Robert Bouchard

[Prebudget Consultations, February 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Beauharnois-Salaberry.

I am happy to have the chance to take part in the debate on the prebudget consultations by the Standing Committee on Finance, especially since the Bloc Québécois held its own prebudget consultations in Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean and elsewhere in Quebec, to find out what Quebeckers' concerns are.

The Bloc Québécois supports the general thrust of the report. We issued a supplementary opinion indicating the initiatives the Bloc supports. The Bloc Québécois outlined its six budget conditions, which are only partially reflected in the Standing Committee on Finance report on the prebudget consultations.

I would like to use my time to talk about a number of concerns that were raised by organizations in my riding but ignored in the Standing Committee on Finance report and to describe the six conditions that must be met for the Bloc Québécois to support budget 2008.

In December, representatives of students, social and community groups, unions, self-employed workers and tourism associations met with my colleague, the finance critic and member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, to share the expectations of people in Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean and my riding, Chicoutimi-Le Fjord. One after another, the participants expressed their concerns and talked about what they wanted to see in the next federal budget.

The Bloc Québécois has conducted this exercise every year, organizing a tour of Quebec to consult with various groups and individuals with an interest in the budget. Participants indicate the measures they would like to see in the budget to improve the distribution of wealth and address Quebeckers' priorities.

The Standing Committee on Finance did not agree to recommend improvements to the employment insurance system in its report. At the meeting, participants raised problems with employment insurance several times. Many feel that the lack of improvements in the employment insurance program is completely unacceptable. The most pressing problems raised were the “black hole” or “spring gap” between the end of benefits and the start of work, the lack of assistance for small and medium-sized businesses and self-employed workers' eligibility for employment insurance.

The committee report ignores another issue raised at the meeting: post-secondary education. Representatives of the student associations at the Collège de Chicoutimi and the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi called for massive reinvestment in education. They condemn the underfunding of post-secondary institutions and suggest that the government invest a portion of the surplus in education.

My party deplores the fact that the committee rejected the Bloc Québécois' request to reinstate transfers to 1994–95 levels, indexed to inflation. The Bloc Québécois is calling for $3.5 billion for all of Canada to reinstate education funding levels. Unfortunately, the committee brushed this recommendation aside.

Another issue that came up during the consultation in Chicoutimi was the state of social programs. People talked about the rigidity of the federal bureaucracy, the short life of programs to subsidize organizations, and their precarious financial situation. Organizations deplored the fact that they are constantly involved in the search for funding, which prevents them from providing services on the ground to their clients.

The Bloc Québécois deplores the fact that the Standing Committee on Finance refused to recommend that the government increase the guaranteed income supplement benefits so that people over 65 who receive GIS benefits in addition to old age security pensions do not have to live below the poverty line.

During the meeting, representatives of the cultural sector decried the situation facing people who are self-employed. They also want the federal government to give more money to the Canada Council for the Arts and to help the arts, culture and museum sectors.

The Bloc Québécois deplores that no funding for culture was included in the report on pre-budget consultations. The federal government is disturbingly indifferent about this matter. The many cuts to the museums assistance program; the elimination of the public diplomacy program, which funded international cultural tours; and insufficient funding for film and television bring home this point. The Bloc Québécois urges the Conservative government to change course and reinstate programs for arts, culture and museum programs, as well as film and television production, for a total of $398 million.

Finally, representatives of the manufacturing and forestry sectors talked about what they wanted to see in the federal budget. The forestry sector wants more help from Ottawa. The government could do much more with its huge surplus. People raised the issue of redistribution of wealth and said that part of the surplus should be reinvested to help programs and small businesses.

Everyone agrees that more assistance is needed from Ottawa to revive the forestry industry. The Bloc Québécois suggests $1 billion for the forestry industry alone, and a fair share of the money for Quebec. It wants the money to be allocated based on Quebec's industrial weight in Canada, and not on population.

We must realize that close to 21,000 jobs have been lost in the forestry sector in Quebec since April 1, 2005, including nearly 4,000 jobs in my region, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. We know that in Quebec, the forestry industry is the primary employer in 230 communities and that in 130 of those, it represents 100% of the jobs. So it is important to ensure the viability of this industry.

I took a few minutes today to talk about the situation in my region. I mentioned some concerns raised by stakeholders during prebudget consultations held by the Bloc Québécois in Saguenay on December 11. The report of the Standing Committee on Finance is one step that we need to improve on. The Bloc Québécois came up with several recommendations after the consultations, but they were left out of the report by the Standing Committee on Finance.

In conclusion, I would like to remind the House of our six conditions for approving the 2008 budget. These conditions have to do with the forestry industry, the guaranteed income supplement, post-secondary education, social housing and the reinstatement of various programs involving the status of women, volunteering, the environment and culture.

We will support the Conservative government's 2008 budget provided that it meets these six conditions.

[Canada Revenue Agency, February 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the organization works very well. A number of casual employees working for the Canada Revenue Agency, including those in Jonquière and Shawinigan, have trouble getting paid. They sometimes wait up to 12 weeks before receiving their cheques. When they lose their jobs, they wait up to six weeks for their records of employment.

Can the minister guarantee that these casual employees working for the agency will receive their pay and their records of employment without delay?

[Canada Revenue Agency, February 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Revenue Agency has closed 27 payroll service centres across Canada. On October 12, 28 jobs in Shawinigan were cut , supposedly to save money and improve services.

How can the minister responsible for the agency claim to have improved services by closing these centres, firing workers and centralizing activity in Ottawa and Winnipeg? How?

[Aluminum Industry, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on February 1, aluminum giants Chinalco and Alcoa acquired a 12% interest in the British group, Rio Tinto.

Once again, uncertainty reigns in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region and in Quebec. Workers and the general public are worried that foreign companies will buy up our companies and our natural resources bit by bit without offering any guarantees with respect to processing or employment in the aluminum industry.

Alcan's recent acquisition of Rio Tinto showed that we cannot count on the Conservatives to protect our assets or our jobs. This government's laissez-faire policy gives foreign companies free rein and asks nothing in return.

With the entry of new players in Rio Tinto Alcan's operations, Quebec and my region will lose even more control over their own development. Quebeckers will not forget the role the Conservative government played by failing to take action.

[Manufacturing and Forestry Industries, February 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on January 12, as reported in Le Quotidien, the Minister of Labour said that the plan to help the manufacturing and forestry industries could only be passed as part of the budget. However, this morning, in the very same Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean paper, the Minister of Labour acknowledged that the government was forced to reverse its decision to make the $1 billion aid program conditional on the adoption of the budget because it was afraid the Bloc Québécois would reject the budget.

In these recent statements, he recognized that the Bloc Québécois is useful here in Ottawa. The pressure we put on the government caused it to backtrack. The Conservatives' plan is not enough for Quebec and my region, nor is it fair. We have won the first round, and we will work hard to keep winning.

[Forestry Sector, February 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, we want to help workers right now. However, I would like to remind the House that the member for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean added that his government should be doing more, particularly for older workers.

Not only does he hold no sway with his Prime Minister and his ministerial colleagues, but he is complicit in the government's sole objective: to help the oil companies.

Will he admit that he is just like the other Conservatives, a mouthpiece for rich oil companies and too bad for workers in Quebec and Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean?

[Forestry Sector, February 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, workers, unions, plant managers and politicians of all stripes have condemned the measures announced by the Conservatives to address the forestry crisis. Even the member for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean said that his own government's announcement was unsatisfactory and that he hoped the Prime Minister would reconsider his decision to make the assistance plan conditional on the budget being adopted.

Does the Prime Minister recognize that he should act now and table his bill so that we can improve it and vote on it without delay?

[Older Workers, December 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, rather than suggest they move to Alberta, the best thing we could do for these workers would be to give them access to a real income.

The government knows that a program like this would cost just $60 million in its first year. It has a projected surplus of $11.6 billion. What is holding it back?

[Older Workers, December 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour's announcement offers nothing to inject some life back into the Belgo plant, which will be letting 550 workers go. Moreover, we know that 270 of those workers are over 50. The minister's announcement will do nothing at all to help them.

Will the minister acknowledge that he could have used this opportunity to show some compassion for older workers by announcing a new income support program for them?

[Older Workers, December 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, when questioned about the urgent need to bring back an assistance program for older workers, the member for Jonquière—Alma said: “There is a labour shortage in Alberta, and they do not know how they are going to find workers. We can hardly turn around and pay workers between the ages of 50 and 55 to stay home.” However, during the Roberval byelection, he said that such a program was coming.

Is the minister telling the workers in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean who have lost their jobs that they should move to Alberta? That is the Conservative plan: forget POWA and go to Alberta.