André HARVEY

HARVEY, The Hon. André, P.C., B.Ped., B.Sc.Admin.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Chicoutimi--Le Fjord (Quebec)
Birth Date
September 16, 1941
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/André_Harvey
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=c697ea4b-9558-42a8-ab76-f1177ed93959&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
consultant, teacher

Parliamentary Career

September 4, 1984 - October 1, 1988
PC
  Chicoutimi (Quebec)
November 21, 1988 - September 8, 1993
PC
  Chicoutimi (Quebec)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (March 11, 1993 - June 24, 1993)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (September 1, 1993 - October 26, 1993)
June 2, 1997 - April 25, 2000
PC
  Chicoutimi (Quebec)
  • Whip of the Progressive Conservative Party (June 18, 1997 - April 25, 2000)
April 26, 2000 - October 22, 2000
IND
  Chicoutimi (Quebec)
October 4, 2000 - October 22, 2000
LIB
  Chicoutimi (Quebec)
November 27, 2000 - May 23, 2004
LIB
  Chicoutimi--Le Fjord (Quebec)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport (September 13, 2001 - January 12, 2003)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Cooperation (January 13, 2003 - December 11, 2003)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources with special emphasis on Development of Value-Added Industries (December 12, 2003 - July 19, 2004)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 129)


May 6, 2004

Hon. André Harvey (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, fortunately, exaggeration does not make one sick, because my colleague would have trouble staying healthy.

We never hear a word about all the progressive measures that have been taken within the employment insurance program and with all the government revenues. Let us think, among other things, about the whole issue of manpower training, which has allowed Quebec, for the past six, seven or eight years, to receive $600 million a year.

I would like to ask my colleague whether it is important to deal with these issues, for example, the reduction in premiums for the 14 million contributors. Is it important for employees and employers to contribute to a program where rates have been reduced by almost a third in the last few years? I would like to know, because this goes into the general fund.

I would like to ask my colleague this simple question. Is she aware that, for the past 20 years, Quebec has contributed approximately $73 billion to the unemployment insurance fund, now the employment insurance fund, and that we have provided a total of approximately $86 billion in benefits? Where would the money have been found to pay off the debt had there been a surplus in Quebec in the EI fund? Can my colleague confirm that, in the last 10 or 12 years, the contribution level has been about the same as the collection level?

In short, this is a Bloc strategy. When there is an issue, they take it and exaggerate it to the limit.

We made improvements to the EI program and we will continue to do so during the next weeks and the next months. Next year, after five years, there will be a complete review of the program.

Unfortunately, Bloc interventions always tend to worsen an issue rather than seek constructive solutions.

I would like to ask my colleague a question. If, over the past 20 years, Quebec has had a surplus of $13 billion with respect to all of its premiums, why does she say that the premiums paid by Quebeckers have been used to repay the total debt or pay down the deficit? If she wants to talk about imbalances in taxation one day, we will talk about this question, but using the actual numbers.

I encourage them to listen less to the Canadian Labour Congress. In their employment insurance calculations, I think even the furniture was included.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 6, 2004

Hon. André Harvey

It is always empty rhetoric. Let them all come and debate the issue at home. We will talk about figures.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 6, 2004

Hon. André Harvey (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, before the hon. member has a chance to get too comfortable, I would like to ask him if he thinks it is right for the Canadian Labour Congress, in its scientific analysis of employment insurance, to include people who have never worked, people who have never paid premiums, formerly self-employed workers and students? Does he think it is right in an insurance context to include in our statistics people who have never contributed to the program?

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 6, 2004

Hon. André Harvey

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to point out, in addition to the preliminary information and considering the errors that they continue to make, that they mentioned three different percentages.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink

May 6, 2004

Hon. André Harvey

Mr. Speaker, it will not be as inflammatory from now on because I will be talking about figures. For people who have an extremely sophisticated research bureau, I must say that when Bloc members decide to work on a particular issue, they have great difficulty getting their facts straight.

With regard to employment insurance, everybody agrees that improvements are made regularly and will continue to be made. Some Bloc members came to my riding and talked about a $157 million deficit in the EI fund. We did some research on these figures, and it was in fact $239 million that was paid in the last year for which the financial reporting had been done. As for the softwood lumber issue, it is always the same.

I have the figures for the last 20 years. In Quebec, over that period, there is a surplus of some $13 billion in the EI fund in favour of recipients. And the same applies for the last 10 or 11 years.

We are talking about numbers, and on this topic I would like to ask my colleague if we can also talk about initiatives funded with the employment insurance fund. Let's think about the annual transfers to Quebec and the labour force training programs that have been going on for eight years at an annual cost of $600 million. If we add up the numbers, the total is close to $5 billion. This year, there are also reductions in premiums which amount to $4.4 billion. That is interesting for the 14 million Canadians who pay EI premiums. We support the concept of program improvement and we will continue to do so.

However, I would appreciate my colleagues from the Bloc using actual and verifiable figures for all the issues on which they make presentations. We will also be ready for the election campaign and will come up with actual figures.

I would ask my colleague to explain why a supposedly responsible political party frequently releases figures that were inspired by the Canadian Labour Congress but invalidated everywhere in Canada.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Supply
Full View Permalink