Paul Crête

[Oceans Act, September 29th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this may be a matter of interpretation, but the gestures he made earlier along with his invitation to step outside, anywhere, anytime, were self-explanatory. In other words, the hon. member wanted to settle a matter in a way that is unacceptable in this House.

[Social Program Reform, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the only way to have an effective employment policy in Quebec is to have a sovereign Quebec that will control the UI system.

Will the minister recognize that his flat refusal to transfer the whole manpower training sector to Quebec, as the province is asking, is a blatant example of the hard-nosed attitude of the federal government and its lack of understanding of Quebec?

[Social Program Reform, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development, to whom I say that we will never trade our votes for training programs.

Thanks to his UI reform, the minister will get, from the cheques to the unemployed, the money to finance his human resources investment fund, thus creating more duplication in manpower training due to the development of new federal training programs.

Given the consensus in Quebec on the need to transfer the whole manpower training sector to the province, and considering the significant savings which could result from such a transfer, does the minister agree that it is improper to reduce payments to the unemployed in order to finance new federal manpower training programs?

[Bombardier, September 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, workers at the Bombardier plant in La Pocatière gave their president, Laurent Beaudoin, a lesson in democracy. They will not let their boss tell them how to vote in the referendum.

This was not Mr. Beaudoin's first attempt at manipulating his employees to make them vote according to his political convictions. Back in 1992, he wrote his employees a letter stating his support for the Charlottetown Accord. This action was denounced by the chief electoral officer at the time and Mr. Beaudoin was later convicted of violating the Quebec Elections Act.

This week, Mr. Beaudoin commented that Quebec would be too small a country for his business. Yet his business was born and raised in Quebec and has been quite successful there. The Bloc Quebecois salutes the workers who have contributed to the success

of Bombardier in La Pocatière and encourages them to remain steadfast in their beliefs. As a plant worker said, votes and work do not mix.

[Oceans Act, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to what the hon. colleague from the Reform Party had to say. This prompted me to take another look at my history of Quebec fisheries, and I would like to share with you these facts that bear a direct relation to the bill.

Between 1922 and 1980, in Quebec, fisheries were managed under an administrative delegation agreement whereby the federal government had transferred fisheries management to the Government of Quebec.

Therefore, during this time frame, we were able to develop a network now referred to as a sustainable development network, because small processing plants and refrigerating plants that pretty well met the needs of shore fishermen sprung up along the coast.

About 1980, following a fight-another one-between the federal minister, who has now become a senator, and his Quebec counterpart, this delegation of power was cancelled. After that-a coincidence perhaps-fish grew scarce and can no longer be found in our oceans.

I would draw a parallel between this and the remarks made by the hon. member because we are often told that big is beautiful. The larger the structure created, the larger the number of people involved and the better the chances it will work and be successful.

I tend to say that maybe the word is "small is beautiful" in this instance. Perhaps, if we had structures better suited to the people's needs, we would have a better chance of getting by. Take for example the fishermen of Rivière-au-Renard, Newport or the Lower North Shore. They keep running into problems with respect to fisheries management in Canada.

While fishing is a major economic activity in the Gaspé Peninsula, the Lower North Shore and the Magdalen Islands, Quebec fisheries are a very small part of the whole Canadian picture and we have always sought ways for our fishermen to have a greater weight in the balance by providing expertise, supporting them through the work of biologists, so that they can adequately argue their points.

The cod stocks were depleted in part because the politicians in charge had frequently given in to pressure. We now find ourselves with many endangered species because the policies did not reflect the reality in terms of the market and the fishing of the species. Some fishermen are forced to stay home because they cannot get the required service.

I will conclude by asking the Reform member if there is a way to ensure that fisheries management stays close to the people, in a concrete and daily fashion, while also taking into account the

opinion of fishermen, instead of having huge structures where the power ultimately rests with whoever has the largest number of biologists or provides the biggest report. Such a structure is of no help to users, namely the fishermen, who do not have enough of a say in the process.

Does the Reform member feel that this bill is headed the wrong way since it promotes a "Big is beautiful" instead of considering also a "Small is beautiful" approach?

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, seasonal workers are fed up with being treated like ping pong balls by the federal government.

Is the minister aware that all the proposals for reform originating within his department include direct attacks on seasonal workers in Quebec and on what awaits them if they vote no in the referendum? If you want to clear away this doubt once and for all, well then just table your reform now.

[Unemployment Insurance, September 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Yesterday in the House the minister stated that he was going to follow the recommendations of the task force on seasonal work.

Now, the key recommendation by that task force is to not create two classes of unemployed persons through penalty clauses for seasonal workers such as those in the minister's document which were made public this past weekend.

Does the minister confirm the Canadian Labour Congress analysis that he will be coming down heavily on seasonal and part time workers by requiring "twice as many weeks and hours of work before they are eligible for benefits".

[Canada Post Corporation, September 22nd, 1995]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should ask Canada Post Corporation to integrate into its development plan a strategy promoting the local development of regions and municipalities in Quebec and Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I find it very interesting to rise today in this House on this motion, especially as the minister responsible for Canada Post Corporation announced, a few weeks ago, that a committee would carry out an in depth review of the corporation.

A while ago, I presented the motion which is on today's Order Paper and through which I want the House to convey to this committee that, from now on, Canada Post Corporation should integrate into its development plan a strategy promoting the local development of regions and municipalities in Quebec and Canada.

We must say that, in this area, things were not too great in the past.

Under the previous federal government, the reform of Canada Post Corporation was entirely and exclusively focused on cutting costs, regardless of the impact on the rural and urban communities affected by post office closures. I would even venture to say that this strategy was part of what brought down upon the government the wrath of the public and caused its demise in the fall of 1993.

I also believe that it resulted in the moratorium banning post office closures which has been in effect since the fall of 1993. However, to this day, the government has made no effort to correct past mistakes. Take, for instance, the village of Saint-Clément, in my riding, where the post office was closed against the will of 100 per cent of the population who clearly proved that it wanted and needed a post office. The previous government turned a deaf ear and so did the current one, arguing that the moratorium did not cover the previous government's mistakes, and that the case was closed.

Now it seems the review committee, which will examine the mandate of Canada Post Corporation, will be open to public complaints concerning postal services so it is important that we give that committee the opportunity to hear the opinion of Quebecers and Canadians on the operations of the corporation and on its contribution to the local development in every region of the country.

Today, we can ask ourselves, as did the committee on rural development in Canada after a thorough examination of the post office issue: Is it possible to modernize Canada Post Corporation and prepare it for the twenty first century? Could we not adopt a new approach, a new form of marketing for postal services and not a defensive attitude like the one which led to the closing of many post offices, not because the clientele was decreasing, but because the post master was retiring? Such measures were totally absurd and it was written quite clearly in the mandate of Canada Post Corporation. It caused some ludicrous situations. Today there are post masters in post offices where clients are few while certain very busy post offices have been closed.

So we really must seize this opportunity given us by the review committee soon to be created. I sincerely hope this committee will be in place very soon. It is important because we should be announcing next week that the review committee will be operational and will review all the issues concerning Canada Post Corporation.

Rural development is not the only issue, there are many other aspects but my motion deals precisely with the local development of rural regions.

I would like to give a very concrete example of that. In the riding of Rimouski-Témiscouata, the village of Saint-Honoré played the game and agreed, four or five years ago, to have its post office closed and the mandate given to a corner store owner.

This owner has now realized that this activity was not profitable at all and he wants to give up that responsibility. That village is now facing the situation where, in February 1996, it will not have any postal service, because the post office will have been closed and sold. With a short term vision, it was thought that giving the mandate to a corner store for a minimal amount was a good idea, but we now find ourselves in a very serious situation because, according to its current act, Canada Post Corporation is responsible for ensuring mail delivery all across Canada, which will not be done in that area.

There is no real solution on the table. In rural areas, there is often one corner store or one grocery store for every village or municipality, and there may not be much choice but to move the post office many kilometres away. It is not a very interesting prospect at all.

So I think it would be important to look at the postal service not only from a humane perspective-what the moratorium has achieved is very important and I think we must recognize the effect it has had-but also in terms of its future. Would it not be possible to compel Post Canada Corporation to say in its development plan what it intends to do in terms of the information highway, for instance, in our villages? Would it not be a good idea to have, in each of our municipalities, an information highway service point which could be used by the local population?

For example, I can see that in a farming area, where farmers need to know about the latest technology, programs, trade opportunities and information in the field. We may not have yet reached the stage where every farmer has access to the information highway. Canada Post could maybe run some pilot projects to ensure that our municipalities are cut off from the rest of society as little as possible.

Post offices could also provide a fax service. Not everyone can afford to pay $100 or $200 for a fax machine, least of all the people who do not use them very often. Let us take, for example, a senior citizen who suddenly runs into trouble with a department, because a technical document went missing. We cannot expect that citizen to have a fax machine at home, but we could provide such a service through the post offices. This could prove interesting.

Another interesting service the post offices could provide is access to the terminals of Human Resources Development Canada. We are not saying that we are against the current centralization of employment centres, but that is not the issue I want to address because we do think that the centralization process is worthwhile. I think that when people are looking for jobs, they must be able to deal with persons.

However, if the workforce is maintained at its current level, we could add several service points to give access to a program the Department of Human Resources Development is already offering. In order to do so, Canada Post would have to say: "Because of our corporate image and because of the benefits this would entail for individual citizens, we would be ready, as a department, to sell you this equipment". Like they are doing actually. Right now, the installation of these terminals costs about $5000. Canada Post could buy quite a few of these terminals, even though it would mean that it would have to inject several million dollars in this project, but it would give all our citizens access to this information.

You have to remember that Human Resources Development Canada does not provide only job search programs. It also deals with our senior citizens and the pension systems. There is a lot of room for improvement in this area and I think Canada Post should be forced by this House, and by the committee considering this issue, to see that its business plan look at ways not only to provide postal services for less money, but also to do something to improve things at the information level.

Let me give you an example, Sweden has decided to decentralize the processing of income tax returns. Instead of having large processing centres clustered in a single region like we do in Canada, they can have income tax returns from one area processed at the other end of the country in a decentralized way, thanks to computer technology, so that, in every town, people can have a job and work without leaving their community. Thus, the nation's territory can be better used, and a fairer distribution of income is fostered.

I think it is much better to keep regions alive through job transfers than through transfer payments, and people could stay in their own communities. That kind of development is possible with a network like that of Canada Post.

Something else must be taken into account. We should avoid any unwarranted competition. Let me give an example. In my own riding, at the time of the year when income tax returns are processed, Canada Post came up with a pilot project that allowed a bank to sell RRSPs in a given town to residents of the area. That kind of competition was unwarranted because there was a caisse populaire in the town, and it had made investments in capital and salaries so that it could to be located right on the spot year-round.

But the bank, thanks to a profitable contract, did not have to pay back the whole investment and did not have to contribute to rental costs of the place, at least not at 100 per cent. That was unfair

competition. This, in my opinion, should be looked into thoroughly.

I think we should also emphasize the need for public debate and hearings on this issue. Right now, a coalition of private couriers is making representations to have the Canada Post's mandate revised so that they can market their own services in densely populated areas like Montreal, Quebec City, Vancouver, Toronto and all cities with a large enough population. A private company might be able to provide services at a lower cost than the Canada Post Corporation.

The provision of these services must not result in a reduction of services in other regions. If Canada Post suddenly becomes responsible for providing postal services in sparsely populated areas and the private company gets to serve all the profitable areas, we will have an unacceptable situation which, in the medium term, will lead to the disappearance of postal services in many places.

I think that there is a need for public debate, for public hearings, and maybe that is what the Conservatives should have done first before carrying out their reform. They should have asked people what kind of postal services they wanted. It would help everybody understand what the real issues are. Closing a single post office may not look so tragic, but in our rural communities, given the way development is going, it is often a sign that other services are about to disappear, like the school and even the church.

We must find a way to ensure the development of those communities. There may have been some mistakes but, in general, people who founded parishes and helped them grow invested a lot of time and energy in those communities. We should ensure that, in the future, services will be maintained to promote the development, and not the disappearance, of local communities.

This seems important to me; it will be a golden opportunity to see how important the development of local communities is to the government. Is the government really willing to do something interesting in this area?

As a final argument, I will broach another aspect of this issue. In the partnership proposed to Quebecers in the referendum campaign, four or five priority areas are clearly mentioned, such as the monetary union, the movement of people as well as various areas in which there could be an agreement between governments, and Canada Post is one of those areas.

I think the committee that will be given responsibility for these studies, which will not be sitting tomorrow morning but probably after October 30, should plan to study this sort of situation so that, in the future as part of the cooperation to be established between Quebec and Canada after a Yes, it is clear that there are advantages for both sides in agreeing and ensuring the service functions properly.

The entire network of post offices in Quebec and Canada has been paid for by all taxpayers, and will therefore form part of the debt allocation. This may be one of the issues we consider important, one that is included within the agreement, which makes provision very properly for a set of issues to be covered under the partnership, and this one strikes me as important.

In conclusion, the letter carrier unions, postmasters, rural communities and private messenger services are asking that this study be as public as possible, so we are sure we do not end up with a monopoly or making decisions that have an impact over a number of years in the future without the community being consulted. I think the public should be informed on this.

When Canada Post will be forced by Parliament to integrate into its development plan a strategy promoting the local development of regions and municipalities in Quebec and Canada, it will know that it is part of its mandate and it will be able to take it into account in its decisions and to avoid the mess of three or four years ago in this sector.

This will make it possible to correct at last significant errors that are still with us today, symbolic mistakes such as the decision concerning the Saint-Clément post office and the one concerning Saint-Honoré and other such examples throughout Quebec and Canada that I gave today. Canada Post must become a corporation that is as modern all over Quebec and Canada as it is in Ottawa where it gave itself great facilities. It is a corporation whose clients want to know what services they will get and how good these services will be. I believe that is part of the challenges Quebec and Canada will be facing in the 21th century. Let us seize this opportunity.

[Point Of Order, September 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, indeed, someone who is not a member of Parliament but who might be one some day came to see me. That person is the head of the pages.

[The Economy, September 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister claims he wants to deal with real issues. However, his government refuses to discuss unemployment, job creation and economic growth during the referendum campaign.

Moreover, the Minister of Finance refuses to appear before a committee to explain to Quebecers and Canadians why there has been no net increase in the number of jobs over the last nine months, as well as why economic growth has been stagnating for the last six months, which is the worst performance among all G-7 countries.

Let us talk about the real problems. After originally announcing its intention to reform the old age pension, UI and GST programs, the government has been postponing these initiatives for two years

now. Let us talk about these issues now, because the government is waiting until after the referendum to cut billions of dollars in social programs. What a way to deal with the real issues.

Mr. Speaker, you can count on the Bloc to talk about the real problems throughout the campaign.