House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 45% of the vote.
Bosnia February 11th, 1994
As a follow-up, Mr. Speaker, can the Deputy Prime Minister indicate to us whether it is true that the Serbs are not agreeing to the gradual withdrawal of peacekeepers, negotiated by the Commander-in-Chief of the UN forces, General Michael Rose, and does she recognize that this situation calls into question the ceasefire conditions negotiated between Serbs and Muslims?
Bosnia February 11th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister, and I must say that we thought of it ourselves. We learned this morning that the ceasefire that was negotiated in Bosnia is not being honoured since fighting has apparently resumed in Sarajevo between Serbs and Bosnian Muslims.
Can the Deputy Prime Minister apprise us of the situation that prevails today? Can she confirm that the Serbs are rejecting the ultimatum issued by NATO and can she tell us how Canada intends to react to this situation?
Patrick Tremblay Foundation February 11th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, in the last few months, the media have been talking about the case of a 21 year-old man, Mr. Patrick Tremblay, who is presently fighting against a devastating form of cancer in Texas.
A foundation under his name has been set up in order to pay for the costs of his treatment and to help other people who are in the same dreadful situation.
The people responsible for the foundation had asked for its incorporation and later issued in good faith receipts for income tax purposes, until they learned that the foundation did not have the necessary accreditation.
Without the financial support of the foundation, Mr. Tremblay would be forced to give up his treatment, which was having good results and contributing to his cure.
The accreditation request for income tax purposes of the Patrick Tremblay Foundation is presently under review by officials from the Department of Revenue. I appeal to the compassion of the Minister of Revenue so that he can put an end to the delay in accrediting this foundation.
Softwood Lumber Industry February 9th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, what with agriculture, western wheat, magnesium, beer, steel and now softwood lumber, does the minister not agree that the American strategy is clear, namely to use every possible recourse to prevent our companies from having access to their markets?
Softwood Lumber Industry February 9th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade. While successive judgements confirm the Canadian position in the interminable conflict on softwood lumber, the United States announced yesterday that it intends to appeal the decision of the panel established under the free trade agreement. We thought that this decision of the panel would end the dispute which has already cost Canadian producers about $500 million.
Does the minister intend to take this matter up with the American authorities to end the harassment of Canadian softwood lumber producers and does he intend to convince the American trade representative, Mr. Kantor, to end once and for all this conflict which has already gone on too long?
Hibernia Project February 4th, 1994
An answer like that is rather surprising, Mr. Speaker, since the Liberals cancelled the helicopter contract as soon as they took office.
At any rate, can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us if she intends to stop this hemorrhage of public funds, or are we to gather from her answer that in fact her government will continue to squander taxpayers' money on a political pay-off to the Premier of Newfoundland, Clyde Wells.
Hibernia Project February 4th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, Hibernia, the oil drilling megaproject off Newfoundland, is becoming the biggest white elephant in Canada's history.
The federal government is sinking billions of dollars into this financial black hole, at the same time as we are finding out that the Minister of Finance is seriously considering a sizable increase in taxes.
My question is for the Deputy Prime Minister, in the absence of the Minister of Natural Resources. Does the Deputy Prime Minister admit that this project is not financially viable and will she confirm that the cost overruns could exceed $1.5 billion?
Pre-Budget Consultations February 1st, 1994
Someone just questioned my right as a parliamentarian here to express my opinion on issues affecting the economic future of Canada, and thus Quebec, because Quebec is still part of this country called Canada.
I find it offensive that the member should have questioned Bloc Quebecois members' ability to speak in the House on the economic future of this country. We have the right, and if you paid attention for a few moments to the speech I made, you may find in it some good ideas for putting Canada back on track. Perhaps you should reread it.
Furthermore, I would point out that my colleague's argument had little or nothing to do with my speech and I must deplore that.
Pre-Budget Consultations February 1st, 1994
If you allow me, Mr. Speaker, I would like to have time to answer everything my hon. colleague just said.
First, I note with undisguised pleasure that every time we make statements, he and I are always together and I wonder if that will go on for long. I do not find it unpleasant, I must tell you, but I do find it interesting that the member lost his cool a little and immediately tried to defend his government. Could it be that his government has something that needs to be defended?
Also, my hon. colleague spent much of his speech explaining that some members of our party were once with another party that they left, I must remind my colleague, because perhaps they learned something after they had joined it. We should not keep going back to that because the fact that they are now sitting on this side of the House, under the Bloc Quebecois banner, means that they have done some thinking and that they realized something which has taken them further in their thinking about the political and constitutional future of Canada and Quebec.
I would remind my colleague that the government which got Canada onto this debt treadmill is not the Conservative government which he complains about having had to put up with for nine years; it is the Liberal government which preceded that Conservative government.
Pre-Budget Consultations February 1st, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to discuss a very significant aspect of the subject before the House today, and I am referring to the close relationship that exists between the economic situation, public finances and international trade.
I think we cannot overlook the fact that the disastrous state of Canada's public finances has an impact on the competitive position of Canadian and Quebec companies on foreign markets. I will therefore attempt to put the problem of our public finances and the federal debt into an international perspective.
Canada's net public debt is now over 70 per cent of our Gross Domestic Product. This ratio is well above the average for the 17 industrialized countries in the OECD. Furthermore, 25.8 per cent of the securities issued by the Government of Canada to finance its deficit are held by foreign interests.
This means that annually, we pay more than $10 billion in interest to our international creditors. The problem is therefore a major one, something which a number of financial institutions, including the International Monetary Fund, have indeed pointed out to us. On February 11 last year, the IMF submitted a confidential report to the Canadian government on the country's economic situation and especially on the problems of the public debt.
Among other recommendations, the IMF advised Canada to deal with this problem, which was seen as giving rise to grave concerns about the state of the Canadian economy. The tenor of this report should surprise no one, since this was the IMF's third warning to Canada about its public debt.
The federal and provincial governments borrow massively on the domestic market, pushing up interest rates and thus depriving Quebec and Canadian companies of the capital they need to renew their production infrastructures and invest in new and more efficient production processes.
Furthermore, to make them more attractive to foreign investors, Canadian Treasury Bills must bear higher interest rates, thus pushing up the value of the Canadian dollar on international money markets and undermining the competitive position of Quebec and Canadian products on international markets.
Restoring our control over Canada's recurrent deficits would help provide companies with the capital they need, at a lower cost, to modernize their plant and would make the Canadian dollar more competitive with the currencies of our principal trading partners.
If the public debt problem makes our companies less competitive on international markets, conversely, international trade may prove to be one of the solutions to this problem.
In fact, Canadian exports rose dramatically during the first ten months of 1993. There is every indication that this increase, which was 16 per cent over 1992, should make this a record year for Canadian exports of goods and services.
It is important to realize the direct impact of exports of goods and services on the creation of jobs and the creation of wealth. According to recent studies referred to the Quebec bureau of statistics, every $10 million increase in exports generates more than 100 direct jobs. Moreover, these $10 million would include more than $6 million in added value.
There is no doubt about the correlation between exports growth and improvement of public finances. When exports grow, so does employment, therefore we see a decrease in public spending for social programs like unemployment insurance, welfare or health care, as well as an increase in revenues due to the greater number of employed people who pay taxes.
The government should see international trade as a factor essential to economic growth, and this is especially true in a country like Canada which derives a quarter of its GDP directly from exporting goods and services. I should point out that the Quebec economy is also largely dependent on exports of goods of services which account for almost 16 per cent of its GDP.
The warm welcome given to free trade with the United States and then the North American Free Trade Agreement in Quebec, by federalist as well as sovereigntist supporters, should surprise no one.
Quebecers understand that only the access to larger foreign markets will guarantee economic development to a small society of 7 million.
In that regard, the lack of enthusiasm for these trade agreements in English Canada seems rather strange. It is easy to see, as the data on recent export increases and on their positive impact on our economy clearly show, that better access to dynamic markets is a source of increased wealth for our country.
Therefore, government must examine without delay what measures to implement in order to promote international trade. They must, among other things, review in depth all assistance programs for small and medium-sized businesses which are the driving force of all economic activity in Quebec and Canada and the main source of job creation.
That review must be made with a constant view to eliminating the multiple overlappings and duplications that exist between federal programs and those of some provinces. We must optimize resource distribution according to the real needs of businesses. Those provinces who wish to do so should manage these resources directly in a way that will ensure they are best adapted to regional economic realities.
On the other hand, the government must ensure that business assistance programs take into account the service sector which is increasingly important in the context of international exports.
In conclusion, we must, once again, question the government's strategy and ask Parliament to participate in this new debate on public finances. We must, of course, welcome this new approach adopted by government which is a sign of increased openness and of greater respect for democracy.
However, given the scope of the financial disaster at the federal level, and given the determination shown by the Liberal Party during the election campaign, we had the right to expect the government to launch a much larger consultation process. Under such circumstances, it would have been appropriate to take measures more in line with the seriousness of the situation.
We would have liked the government to follow through with the request presented by the Bloc Quebecois several months ago, asking it to set up an ad hoc parliamentary committee to carry on an item by item review of federal tax and budget expenditures. The Reform Party, through the member for Calgary North, answering a question I asked her on January 21, and earlier today, through the member for Lethbridge answering a question from my colleague for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot, already indicated that it was willing to participate in such a process.
With such unanimity, the government had the opportunity to undertake a consultation of a magnitude yet unknown in the history of this country and ferret out all sources of waste, costly overlapping and excessive spending.
That exercise would have allowed the government to avoid having to consider easy solutions, such as increasing the already excessive burden on taxpayers or cutting social programs.
Instead the government chose the easy way out: business as usual! Yet, if I remember, this government was not elected for its lack of courage and determination. Nobody expected that it would quietly carry on a traditional policy of day to day management.
The government's answer to the proposal made by the opposition is that it would table the budget in a few days. Be that as it may, we will wait for the budget, but make no mistake, we will be ready for it.