Michel Gauthier

[National Defence, December 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, President Bush stated yesterday that his discussions with the Prime Minister of Canada concerning the future of NORAD also addressed the way that organization would be used in ballistic missile defence. Contrary to what the Prime Minister has always maintained, this declaration means that the missile defence shield is an integral part of the discussions on NORAD.

Will the Prime Minister admit that President Bush's remarks confirm that discussions on the future role of NORAD are indeed the beginning of the implementation of the missile defence shield?

[The Environment, November 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I want to believe what the minister is saying, but if the Americans are so keen on talking about climate change that is what the Kyoto protocol is all about.

Will the government agree that if the Prime Minister at least raised the subject with President Bush it would be a show of good faith where the Kyoto protocol is concerned? Does silence not indicate a lack of conviction about Kyoto?

[The Environment, November 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in the context of President Bush's visit, in addition to the Prime Minister's refusal to address the missile defence shield with the President, there is another equally important issue that will be covered in a shroud of silence: the Kyoto protocol.

Considering that even Russia has ratified the Kyoto protocol, why does the Prime Minister not use this visit by President Bush to encourage the Americans to ratify the Kyoto protocol to decrease greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere?

[Taxation, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is always quite complicated on that side when it comes to giving the public justice and treating everyone equally.

According to this study, in the first four years the banks saved $5.7 billion in taxes by using tax havens. Our own figures in the Bloc Québécois show that in eight years, Canadian investment in Barbados increased by 369%.

What is the government waiting for to change its tax rules that allow banks and other companies to shirk their fair share of the tax load?

[Taxation, November 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, a study released this morning by a professor from the Université du Quebec à Montreal confirms that Canada's big banks saved $10 billion in taxes over a 13-year period through 73 branches in tax havens. The Bloc Québécois has been denouncing this situation for 10 years.

How can the government accept that the provisions of the federal Income Tax Act, together with the tax convention with Barbados, allow the big banks to save billions of dollars, while ordinary citizens pay all their taxes here in Canada?

[Employment Insurance, November 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this is a joke. A mere $46 billion was diverted from the account by the government. A minor detail

In front of millions of viewers, during the leaders' debate, the Prime Minister himself made a commitment to review the 910 hour rule determining eligibility.

What is the government waiting for to meet this commitment made by the Prime Minister? He will not be able to back out because he made this commitment in front of millions of people.

[Employment Insurance, November 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General was very clear in her report yesterday on the subject of employment insurance. The only expenditures that can be charged to the employment insurance account are benefit expenditures and administrative expenses.

In light of this stark observation by the Auditor General, how can the government continue to refuse to improve the program when, again this year, another $2 billion was diverted from the account, for a total of $46 billion?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, November 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the minister is that, while he is examining suggestions, for the past 18 months, the dairy producers in Quebec have been losing the shirts off their backs because the minister refuses to understand.

I am asking him today to set a floor price for cull cows. That is not demanding anything of him, except goodwill. Why is the minister reluctant to help producers in Quebec and to accede to the request of Quebec's agriculture minister? All it takes is a little goodwill.

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, November 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec producers, and dairy producers in particular, are losing a great deal of money on their cull and are asking the federal government to cooperate with the Quebec government in setting a floor price for cull cows.

Why is the Minister of Agriculture reluctant to intervene in setting a floor price when this is a matter of interprovincial trade, which is his responsibility?

[Agriculture and Agri-Food, November 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear with the minister. Right now, a farmer can get between $100 and $200 for a cull cow. The same cow is then sold to consumers at between $800 and $1200. It is not surprising that the abattoirs have more than doubled their profits over last year.

I call on the minister to do something, which will cost him nothing, and that is to work with his counterparts from Quebec and the provinces to establish a base price for cull cows in order to save the farmers. It will cost him nothing, requiring only good faith.