Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was justice.

Last in Parliament November 2005, as Liberal MP for Ahuntsic (Québec)

Lost her last election, in 2008, with 39% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Supply April 23rd, 1996

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the opposition member on introducing this motion in the House. I would point out, as did my colleague, that it was the member for Don Valley North who initially introduced this motion in the House of Commons.

Secondly, I would perhaps echo my colleague's question and comments. It is all very well to read the comments by the mayor of Montreal in the papers, but there is no evidence. I would like the hon. opposition member to provide written or verbal proof that the minister or a representative of the Canadian government said we were opposed to a monument being erected.

There is no proof, it was only the mayor's word. It is the mayor of Montreal, Mr. Bourque, who is responsible for this matter. He must assume his responsibilities and keep his word to the Armenian community and to others, because the monument is not just for the Armenian genocide, but for all crimes against humanity. We were 100 per cent in favour of the idea, and there is no evidence to the contrary. I would prefer people did not invent stories and did not attribute remarks to someone, if they are not what the person said in this House.

I would also like to ask the opposition member what led him to raise this motion in the House at this specific point in time.

Supply April 23rd, 1996

The mayor's comments or the minister's comments?

Terrorism April 22nd, 1996

Mr. Speaker, the harsh realities of terrorism were once again brought home last week when a Canadian was among the 18 tourists who were massacred by a gunman outside their hotel in Cairo.

This tragic event reminds us that no one is safe from terrorist acts. Canada must continue to play a major role in the promotion of peace and to voice its opposition to terrorist acts.

I wish to express my deepest condolences to the family and relatives of Nick Petrou from London, Ontario as well as to the Greek government and the families of the 17 Greek citizens who were also among the victims of this tragic incident.

Canadians will mourn the loss of these innocent victims. Terrorism in any form must be condemned and punished.

The Budget April 15th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, the opposition keeps attacking the budget put forth by our government by using intimidation

regarding the culture preservation issue. As I said before, as did several other speakers, the budget has put in place measures to ensure that funds are available to preserve our culture as weknow it.

The fact remains that culture-perhaps the opposition will disagree-is something that evolves. There is no such thing as an unchanging culture. It grows and gets better over time.

Moving to other budget issues raised by the hon. member, the preservation of our social programs and the sacrifices that had to be made in the system we have enjoyed in Canada, we can be thankful for the measures that we have taken as a government to ensure that sufficient funding will be available to continue preserving the French language across Canada and preserving French language programming across Canada. The survival of the French-Canadian language and culture in Canada is guaranteed through the measures put forward in this House by the Minister of Finance to ensure that funds will be available.

The Budget April 15th, 1996

Blackmail yourself, Madam. Let me speak.

The Budget April 15th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, what our friend opposite said about protecting culture is most interesting. A question comes to mind however: What culture is that? The Canadian culture, which includes the Quebec culture? Or are all cultures lumped into one?

I think the best way to protect a culture, a language or a people, as our friends opposite would say, is through the Canadian government, the federal government, as opposed to the provincial level of government. The measures we have adopted in this budget are but one way of ensuring that a typically Canadian culture is preserved, so to speak.

Canadians Of Greek Origin March 26th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was an important day for Canadians of Greek origin.

The first reason is that the Liberal candidates they voted for in the byelections were all elected. I want to congratulate my new colleagues to this House.

The second reason is that they celebrated the 175th anniversary of the independence of the Hellenic republic. On that day in 1821, the Greeks declared their independence from nearly 400 years of Ottoman rule. The struggle for independence and democracy put forth by the Greeks of that time will forever be remembered by their descendants no matter where they are in the world.

Today on Parliament Hill we will celebrate this special day with Canadians of Greek origin from across Canada. I wish to take this opportunity to welcome them to Ottawa and to offer them my best wishes. I ask all my colleagues to attend if they can tonight.

ZHTO H ELLAS

ZHTO O KANADAS

Racism March 20th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the International Day for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. It is a day for Canadians to reflect on the harm racism causes in our communities and to think of what we can do to make Canada a more tolerant society.

At this time last year, I really believed we had made progress in this area. However, the racist remarks and accusations made by the

Bloc and the PQ during the referendum, and especially those uttered by the former premier of Quebec, have only increased racial tensions in Quebec. Worse yet, the new premier of Quebec never distanced himself from his predecessor's racist comments.

Part of the solution is admitting that you have done something wrong. By refusing to apologize for their behaviour the Bloc and the PQ are saying that it is okay to make remarks like this and that people will eventually forget anyway. I have not forgotten and I am still waiting for an apology.

Supply March 19th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time.

In his budget speech, the federal Minister of Finance clearly expressed his intention on the business tax system. He said that a technical committee would take a comprehensive look at the business tax system guided by three main objectives: to promote jobs and growth, simplify the system and make the system fairer.

The technical committee examining the business tax system will look at corporate income tax and tax paid from commercial activity revenues and will evaluate the level and make-up of these taxes. This measure, also found in the budget, is neither spontaneous nor improvised. In fact the government, and this is something the opposition often forgets, set up a process for consultation and co-operation as part of the last two budgets. This is not the first time, and in fact each time we consult Canadians from one end of the country to the other.

These unprecedented public consultations have encouraged Canadians of all walks to debate the economic and financial problems facing the country as a whole.

On January 1, 1994, for the first time in the country, the House of Commons as a whole met to prepare the budget. In 1995, co-operative efforts to prepare the budget were on an even larger scale.

On October 17, 1995, the Minister of Finance made public a document entitled "New Framework for Economic Policy", which outlined a broad job creation strategy.

As for the 1996 budget, the co-operative effort was still greater in that the Standing Committee on Finance and the minister took more time to listen to views and recommendations on approaches taken to improve the financial situation. Canadians also feel that the Liberal government listens to them in order to achieve the economic, fiscal and financial objectives that have been set.

Although, from the time of its election, the opposition was in agreement on the urgency of tax reform, it nevertheless made a number of proposals. Until now, the Bloc proposals have precluded the achievement of the two objectives essential to any tax reform, namely: that government should be able to collect the taxes it needs to function and that economic development should be encouraged.

Bloc members often harp on loopholes, as do other parties, and claims of overly generous corporate tax regimes, as if these were the only reason for the deficit. They have no conception of how to use the tax system in a balanced and judicial way to collect revenues and promote economic development.

Let us look at the response to the budget measure reducing the labour sponsored venture capital corporation, the LSVCC tax credit. The LSVCC has more than three year's worth of capital to invest. However, the Bloc wants that credit in place, I guess to ensure that high income Canadians do not miss the beneficial tax break.

In the minority report on the finance committee's prebudget consultations, the BQ recommended a complete review of the tax system be undertaken. Apparently it is not satisfied even when the government agrees with it as we have in this case. The Bloc went on to criticize Canadian businesses that use loss carry forwards which allow businesses to balance their tax loads over good and bad years. The Bloc wants this eliminated and replaced with a minimum corporate tax on small business. This would not create jobs, just the opposite. The Bloc clearly still does not get it: Canadians want jobs and its recommendations would not create a single one.

Let us not forget what the Quebec minister of finance said recently in a speech. I do not have the exact quote but he said that Quebec will be a tax haven after separation. I would like to have hon. members tell me exactly what the minister of finance of Quebec meant by a tax haven.

Later in the minority report under the heading, Recommendations for an Effective Attack on Unemployment, Bloc members tell the federal government to get out of regional development and tourism altogether and transfer more tax points which they have elsewhere claimed are worthless to the provinces.

None of these measures would create a single job either in Quebec or elsewhere. Let us not forget it does not fit in the ultimate scheme of Bloc members because if we create jobs, the Canadian federation works. That is exactly what they do not want. They do not want it to work. Their ultimate aim is the breakup of this country, a separation.

The government, the provinces and the private sector are working together constructively on the Canadian Tourism Commission, an initiative that has been praised as both effective and harmonious by all participants. Nobody on the commission would support the Bloc's contention that the federal government should abandon its initiative.

The most astonishing thing of all in the Bloc's arguments is their claim that the government is not acting with complete transparency. On the one hand, they criticize the fact that the technical committee set up by the Minister of Finance is composed of members who are taxation experts, whom they describe as judge and judged, when the whole process is public, from the preparation of the budget down to the discussion concerning the taxation review, as mentioned by the Minister of Finance during question period last Monday, and I quote:

Any discussion concerning the taxation review will certainly be public, because the objective of that committee is really to prepare a background document that will be used for consultation, undoubtedly by parliamentarians, including members of the finance committee with his colleague.

Any government turns to experts when looking at more specific questions. Contractors are then engaged from outside the government without calls for tender.

Do not forget that the Government of Quebec also called on experts recently during the Quebec referendum. And do not forget the billions of dollars spent by the Quebec government for the very purpose of consulting the experts, friendly experts of course.

I would like to finish by saying that once again-

The Budget March 14th, 1996

Mr. Speaker, as we saw last week, the numerous reactions to the budget tabled by our Minister of Finance were, for the most part, enthusiastic. Among the positive reactions our government's third budget raised, allow me to quote from one by the Quebec minister responsible for industry, commerce, science and technology.

In a press release issued this past Friday, Rita Dionne-Marsolais spoke of her positive reaction to the creation of Technology

Partnerships Canada, to replace DIPP, which the federal government has been gradually phasing out in the past few years.

We are glad to learn that, at last, the PQ government's ministers are setting aside the constitutional disputes and giving the Liberal government's actions in the area of research and development their proper due.