Yvon Godin

[Health, March 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in Alberta, Ralph Klein has proposed bill 11 to privatize hospitals. In Nova Scotia, John Hamm is suggesting user fees. In New Brunswick, Bernard Lord is wondering which is the best way to go.

My question is for the Minister of Health. Will he stop this hemorrhage and put money into the health system by next week, before his meeting with his provincial counterparts?

[Journée Internationale De La Francophonie, March 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate a special holiday in Canada and around the world, that of the Francophonie, a celebration of pride and cultural identity.

The declaration of a Journée internationale de la Francophonie, I think, points out the uniqueness of the language and the dynamism of the culture in all areas of international endeavour.

As a francophone, I invite Canada's francophones to show their pride and host communities to show their respect, thus underscoring this country's cultural diversity.

Long life to the Francophonie and a good day to all of Canada's francophones.

[Canadian Heritage, March 16th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, last year, Canadian Heritage did not include the Fête nationale des Acadiens in its calendar of national celebrations.

After pressure from the Acadian community and the SAANB, the Minister of Canadian Heritage apologized and corrected matters. This year, the same problem arose again. This is really scornful treatment of the Acadians.

My question is as follows: When will the Minister of Canadian Heritage settle this problem once and for all?

[Gasoline Prices, March 13th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the price of gasoline is at a ten-year high, and this is bad for Canada's truckers and for Canadians in general. On Friday, the Minister of Labour asked her colleague, the Minister of Natural Resources, to do away with the federal tax on fuel.

Is the Minister of Natural Resources going to heed his colleague and all of the people of Canada and show some leadership in connection with the oil crisis?

[Westray Mine, March 3rd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to talk about an important subject that is dear to my heart. I will try to easy, since it is a question that is very dear to many hearts.

The reason all of this is so dear to my heart goes back to the accident at the Westray Mine on May 9, 1922. We lost friends in this tragedy, 26 miners. Talking about this here in the House is a very emotional thing for me, because I myself am a former miner.

I worked for more than 15 years in the depths of a mine, I remember that, in 1976, in the mine where I was working, we buried six miners in 18 months. It is really not easy to accept the death of a colleague in one's workplace.

For example, one of those guys drove to work with me every day. One morning we came in together and by nighttime, he was gone.

I would like to congratulate the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough for introducing this bill in the House. It reminds me of another bill, introduced by the leader of the NDP, which has not been drawn yet and which is intended to show Canadians that it is absolutely unacceptable in Canada that a corporation, whether small, medium or large, would not have a license to hire workers and then be found guilty of criminal negligence causing the death of a worker.

This is what Motion No. 79 is asking members to support. We need a bill to forbid an employer to obtain a licence to hire workers and then do what it pleases.

If I recall correctly what happened in the Westray disaster, the federal government should assume its responsibilities, because it is partly to be blamed for what happened. I will explain.

If my memory serves me right, workers from the Westray mine went to the employment insurance office and asked if they would be penalized if they quit their job. They were told that if they quit their job, it would not be justified. The same thing happened in others mines in my riding.

Last year, a fellow named Stéphane quit his job because it was unsafe, but the employment insurance commission denied him benefits. He appealed and lost his appeal. He then had to appear before an adjudicator and won at long last.

Another similar case occurred when a worker refused to perform an unsafe task with a truck. The truck had faulty brakes, and when he quit his job the federal government turned down his application for employment insurance benefits, stating that safety was not sufficient grounds to quit one's job. He appealed to the employment insurance commission in Bathurst, and the commission denied him benefits. He then appeared before an adjudicator and won his case. The same thing happened at the Westray mine.

Workers from the Westray mine appeared before the employment insurance commission, asking to quit their jobs because of safety concerns. I want to inform the House that the steelworkers' union had been approached to establish a local union at the Westray mine because it was unsafe.

Today the hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington is changing his mind to protect companies, to protect the big bosses.

I think he does not represent Canadians or workers of this country. Today, if I get behind the wheel of my car after I had three or four drinks and I kill someone, I would be guilty and I would go to jail.

When a corporate executive can blackmail his employees by telling them “If you do not work, you will lose your jobs” and when the federal government condones that by refusing to pay employment insurance benefits to those who want to leave their jobs, I say that those who made those decisions and the ministers who decided to impose such restrictions on workers should go to jail too.

It is too bad we have to plead with the government to pass a law that any person in charge of a company should not have a licence to run an industry unsafely and jeopardize the lives of workers in a mine or any workplace. That is what happened at Westray mine. Those people claimed it was an unsafe workplace. When they wanted to take the president of the company to court to be put in front of a judge, they were refused because there was no law to do it. We are asking the Government of Canada to set an example and show every province that no one will have a licence to have a place of work which jeopardizes the safety of the workers because it is totally unacceptable.

I worked underground for 15 years. In 1976 within a period of 18 months, we buried six workers. We buried one after the other for 18 months. It was no fun having to bury our friends and colleagues. Remember how members of the House reacted when we lost one of our colleagues a few years ago and another colleague last year. Hon. members know how they felt. The member who flew on a jet to Windsor knows how he felt. I can tell him how I felt when we lost our miners underground at Brunswick mine.

I know how the people at Westray felt when they lost 26 of their miners. I know how hurt they were. The government can help them by putting a law in place so that a court of law will judge whether or not the person was negligent. We are asking for that basic principle, that those who are negligent are judged in a court of law.

Why is the culprit, the vice-president of the company, getting away with all of this? It is totally unacceptable and it should never be tolerated in Canada. That is why I am asking the government to rethink what is going on, to rethink its position on the motion by the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough. Let us put a committee together to look at some rules and regulations that will take care of this.

If a miner or a worker is negligent and does something to kill somebody else, he will go in front of a judge. Why do the people in charge of a company have the licence to get away with that?

We are not asking for something that is out of the ordinary. We are asking for justice. We are asking for justice for our workers, the women and men who are forced by negligent people to work in an unsafe place. We see it every day. We cannot hide behind facts when culprits get people to work in unsafe places. We cannot hide behind facts. The culprits should go before a court and be judged like any other Canadian.

[Westray Mine, March 3rd, 2000]

Right on. You have it.

[Health, March 3rd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government must assume its responsibilities in health care.

Monday's budget would give the Province of New Brunswick only $60 million over four years. This is not even enough to cover the debts of New Brunswick's hospital corporations.

Will the government listen to the Premier of New Brunswick and to all the other premiers and pay for 50% of the cost of the health care system in this country, in order to keep it from being privatized?

[Supply, March 2nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik talk about the health care system, about the billions and billions of dollars that the federal Liberal government has put into health.

I have some more percentages. I do not know whether my colleague remembers that, in 1969, when the Liberal government was in power—the governments that followed did the same thing—it began to make cuts, with the result that transfers to the provinces are now 15% of what they were.

Would the member agree with me that today in Canada our children or our parents have to wait for treatment in hospital corridors, that people have to wait six months for cancer treatment or for a heart operation?

One of my sisters-in-law was operated on for cancer in Quebec City in January. She had to go to Augusta in the United States for her treatments. She had to stay five weeks and the treatments cost Canada or Quebec $18,5000. Here in Canada we are not even capable of treating our own citizens. I would like to know where the member stands on this.

Would he agree that the federal government should change its approach to provincial transfer payments so that our parents and our children do not find themselves stuck in hospital corridors waiting for care?

[Supply, March 2nd, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question and make a comment.

In 1969, if hon. members will recall, the federal government's share of the health care system costs in Canada was 50%. Today, in the year 2000, its share has dropped to 15.3%, and that includes the new investment of $2.5 billion. This is quite a difference.

If we look at the American system, people have to pay to get real health care. This is what Canadians want to avoid. Since the the budget was brought down in the House on Monday, Canadians from all across the country have expressed their opinion and the premiers of all the provinces indicated their disagreement with the way the federal government supports health care.

For instance, if the federal government contributes only 15%, the provinces have to kick in 85%. Can we imagine what that will cost the provinces? If the federal government really wants to preserve health care and avoid privatization, is my colleague across the way ready to admit we are facing an urgent situation, especially when we consider the reactions of the Premier of Alberta, of Premier Mike Harris and of the Premier of Newfoundland, Brian Tobin? He said “We will have to come to Ottawa to get the money, because this makes no sense whatsoever”.

Those were the words of an important member of the Liberal Party, a man who is respected by the Prime Minister of Canada. He supported the other premiers, who claim that there is not enough money for health care. There is nothing more important than health. Health is what matters. We need the federal government and its 50:50 partnership.

[The Budget, February 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask to my colleague from the Reform Party a question. Every time I hear we should bring employment insurance premiums down, but what about those 800,000 workers who have lost their employment and do not qualify for employment insurance? What about the 1.4 million children who are hungry? What is the position of the Reform Party?

I have a motion in the House of Commons and it seems that the Reform Party does not want to support it. The only thing my motion says is to revise employment insurance. The only thing I hear from my colleague is to bring the premiums down. I have not heard any workers on the streets asking for the premiums to be brought down. They have asked that the benefits be brought up.

I would like to hear his position on that.