House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1993, with 51% of the vote.
Defence Policy February 17th, 1994
Workers in military plants who are in danger of losing their jobs tomorrow morning do not want to hear about setting up a joint committee that will report in six months or a year or two. The government should take a position before then. It is urgent. Enough discussion-let us act.
Defence Policy February 17th, 1994
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to answer the question raised by my colleague. Of course, the Bloc Quebecois agreed 100 per cent with the cancellation of the helicopter contract, except that it was only half done. Not only should they have cancelled the helicopter contract but they also should have recovered the money that was to be invested in it and put it in an industrial conversion fund. I blame the government for not doing that part of the job. It was only half done.
This second part could have redirected all the money to be saved on the manufacture and purchase of the helicopters-over $5 billion. If this $5 or $6 billion had been invested in converting military companies, we could have stopped the hemorrhage that is going on right now.
I take the example of the Expro plant in my riding. It makes powder and shells. Not so long ago, the Expro plant had over a thousand workers, but with the end of the cold war, Expro's orders from the defence department dropped drastically. Now this plant has only 400 employees. I give you this example because I know that plant particularly well, since it is in my riding, but the same danger threatens some 60,000 workers in these military plants throughout Quebec, over 60,000 if we consider all of Canada.
The Liberals only did half the job when they cancelled the helicopter contract because they did not take the money that should have come back to them and invest it in industrial conversion.
There was a second part to the question, but I spent so much time on the first that I forgot the second. I do not know if my colleague-Oh yes! It has come back to me, Madam Speaker.
The whole issue of industrial conversion should probably be discussed by the defence committee and I hope that we will not have to discuss it as well in the joint committee that you want to set up, because that would further prolong the debate-there would be no end to it. Workers in our factories are now waiting for a conversion program before they are unemployed. That is the threat hanging over us.
Defence Policy February 17th, 1994
Madam Speaker, today the government, in a somewhat hasty move, has introduced a motion calling for the establishment of a joint committee which would duplicate the work of the Standing Committee on National Defence. I do not want to expand on the substance of the motion at this time since several of my colleagues have argued against it and stressed that there is no justification whatsoever for setting up a joint committee which would cover the same ground as the Standing Committee on National Defence, increase costs and delay the implementation of a defence program. Therefore, not suprisingly, I join with my Bloc Quebecois colleagues in denouncing the striking of this joint committee, as proposed by the government in its motion.
Instead, I would rather spend my time focusing on the issue of industrial conversion. As we know, defence industries employ a considerable number of people and since the end of the cold war, these factories are getting fewer and fewer orders. They have already begun laying off workers. Therefore, steps must be taken quickly to convert military factories for civilian purposes.
What I do not understand is that the Liberal Party of Canada appears to be saying two different things. When it formed the Official Opposition, it said one thing, but now that it is in power, it seems to be singing an entirely different tune. To confirm my suspicions, I would like to read to you a short excerpt from a March 26, 1993 press release prepared for immediate publication by the office of the then Leader of the Opposition. Therefore the current Prime Minister was Leader of the Official Opposition at the time. He was in Quebec City where he announced to reporters a policy to convert the defence industry for civilian purposes. That announcement appeared on the following day's papers. Three opposition members were also making a similar announcement here in Ottawa at the same time and virtually all of the media in Canada covered the story.
Right now, the Liberal government has all the data it had back when it was in opposition. Why authorize another joint super-committee to conduct further studies and analyses and undertake more trips when we already have a committee, the Standing Committee on National Defence, to do the job? It makes no sense!
I would like to read part of the statement issued by the then Leader of the Opposition at the press conference held on March 26, 1993. "Today, Liberal leader Jean Chrétien, speaking in Quebec City, and three Liberal MPs, speaking in Ottawa, unveiled the defence conversion policy that would adopted by a Liberal government to bring our high-tech military industry into the post cold war era, while creating at the same time new economic development opportunities".
Here are the highlights of the announcement made in Quebec City by Mr. Chrétien and in Ottawa by Mr. Axworthy, the External Affairs critic, by Mr. Bill Rompkey, the Defence critic and by Mr. Jim Peterson, the Industry critic.
They proposed to expand the mandate of Industry, Science and Technology Canada's $200 million Defence Industry Productivity Program, known as DIPP, from developing defence technology to helping the industry convert and diversify into areas such as environmental technologies and high-tech peacekeeping technologies. They also proposed the establishment of an Economic Conversion Commission, with the participation of industry and labour, to facilitate and coordinate the process of conversion in the 100,000-job defence industry. Quite a few people work in the defence sector, 100,000 to be exact.
The Liberals urged the opposition and suggested to the Conservatives, then in office, to develop joint conversion arrangements with the United States, the market for 80 per cent of Canada's defence exports. Under the Clinton administration, the United States have embarked on a major defence conversion effort, thus reducing demand for Canadian-built defence products.
"The cold war is over, and Canada must adapt to a changing world", said Mr. Chrétien at that press conference. He went on to say that "the Tory government has no defence conversion policy and has been content to let the market dictate diversification".
Mr. Chrétien noted at that press conference that he had been calling for government action on defence conversion since March 1990. The Liberal leader called the international arms trade, which has shrunk by 25 per cent in the last few years, an industry of the past. He said, "We need to invest in the economic winners-and the job creators-of tomorrow". He wanted to invest and suggested to the then Conservative government to invest $5.8 billion in helicopters. He said that it was a cold war policy and that it was no way to develop Canada's high-tech potential. The Liberals believed instead in gearing this shrink-
ing industry towards more competitive military and civilian goods. Government can and must show leadership in shaping change. It was still Mr. Chrétien talking.
He then concluded by saying, "Canadians are entitled to a government that is prepared to lead, a government that has new ideas and new strategies and which helps them adapt to changing times. Our policy on defence conversion is a clear example of how a Liberal government will respond to the needs of Canadians in the 1990s".
When we look at, listen to and read what the Liberals were saying when they were the Official Opposition as opposed to what they are not doing now that they are in power, it is clear that they have two languages: one for the left side of their mouths and another for the right side.
The Bloc Quebecois's policy on conversion takes into account the importance of the armament industry and its structural impact on the economy. The Bloc Quebecois proposed during the last election campaign and fervently hopes that the federal government will take steps to facilitate the defence industry conversion process. Such a program is necessary and must be implemented as soon as possible.
The Bloc Quebecois doubts that the Liberal government will pursue a wide-ranging conversion policy. The EH-101 helicopter episode is revealing in this regard and clearly shows that the Liberal government does not intend to pursue a comprehensive strategy on this. It was a perfect opportunity for this government to show its true intentions in this area, but it preferred to single out the helicopter program, without a conversion program in return.
Then how can we launch such a program? Professors Bélanger, Fournier and Desbiens, of the defence industry conversion research group at the Université du Québec in Montreal, did some research and came to the conclusion that a very large number of defence workers live in Montreal, a region where they conducted a more in-depth study on the effects of non-conversion.
The Montreal region is the main defence industry centre in Quebec. More than 500 defence companies are located there and the total value of goods and equipment delivered amounts to a little over $2.1 billion. The region alone generates 63 per cent of defence economic activity in Quebec and accounts for 26 per cent of the Canadian market. The employment picture shows what is happening.
My time has expired, even though I would have liked to go on. I will continue at the next opportunity. I would just like to say that, on this whole issue of industry conversion, many jobs are at stake and there is an urgent need to intervene.
Defence Policy February 17th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know if we are still in the questions or comments period or if I am beginning a 20-minute speech.
Winter Olympics February 16th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Jean-Luc Brassard from my riding on his brilliant victory this morning in the free-style skiing finals at the Lillehammer Olympic Games. Mr. Brassard won the first Canadian gold medal. That is a glorious event for this young Quebecer who, on many occasions, has been an honour to Quebec and to Canada in several international competitions. The people of Beauharnois-Salaberry are very proud of the outstanding performances of this talented athlete. His spirit and his determination will continue to inspire all young Quebec and Canadian athletes.
On behalf of my constituents and on behalf of Quebec and Canada, I would like to reiterate my most sincere congratulations to Jean-Luc and wish him good luck for the rest of his stay at the Olympic village.
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements And Federal Post-Secondary Education And Health Contributions Act February 9th, 1994
Madam Speaker, I listened closely to the previous speaker. He criticizes Bloc members, and the province of Quebec, for focusing on money and on how poor we are and how we do not get our fair share of the equalization pie. But if this gentleman paid us a visit, he would see the effects of not getting our fair share of equalization payments for research and development and regional development. What is the outcome? Unemployment.
Let him go and tell Quebecers on unemployment or welfare what a great and beautiful country Canada is. When one is hungry, unemployed or dependent on welfare, one does not care much about this great and beautiful Canada. That is why equalization transfers are important. We must get our piece of the pie.
Quebec hands over to Canada over $28 billion a year in taxes, but we are left with the crumbs. This has drastic consequences in the daily lives of the people of our country, which is Quebec. That is why we are not afraid to claim what Quebec is entitled to.
We are not indifferent to the Canadian deficit and $500 billion debt, as it has daily consequences for all people living in this country. Speeches such as the one delivered earlier should not be allowed.
Winter Sports February 3rd, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to join the population of Beauharnois-Salaberry in wishing good luck to free-style skier Jean-Luc Brassard who will be taking part in the Winter Olympic Games, in Lillehammer.
After winning the World Cup for the 1992-93 season, a feat I just had to mention, world champion Jean-Luc Brassard won an event, last week end, which could help him to repeat and win another World Cup this season. In no time, his hard work and dedication to a fantastic winter sport has earned him the admiration and respect of all who know him. My constituents can be proud to have amongst them such a talented young man, whose many achievements make all Canadians very proud.
I want to wish good luck to Jean-Luc in his event, to be held on February 14. The people of Beauharnois-Salaberry will be cheering for him.
Social Security System February 2nd, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the comments of the hon. member who just spoke. In his speech, he showed his concern for people who are employed but are afraid of losing their jobs. I must say I share his concern because we have a plant called Expro which manufactures military equipment. Not so long ago, the plant had 1,000 jobs, and now there are only 400 left.
As part of the pre-budget process we are involved in today, I would like to make a suggestion and also put a question to the previous speaker. Would his government be able to do what was done in the United States by Bill Clinton, who set aside a certain amount of money in the defence budget for reconversion of the defence industry? Now that the cold war is over, we do not need as many plants. Orders are shrinking, and that is what causes lay-offs. In the United States, they set aside a certain amount of money in the defence budget to be invested in converting defence plants to civilian production.
Does the hon. member who just spoke agree with this suggestion? Would he be willing to put this proposal to his government so that we could convert defence plants to civilian use?
Social Security System February 2nd, 1994
I do have a question, Mr. Speaker.
Why is the government not willing to follow the recommendations put forward by the opposition party, the Bloc Quebecois? Why will it not eliminate trusts, end duplication of services and tax large corporations? Why?
Social Security System February 2nd, 1994
I am prepared to co-operate, Mr. Speaker.