Michel Gauthier

[Gasoline Prices, May 7th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry has all the authority required to demand a more thorough investigation of the gas and oil companies by the Competition Bureau. On the one hand, we have the companies and their tripled profits for refining, and on the other we have the consumers, who feel they are being taken advantage of and whom the minister refuses to protect.

I am asking the Minister of Industry why he is so lacking in courage that he cannot make use of the powers conferred upon him by the legislation to call for a more thorough investigation. The legislation allows him to do so, but he lacks the courage to use it.

[Employment Insurance, May 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, what I agree with—and the minister ought to agree with us—is that special conditions have been created by reducing the quotas. People are suffering, both those who are no longer working in the fish plants and those who are more directly involved in fishing.

The temporary measures the government took to satisfy these communities just before the last election will expire in October. I ask the minister if , at least, these measures could be extended, even though they are insufficient and the situation will be much worse by October.

[Employment Insurance, May 5th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. The surplus in the employment insurance fund is $44 billion, a huge sum, and the EI system, as it has been butchered by the federal government, does not really meet the needs of fishers from the North Shore, the Gaspé, the Magdalen Islands, and all of eastern Canada.

Instead of giving us her cold speech on the mechanics of the system, should not the minister have agreed to adjust the system with special provisions for people working in the fishery, who have been seriously affected?

[Taxation, April 30th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, clearly the federal government is not likely to go back into deficit when it is collecting too much tax money compared to its responsibilities. In spite of its mismanagement, there will always be some surplus somewhere, which can be given as handouts to the provinces. That is the reality.

I wonder if the minister would be kind enough to clearly state that regardless of who is in office in Quebec, be it the PQ or the Liberals, the federal government's answer remains, “Forget it”.

[Taxation, April 30th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the fact that it persistently denies the existence of the fiscal imbalance, in spite of the fact that it was very clearly demonstrated by the Séguin report, proves that the federal government is using this fiscal imbalance for its own purposes.

My question to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs is the following. Will the minister admit that the fiscal imbalance is serving the federal government's strategy, allowing it to interfere in areas that are not under its jurisdiction, and that its existence is purposely denied?

[Iraq, April 9th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is the one with the problem. When he does not understand that a commodore in charge of a fleet is concerned about the lack of orders in the event that he should take Iraqi prisoners, there is a problem somewhere.

Does the minister not understand that his attitude is one of ambiguity and is unacceptable in circumstances as tragic as those we are now witnessing?

[Iraq, April 9th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, with the changes that have occurred in the past few hours, a statement made by Canadian Commodore Roger Girouard, the commander of an international fleet in the Persian Gulf region, is taking on increasing importance. What he said was that he had no orders about what to do with any Iraqi dignitaries whom he might take prisoner.

Will the Minister of National Defence acknowledge that this admission that he would have to contact Ottawa to find out what to do if he takes prisoners demonstrates an unusual degree of improvisation?

[Iraq, April 1st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to get across to the defence minister—and I hope he will be somewhat receptive—that it is not asking him a hypothetical question to ask what instructions—that is straightforward—he gave soldiers the day he told them to go to war as members of other battalions. What instructions did he given them?

[Iraq, April 1st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, when there is a war, it is very likely that people will be taken prisoner.

When the Minister of National Defence ordered Canadian soldiers to go with the British and American units, when he gave them that order, what were his instructions to them in the event they were taken prisoner? Did he tell them that Canada would represent and defend them if that happened?

[Iraq, March 27th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, there are limits to what can be said here. Every day, CNN explains where the American soldiers are, what they are doing, what their objectives are, what happened during the day and what is likely to happen in the next few hours.

Our soldiers supposedly have an auxiliary role and the government is trying to tell us that if we knew the whereabouts of our soldiers, who have an auxiliary role, it would threaten the safety of the entire army.

The minister should do his job and tell Canadians where these 31 soldiers are. It is his duty to do so, before journalists tell us.