House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament March 2011, as Bloc MP for Sherbrooke (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 36% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Family Trusts March 5th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, George Harris of Winnipeg is asking the courts to get to the bottom of the family trust scandal, where $2 billion were allowed to leave Canada tax-free in 1991, but the Liberals are going to appeal the ruling, which allows Mr. Harris's request.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. Given that all the government's fears have been laid to rest in the Muldoon ruling, can the Minister of Finance tell us why it is stubbornly blocking an investigation into the family trust scandal? What is he hiding from Quebeckers and Canadians?

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, indeed the Government of Quebec, which did not sign the social union agreement along with the other provinces, was soundly punished for this. According to the federal budget, social transfers are made on a per capita basis, but if one looks at the reality, there is $150 million for Quebec and about $900 million for Ontario.

Doing the math, this must mean Ontario has a population of some 42 million, since Quebec has approximately 7 million. So it can already been seen that, where the social transfer is concerned, and they speak of payments according to population, the figures do not balance out.

Health is a provincial area of jurisdiction. It is one Quebec is capable of managing properly. While Quebec, and a number of other provinces, were concluding that health reform was necessary, the federal government was brutally slashing health funding, which pretty well hamstrung all the efforts the provinces and Quebec were putting into health.

Now, with all these surpluses in its coffers, the federal government is trying to interfere in all manner of areas in which it has no business, seeking any excuse, seeking to justify its existence. As far as I am concerned, however, the federal government no longer has any reason to exist.

The Budget March 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure and a great deal of interest to be sure that I rise today to participate in the budget debate in this House.

True to form, the Liberal government has once again tried to convince the public that it is the grand champion as far as money management is concerned. I have some doubts about this, and I would like to demonstrate that this is, in fact, a vast coverup operation to justify the directions being taken by a government that never stops meddling in areas that do not belong to it.

First of all, the ones really responsible for balancing the budget, the ones that merit congratulation, are the people of Canada. The Minister of Finance may well take advantage of any and all opportunities to tell people that he has worked miracles with Canada's finances, but we are nobody's fool. Everyone knows very well that it is the middle class taxpayers and the unemployed who have done the job, the people who keep seeing a bigger and bigger chunk of their paycheques disappear, not the Minister of Finance.

On a first examination of this year's budget, it would be easy to buy into the minister's announcement that he will be reducing the cuts by $9 billion over the next three years, to $33 billion rather than $42 billion. Nevertheless, these are still cuts imposed on the provinces, and there is no cause for celebration.

However, things are not all that rosy, for roses have thorns. The Liberal government is taking advantage of the awkward situation in which it has placed the provinces to force a whole new round of interference on them in exchange for a certain increase in transfers. After depriving the provinces of billions of dollars for health care, the Liberals want to spend hundreds of millions in statistics and on paper.

This Minister of Finance has nothing to crow about because, as the auditor general pointed out in his report last April, he does not meet accounting standards and juggles financial statements to achieve his ends.

Since 1994, the Liberal government has been making bigger and bigger mistakes in its deficit and surplus forecasts. In the 1999 budget, the Minister of Finance continues his juggling, despite the warnings of the auditor general.

We in the Bloc Quebecois have revealed the real figures. While the Minister of Finance is predicting no surpluses for the next three fiscal years, we can say that the reality of the matter will be quite different. For 1999-2000, surpluses should be on the order of $15 billion, whereas for 2000-01, they will be around $20 billion.

That having been said, although the Minister of Finance had ample funds to introduce intelligent measures in response to the terrible job, health and poverty problems, he chose not to.

Since 1994, there is no doubt that the public has paid dearly for the terrible cuts in health, education and social assistance. Unemployed workers saw their EI benefits drop or disappear entirely because of tighter eligibility criteria. And I will not mention the recovery quotas imposed by the Minister of Human Resources Development on his employees.

All these sacrifices generated several billions of dollars for the EI fund and it is these surpluses in part that were used to lower the deficit. When we know that the government has not put one red cent into the EI fund since 1990, that the fund is growing at the astonishing rate of $2.5 million an hour, and that six persons in ten do not qualify for benefits, it is simply scandalous to see the Minister of Finance dipping into the fund whenever he wants.

The economy in the Sherbrooke region is down $23 million since the reform. Another thing to consider when looking for who is really behind the reduced deficit is the increase in government revenues. It is the taxpayers who, since 1994, have enabled the government to increase its revenues by contributing 56% of the increase in tax revenues and 14% through the GST, which, by the way, the Liberals promised to scrap in 1993.

At the end of 1993-94, when the Liberal government took office, Quebeckers and Canadians paid $51.4 billion in personal income taxes. By the end of the year 1999-2000, they will be paying $75 billion per year. This is an increase of $24 billion or 46%, and it amounts to $654 per capita.

The budget did not change anything. Quebeckers and Canadians are always paying more for less. Once again, the government is collecting money from ordinary people. Even if salares increase from year to year, the mere fact that the government has not indexed tax rates and tax credits since 1986 means that people have less money in their pockets.

Take the case of a person who, in 1986, had two children and was earning $25,800. Because of the cost of living increase, that person's salary was $35,400 in 1996. However, this does not mean that person is earning more. First, the fact that the tax on the additional income was not indexed means that the person now has $3,790 less in disposable income than in 1986. Also, since the GST credit was not indexed, another $944 is gone. Then, because the federal family allowance was not indexed, another $544 has disappeared. Non-indexation of the child tax benefit means an additional shortfall of $602. Finally, we must take into account the child benefit, which still existed in 1986 and which represents a further drop of $1,157.

I did the calculations and a person who earned $25,800 in 1986 and who is now making $35,400 has $7,047 less than in 1986. So, under this federal system, a middle class worker must constantly pay but is always getting less for his money.

We would have expected the minister to use the surpluses to tackle urgent issues, such as job creation, the fight against poverty and the funding of social programs, which he, along with his colleagues, dismantled. But no. True to himself, the Minister of Finance chose instead to help the wealthiest people in our society.

Furthermore, the government is wasting billions of dollars in inadequate and mismanaged programs. We need only think of the grants and contributions it makes through various departments such as Industry Canada or Heritage Canada, without any follow-up to show that our friends opposite are incapable of properly managing public funds.

Another example of the Liberal government's laxness are the renovations to the buildings on Parliament Hill, which will cost Quebec and Canadian taxpayers $1.4 billion. A fine priority when we consider all the problems in society.

I could go on at length about the irregularities the Liberal government allows to go on, but the list is too long. I will have the opportunity to come back to it and unmask the guilty. And I will do just that.

I will return to those that the millionaire Minister of Finance has looked after in his budget, that is, society's most well off. The minister, in his magnanimity, has chosen to eliminate the 3% surtax on those with incomes over $60,000. This means that someone earning $250,000 will be entitled to $3,800 in tax savings this year. People earning $120,000 will get about $700, whereas taxpayers with an average income of $50,000 will save only $350.

The majority of people, who earn on average only $30,000, will save a meagre $90. The minister is far from fair.

This sixth budget of the Minister of Finance will go down in history, because the people of Quebec will long remember the bitter taste it left them. This year's budget is an insult to the people of Quebec.

All the Minister of Finance has accomplished with his many cavalier measures is to show the public what really lies behind the masks of the Liberal cabinet members from Quebec.

How can these federal ministers from Quebec claim to represent their constituents? I wonder, because what they have allowed to happen is unacceptable. Why did these people stand by while Quebec was once again given the short end?

The infamous social union agreement that the Prime Minister and his sidekick the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs tried to get the Government of Quebec to endorse is completely ridiculous. Although Quebec did not sign the agreement, the Minister of Finance used this piece of paper to amend the already tenuous balance of the social transfer formula as he wished and with no advance warning.

This government decided unilaterally that it would change the rules of the game this year. In the past, federal transfer payments for health were based on a traditional formula, but now, without warning, it has been decided that population will be the criterion.

Not surprisingly, the result of these changes is that the richest provinces will now suddenly get the biggest slice of the federal transfer pie. No wonder the Premier of Quebec found himself on his own at the February 4 first ministers meeting. The government had just negotiated an agreement, to his detriment, with Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta that would mean a big pay-off for them.

It is clearer now why these three provinces were such staunch defenders of the social union. For the upcoming fiscal year, Ontario will get $1 billion of the CHST, British Columbia $400 million and Albert $300 million. What will Quebec get? A paltry $150 million. It is ridiculous.

The Minister of Finance would have us believe that Quebec is benefiting from the federal government's generosity through equalization. I remind the minister that the equalization program has been in place for a long time and that its purpose is to give provincial governments adequate revenues to enable them to provide public services at reasonably comparable quality and tax levels.

The $1.4 billion that the federal government is sending to Quebec was owed to us, because the calculations for previous years were erroneous. The federal government is sending $1.4 billion after depriving us of $6.5 billion since 1994. I say the minister could have done better, much better. And members should not try to tell me that we are getting more than our fair share. Since 1994, 39% of the cuts made by the Minister of Finance to social transfers have affected Quebec, compared to only 32% in the case of Ontario. Once again, the Minister of Finance does not seem very fair.

But the real issue is why these equalization payments are made to us, and not to other provinces, such as Ontario. The answer is simple: it is because Quebec's economy is weaker than the economy in Ontario, which has always enjoyed preferential treatment on the part of the federal government. If Quebec got its fair share of federal investments, it would more than likely not receive equalization payments.

As we know, Quebec is only getting 20% of the federal government's current spending in goods and services, only 18% of the federal funding to businesses, and only 14% of the federal money invested in research and development. I would be remiss if I did not also mention the $2 billion the federal government owes to Quebec for harmonizing the GST. Members can imagine the difference all these billions could make in Quebec.

The reason I said this budget would go down in history is simple: this budget is the last straw when it comes to the arrogance displayed by the federal government toward Quebec. After intruding in education last year with its millennium scholarships, this government is doing the same thing again this year in health.

Ottawa will therefore be injecting $1.4 billion into health, although this is still a provincial jurisdiction. What conclusion can one come to about such measures, which do nothing but duplicate services Quebec is already offering to the population? What a fine waste of time, money and energy.

Having cut billions of dollars from transfer payments, having smothered the provinces, which were already busy tidying up their own finances. and did not need any additional burden, and having provoked an unprecedented crisis in the health field, the Minister of Finance and his colleague the Minister of Health have piled arrogance on top of arrogance, by imposing their views upon the health sector.

This budget contains in particular $328 million for health information systems. However, I would like to know how such a measure will make it possible to shorten the waiting time in our constantly overburdened emergency departments.

Creation of the national health surveillance network with its budget of $190 million over the next three years, is another example of inappropriate and pointless spending, for such a network dealing with the detection of serious illnesses and the electronic linking of Canadian laboratories will not respond to the real and crying needs of the health care system in Quebec.

Creation of the Canada health network, telehealth and telehomecare are other measures dreamed up by the federal government to create still more administrative structures it can control from Ottawa. People will understand that this is obviously part of the Liberal plan to satisfy their unquenchable thirst for visibility.

The Canadian institute for health information is another institution that will receive funds to report periodically on the health of Canadians and their health system, specifically on waiting lists, and the doctors and specialist assignments and the most effective courses of treatment.

According to the federal government, this funding will promote a better accounting of health care. While all the provinces rejected the annual health care report card, the government is doing indirectly what it cannot do directly under the Constitution.

Another example of what the federal government has come up with to waste public money, and we know it does not lack for ideas in this area, is the famous research and evaluation fund for nursing staff, which will conduct research in the amount of $25 million over the next ten years to, among other things, come up with solutions to the challenges to nursing staff in the coming decade. But what exactly does this have to do with the federal government, I wonder?

Finally, we can add to this dismal list of federal interference the amount of $75 million to be spent over the next three years on prenatal nutrition programs, and the $50 million, again over the next three years, to find ways to attract doctors to rural areas.

After thoroughly reviewing the budget, it is clear to me that the Minister of Finance is trying to make us believe that this is a budget that is fair to all Quebeckers and Canadians. However, this is not the case.

This budget is a gift to the privileged in our society, whether they are individuals or rich provinces, at the expense of the unemployed and the poor. Moreover, as members will have noticed, the Liberal government is doing something with this budget that it has no right to do, that is to ignore the Constitution and once again get involved in areas of provincial jurisdiction.

Quebeckers are no fools. Our determination to take control our own destiny is strengthened when we see the real nature of the federal government.

Earlier, the member for Broadview—Greenwood said he did not think there were many separatists in Quebec any more. He is right. There are not many separatists in Quebec, but there are more and more sovereignists, particularly as a result of the Liberal government's budget.

The Budget February 17th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget contains $153 million for promoting culture and sports in Canada.

We checked with officials yesterday and were told that no amount had been set aside in this envelope for professional sports.

My question is for the heritage minister. Are we to understand that the government finally abandoned any plans to support professional sports teams, contrary to what was recommended in the Mills report?

Nicolas Fontaine February 12th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, the last competition of the season for the free-style skiing world cup was held last Wednesday, in Altenmarkt, Austria. For the third consecutive year, Nicolas Fontaine, a 28-year-old man from the Sherbrooke area, won the prestigious title of world cup champion.

This third consecutive title is all the more prestigious since it is the first time a male athlete has ever accomplished such a feat in that discipline. Once again, an athlete from the Eastern Townships has achieved world fame, bringing honour to all the people of our region. Nicolas' fighting spirit and determination have helped him reach a level of performance that is unprecedented in Canada.

On behalf of all the people of the riding of Sherbrooke, I want to congratulate Nicolas Fontaine and wish him every success in future competitions, especially in the upcoming free-style skiing world championships to be held next month.

Again, congratulations, Nicolas.

Supply February 4th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite referred in his speech to principles that all provinces, including Quebec, share in the area of health, improvement of care, equipment, and education.

Is there something new here? When his government decided to cut transfers, in health among others, did those principles not already exist? Now that this government has the financial means to act, is its main concern not to get involved in health care, to gain overall control of this area and to promote its visibility?

However, I would like to come back to the question he did not answer. With regard to health, is hepatitis C a concern for the government?

Finance February 2nd, 1999

Madam Speaker, as far as I know, transfer payments and equalization payments are two different things. There will be a debate, moreover, on equalization payments in the coming days or weeks. Transfer payments are one thing, and equalization payments another. At present, my first concern is the transfer payments. In this regard, as far as I know, all of the provinces have been contributing since September 14.

Finance February 2nd, 1999

Madam Speaker, I did not grasp the meaning of the whole question, but I did get the gist of it.

There are transfer payments from the federal government to Quebec and to the other provinces, of course. The amounts are quite substantial and have an impact across Canada.

What I was saying just now, of course, addressed all of the provinces, and Quebec, but given the need to find the essential elements to demonstrate the human suffering which can result from such dramatic cuts, I did of course take my riding of Sherbrooke in particular as my reference, and the people of Quebec in general.

Now, Quebec contributes a great deal to the financing of the federal government, totalling about $32 billion yearly. It is normal for Quebec and the other provinces to get back the transfer payments cut from them by the federal government, so that everywhere across Canada, obviously, they can reinvest in health, social programs and education. That is vital.

Those three elements are what will allow Canada and Quebec to develop in an increasingly happy future for everyone.

Finance February 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the House today on the report by the Liberal majority on the Standing Committee on Finance. This report was reviewed and corrected by the Minister of Finance himself. It proposes a number of avenues for the upcoming budget.

The use of federal government surpluses has been a current topic for a number of months and will remain so for a number more, but for the first time in 30 years, the federal government has begun to have budget surpluses. This year's surplus will be considerable. It is still reasonable to say it will be somewhere around $12 billion.

This considerable surplus belongs to taxpayers, and this is why the Bloc Quebecois thought it vital to consult as many people as possible and let them give their opinions on the subject, especially since the government's consultation in Quebec was definitely limited.

Thus the process of consultation began with an information session by the leader of the Bloc Quebecois and the finance critic, the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot. Through August and September, the Bloc Quebecois criss-crossed Quebec.

These quality consultations revealed three points of clear and specific consensus: first, the urgency for reinvestment in health care, education and social assistance; second, a reduction in the tax burden of individuals, specifically those in the low and middle income bracket; and, third, an improved employment insurance plan.

During the Bloc Quebecois' prebudget consultation, I was in the middle of an election campaign in my riding of Sherbrooke. I therefore conducted the best kind of consultation of all, which is the door-to-door kind, at the same time. I met with ordinary people, and I also saw real tragedies, people with health problems and people living in poverty because taxes were depriving them of the basic necessities.

They were having problems with EI because of lower benefits and because of reduced accessibility as well. They were also dealing with the impact of federal government cuts in welfare. Employment insurance has become surplus insurance for the government and poverty insurance for those who pay premiums.

The federal government has room to manoeuvre, but the situation continues to deteriorate. All the finance ministers before the one we now have faced difficult situations, and several of them, despite their best intentions, had nowhere left to turn and had to make difficult choices that had a negative impact on the public.

Today, in view of the Minister of Finance's lack of compassion, I can only conclude that he is heartless and insensitive to people's needs.

As I said earlier, I sensed those needs, I saw them and was aware of them during the election campaign. To show that people think along the same lines as the Bloc Quebecois, on September 14, I was elected as a Bloc member because of what was being said about how the surpluses ought to be used.

The federal government cut $6.3 billion from transfer payments. It now says we must look to the future. But cuts to education are cuts to the future. And cuts to health are cuts to the future. Cuts to social assistance are also cuts to the future, as are cuts to employment insurance.

In my riding of Sherbrooke, there are three colleges and universities. Need I say what impact cuts to education have had? There is also a university health centre that is facing a $15 million deficit this year. There are also the 55% of unemployed who are ineligible for employment insurance benefits, which means a shortfall of $23 million for families each year.

The Minister of Finance feels no remorse when he impoverishes people and regions. He wants to use all the money he grabs from the most disadvantaged to intrude into areas under provincial jurisdiction. We know about the millenium scholarships; we know what is being planned in the area of health.

Let us look at health. The Prime Minister said that the one who collects taxes should be able to tell taxpayers what is being done with their money. Why is he saying that when this is an area under exclusive provincial jurisdiction? Do we know where the money spent by the federal government for the CIO, for federal grants or for renovations on the Hill—estimated at $423 million but likely to reach $1.4 billion—is going? Do we know what is happening with the hundreds of millions spent on accounting and computer systems? Is the government saying where this money is really going?

I sit on the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Since September, I have read horror stories in two reports by the auditor general. If the federal government acted responsibly and cleaned up its management, there could be several billions in savings.

This is why the Bloc Quebecois is asking the federal government to give back to Quebec and the provinces what it has taken from them in transfer payments, to substantially lower taxes for real low income people—not for millionaires and ministers—and to improve employment insurance by increasing benefits and accessibility, because the employment insurance surpluses belong to those who have paid into the system.

I ask the Minister of Finance to show more compassion for the most disadvantaged and to reinvest in our social programs.

Annie Perrault February 2nd, 1999

Mr. Speaker, Annie Perreault, a young woman from our Eastern Townships, won two medals at the Nagano Olympics, one of them a gold in short-track speed skating.

Since that memorable performance, Annie has been honoured three times in the last month. On January 5, she was awarded the 1998 leadership award as a model athlete by the weekly newspaper La Nouvelle de Sherbrooke . Then, at the gala du Mérite sportif de l'Estrie, Annie was named athlete of the year for the third time. Finally,, last Friday, January 22, at the Sports-Québec gala in Montreal, Annie was crowned top female international athlete of the year.

On behalf of all the people of the riding of Sherbrooke, I offer my heartiest congratulations to this athlete who is making our region known throughout the world, and who has risen to the top because of her passion for sport and her constant efforts.

Thank you so much, Annie, and good luck in future competitions.