House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2006, with 55% of the vote.
Government Contracts June 13th, 2003
Not only are these requests numerous, they also get lost in the department. And the minister tells us he does not see responses to ATIP requests before they go out. Yet, when it comes to requests from the Bloc Quebecois, on which we are still awaiting responses, the department tells us the minister's office needs to see them first.
Contradictions? Cover up? Mistakes? A lot for just one minister. Who is telling the truth? Who is responsible?
Government Contracts June 13th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Public Works and Government Services said he did not see what the problem was concerning the access to information request from the La Presse reporter who was trying to get some details on the amounts of contracts awarded to TNC Médiacom. The minister's defence was that he did not even see the access to information requests.
How can the Minister of Public Works and Government Services explain that all the difficulties in his department—regardless of who the minister is—are, by sheer chance, related to the sponsorship program and, by sheer chance, always benefit cronies of the regime?
Amateur Sport June 11th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport can say what he likes, but one thing is clear: in amateur sport in Canada, francophones are being treated like second-class citizens. The commissioner confirms this, and the athletes are tired of it.
What is he going to do to rectify this immediately?
Amateur Sport June 11th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, in June 1999, I personally filed a complaint to speak out against the treatment of French-speaking amateur athletes. Again today, the Commissioner of Official Languages is harsh in her condemnation of the excessive slowness and the lack of a consistent approach in implementing the recommendations she made in 2000.
How can the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport claim that he is doing his job when the commissioner is saying today that Sport Canada is still a long way from reaching the podium and that, ultimately, English is the language spoken when it comes to sports in Canada?
Société Radio-Canada June 9th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, although there will be a reception tonight to celebrate the new Physical Activity and Sport Act, Radio-Canada is preparing to pull the plug on the only French-language sports report, depriving not only francophones but also amateur athletes of an essential forum for promotion and increased visibility.
How can this government reconcile, on the one hand, adopting measures to promote participation and excellence in sports with the fact that, on the other, Radio-Canada is cutting the means for promotion and broadcasting?
Transport 2000 June 6th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, in addition to the fact that what the minister is saying is incorrect, the Canadian Urban Transit Association has received the mandate from the federal government to put together a Canadian campaign to promote Clean Air Day with public funds. However, the organization's web site provides information on this event only in English.
How can the federal government explain that a Canadian campaign, with a registered trademark and funding from this same government, is providing the public with services solely in English?
Transport 2000 June 6th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, every year since 1996, Transport 2000 Québec has organized the awareness campaign for Clean Air Day, held on June 4. Despite a three-year agreement, however, Environment Canada last year appropriated the official Clean Air Day trademark and gave the Canadian Urban Transit Association the mandate, along with $250,000 in funding.
Why is Environment Canada not respecting its signature and why is it withdrawing funding from Transport 2000 Québec, although it congratulated this organization in the summer of 2000 for its exemplary contribution to public awareness?
Statutory Instruments Act June 4th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, I welcome this opportunity to speak to Bill C-205, which is specifically designed to strengthen parliamentary control.
I take this opportunity to thank my colleague from Surrey Central for bringing this important question to the House for debate.
As a member of the Standing Joint Committee on Scrutiny of Regulations, I obviously want, and it is my duty, to ensure that our rules are efficient and respectful of democracy.
It is important to point out that the purpose of the bill before us today is to provide a legislative basis for the disallowance procedure for statutory instruments by enshrining it in the Statutory Instruments Act. The current procedure set out in the Standing Orders of the House considerably limits our responsibility as parliamentarians to efficiently oversee delegated legislation.
Under Bill C-205, the disallowance procedure will now apply to all statutory instruments, which seems to me to be very important, given that it is currently limited to regulations made by the governor in council or by a minister of the Crown.
Many regulatory organizations, such as the CRTC or the Canadian Transportation Agency, escape our purview. If we want to extend the control we have over delegated legislation to all statutory instruments, it is imperative that it be provided for in an act, in addition to the Standing Orders of the House; all the more reason to pass this bill.
Many have been hesitant to have such organizations come under the control of Parliament, because of potential interference in organizations which are operating at arm's length to some extent. I do not think that it will prevent them from managing their affairs appropriately and in accordance with their mandates. On the contrary, I think that these organizations should be accountable, since they are publicly funded.
Our committee already reviews the bylaws of these organizations. It would therefore only make sense that we could repeal them. However, these organizations must not forget that they have regulatory power only because it was delegated to them by Parliament. We must never lose sight of the fact that the function of Parliament is to ensure the proper use of public funds and to legislate. It is normal, indeed essential, that Parliament have the right to oversee the use made of this delegated power and hold these organizations to account.
We vote on bills in the House, but we delegate the responsibility for regulating several aspects of these bills. These are aspects that can have a major impact on our constituents. Regulations can mean life or death for projects, individual rights or the economic survival of businesses.
When we consider the fact that the lion's share of the law that governs our society is contained in regulations, and not in the acts themselves, it becomes critical to ensure that regulatory power, this delegated power, is exercised in accordance with the purposes for which it was delegated and that the intent of the legislator has indeed been respected.
One specific aspect of this bill that caught my attention is the fact that after having voted in support of a resolution in the House, the text will be repealed within 30 days, whereas under existing procedure, it is simply an order of the House calling on the government to repeal the text in question.
The problem is that the government has discretionary power to decide when it will repeal a regulation and also to decide whether or not it will repeal it. There is no legal way of punishing the government for violating an order of the House.
Another aspect that also deserves our attention is the fact that prior to using a disallowance procedure, there are all kinds of exchanges, letters and even promises made by the government before it amends the regulation in question.
Years can go by from the moment a regulation is deemed to contradict the spirit of the legislation and the time the government finally decides to amend it.
The Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Regulations, which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage referred to during a previous debate, is a good example to illustrate that the government is not always quick to respond.
When the Standing Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations tabled a report recommending that certain articles of the regulations be repealed, more than seven full years had gone by from the time of the initial discussions with the government on the matter. That means that during this time, the government or the department or the organization continues to enforce the regulation illegally, which is an abuse of power. That is extremely dangerous in terms of democracy.
I believe that respect for our democratic institutions is extremely important. As it happens, I had the honour of being a guest speaker at the seminar on Parliament in the 21st century. I have also taken part in other events and published articles on democratic institutions and the importance of making changes that contribute to increasing the public's confidence in and satisfaction with their representatives.
One aspect that seems very serious and may have negative consequences for our democracy is the excessive concentration of power in the hands of executives. For instance, the governor in council and cabinet ministers have been given impressive regulatory power. But they hold this power directly from Parliament itself, and because of this, they must be accountable for the way they exercise this power. If the executive exercises its powers without respecting the spirit and the letter of enabling legislation, Parliament should have a legal means of intervening, and that is precisely the purpose of the bill before us.
Our system and our rules must be flexible enough to permit members to play their role to the fullest and to preserve in this place the rights and freedoms of those we represent. My fundamental belief is that members should have much more power within Parliament.
That brings us back to the very essence of our role as parliamentarians. We must never lose sight of our prerogatives, especially that of creating legislation. Of course, this is a complex task, and the very technical aspects of regulations and many other considerations make it necessary for us to delegate some of this power. But make no mistake, the supremacy of Parliament remains, as does our duty as parliamentarians to ensure it is respected.
Based on this principle, I fail to see why anyone would deprive us of the fundamental right to maintain control over this delegated legislation. No doubt Bill C-205 will be one step closer to the preservation of our parliamentary supremacy. The more democratic this control, the healthier our democracy will be.
We are pleased to give our support to Bill C-205.
Société Radio-Canada June 4th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage claimed last year that Radio-Canada, which was preparing to stop broadcasting Hockey Night in Canada in French, had to respect the rights of francophone minorities.
This year, Radio-Canada will pull the plug on its nightly sports report, depriving francophones without cable of the only daily amateur sports forum currently on public television. While the English network runs six hours of sports per week, the French network runs only two.
Can the minister tell us if she approves of Radio-Canada's decision. Is it normal, in her opinion, that francophones are not entitled to the same service as anglophones?
Better Speech and Hearing Month May 27th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, each May, I make a point of finding a special way to celebrate Better Speech and Hearing Month.
This year, I had the pleasure of meeting various organizations and learning about ongoing initiatives, particularly at St- Jude school in my riding, where the oral method is taught to deaf children, among other things.
However, despite the remarkable work of the school staff, the problem remains, since these children cannot hear. Not all television programs are close captioned, so that they may read what we hear.
I also met with people from CRIM and the Regroupement québécois pour le sous-titrage, which are collaborating on a research project to develop a real-time captioning system using voice recognition technology.
Although this cutting edge technology will soon be available, the key is obviously financing. Therefore, I invite all members, as well as the government, to remember the House's unanimous commitment to provide the necessary tools to ensure the full integration of the deaf and hard of hearing in our society.
We must turn our words into actions..