Michel Guimond

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, it is true that the member knows his riding and his home province much better than I do. His French is so good, I had forgotten that he is a member from British Columbia. He is bilingual and studied at the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi. Many Conservative members would do well to follow his example when it comes to knowing French.

I stand by what I said earlier, which is that a flawed agreement is better than none at all.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we were in a certain situation at the time. I admit that the agreement may not have been the best, but it was better than nothing at all.

I worked in labour relations for 16 years. I also practised law. There comes a time for reaching a settlement. This issue was really hurting workers in the forestry industry in Quebec. My colleague represents Ontario, where they are talking about the fines that have been imposed for exporting too much to the United States.

I would like to hear in a future speech from the NDP members whether they agree with the Bloc’s proposal that these fines should be pro-rated to reflect the companies that exported to the United States. According to our figures, 60% of the companies that exported too much to the United States were from Ontario. As a result, Ontario should assume 60% of the $68 million in fines, rather than having it shared equally, as seems to be the case under the current settlement. I would like the hon. member to ask one of his colleagues in the NDP whether he agrees that Ontario sawmills should pay 60% of the $68 million bill.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform you that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from the riding of Québec.

I am pleased to speak on behalf of the Bloc Québécois and also on behalf of the citizens from all regions of Quebec.

The Bloc motion seeks to raise the awareness of this totally apathetic Conservative government, to wake it up. This government refuses to accept its responsibilities in an unprecedented crisis that has affected a sector found in many, if not all, Quebec regions.

Let us not forget that there are pulp and paper workers even in downtown Montreal. In fact, Quebec paper companies have head offices and regional offices in that city.

I would first like to quote Mr. Guy Cheverette, President and Chief Executive Officer, Quebec Forest Industry Council (CIFQ), who appeared before the Subcommittee of Canadian Industrial Sectors on March 12. He stated:

The [forestry] crisis is just as big, even more so, than that in the automotive sector, since it affects 825,000 workers, compared to 500,000 [auto industry]workers. It seems to me you have to make an effort to be coherent, an effort to use common sense.

The current crisis has struck at the very heart of Quebec regions and a number of Quebec communities. I rise today to speak on behalf of the Bloc Québécois. My colleague for Berthier—Maskinongé in the Mauricie region, my colleague for Laurentides—Labelle, who is from a region which employs forestry workers, especially in the Upper Laurentians, or others, such as my colleague for Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine who is present, can bear witness to the fact that their regions have also been affected by the forestry crisis.

Eighty-eight thousand Quebeckers work in logging operations, sawmills and pulp and paper plants. Their jobs account for one-third of all Canadian forestry jobs. Quebec has 70 cities and towns and 160 villages that are highly dependent on the forestry industry. Some of those listening to us currently live in villages that are entirely dependent on forests.

In my riding, in Haute Côte-Nord, Scierie Jacques Beaulieu, a family operation, was sold to Kruger. It is the main employer in Longue-Rive, in the Haute Côte-Nord area. Kruger recently closed down its operations in three sawmills in the Côte-Nord area, two in Haute Côte-Nord and one in Moyenne Côte-Nord.

The village of Hauterive currently has a totally unacceptable unemployment rate of between 22% and 24%, a direct result of the forestry crisis.

This government chose to use its budgets and its economic stimulus measures to help the auto industry, which is located primarily in Ontario. It is providing some $10 billion in subsidies to the auto industry.

In the Conservative Minister of Finance's latest budget, the amount allocated to the forestry and manufacturing industries, $170 million over two years, was peanuts. This is a double standard. Everything for Ontario and its auto industry, and nothing for the forestry industry and forestry workers. Let us not forget that 160 communities rely directly and exclusively on forestry.

Since April 2005, over 25,000 jobs have been lost in Quebec's forestry sector and related industries. I know what I am talking about because I spent 14 years working in the pulp and paper industry for Abitibi-Price, AbitibiBowater's predecessor. The situation has deteriorated since 2005. Workers in the industry are entitled to their fair share. Let us not forget that Quebeckers pay $54 billion per year. When Quebeckers ask the federal government to invest in Quebec, they are not asking for charity, they are asking for respect.

This is what we call dignity of work. Pulp and paper workers are proud people devoted to their jobs and their companies. But the fact is that right now, the industry is in crisis. During a crisis, the government must provide suitable solutions. But the Conservatives are not stepping up. The Bloc Québécois proposed a comprehensive plan to help the forestry industry, a plan with three main goals, the first of which is to provide immediate support to the industry via loan guarantees, among other things. We have talked to people in the industry who say that they do not necessarily want subsidies, they want loan guarantees.

When a person is deep in debt and goes to the bank or credit union, chances are the banker or the credit union manager will refuse to lend that person money because his or her industry or company is too unstable. That goes without saying. So we are asking the government to provide loan guarantees. It is legal, for crying out loud. I do not know why the Conservative government is so stubbornly refusing to help the industry. These measures are legal, pure and simple.

We also want to help the workers who are affected. That is one reason why we have proposed various employment insurance measures, such as immediately eliminating the waiting period. Thus, workers who have the misfortune of losing their jobs, either permanently or temporarily, could receive employment insurance benefits immediately. The two week waiting period must be eliminated. Eliminating that waiting period will immediately put money back into the economy. In fact, this would mean that account payments to credit unions and other creditors would continue coming in. Someone who has lost their job would therefore not have to tell the manager of the credit union that he or she had to stop making payments for five or six months. We are familiar with the amount of debt people are carrying at this time. People cannot tell Visa or Visa Desjardins or another credit card company that they are stopping their payments and they will begin paying again when they find another job. The bills continue to come in, which is one of the reasons why we are calling for an elimination of the waiting period.

The Bloc Québécois action plan also aims to help a third sector, namely, to help modernize the forestry industry, to make it greener and more productive. This afternoon the Cascades plant in Lachute announced that it had invested $33 million, thanks to help from the Government of Quebec, to go green. This is something this industry really has to do and it deserves help.

Since I only have a moment left, I would like to close by saying that, because of its ideological decisions, this Conservative government has turned its back on the Quebec forestry industry and has focused its attention on the Ontario auto industry and the western oil industry.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among all parties and I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, October 20, 2009, at 5:30 p.m.

[Employment Insurance, October 9th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary should tell that to the 3,700 Quebeckers who lost their jobs last month. He should explain that to them.

Why does the government not understand that we have to improve EI eligibility criteria and improve benefits by increasing income replacement rates from 55% to 60%? We need a complete overhaul of the employment insurance system.

When will this heartless government understand that? The Conservative government is heartless indeed.

[Employment Insurance, October 9th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec lost 3,700 jobs last month, 1,100 of them in the forestry and mining sectors. Since 2007, a total of 47,000 jobs have been lost. A complete overhaul of the employment insurance system is needed now more than ever because half of all unemployed workers are not eligible. Forestry workers, tourism workers, people in unstable jobs, young people and women always have a hard time qualifying.

When will the government understand that Quebec's priority is to make changes to employment insurance eligibility?

[Democratic Reform, October 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is why the Conservatives lose in Quebec every time we have an election.

Not even the Minister of Public Works, a Quebec minister, has made any attempt to block this bill. Instead, he said that Quebeckers should just make more babies, and that he himself did his part by having three kids. We do not really care what the minister does at home; we care about what he does in cabinet, which is nothing.

Why did the Minister of Public Works refuse to defend the interests of the Quebec nation?

[Democratic Reform, October 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the National Assembly of Quebec, the Quebec nation's supreme governing body, unanimously condemned the federal government's plan to reduce Quebec's political weight in federal institutions. The Bloc Québécois has been defending the Quebec consensus in this House, but Conservative members from Quebec have made a poor showing by scornfully dismissing our National Assembly's demand.

My question is for the Quebec ministers. Why are they incapable of standing up for the consensus expressed by the Quebec nation?

[Points of Order, October 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois would like to reserve its right to respond to the hon. member's point of order.

We are surprised, but he is entitled to his opinion. We are asking for a chance to be heard on this another time.

[Business of Supply, October 1st, 2009]

Madam Speaker, that is the problem with the current situation. With this Conservative government, and this was also the case with the Liberals, there is always a double standard. Today, our leader opened question period by talking about harmonization of the GST.

Former Prime Minister Mulroney made an agreement and the current Conservative Prime Minister is refusing to honour that agreement. When the time came to harmonize the GST in Ontario or in the Maritimes, they found the money. But when it comes to Quebec, there is always a different standard that applies.

For that reason, when Quebec is sovereign, we will stop begging Ottawa for what is rightfully ours. Decisions will be made in Quebec, for Quebec. As Maurice Duplessis said, “Give us back our loot.” It is our money.