has already recognized in the budget its obligation to try to come to the assistance of low income families and, in particular, to try to protect children living in such situations.

With regard to the proposal to which the hon. member is referring, which was made last fall, before Christmas, as everyone knows, the provinces' reaction was very lukewarm. They were concerned that the Government of Canada was once again interfering in their affairs, that the proposal would have meant interference in a strictly provincial matter.

Is this the only way we can intrude in situations where the provinces must take responsibility? Because, what happens? We see that in the employment insurance bill, for example, we have a proposal that could, in fact, provide relief for these people who need help with the cost of day care for their children, among other things.

[Adoptive Parents, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, aware of the ruling made by the court in this matter. But we still feel that we have a duty to carefully consider this ruling. In due course and in consultation with the Minister of Justice, we will make a decision concerning a possible appeal.

[Employability Enhancement, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the transition funds will be managed in co-operation with the other governments. In Quebec, there is indeed a sum of money that will be available to the Government of Canada, in co-operation with the Government of Quebec. If Quebec wants to maintain some system outside its government administration, and certainly outside the federal administration, we can certainly discuss it.

However, neither in Quebec nor elsewhere will we take measures that would force governments or other organizations to take charge of any agreement that we have reached. After all, we are trying to negotiate so that the federal government will, in many cases, withdraw from these activities.

[Employability Enhancement, June 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there is a whole slew of organizations working in the area mentioned by the hon. member, including the Government of Quebec, the SQDM, the Government of Canada and various other groups.

This is a difficult issue, since we are being asked to proceed rather quickly, to try to follow up on the Quebec consensus regarding active measures, training and so on. We are trying to ensure the greatest possible flexibility regarding the new management and the new arrangements which we will reach with Quebec and the other provinces.

There is no doubt that some major changes will take place. Since January, when I became responsible for this portfolio, we have been asked to proceed quickly, to avoid getting involved in areas where the province should play a quasi-independent role, and I have agreed to do that.

Now, we are being asked to stay put, to maintain the status quo. Let us not forget that these organizations knew all along there was nothing permanent about their funding. I hope the Government of Quebec, the SQDM and other stakeholders will look at the role played by these groups and will decide accordingly.

[Student Loans And Scholarships, June 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think so. The hon. member's question about student loans has nothing to do with meddling. We respect Quebec's jurisdiction.

However, we suggest, discreetly I hope, that it is for the good of young people-just like people in this House who have studied outside their province-be they young New Brunswickers studying in Quebec or young Quebecers coming here to study in French at the University of Ottawa, or Albertans heading to McGill in Montreal. This is a longstanding practice.

I think, on the whole, that young people in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada want to be able to continue their studies in their home province, in their country or abroad. This freedom and this flexibility are what strengthens young people and Canada.