House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 24% of the vote.
Transportation May 7th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, in its last budget, the Quebec government announced a $200 million contribution for a rail shuttle between downtown Montreal and Dorval Airport. However, they are still waiting for the federal government's contribution to this project.
What is the federal government waiting for to announce its contribution?
Haiti May 5th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, more than three months after the earthquake, parents of Haitian origin are struggling to obtain visas for their biological children, who are still sleeping in the streets in Haiti. The government promised to implement emergency family reunification measures.
Why do biological children not have access to the same expedited process as Haitian children who are being adopted by parents here?
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 29th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I was so close to my colleague that I could hear the end of her speech even though her microphone had been turned off. That is the advantage of being in this corner of the House.
My colleague spoke at length about safe countries in terms of the problem of respecting rights. We wonder why some foreign nationals would have different rights than others based on their country of origin.
This issue of safe countries poses another problem. We are not convinced, or at least I am not, that this will save time. Instead of appealing to the refugee appeal division, lawyers may well appeal to the Federal Court, arguing that this measure is discriminatory and prevents them from properly defending the rights of their clients.
In my opinion, it will end up taking more money, time and energy to have a series of challenges before the Federal Court, which is very cumbersome and difficult to run. It would be more effective and more fair to allow appeals to be heard from the outset by the refugee appeal division being proposed in the bill.
I would like to know whether the hon. member shares my opinion on this.
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 29th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his excellent speech. People have a lot to say about the provisions concerning so-called safe countries. Many lawyers have said that if their clients are denied the opportunity to appeal a decision before the Federal Court, they could argue in court that their clients were discriminated against because they were granted fewer rights based on their country of origin.
People may choose to appeal decisions before the Federal Court to avoid going through the refugee appeal division. But dealing with appeals in a simpler system would cost less and be more efficient than dealing with them in the Federal Court.
Is my colleague as concerned as I am that the minister will end up with a system that is just as costly and complex as the one in place now? It would be easier to forget about the safe countries provision.
Citizenship and Immigration April 27th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, this woman filed a claim for refugee status to escape a husband who mutilated, burned and beat her.
The stay granted by the court will allow her to give birth to her child in Quebec. If the woman were then deported to a country where maternity and health care are virtually non-existent, it would be a death sentence for her and her baby.
Will the government re-examine and postpone the deportation until this woman obtains a response to her application for permanent residence on humanitarian grounds?
Citizenship and Immigration April 27th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, Canada was about to deport a Guinean national who is in a high-risk pregnancy and has type 2 diabetes. In her condition, there is a serious risk of complications. Deporting a pregnant woman in this condition is absolutely unconscionable.
Will this government, which claims to care about maternal health, make the most of the stay granted by the Federal Court to review its position and avoid exposing this woman and her child to such risks?
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 26th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I never miss an opportunity to ask a Liberal member this question, because I want to make sure that we can really count on the Liberals when the time comes to amend this bill.
My colleague must know that I introduced Bill C-291 on the refugee appeal division. The Liberals said they supported that bill, which was a very popular thing to say. But when it came time to vote in the House, the Liberals had twice as many members absent as all the other parties combined. The opposition still had three more members present in the House than the government, but as luck would have it, four Liberals remained seated. The bill was defeated by a single vote, as if by magic.
No one is fooled. With that vote, the Liberals turned their backs on refugees. It suited them to say publicly that they were in favour of the refugee appeal division, but they did everything they could to engineer the defeat of my bill in the House.
This time around, can we count on the solid support of the full Liberal caucus?
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 26th, 2010
Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question about the bill's title. The Conservatives are developing an annoying tendency. Instead of naming bills based on the legal purpose of the enactment, for instance, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, as is traditionally done, the Conservatives are adding more and more subjective qualifiers. If my memory serves, in this case, we are now talking about a balanced refugee reform act.
Does my colleague think this ridiculous practice should stop? They should be more serious. We are voting on a bill, and value judgments have no place in the titles of bills. I would hope that parliamentarians vote in favour of a bill because it is a good bill. There is no need for the bill to indicate that it is a good bill.
We saw this tendency earlier this week with the bill to improve the health of Canadians and the economic stimulus bill. Does my colleague agree that these ridiculous little stunts need to stop and that the Conservatives should stick to the legal aspects of the legislation?
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 26th, 2010
Madam Speaker, I listened to my colleague's remarks.
I know that he is motivated by strong principles. That being said, I would like to take this opportunity to ask him about his colleagues' behaviour during the vote on Bill C-291. I talked about this earlier today. I know that the past is the past, but if we want to move forward, we have to figure out what happened.
When I introduced a bill that was voted on here in the House to implement the refugee appeal division, 12 Liberal members were absent. Four Liberal members were present, but abstained knowing full well that the opposition had won the previous vote by three votes. Their strategy seems to suggest that, on the one hand, they were in favour of the refugee appeal division, but on the other, they did not want the bill to pass in the House.
We will have to work with the Liberals to improve this bill, enhance it and change a few of the principles in it.
Will we be able to count on their sincere support this time? Can we be sure that they will always act in accordance with what they say in public and with their values?
Balanced Refugee Reform Act April 26th, 2010
Madam Speaker, we asked that the regulations that go along with this bill be presented to the committee. The minster said he could provide us with at least some rough drafts. That is a good start. That would give us a general idea. However, it is by no means a final solution, because the regulations can be changed at any time without consulting Parliament. We must therefore ensure that the bill includes all the basic principles and that the regulations contain only administrative features, and that Parliament does not shirk its responsibilities regarding the principles of the legislation. I say yes to regulations. I think they are fundamental. Studying this bill with no information about the regulations would really be like signing a blank cheque for parliamentarians. We must go further. We must ensure that the main principles of governance are included in the legislation and that the regulations deal only with administrative matters.