Jean Chrétien

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have spent 33 years in public life and I learned a long time ago that insult is the weapon of the weak, the weapon of those who have no arguments.

I have been in this House for over 30 years and I was elected for 28 years in a riding that is 98 per cent francophone. I have always protected the interests of my constituents based on my conscience, and they have always renewed my term of office.

I have also always respected democracy, but I know these people do not want to respect democracy. They do not want to accept defeat. They do not want to admit that Quebecers want to remain Canadians, and this is why Montreal is currently in trouble. People are leaving Montreal because of the political uncertainty. But we say it is possible to be proud Quebecers and to be proud Canadians at the same time.

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I guess my visit to Montreal did not go unnoticed. I guess the announcements we made regarding Canadair did not go unnoticed in Montreal. The other initiatives we are taking in the Montreal region must be effective, given that the Bloc Quebecois is so upset today.

Let me say one thing: we implement programs in every region of the country. We know, and I acknowledged it before, that, because of the current problems in Quebec, where everyday the provincial government says it will soon hold a referendum, businesses are leaving the province because these irresponsible people will not recognize that, twice, Quebecers have opted to remain in Canada, since it is in their best interests.

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, will the hon. member rise in this House and tell the public that, under the equalization payment system through which the Canadian government provides assistance to any region of Canada experiencing financial difficulties-and they say they appreciate it-last year, because its revenue was below a certain level, Quebec actually received an extra $500 million from the federal government?

Will the hon. member rise in this House and admit that our good policies have resulted in lower interests rates over the past 18 months and that the Quebec government actually saved $625 million because there is a good, responsible government in Ottawa?

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, in our system, government procurement is through public tenders. Each province, in fact, each citizen may submit a bid.

Some things are bought in one part of Canada and others in other parts, and all the provinces are treated equitably. If the hon. members are suggesting that we should stop using this system and award contracts only to those we like, that would not be honest government. It would amount to systematic favouritism.

One of the actions we have taken was to set specific rules providing a level playing field for everyone. If they really did respect the wishes of Quebecers, who, twice already, have said they want to remain in Canada, they would stop talking about referendums. Businesses would then not be leaving but moving to Montreal.

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, in a few seconds the Leader of the Reform Party will rise to accuse me of investing too much in Montreal on Monday, by helping Bombardier develop a new 70 seat aircraft to take advantage of an increasingly accessible market. We have been helping this company for a very long time. It is now the sixth largest aircraft manufacturer in the world and very soon will rank fourth. The company received $85 million on Monday. We have to choose our priorities, and that is the one we chose.

As for the pharmaceutical industry, the legislation is in effect. There will be a review at some time, as required by law. We will have to see whether the pharmaceutical industry is fulfilling its obligations to engage in research and development and to locate facilities in Canada, and if it is, the legislation will be maintained. The industry has made certain commitments which I hope it has met. When the House of Commons reviews this question, a decision can be made. It is true that in the past three years there has been pressure to amend the legislation, but we have not done so. The leader of the opposition does not seem to be aware of that fact.

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Yes, cutbacks were made in Quebec, in Ontario and all Canadian provinces. It was felt this particular program was not a priority at this time. Other cuts in the same sector have affected similar scientific projects elsewhere in Canada.

We would probably have preferred to keep it, but the Minister of Natural Resources indicated many times here in the House that she could no longer keep this program because there were other priorities.

[Montreal's Economy, October 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the government was forced to make cutbacks in this area, and we had to-

[Asbestos, October 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we are doing everything within our power to maintain the asbestos market. As I have just said, we are making representations at the highest levels possible. We cannot take decisions for the European community, but we are making representations at the highest levels.

It is my opinion that they are ill advised in not using this form of product, which can be used very easily if the necessary precautions are taken to protect the public from possible hazard.

It is, moreover, hard for me to bust my britches; I have a very sturdy belt.

[Asbestos, October 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have personally written to the Prime Minister of France, and this very morning two of my ministers have met with a delegation here in Ottawa to discuss this problem.

Through the Ministers of International Trade, Foreign Affairs and Health, the Minister of Labour is making representations to the French authorities, and I am convinced that the latter will, once they have an objective view of the situation, acknowledge, as the international labour organizations do, that it is possible to use asbestos safely. We do so in Canada, and I do not see why it would not be possible in France.

[Ethics, October 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, all the facts have been made public. He did what is absolutely normal.

The facts are in front of the public. If the member thinks that the minister broke the guidelines, he should tell his leader that he broke the guidelines. Members of Parliament, including ministers, use their letterhead to inform the press of their whereabouts.

I suppose the hon. member might have done it once in a while. I do not think he does it very often because he knows that if he invites members of the press to listen to him, they will not come.