Marcel Proulx

[April 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to address the House here today to reiterate to the Conservative government that urgent action is needed to help the forestry industry. Indeed, the crisis currently facing that industry has reached record proportions.

On March 9, 2009, I asked the government across the floor what it was waiting for to help the forestry workers in the Outaouais. The Minister of State replied by saying that he was very sensitive to the plight of workers, but that they were the victims of the global forestry situation.

Those workers need a lot more than sensitivity. We all feel for these victims of the economy. However, more than sympathy, the industry needs financial support such as loan guarantees. The Outaouais, like many other regions in Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia, has been hit hard by this unfortunate crisis.

On October 31, 2008, the Smurfit-Stone company closed its doors for good, laying off 218 people. That closure was absolutely devastating, considering it happened in a rural, isolated area like Portage-du-Fort. That plant in the Pontiac had been open since the 1960s and produced pulp and paper.

On April 14, the AbitibiBowater plant in Gatineau pulled one of its machines from production. That will mean a work stoppage for 50 workers. This is not the first work stoppage at this plant, which temporarily laid off 358 workers in January. And every time, people ask themselves where this government is hiding.

Another company, which was to close its doors temporarily from April 3 to 13, stayed closed longer than anticipated. The Papiers Masson plant wanted to reduce production and laid off 50 workers the first time it closed and nearly 200 employees when it closed again later.

In Thurso, which is also in the Outaouais, the Papiers Fraser plant closed temporarily to reduce its inventory. That production shutdown, which lasted eight weeks, put 300 people out of work.

In Clarendon, in the Pontiac, the Maibec plant announced the temporary closure of its shingle plant. The plant, which employed 56 workers, may resume production if market conditions pick up.

More than 7,500 jobs are at risk at AbitibiBowater alone. What is the government doing to help these workers? It is expressing its sympathies and setting up a committee.

What workers need is an action plan like the one we, the Liberals, had in 2005. It was a real plan to help the forestry industry, not a committee to drag things out. Our plan addressed key issues like allocation of loans, research assistance, new technologies, skills development and community adjustment. The Conservatives cancelled our plan when they came to power, but they have not put in place a comprehensive plan for the forestry industry.

I firmly believe that the government must help the forestry industry and the people who work in that industry. Instead of watching equipment rust, we need to help these companies get through these tough times. That is what being sensitive means. When will this government take action? When will it help forestry companies and workers?

[Canadian Council on Learning, April 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is only for one year. We learned that the government has cut the funding for the Canadian Council on Learning, which provides retraining and skills transfer services to help workers adapt to a changing labour market landscape.

Regardless of the generosity that he claims, what sense does it make to cut funding to an organization that helps workers to acquire the skills to find new employment while hundreds of thousands of jobs are disappearing across the country?

[Canadian Council on Learning, April 24th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have cut funding for the Canadian Council on Learning, which has had to reduce its staff by 20% and close its provincial offices. The council's services include skills transfer and acquisition for workers who have to find a new job.

Why are the Conservatives depriving the unemployed of a resource that helps them retrain for the job market?

[Business of the House, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons. What is the government's business plan for the next two weeks? Does he have any supply days to designate?

[Robert Fowler and Louis Guay, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues are as delighted as I am to learn that two kidnapped Canadian diplomats have been released unharmed.

Following their disappearance several months ago, they had to deal with one of the most harrowing situations imaginable.

We are especially happy for the families and loved ones of these two men. There is no telling the amount of anxiety they must have lived through until news of their recovery was confirmed.

A special envoy for the United Nations, Robert Fowler is well known as an outstanding diplomat of the kind which makes Canada's international reputation so proud.

The high praise that Louis Guay, Mr. Fowler's assistant, has received for his professionalism does our country a great honour internationally.

We can never thank these two men enough for the sacrifice they have made.

Let us hope that they will benefit from some much deserved rest once they have been reunited with their loved ones.

[National Organ Donor Week, April 20th, 2009]

This is National Organ Donor Week. I rise to encourage all my colleagues and fellow citizens to sign their organ donor cards and to inform their families of their wishes.

Yesterday marked the beginning of National Organ Donor Week and much remains to be done to give hope to patients waiting for an organ transplant. With this in mind I urge my colleagues, as well as all Canadians, to sign their organ donation cards and make sure their loved ones are aware of their decision.

Too many people remain on waiting lists for organ donations.

A single donor can save up to eight lives. I would also like to remind my colleagues that National Organ Donor Week has a lot to do with one of our colleagues in the House.

In fact, the National Organ Donor Week Act received royal assent in 1997.

This private member's bill had been put forward by my colleague, the member for Pickering—Scarborough East, and I wish to thank him for his important initiative.

[Toronto Port Authority, April 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it was revealed that the Minister of Natural Resources had some exaggerated expenses when she was CEO of the Toronto Port Authority. On top of her $200,000 annual salary and benefits, she spent another $80,000 in travel and hospitality. In response to these expenses, the port authority had to change and clarify its rules, but the Tory-appointed chairman of the port authority would not reveal how these rules were clarified.

This is a public institution. Why the secrecy? What is the government trying to hide?

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very pertinent question.

The government needs to start coming up with some answers. I have just asked my colleague from Saint-Boniface what explanation she will give francophones outside Quebec, such as the ones in the Winnipeg area, for their local news being cut. How can this government tell us on the one hand that it is doing all it can to create employment in order to avoid lay-offs, while on the other hand it is forcing the lay-off of 800 people? How can the government claim that the corporation will fulfill its mandate, when it is slashing the corporation budget and thereby forcing it to cut services to regions and language minorities? What answer can the government give to that?

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

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

The Conservatives are trying to convince the public that they have maintained and increased funding to CBC/Radio-Canada. That is false, absolutely false. In 2006-07, the Conservatives reduced allocations to the corporation by $32 million, despite a budget surplus of $13 billion. And who had left them that surplus? The Liberal government. That is the Conservative rhetoric.

We have been accused of making major cuts in 1995. Let us keep this in mind, however: why was the Liberal government obliged to make cuts? Because the Conservative government had shown itself to be incapable of managing this country properly. When the Liberals took over, we found what a terrible mess the Conservatives had left us with, and as good administrators of Canada, were forced to take unavoidable and costly remedial action.

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that I did not say that the government was cutting CBC/Radio-Canada funding. I did not use those words. The government refused to grant the corporation permission to borrow money, as any other Canadian company or individual can do. The government had another option. It could have made funding available to CBC/Radio-Canada. I clearly explained that the government refused both options.

Obviously, this is a difficult situation, since advertising revenues are decreasing because of the financial crisis, so the crown corporation has been forced to make cuts in programming and human resources. However, the only thing the government has been doing for a number of years is continuing to follow Treasury Board regulations by adding 1.5% a year, but the government has not increased funding any more than that.