Jean Chrétien

[Bosnia And Croatia, May 3rd, 1995]

I hope everyone realizes it is completely futile to try to resolve this problem by using arms and fighting. Also I hope that the propositions that have been made so far will be taken seriously.

In the meantime we are making sure that our soldiers are being exposed as little as possible. They know they are in extremely difficult circumstances at this time.

I met those who left Valcartier two weeks ago. I am always impressed with their courage and determination, and how willing they are to take chances with their own lives in order to make sure that people are protected from the misery of people who just prefer arms to negotiations.

[Bosnia And Croatia, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we deplore the activities that have resumed in that part of the world. We hope that everybody will have the good sense to resume the ceasefire. I am informed that at two o'clock p.m. GMT today a ceasefire was accepted by all parties.

[Canada Social Transfer, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in health matters, there will be no negotiation, because, as we said clearly during the election campaign, and as I repeat now, the five principles incorporated in the Canada Health Act must remain. We have no intention of changing national health standards for any reason.

As to holding a federal-provincial conference, the Minister of Finance regularly meets his provincial counterparts, and the Minister of Human Resources Development will be contacting and discussing matters with the provincial governments. I am surprised now to see that the Bloc Quebecois wants normal relations with the Government of Canada. Speaking for the Government of Quebec, I suggest they consult Ms. Beaudoin; this is another change in direction, Mr. Speaker.

[Canada Social Transfer, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have just said that standards already exist, which must be changed. The opposition has called for their change. We want to make changes. We want to discuss the nature of these changes in the House and then we will talk with the provinces. However, the standards that are in place will stay in place, and we are prepared to change them.

If the opposition does not want us to change them, on the other hand, we will not change them. If they do have to be changed, I am sure the proposals of the Minister of Human Resources Development and the Minister of Finance will be very reasonable, as usual, and the provinces will be pleased to accept them.

[Canada Social Transfer, May 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the Minister of Finance provided a very satisfactory explanation yesterday. This bill will come before the House of Commons, and we will be able to discuss it. Here in Canada, we must maintain national standards. They already exist in all these programs.

Some need changing, and so the Minister of Human Resources Development and the Minister of Finance will hold the necessary discussions. Since we want to maintain an appropriate level of support for all Canadians, we must ensure that the standards will continue to ensure proper services for people from one end of the country to the other.

[Seagram, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics counsellor told me that I am acting absolutely properly.

[Welfare, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as a result of changes in unemployment insurance benefits, 250,000 families in Quebec now receive an additional $1,000 since the changes in the program came into force.

I am glad that we are starting to talk about these problems, because Quebecers like me, and other Canadians as well, are sick and tired of hearing about the Constitution and separation. At last we are going to talk about the real problems of Quebecers: unemployment and employment. If they would only stop bothering us with all this talk about separation.

[Welfare, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member I too deplore this state of affairs in Quebec. And that is why, since we came to power, we have discussed the need for job creation, and we have had some results. Nearly 100,000 new jobs were created in Quebec since we formed the government, and unemployment in Quebec dropped by 1.3 per cent over the past 18 months.

Unfortunately, at a time when Quebec has the most serious social problems in Canada and unemployment is increasing, the Government of Quebec only thinks about independence, separation and the Constitution. And while it does its political fancy footwork, the poor in Quebec are paying the price. That is what is so unfortunate. We want to talk about job creation, while it dreams of separatism at the expense of the poor in that province.

[Seagram, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, now I will have to inform my cabinet ministers that when they go on trips they should ask the permission of the ethics counsellor.

Come on, look at the facts. This Canadian company of the Bronfman family, a great business success in Canada, has expanded into the United States. We should not be ashamed of that.

If it is still a Canadian company, it does not have to apply to Investment Canada. If it has too many interests outside Canada and has no more Canadian interests, it will have to apply.

There is no mystery. Why do they use innuendoes to try to destroy the reputations of people when the process is completely open and when we want to introduce some competition in the communications system of Canada?

I know le désespoir of these guys on the other side of the House. They do not have anything to say. They are trying to find fault when there is no problem. That is why the Canadian public is not responding to them and why they are so low in the polls.

[Investment Canada, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry, who is responsible for Investment Canada, has explained very clearly that there is a process.

There will be an application from the buyers of this complex. They will have to establish very clearly something that is very easy to understand: Is this company Canadian controlled or not? It is a matter of fact. Investment Canada will review this. If it is a Canadian company it means the huge corporation will be controlled by Canadian interests. I do not see anything wrong if that is the case.

If it is not the case and it is an American concern, it will have to follow the same route as any other foreign investment. Therefore, it will be decided by Investment Canada. Investment Canada will look at the books of the Seagram corporation and decide if it is Canadian or not. It is not my decision. It is for Investment Canada to decide.