Jean-Yves Laforest

[Committees of the House, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, before I reply to him, I would like the member who just raised this question to tell us what will be in that budget.

Can any conscientious person say in advance how he or she will vote without knowing exactly what will be in that budget? I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

In the question he raised, he spoke of $20 billion. Since the Conservatives have started to read the Bloc proposals carefully, they have backed off on the matter of a billion dollars: they have removed the condition that tied the billion dollars to the budget. That is already a step in the right direction.

Nevertheless, in the Bloc Québécois proposals, there would still be $3.5 billion to apply to the debt. Moreover, when he said that the Bloc Québécois proposes to transfer $20 billion and to take the rest of the surplus for—

[Committees of the House, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques for her question. As a matter of fact, the point she raises is extremely important.

There are about 35,000 private producers in Quebec forests. The government has completely excluded them from the assistance plan. These people have to work without the resources of the big forestry companies. Very often, they have to go into debt and mortgage their home in order to continue the work of developing sectors as part of proper and effective forestry plan in Quebec. These producers have often developed the forests that they own. Frequently, it is a family tradition. The forests are extremely well managed. These producers invest their own money in very expensive equipment.

Very often, these people work for many months without receiving any money at all because the companies that use the wood for pulp and paper or for sawmills do not always take up the wood, all the more so now that restrictions are in effect. These producers still must continue to invest to remain efficient and to properly manage the forests, which certainly make up one of the jewels of Quebec’s resources.

[Committees of the House, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Chambly—Borduas.

First of all, the motion introduced this morning by the Bloc Québécois picks up on the motion adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance and carries on the attempt to deal with the difficulties that the forestry and manufacturing industries are currently experiencing, especially in Quebec.

The Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology adopted a series of extremely pertinent, logical measures to assist in particular the manufacturing and forestry industries, especially in Quebec. The Standing Committee on Finance re-examined this very detailed plan and picked out some extremely attractive and important tax measures the government should definitely consider. This motion was adopted unanimously by the Standing Committee on Finance. It is imperative, therefore, if we want to continue down the same logical path, for all parliamentarians to pass it unanimously so that we send a very clear message to manufacturers and the people working in these sectors, as well as all working people in Quebec who deal with these major problems every day.

The recommendations of the finance committee are taken up in today’s motion and focus on capital cost allowances to help companies modernize their equipment in order to remain competitive. Some sectors were specifically targeted, such as energy, information, information technology, the environment and rail transportation. These are all interconnected. When we speak about public transit, we are also speaking about the importance of the environment and about ensuring that companies in these sectors remain competitive with companies elsewhere in the world.

The other major aspect has to do with increasing investment in research and development. Many companies in Quebec do a lot of R and D but do not compete on a level playing field. The government must take action to help these companies become more competitive. The free market clearly favours companies that are doing well at the present time, but this does not mean that companies going through a rough patch should be left to their own devices. The government must take action, especially in Quebec, in view of the importance of the manufacturing sector. Many jobs are being lost, and it is essential to give this sector a boost by means of the measures mentioned in the motion, especially credits for R and D and the modernization of equipment.

The manufacturing industry is in sad shape in Canada, but especially in Quebec, because Quebec and Ontario are the two places the crisis is hitting the hardest. The manufacturing sector in Quebec is vital, accounting for 536,000 jobs and $22 billion in salaries. That is nearly three times more than in Alberta. Yet the measure the government has proposed will give as much money to Alberta as to Quebec. This is completely absurd.

Manufactured goods account for 59% of Quebec's GDP, which shows just how important manufacturing is to Quebec. In many cases, these services support industry, research and development. The collapse of the manufacturing sector is hurting Quebec's whole economy, and it desperately needs a helping hand.

The forest industry in Quebec cannot be abandoned. Here again, the government must set aside its economic laissez-faire philosophy, which holds that only the strongest companies will or should survive. Entire communities in Quebec depend on the manufacturing industry and especially on the forestry industry.

Quebec is inhabited because of the forestry industry. Throughout Quebec, forest resources have been developed in an organized way for hundreds of years. It is important to support the communities whose economies and labour markets are centred around these industries. Quebec is going through a tough time right now, but that will not always be the case. Companies need help to modernize their equipment and compete better against foreign companies so that they can turn a profit.

Moreover, the plant closures and job losses have a social dimension. The people who are affected are truly in dire straits. We can all imagine what families throughout Quebec are going through. We must look ahead. We must help companies modernize, diversify and make it through this crisis.

In Quebec, 230 towns and cities depend heavily on the forestry industry, and 160 depend on it exclusively. We cannot just sit back and see what happens and say how nice for those that managed to survive. We need a strong assistance program that can offer much more than the $1 billion proposed, only $216 million of which will go to Quebec. The next budget must include additional amounts. Two hundred and sixteen million dollars over three years for the whole of Quebec's manufacturing and forestry sectors does not make sense. For example, the Trois-Rivières region needs an investment of about $300 million just to reopen one plant.

It is as the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain that I am making a speech on the impact of the manufacturing sector crisis. My riding includes the city of Shawinigan. I raised this matter in the House when the Belgo plant shutdown was announced last fall. I would like to explain how tragic that can be for a city like that. The city's best industrial years were behind it, and it was completely abandoned by successive governments. The town has become utterly depressed. One pulp and paper mill is about to close, and another of the same company's mills is in danger of closing. AbitibiBowater announced that the other mill in that city is on life support.

It is hard to imagine how a city of 50,000 can make it through the closure of two mills within months of each other. The government simply must intervene with effective measures to ensure the survival of the company, especially since it has the means to do so.

The government has taken measures that, once again, send very bad signals to the economy of the Shawinigan region. Last fall, the government closed a Canada Revenue Agency office there and moved it to centralize services in Ottawa. As a result, 20 jobs were cut in Shawinigan alone.

The government must have a much broader vision for supporting communities. All of its actions should aim to save jobs and focus on people's ability to take charge of their own lives and develop their skills.

In short, the Conservatives' $1 billion trust will obviously send a message.

The main message is that the government is able to take money from the $11.6 billion surplus—

[Committees of the House, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I too would like to commend my colleague for his excellent speech on the motion introduced this morning. One aspect of his speech that struck me was the issue of distributing the proposed aid package to the manufacturing and forestry industries, namely through the trust the government is currently putting in place. My colleague was saying that in the mad cow crisis, the previous governments implemented a program that targeted, in a way, areas where the crisis affected producers the most. The current trust does not have that same measure. I would like my colleague to elaborate on that.

I am thinking here of another example concerning the Government of Canada. In times of crisis, the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec can take measures only when losses as a result of the crisis exceed $10 billion. If disaster strikes and it is not significant enough, the government does not step in to help. This is somewhat similar. I would like to have my colleague's opinion on that.

[Guaranteed Income Supplement, February 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance prefers to use $10.6 billion to pay what he owes the banks rather than paying what he owes seniors, thereby breaking his party's promise to make full retroactive payments to correct the mismanagement of the guaranteed income supplement program.

Why does the Minister of Finance insist on paying the banks so much, some $10.6 billion, when he is not even able to use $3.1 billion of his surplus for seniors?

[Manufacturing Industry, December 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about Shawinigan. While hundreds of workers at the Belgo plant are losing their jobs and trying to stay hopeful, the government has not announced any income support program for older workers. These 270 older workers need to know now, not when the next budget is brought down, what to expect after this plant closes for good.

What is this government waiting for to put in place a real income support program for older workers? How many plants will have to close and how many people will have to lose their jobs before the Conservatives do something?

[Manufacturing and Forestry Industries, December 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, on November 13, the Conservative government refused to support the Bloc Québécois motion to save thousands of jobs in the manufacturing sector in Quebec. Since the beginning of this session, the Conservatives have been ignoring the calls from Quebec, despite the huge budgetary surplus that could reach $69 billion in five years.

The only thing that matters to the Conservatives is not to touch the surplus, but in the meantime, thousands of workers do not have access to employment insurance.

The government will not touch the surplus and it is also denying seniors full retroactivity for the guaranteed income supplement; students will see the budget for summer jobs cut in half; and manufacturing and forestry businesses will close their doors one after the other.

The Conservatives are so focused on their surplus that they do not even see the glaring problems that have to be resolved right now, not three months from now.

[Manufacturing Industry, December 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, since last Thursday, I have met with hundreds of people of all political stripes and they all said the same thing, “How is it that the Conservative government has done nothing to help us? Is the government waiting for the whole town to shut down, before it reacts?”

Will the Conservative government finally wake up and decide to use the $11.6 billion surplus, as suggested by the Bloc Québécois, to help a community that is at the end of its rope and crying for help?

[Manufacturing Industry, December 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, on November 22, 2007, right here in this House, I asked if the Conservative government was finally going to decide to support Quebec's manufacturing industries. I even referred to the difficulties facing pulp and paper mills in Grand-Mère and La Tuque, and Belgo in Shawinigan. The Minister of Industry responded by saying that he did not agree, since they had created conditions to support business development.

Does the Prime Minister really think that the 550 workers at Belgo who just lost their jobs are satisfied with those conditions?

[Industry, November 27th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironic that Rio Tinto is looking to divest itself of its Saint-Maurice cable plant, in Shawinigan, the birthplace of Alcan. Taking advantage of the inaction of the minister, who did not impose any conditions on the company, Rio Tinto has decided to sell that plant established in Shawinigan.

What does the Minister of Industry plan to do this time, to prevent Shawinigan from becoming another city where plants export their entire production of aluminum without any transformation being carried out locally, which results in hundreds of jobs also being exported?