Jean-Yves Laforest

[The Economy, March 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, first the government denied that we are in a recession, then it gave us a statement that was more ideological than economic and suspended the work of the House. Now it is threatening to go to the polls if the opposition refuses to give it a blank cheque for its stimulus plan, which is plainly inadequate and insufficient.

Not since 1991 has the GDP dropped this much, so perhaps the Prime Minister should pay attention to the Bloc Québécois' suggestions for dealing with the crisis rather than constantly threatening to call an election.

[Finance, February 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it was the Minister of Finance himself who said that there would be mistakes.

And while he was saying there will be mistakes, the President of the Treasury Board tabled the Main Estimates, which contain a special credit of $3 billion that he can distribute as he sees fit.

How can the government have the gall to ask for a blank cheque from Parliament when it is admitting it is incapable of being truly accountable?

[Finance, February 26th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has admitted that there will be mistakes in the way the money earmarked for tackling the economic crisis will be used.

Does the minister not understand that he has already made serious mistakes in his budget by offering mere crumbs to the manufacturing and forestry sectors as well as to the unemployed and by not reinstating the funding cut from culture?

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague talk, in his excellent presentation, about the different parts of the motion tabled today. He mentioned an important aspect at the very beginning of his speech concerning the problem caused by the government's decision to give preferential treatment to Hydro One, in Ontario, compared to Hydro-Québec, in Quebec.

The transmission and distribution of electricity in Quebec represents two thirds of Hydro-Québec's activities. The Conservative government refused to consider this when calculating the dividends paid by Hydro-Québec to the government. I would like to hear the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel talk about the unfairness of this decision which has resulted in the loss of $250 million in additional equalization payments to Quebec.

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to our colleague cite a variety of interventions relating to the budget and the measures proposed. I would like to ask him if he read the letter to the finance minister from the Quebec finance minister. In it, she expresses her opposition and that of the entire National Assembly. She also refers to a unanimous resolution by the National Assembly, which is completely critical of the proposals contained in the Conservative budget. These proposals would unilaterally amend the equalization formula, which would deprive Quebec of $991 million next year alone. There is also a plan to create a single securities commission.

The member spoke of a series of interventions along the lines he would like, but the majority of the members of the National Assembly still support the remarks Ms. Jérôme-Forget made in her letter. Has he read it?

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her fine speech. She referred to a letter that the Quebec finance minister sent to the Finance Minister of Canada. In it, Ms. Jérôme-Forget reiterated the Quebec National Assembly’s unanimous opposition to the federal government’s plans to make unilateral changes to equalization and establish a single securities commission. In regard to equalization in particular, she referred to an obvious lack of transparency on the part of the federal government in a process that no one saw coming.

I wonder if my colleague could make a few comments on this letter.

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member to my left should realize that the Bloc Québécois does not sit in Quebec City and is not picking a constitutional fight. A unanimous resolution of the National Assembly of Quebec states that oversight for securities falls within Quebec's jurisdiction. Therefore, the Bloc is not picking a constitutional fight. It is defending the interests of Quebeckers.

I would like him to answer honestly the member for Brome—Missisquoi, who asked about the per capita amounts given to other provinces. We know very well that Quebec is one of the provinces that receives the least—

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for his excellent speech, which is truly in line with the motion presented this morning. The motion denounces two measures found in the budget which are totally unacceptable: the intention of the Conservative government to establish a single securities commission and a radical change in the equalization formula. The member also mentioned—and it is included in the motion—the inequity caused among other things by the decision of the Conservative government to consider the Hydro One revenues, in Ontario, as business revenues instead of revenues from natural resources. At the same time, the government decides not to grant the same tax benefit to Hydro-Québec. By the way, such a measure takes 250 million dollars away from Quebec.

Does my honourable colleague know why such an inequity exists? The question was put to the Minister of Finance at the Standing Committee on Finance yesterday, and he was unable to answer adequately. He simply said that Hydro One and Hydro-Québec had different operations. But, we know very well that two thirds of the operations of Hydro-Québec are exactly the same as Hydro One. They are transmission and distribution operations.

Does my colleague not see this as a measure which is completely unfavourable to Quebec and favourable to Ontario, once again?

[Shawinigan Tax Centre, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, a year ago, I asked the Minister of National Revenue a question about the employees at the Shawinigan tax centre, who were having incredible delays with their pay.

Since compensation services were centralized in Ottawa 15 months ago, close to 1,000 Quebec employees of Revenue Canada are still having problems, according to the union representative.

Will the minister finally admit that the decision to centralize these services was not only inefficient but led to job losses in a region already suffering high unemployment?

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

Obviously, we have absolutely no idea of what the Conservative government's plans are when it talks about establishing a single securities regulator. What is the game plan? What we are realizing is that there is none. There is no game plan. The government should put in place instead a process to prevent the foreign takeover of Canadian and Quebec businesses, as we are seeing more and more these days. The Toronto stock exchange is in difficulty not just because of the economic crisis, but to a large extent because of the foreign takeover of Canadian and Quebec businesses.