Jean Chrétien

[Bosnia, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, not before Sunday.

[Bosnia, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we should all rejoice because the peace process taking place at this moment in Bosnia is making a lot of progress. I am very proud of our Canadian soldiers who have proudly represented Canada during very tough times in order to save thousands and thousands of lives.

While the Reform Party changed its mind during the process, the government kept faith in the process of peace. Progress is being made at this moment. We will decide if we are still needed there. Even if there is a peace agreement signed in the weeks to come, there will still be a need for Canadian soldiers.

This morning I discussed the situation with the President of France and the Prime Minister of England. We keep in touch with them because we want to participate. We have participated and contributed to a situation where everybody thinks there will soon be peace. It is not the time to quit when we can still make a contribution.

[Old Age Pensions, September 28th, 1995]

Yes, we will see.

But if we really want to reassure retired people in Quebec, the best way to do so is to tell them that they will continue to receive their old age pensions from the government of Canada after October 30, while the Parti Quebecois is creating extreme uncertainty with its separation plans. The best way to reassure Quebec seniors is to tell them: "The government of Canada will still be there after October 30 to pay your old age pensions". There will be no doubt about that.

[Old Age Pensions, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in our concept of society, people aged 65 and over already receive pensions. They therefore have no reason to worry. I am saying that we will have to look at the problems in the years to come. We will see; studies will be done.

[Old Age Pensions, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, at the rate of one scare a day and with 32 days left, they still have to come up with 32 new scares. I think that the opposition is starting to feel scared that they will run out of scare stories. As I clearly stated earlier in response to his colleague who is already receiving his old age pension, we will never compromise the security of seniors who depend on government pensions.

That is clear. I cannot be any clearer than this. I am not saying that there will be no reforms because there will be reforms. I know that opposition members will not be here at that time, but we on this side hope to be here for a few more years. We must now ensure that there will still be an old age pension plan for those who will retire in the coming millennium.

These are our responsibilities, and we are not about to say that we are not looking at these problems when we are. But to those who are afraid today because PQ members are trying to scare them, I say: "Do not be afraid". There will be no statements on cutting their old age pensions either in November or in the February budget. I cannot be any clearer than this.

[Old Age Pensions, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have just said that we do not intend to cut the old age pensions of people who are currently retired. This is very clear; we have said this. We said so. The only thing is that some work has to be done to make sure that, in 2005 or 2010, we still have an old age pension system in Canada.

I can understand the hon. member and the Bloc members. They see no further than October 30. We are thinking about the future of all Canadians and about the pensions of Quebecers and Canadians not only for 1996, but for 2005 and for 2010 as well.

[Old Age Pensions, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in the budget, the Minister of Finance said that a periodic review of the CPP, as I said earlier, was necessary at least every five years in cooperation with the Government of Quebec, which has its own pension plan, but which works with the federal government to harmonize both systems.

I have said it and I will repeat it, we will never compromise the security of seniors who depend on the government pension. However, there are problems with this system as with all the others, and we want to ensure the system is adjusted, but not simply for this year and next, because good management requires us to be able to predict what the situation will be for people reaching retirement age in 2005 and 2010. We are doing studies right now, because, if we are not careful, people reaching retirement at that point might perhaps not enjoy the same services as people today do.

Those who have reached that point today, those who are receiving pensions from the Canadian government and need them in order to survive, may rest assured that we do not intend to change them, because we know it is vital to allow them to keep their current standard of living.

[Social Program Reform, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, speaking of a democratic society, when we have a leader of the opposition in a democracy, sitting in Parliament and proposing the division and break up of the country in which he lives, this has to be a record for democracy anywhere in the world.

In a democracy, people who propose separation should have the courage to say they are separatists, not just to the Americans but to the people in that province, so they will understand. In a democracy, they should have the honesty to say clearly what they want to achieve with their objective, which is separation, but the Leader of the Opposition is afraid to tell Quebecers the truth as he should, in a democracy: that he is a separatist and wants to leave Canada.

But Quebecers will understand, and on October 30 they will vote to stay in Canada. I am sure they will, because they know the opposition does not have the courage to do as it says.

[Social Program Reform, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we are acting very responsibly, and the legislation is not ready yet because the appropriate decisions have not been made. As soon as these decisions have been made by cabinet, the legislation will be drafted and tabled in this House. If the legislation is ready before the referendum, it will be tabled before the referendum.

We have discussed these matters and obtained the input of a great many people on this reform. We want to do a good job, and we will ensure that Quebecers are treated exactly the same as everybody else. This has no connection with the referendum. It is because we want to act responsibly.

I want to take this opportunity to ask the Leader of the Opposition if he would care to clear the air about what he said yesterday. He probably said more than he intended, because at this stage, the Leader of the Opposition cannot afford to give foreign markets the impression that some provinces or governments in Canada would not do what any country would have to do, which is pay its debts as agreed in contracts with investors.

[Social Program Reform, September 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I said early this week, and the Minister of Human Resources Development fielded questions on the subject several times, that we are working on the unemployment insurance reform. The process started some time ago. A green paper was tabled, and there were consultations with members. As soon as the bill is ready, we

will table it in the House of Commons, there will be a debate and amendments will be proposed by all parties, including the opposition's party.

There is a debate going on now, and I want to repeat that the reform will apply to all Canadians. It will apply not only to Quebecers but to all Canadians. We want to make sure that the unemployment insurance program and social reform will focus on job creation and on giving Canadian and Quebec workers the dignity of work, the dignity they desire.

As for old age pensions, this is our responsibility. As everyone knows, the federal government has an obligation to meet with the provincial governments every five years to review what is referred to in English as the CPP with the nine other provinces. Although the Government of Quebec is fully autonomous in this area because the Quebec pension plan is strictly under its jurisdiction, it is party to the discussions because it does not want to undo the harmonization that exists in Canada.

This meeting will take place in a few weeks, and the finance minister will be there. In any case, we have absolutely no intention of compromising the security of senior citizens who depend on government pensions. That is not our purpose. The point is that we must act responsibly and face up to our responsibilities. The point is not to have one policy before the referendum and another one afterwards, as seems to be the case with the Parti Quebecois in Quebec City.