Kevin Lamoureux

[Petitions, November 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, this is a very timely petition given the government introduced Bill C-18, which is going to kill the Canadian Wheat Board. This petition is signed by many prairie farmers calling upon the government to respect the wishes of a majority of farmers. We all know that the majority of prairie grain wheat farmers want to retain the Canadian Wheat Board.

It is with pleasure that I submit this particular petition, which is very timely, and would ask all government members to pay attention to what a majority of grain farmers are saying in the Prairies.

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers, November 28th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I truly believe that the Prime Minister of Canada has had a very strong personal hatred for the Canadian Wheat Board long before he even became the Prime Minister of our country. I think this whole Bill C-18 to get rid of the Wheat Board has more to do with the personal opinions and feelings of members of the Conservative government. I say that because over 20,000 prairie grain farmers from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba sent a very clear message to the House of Commons, to this Prime Minister, saying that they see the value of the Canadian Wheat Board and that they do not want the government to get rid of the Canadian Wheat Board. This is the message that I believe the prairie farmers sent to the Prime Minister.

Would the member agree that the vast majority of prairie grain farmers are sending that message to the Prime Minister? Why does the member believe the Prime Minister is not listening to the pleas of the prairie grain farmer today.

[Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, November 22nd, 2011]

On the same point, Mr. Speaker, I just want to make it very clear that the Liberal Party of Canada does not support the actions that are being taken by the government, knowing full well that a vast majority of prairie grain farmers—

[Copyright Modernization Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the bill does send some mixed messages to individuals who are following this debate. On the one hand, we recognize that jobs in the gaming industry for example, whether in Winnipeg, Vancouver or Ontario, are important and valuable. We also recognize that individuals have the right to protect their interests. On the other hand, this legislation gives us serious concerns because it deals with what a student at a local university would be able to keep, that the student would have to dispose of homework. A lot of university students love to keep the work they did during their studies. Some of them will keep it for years. Could the member provide his thoughts on that issue?

There are some good things in the bill, but there are also some things which would have a profound negative impact.

[Ukraine, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, this week, we remember Ukrainian men, women and children who lost their lives during the Holodomor. Between 1932 and 1933, under the directive of Joseph Stalin, millions of innocent people died as a result of poor living conditions and starvation. Once known as the breadbasket of Europe, Ukraine was forced to give up its grains to the Soviet regime, under an imposed system of collectivization that devastated the country.

Today, the Ukrainian community plays an integral role in Canada's vibrant culture and has no doubt been an important part in the development of our nation.

This week has been officially declared by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress as the National Holodomor Awareness Week.

In Winnipeg, the Canadian Museum of Human Rights is set to open its doors in 2012. I, with many others, look forward to seeing a permanent display of the Holodomor. It is my sincerest hope that through means such as the Human Rights Museum, people will be better informed of these past tragedies because it is so important that we never forget the genocide that occurred.

[Senate Reform Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate just how clear the member was about the NDP's position to abolish the Senate. I have had the opportunity to ask other members of his caucus about the potential of the Senate having some value. If a majority of Canadians supported it, would the NDP support abandoning its lifelong ambition to abolish the Senate.

My question is fairly simple and straightforward. If a majority of Canadians supported having a Senate, would the New Democratic Party stop pushing to abolish it if it were deemed there was some value to it? Or, no matter what happens in the referendum it called for, would its intention still be to abolish the Senate?

[Senate Reform Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the member made reference to the position of Manitoba. I am not too sure if any other province has done this, but Manitoba had an all party task force, with a majority of the members being New Democrats. I was actually a member of that task force. We canvassed the entire province of Manitoba, heard numerous presentations on the Senate and the overwhelming feeling was that there was value to having a Senate.

If we look at the public hearings that were conducted in Manitoba and, I suspect, if we were to canvas most Canadians and talk about having a valued Senate, we would find a majority of Canadians would support it because they see the potential value of it.

Having said that, if a majority of Canadians do support the Senate, would the member be prepared to come on side, recognize and support having a Senate in the future?

[Senate Reform Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the member made reference in his comments to the fact that there was a fairly extensive poll or survey carried out in which 36% of the respondents felt that it was necessary to abolish the Senate. Ultimately, that would imply that there was a majority that did see some value to retaining the Senate.

If the member were to canvass his own constituents and they were of the opinion that indeed there was value in the Senate, would the member then take the position of supporting retaining the Senate, maybe advocating for change but at the very least supporting a Senate?

[Senate Reform Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am always intrigued by the NDP's position in regard to the Senate. It seems to be fairly straightforward and simple in the minds of many colleagues in the NDP and that is that we abolish the Senate, that there is no situation in which the New Democratic Party could envision where there would be any value whatsoever to Canada by retaining some form of a Senate.

If the majority of Canadians disagreed with the NDP and believed that there was some value in retaining the Senate, would the member be prepared to support the will of the majority of Canadians?

[Senate Reform Act, November 22nd, 2011]

Madam Speaker, on the one hand the NDP would allow the country to break up if a majority of Quebeckers, 50% plus one, were to vote for separation, yet when a majority of Canadians see value in having the Senate, the NDP does not believe that Canada deserves keeping it. How does the member reconcile those two points?