Monique Guay

[Supply, October 9th, 1997]

To come back to the issue at hand, Madam Speaker, even the director of the employment centre deplores the minister's decision. He told us that he had always been very satisfied with the quality and service of the premises and that he wanted to stay in the building located at 222, Saint-Georges Street, in downtown Saint-Jerôme.

According to the director, the visibility and pre-eminent location of the employment centre are essential to serve Saint-Jérôme and the surrounding area and especially the other cities served by Saint-Jérôme following the streamlining of the employment centres by the minister. Now, adding insult to injury, the minister wants to relocate the centre to the outskirts of downtown Saint-Jérôme, which is the economic capital of the Laurentides region. The centre's director was very blunt on one point: if it were relocated in Saint-Antoine-des-Laurentides, the centre would lose all of its present high profile.

The support I have received to prevent this move does not end there. On September 19, 1997, Mrs. Louise Harel, Quebec labour minister, wrote a letter to the Minister of Human Resources Development, asking him for a moratorium on this move since it goes against the spirit of the Quebec-Canada agreement in principle on manpower training, which is aimed at making both federal and provincial service points more accessible, not less so as is the case here. As of September 10, the minister had only received an acknowledgement of receipt of her letter.

With regard to the firm RAMCO développement Inc., its president, Mr. Jacob A. Attias, is rightly surprised and mostly quite shocked by he lack of transparency of the Liberal government's process in the matter of moving the CEC out of its present location.

In 1991, RAMCO développement spent $1.7 million to add to the building in order to make room for the employment centre. Mr. Attias had even offered to lower the rent by close to 30%.

To add insult to injury, RAMCO had agreed with Public Works to invest a further $120,000 to upgrade and renovate the facilities in order to better meet the department's requirements.

One can imagine how Mr. Attias feels after such an experience. Not only is this businessman being overtaxed, he is being literally fleeced and taken for a ride by the very people who manage his taxes. This is totally outrageous and despicable.

Given all these facts, I am entitled to believe and to say that partisan interests or influence peddling are behind this unjustified and unjustifiable move.

The more I talk about the issue, the more I wonder. Since it is practically impossible to meet the Minister of Human Resources Development and to shed light on this vital issue for the socio-economic development of the Laurentian region, I urge the minister to take into consideration the questions that follow and to provide me with answers as quickly as possible.

First, why does his department not comply with the will of our community's stakeholders to have public services grouped together in the downtown core of Saint-Jérôme, as clearly stated in a resolution from the RCM of Rivière-du-Nord on interim control?

Second, why does his department totally disregard the very high level of satisfaction of its managers with the current location of the employment centre?

In both cases, that is the move of the Saint-Jérôme employment centre and the RCMP investigation, we find the same silence which truly gives us the impression that someone from that party has a guilty conscience.

If Liberal Party ministers or employees made mistakes or did not comply with a basic code of conduct, they will, sooner or later, have to pay for their mistakes, because no one will trust them any more, and rightly so. As elected representatives, members of Parliament are accountable to the public. However, and I deeply regret having to say this, there seems to be a blatant lack of accountability and transparency on the part of certain individuals working for the federal government.

I move:

That the motion be amended by deleting the word “in-depth” and substituting the following therefor: “complete”.

[Supply, October 9th, 1997]

Madame Speaker, I am happy to speak today in this House.

Unfortunately, the buzz word in the House these days seems to be “influence peddling”.

All the more so that there is presently in my riding a hotly debated issue which could literally burn the Liberal government since it could involve once more, influence peddling and partisanship in its organization.

It is about the much criticized relocation to the neighbouring town of Saint-Antoine-des-Laurentides of the employment centre that has always been located in Saint-Jérôme, the economic capital of the Laurentian area. But to really understand what is involved in this case, it is essential to go back over the events from the beginning.

The CEC has always been located in Saint-Jérôme's downtown core. In 1991, after the public works department accepted the bid of the property management company RAMCO Développement Inc., the latter invested $1.7 million to expand its building located in downtown, so it could accommodate the Saint-Jérôme CEC and meet the department's requirements.

Last summer, public works elected to make use of a one year renewal option on CEC's lease ending in April 1998. In June of this year, Public Works Canada suddenly informed RAMCO, without going into great detail, that there would be a call for proposals on invitation. The location perimeter for that proposal call, which is without precedent in the history of the CEC of Saint-Jérôme, will be extended as to include the town of Saint-Antoine-des-Laurentides, where there is space available in a shopping centre. Now rumour has it that those premises belong to a friend of the Liberals, someone who had contributed to the party's election fund. How peculiar.

Members will agree that this is where the problem lies. Why extend the location perimeter of the CEC's premises? Why does the federal government feel compelled to get involved, with its not so subtle approach, and without any concern for the development priorities established by the locals?

In this regard, on July 26, the Rivière-du-Nord RCM undertook to review its development plan in an interim control resolution, which provided, and I quote: “That any new government or quasi government service be established in downtown Saint-Jérôme”. The resolution was passed by a majority of the mayors of the Rivière-du-Nord RCM on September 17.

The Minister of Human Resources Development was in fact made aware of this in a letter from Gaston Laviolette, the mayor of the municipality of Bellefeuille and the reeve of the Rivière-du-Nord RCM and Marc Gascon, the mayor of the city of Saint-Jérôme.

Despite the relevance of their remarks, the minister turned a deaf ear. On the strength of this we can assume that the minister has no sense of what is involved in regional development, since this is what it is all about.

I too put pressure on the two ministers concerned in this matter. On many occasions I called the offices of the Minister of Human Resources Development and of the Minister of Public Works. I finally managed to meet the executive assistant of the Minister of Public Works with my colleagues Mr. Gascon, the mayor of Saint-Jérôme and Mr. Laviolette, a mayor and the reeve of the Rivière-du-Nord RCM. Here again, nothing came of the contact.

Unable to meet the Minister of Human Resources Development, I took the initiative of stopping him in the Liberal's backroom. After hardly a word was said, the minister, who was already on the defensive, made it clear he did not want to hear anything about partisan politics in the matter.

However, after I added new facts, which, I add, disagreeably surprised him, he changed his attitude to some extent and assured me that he would look into the matter and would get back to me about my concerns. However, I still have heard nothing from the minister.

I am still waiting for word from you, Mr. Minister. I assume he is too busy with the RCMP investigation of allegations of influence peddling—

[Foreign Affairs, October 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Following what appears to be the fraudulent use of Canadian passports by the Israeli secret services, we have learned that this has apparently been a common practice among the secret services of many countries for quite some time now.

What does the minister intend to do to tighten up protection of Canadian passports so that such situations do not recur?

[Quebec Economy, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says there is nothing more illusive than a million dollars, when he wants to scare Quebecers who, in his opinion, are a little too keen to be masters in their own house.

Yesterday, however, Intrawest announced it was investing an additional $500 million in its tourist mega project at Mont Tremblant.

Intrawest president Joe Houssian said he was not worried about the political climate. He went on to say that Tremblant would have a long history that would go well beyond the political history of the region.

The Bloc Quebecois is delighted and congratulates Intrawest management on its wise decision. Quebec is and always will be an excellent place to invest, and business people know this, so the federalists can use as many scare tactics as they like.

[Mirabel Airport, April 25th, 1997]

That is not true.

[Mirabel Airport, April 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister really cared about this issue, he would give us a clear answer today.

On April 16, the transport minister announced that he would spend another $60 million, paid in part by Quebec taxpayers, in addition to the $185 million given to Toronto's Pearson airport on March 25, to make up for his blunders.

With an election about to be called, will the minister show the same stubbornness regarding Montreal's airports and say that he is prepared to sit on the commission to correct the mistakes he made regarding Montreal and Mirabel?

[Mirabel Airport, April 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport.

On April 14, the minister said, in response to a question by the Bloc Quebecois on the future of Mirabel airport, that he was prepared to co-operate with any organization wishing to improve the utilization of Mirabel, without specifying whether he would take part in the joint commission created by the Quebec government. Again yesterday, a spontaneous public protest was held. Eight hundred people gathered to oppose the closing of Mirabel, and this is just the beginning.

Given the enormous responsibility of the federal government in this matter, and considering that its mistakes resulted in considerable losses for the Lower Laurentians, will the minister finally be clear and say that he will take part in the work of the commission announced by Premier Bouchard?

[Canada Endangered Species Protection Act, April 24th, 1997]

moved:

Motion No. 2

That Bill C-65, in Clause Preamble, be amended by replacing lines 27 and 28 on page 1 with the following:

"levels of government in this country and that under the National Agreement on the Protection of Endangered Species it is essential for them to work together to"

Motion No. 16

That Bill C-65, in Clause 3.1, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 13 on page 6 with the following:

"3.1 Where a provincial minister advises the Minister that the government of the province does not wish a provision of this Act or a regulation made thereunder to apply in the province in respect of wildlife species and their habitats in so far as individuals of those species are found on lands in the province that are not federal lands, that provision or regulation, as the case may be, shall not apply to those species and their habitats until such time as the provincial minister consents to its application to those species and their habitats."

Motion No. 21

That Bill C-65, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing, in the French version, lines 28 and 29 on page 7 with the following:

"disparition des espèces sauvages et à per-"

Motion No. 24

That Bill C-65, in Clause 7, be amended by adding after line 33 on page 8 the following:

"(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2), no responsible minister may enter into an agreement under that subsection with an organization or person in a province unless the minister advises the provincial minister of that province of the responsible minister's intention to enter into the agreement with the organization or person, as the case may be, and the provincial minister informs the responsible minister that the government of the province does not object to the responsible minister entering into such an agreement with that organization or person."

Motion No. 26

That Bill C-65, in Clause 8, be amended by adding after line 10 on page 9 the following:

"(1.1) Notwithstanding subsection (1), no responsible minister may enter into an agreement under that subsection with an organization or person in a province unless the minister advises the provincial minister of that province of the responsible minister's intention to enter into the agreement with the organization or person, as the case may be, and the provincial minister informs the responsible minister that the government of the province does not object to the responsible minister entering into such an agreement with that organization or person. "

Motion No. 34

That Bill C-65, in Clause 20, be amended by replacing line 15 on page 13 with the following:

"tion of COSEWIC and with the approval of the Council, make regulations estab-"

Motion No. 35

That Bill C-65, in Clause 26, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 15 with the following:

"COSEWIC and with the approval of the Council, may restrict the release of any"

Motion No. 44

That Bill C-65, in Clause 33, be amended by adding after line 24 on page 16 the following:

"(1.1) Where a provincial minister advises the Minister that the government of the province does not wish subsection (1) to apply in the province in respect of a wildlife animal species in so far as individuals of the species are found on lands in the province that are not federal lands, this subsection shall not apply to the species until such time as the provincial minister consents to its application to the species."

Motion No. 49

That Bill C-65, in Clause 38, be amended by ( a ) replacing line 1 on page 21 with the following:

"38.(1) With the assistance of the Council, the responsible minister must" b ) by replacing line 9 on page 21 with the following:

"recovery plan together, with the assistance of the Council."

Motion No. 55

That Bill C-65, in Clause 38, be amended by replacing line 34 on page 21 with the following:

"advice of COSEWIC and with the assistance of the Council, must determine wheth-"

Motion No. 64

That Bill C-65, in Clause 38, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 23 with the following:

"recovery plan, the responsible minister, with the assistance of the Council, must"

[Earth Day, April 22nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that today is Earth Day, an occasion celebrated throughout the world. On this date, the public is invited to do something, however small, to help improve their environment.

Unfortunately, we must conclude that the Liberal government has never heard about this invitation, because its record in this area is dreadful. Just recently, the Minister of the Environment himself admitted that his government had failed in the fight against greenhouse gases. The latest ozone layer figures are extremely worrying. Recently, there have been news reports on the former American military bases in the Arctic that are posing a dangerous threat to that region's fragile ecosystem.

This government does not hesitate, however, to implement legislation interfering directly in areas of provincial jurisdiction, thus leading to costly and unnecessary overlap.

The public does not intend to follow the Liberals' example, and we congratulate all those who are using this day to help improve the environment of the region in which they live.

[Decontamination Of Military Sites, April 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, by burying PCBs or other toxic substances, Canada is creating a veritable time bomb, which, very soon, will contaminate the water table and the fragile habitat in northern areas.

Should the minister not immediately impose a moratorium on burying wastes until his department has made a complete and exhaustive assessment of the environmental situation at military sites and found an ecological manner in which to destroy these contaminants?