House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1997, with 50% of the vote.
Day Care May 12th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, a study released yesterday reports that the Quebec day care model is markedly superior to the Canadian one.
Yet the Minister of Finance, with his wall to wall taxation, is penalizing Quebec parents who only pay $5.00 a day for day care.
How can the Minister of Finance accept a taxation policy which continues to penalize Quebec parents, when the Quebec system is the one on which all others ought to be modelled?
The Criminal Code May 11th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Joliette made some very good points regarding a long standing problem, which has existed from time immemorial and which every country is facing, namely how to ensure that the sentence fits the crime.
I would ask him to comment on the following statement, which has long been considered as the common judicial wisdom of the ages: an appropriate sentence is the one beyond which the guilty party becomes a victim. It is the one which, should it be any harsher, would make the guilty party appear to be a victim in the eyes of the public. This is obviously the case if the sentence is too harsh.
Prime Minister April 13th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, having committed a blunder in Jerusalem offending the Palestinians, our Prime Minister, ever eager for balance, was careful to commit one in Gaza, a second one, which, this time, offended the Israelis.
On the subject, the next day, of the lake of Tiberias where Christ walked on the waters, this tireless blunderer, tiptoeing on the eggs of an ultra sensitive matter, went in up to his neck, this time offending Syria before the dumbfounded gaze of international opinion, which did not really consider him capable of such a singular hat trick.
Now the world waits with bated breath to see how Egypt will inspire our Prime Minister. Will he, like Moses, who descended Mount Sinai bearing the tablets with commandments, before a hundred journalists, descend the steps of his hotel brandishing a peace plan for the Middle East that will cause everyone distress? Or, as is his wont, will he deliver his plan B in order to revive the conflict? Anything is possible with this man. But one thing is sure. He will oblige us to drink the cup of ridicule before world opinion to the lees.
Aéroports De Montréal April 11th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, for a number of weeks now, the papers have been full of revelations on the inadequate management practices of Aéroports de Montréal. These troubling revelations have led the Bloc Quebecois to send for the chairperson of the board of directors, Ms. Pageau-Goyette, to have her appear before the Standing Committee on Transport. Problems of labour relations, lack of transparency and the appearance of conflict of interest have been raised.
The responses provided by ADM management have been, to say the least, unsatisfactory and perplexing. Crucial decisions on the development of Montreal were made by ADM, and major investments were announced in a context that shook public confidence considerably.
The Bloc Quebecois does not intend to stop there. The airports of Montreal are public assets funded out of the public purse.
Management of ADM will have to review its practices in order to win back the confidence of the public and elected representatives. There will be no question of repeating the practices being followed at Department of Human Resources Development within an agency given the task of developing infrastructures so important to Quebec.
Petitions March 30th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of presenting, in both official languages, two petitions from residents of my riding asking parliament to promptly pass legislation making it mandatory to label all foods that are wholly or partially genetically modified.
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 410
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. (1) On the expiration of five months after the coming into force of this Act, the provisions contained herein shall be referred to such committee of the House of Commons as may be designated or established by Parliament for that purpose.
(2) The committee designated or established for the purpose of subsection (1) shall, as soon as practicable, undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act and shall, within 14 months after the review is undertaken submit a report to the House of Commons thereon.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 396
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on December 1, 2011.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 379
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on May 1, 2010.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 347
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on September 1, 2007.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 265
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. Section 2 shall come into force on the day that is one year after the day on which it is assented to, and sections 1 and 3 shall come into force on the day that is ten years after the day on which this it assented to.”