Jean Chrétien

[Delegations Abroad, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, what I said is that they work in conjunction with the Department of International Trade and the Department of Foreign Affairs. They make use of our facilities, and they do this to save money. That is not the option Quebec chose. They prefer to have their own delegations with their own buildings and all the rest, and that costs more money, so there is less for health.

[Government Programs, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we are the only government in 50 years that has paid the national debt. We have reduced the national debt by $45 billion since we have been here. We have balanced our books and we have said that we will do the Speech from the Throne within a balanced budget. We have something to prove that because in the last five years we have shown the Canadian people that we can do these things.

When I listen in the House of Commons there is not one day when members on the other side do not ask for more spending on this and that. Every day they ask us to spend billions of dollars but, happily, we are not listening to them too much.

[Delegations Abroad, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I was in the House when that resolution was passed, and the contempt came from the Bloc Quebecois, because its members refused to vote to support the resolution on a distinct society.

[Delegations Abroad, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there was a time when all the provinces had delegations abroad, including British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Ontario, which had many. These provinces decided to reduce their spending and to close their offices. When they need someone to represent them, they use the facilities provided by the federal Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Quebec, however, has maintained its delegations and is spending over $100 million annually for that purpose. It has the right to do so. But that same government spends less than any other government on health.

[Kyoto Protocol, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what the minister said a minute ago. We are ahead and we are improving our own fleet so we can make a positive contribution to this problem.

I am very happy to see that the unions want to collaborate. I know the provinces will want to collaborate. I know that if all sectors of Canadian society want to collaborate we will attain the Kyoto goal of 2012 by having everybody committed to reducing the problem of CO

2

and climate change.

[Taxation, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, we no longer need to pay into the account because unemployment has decreased. When unemployment was 11.5%, we did. Now that it is down to 7%, we do not anymore, and I hope we will not have to start paying again. That is why we continue to work for good economic conditions across the country.

[Taxation, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the employment insurance program is a plan into which workers pay, as do the government and employers as well.

When, under the Conservatives, the unemployment insurance program ran a deficit, the taxpayers were replenishing the UI account. Now that the economy is doing much better, there are surpluses, and a balance is being achieved. What the government paid in the past came out of the consolidated revenue fund.

So, the so-called EI surpluses belong in fact to the consolidated revenue fund.

[Taxation, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, if the member were to look at the situation calmly, he would realize that the Government of Quebec spends less of its own money on health care than all the other provinces. Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Manitoba all spend more money per capita than the Parti Quebecois government.

[Taxation, October 10th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud that we have gone from a $42 billion deficit to successfully posting five surpluses in a row since.

The provincial governments have the same taxation powers as we do. What the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc Quebecois want is for us to collect the taxes, and for them to hand out the cheques.

[Ethics, October 10th, 2002]

Yes, he was, by the leader of the opposition of the day. We consulted with the opposition before he was named. Now they want to dismiss that. We will let him do his job. When he reports, we use it.

In terms of the conflict of interest for members of Parliament, we are acting on a report from a senator and the Speaker of the House that was prepared some years ago. I said yesterday it would go to a committee. The members will be able to argue and eventually a piece of legislation will be passed. We are preoccupied with that. We wanted to implement the report.