Marcel Proulx

[Business of Supply, March 16th, 2010]

People opposite can yell and gesticulate all they like, the fact is I voted against the budget.

[Business of Supply, March 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to reaffirm that I respect my colleague’s right to his own opinion. But I am surprised he could think that, because we do not sit far from one another in the House. He certainly did not pay much attention. He likes to say that I voted in favour of the Conservative budget, but as a matter of fact, I voted against it.

[Business of Supply, March 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to set the record straight regarding the motion we have before us, that federalism does not fulfill the goals and requirements of Quebec.

Something is not right here, because it is not federalism that is preventing Quebec from achieving its objectives, it is the Conservative government. Obviously the Bloc’s goal is to show Quebeckers that its primary objective is sovereignty and that federalism is against the interests of Quebec. It is not federalism that is in issue today, it is the Conservative government, which has failed to respond to the needs of many Canadians, including many Quebeckers.

Our colleagues in the Bloc Québécois tried to create an equation: a Conservative government equals federalism. But let us look rather at the major concerns of the people of Quebec: forestry, the manufacturing sector, the environment, the aerospace industry and poverty, for example.

In terms of forestry, since the Conservatives have been in power, Canada has lost tens of thousands of jobs in the forestry industry, a large number of which were in Quebec.

In 2005, as my colleague said, the Liberal government, in partnership with forestry stakeholders, announced a solid plan for the forestry sector, the Forest Industry Competitiveness Strategy, and allocated $1.5 billion to it over five years. When the Conservatives formed the government in 2006, they cancelled the plan. Workers in Quebec’s forestry sector are still paying for that decision today.

The Liberal Party is in favour of credit and loan guarantees to help the forestry sector in Quebec transform itself and come through this crisis. It is in favour of financial incentives to help forestry companies purchase new equipment, and it is in favour of support for non-polluting energy derived from forest waste.

Let us talk about the manufacturing sector and job creation. Many Canadians work in the manufacturing sector and Quebec had a strong manufacturing industry. It represents an important segment of our economy that is still suffering. This economic sector has been hard hit in the last decade, particularly in Quebec.

Instead of showing leadership and investing in green technologies, the Conservative government prefers to ignore the manufacturing sector. With the declining number of hours worked in that sector, people are having to job-share, to become self-employed or to accept part-time work, and this means that the quality of work and the quality of life are declining in too many communities. The result is an uncertain and precarious future for families.

We believe the government should focus on creating well-paid, high-quality, long-term jobs. Federalism is not what is preventing anyone from participating in Quebec’s economic recovery; the Conservative government is doing that.

The aerospace industry is a jewel in the crown of the economy of Quebec and Canada. It represents our creative and innovative character. Montreal boasts the second largest aerospace sector in the world. It contributes more than 30,000 jobs and generates revenue of $12 billion. But Quebec’s aerospace sector had to lay off workers several times in 2009.

This government has done little for the manufacturing sector. As the hon. member mentioned, Jason Myers, president of Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, said that the 2010 budget was of little benefit to manufacturers.

As for Claude Lajeunesse, president of the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada, he was disappointed in the budget, which includes neither a long term space plan, nor investments in aerospace innovations. In fact, over the past two years, $160 million approved for spending by the Canadian Space Agency were not touched by the Conservative government. These funds could have been used to strengthen the economic development of the aerospace sector.

It is not federalism that prevents Quebec's aerospace industry to continue to thrive. It is, once again, this Conservative government, which does not understand anything, or which is too blind to realize that this economic sector needs support to remain a leader in what has become a very competitive economy.

Quebeckers are very sensitive to environmental issues and they have made wise choices in order to protect our environment.

Once again, the Conservatives are showing their inability to understand this major sector in our economy and in our lives.

The Conservative government has had three ministers, three different plans to deal with the climate change issue, but to this day no progress has been made. Quebeckers were very disappointed in the attitude of the Conservative Party at the Copenhagen conference. Quebec Premier Jean Charest took exception to the fact that the Prime Minister of Canada criticized Quebec's initiatives during the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Mr. Charest even indicated in Copenhagen that his government might ignore any agreement signed by the Conservative Prime Minister if the targets set are too timid.

Because of the Conservative government's inaction, Quebec has set ambitious targets, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and, more recently, established new stringent vehicle emission standards.

The Liberal Party supports a verifiable and binding quota and greenhouse gas emissions trading system. Such a system would be fair for all regions. It would include all industry sectors and its binding quotas would lead to absolute reductions.

In addition to a comprehensive greenhouse gas reduction plan, the Liberals are proposing a historic investment in clean energies and in jobs that support energy efficiency. We have also set an ambitious target, which is to quadruple the production of renewable energy in Canada by the year 2017.

Again, what stands in the way of contributing to Quebec's economic recovery is not federalism, but rather the fact that the Conservative government offered only gimmicks in its latest budget. Only $25 million is allocated to clear energy, despite the fact that the government spent hardly any of the green infrastructure fund last year.

Finally, it cancelled the ecoENERGY program for renewable power production.

With respect to poverty, the Conservative government has once again failed to do anything to help the least fortunate in society. The richest 20% of Canadians have a net worth of $3.4 billion, while the poor carry a net debt load of $6.3 billion.

Since March 2008, food bank use has increased by 10%. One in nine Canadian children still lives in poverty. In our first nations, one in four children grows up in poverty.

The Conservatives simply have no strategy to reduce poverty among children. In 2006, they dismantled the Liberal early learning and child care services program.

The Liberal Party introduced the national child benefit supplement in 1997 and the working income tax benefit in 2005, and increased funding for the guaranteed income supplement by $2.7 billion. The Liberal Party continues to help improve opportunities for all Canadians by focusing on education and investing in a national child care plan.

Again, it is not federalism that hinders the fight against poverty, but rather this cold and blind government which refuses to adequately meet the needs of the less fortunate.

To conclude, it is this heartless Conservative government without any vision that is causing unacceptable harm to the people of Quebec, thereby tugging at the heartstrings of our friends from the Bloc Québécois. Let us not confuse federalism and Conservative government. This would play in the hands of our colleagues over here.

[Government Spending, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government claims to be tightening its belt, but it is clear that the Conservatives would rather cut services and international aid rather than make cuts to their own contracts.

Why spend $36,000 a year for an extra cleaning of the minister's office? There is an existing cleaning contract, and another cleaning is being done during the day, which costs $36,000 per year.

Can the new Minister of Public Works and Government Services promise to be cleaner than her predecessor, so that only one cleaning per day is needed?

[Government Spending, March 10th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we must not downplay the Public Works Canada contract. Since 2006, the Conservatives have already extended it twice. In fact, the agreement that would have ended in 2011 has already been extended to 2013.

Florists have told me that it should cost $1,000 and not $2,000, for the types of plants purchased. Then there was a doorbell at $1,000. I hope it is a loud one.

Why are they spending $1,414—more taxpayer money—for three blinds? Why have work done after normal hours, which is more costly?

[Petitions, March 9th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition with a large number of signatures.

The petitioners state that over a billion people around the world need animals for their livelihood and that many people have pets. They are asking the Government of Canada to support a universal declaration on animal welfare.

[Afghanistan, December 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the document made public yesterday by General Natynczyk revealed something vital but not new. In November 2007, this document was included in a bundle of 1,200 pages filed with the Federal Court by National Defence. At the time, the date on the document was blacked out, as were sections on the mistreatment of the detainees. It may have been new to General Natynczyk, but it certainly was not new to the government.

Why did they hide the truth?

[Afghanistan, December 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, General Natynczyk's revelations yesterday are indisputable: yes, the detainees transferred to the Afghan authorities were tortured. We have been asking the Conservatives the question for years. After all the questions in this House, it was only yesterday that a bit of light was shed.

If this is not an operation to hide the truth from Canadians, then what is it? Crass incompetence on the part of the minister?

[Government Contracts, December 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I hate to disappoint the minister, but Elvis is dead.

The work being done on the north tower of the West Block of Parliament is very close to home for all Canadians. It would indeed be an outrage if anything pertaining to the Parliamentary precinct were tainted by any impropriety.

Could the minister confirm that there was no political interference of any kind in the tendering process for this contract?

[Government Contracts, December 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Works and Government Services has not given us many details about the investigation that is currently underway within his department. Let us hope that there will soon be some transparency.

Can the Minister of Public Works and Government Services assure us that all of the rules for awarding contracts were followed for the work done on the north tower of the West Block of Parliament?