House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was quebec.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as Bloc MP for Laval East (Québec)

Won her last election, in 1997, with 38% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act December 4th, 1997

I will therefore conclude, Mr. Speaker.

In conclusion, the Canada pension plan is one of the essential elements of the Canadian social safety net. It is therefore important to protect this public pension plan for the people who have worked all their lives and to provide for their retirement. The sustainability of the plan is also essential for future generations.

For these reasons and despite the numerous improvements that should be made to this bill, the Bloc Quebecois will support it.

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act December 4th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-2, which we have been considering for several days, proposes a reform of the Canada pension plan and the establishment of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, and it is not a moment too soon, as my colleague from Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans pointed out.

These changes had become essential in order to ensure the long term financial viability of the Canada pension plan. The amendments are justified by demographic and intergenerational equity concerns.

In the next 35 years, the percentage of people over 65 years of age will almost double, reaching 23% in 2030. When the plan was set up, there were eight contributors for every retiree. Unless something is done, by 2030, the ratio will be three workers for every retiree.

More specifically, this bill serves to increase the capitalization of the plan, improve investments and reduce administrative costs. The government needs the approval of two- thirds of the provinces representing two-thirds of the population in order to effect these changes. Consultations have given the federal government the support of eight provinces and enabled it to get on with reforming its pension plan.

As you know, Quebec is not affected by this reform, because, since 1965, it has administered its own pension plan, the Quebec pension plan. But it gave its support for the amendments proposed by the federal government. In fact, the Government of Quebec is also undertaking a series of improvements to its pension plan, through Bill 149, in order to ensure intergenerational equity.

The CPP is funded by means of obligatory contributions from employees, employers and the self-employed. All Canadian workers between the ages of 18 and 70 will be affected by this important and necessary effort since, last year, 10 million people paid into the plan. Last year as well, close to 3.5 million Canadians drew CPP benefits.

In Quebec, the situation is different because, as I mentioned earlier, the Caisse de dépôt et placement administers our plan. There are 12,882 Quebeckers receiving pension benefits from the federal government, however, and the Bloc Quebecois feels that these benefits should be adequate.

These people fall into three groups: the first consists of members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP living in Quebec; the second of individuals now living in Quebec and already drawing CPP; and, finally, individuals living in Quebec who have worked all their life in another province.

Right now, the plan is undercapitalized. To put it more simply, the plan is underfunded and will run out of money by 2015. If the federal government had not done something, the fund would have become depleted and coming generations would have paid a heavy price. It is not too late to take action.

This bill will ensure that there is a reserve of five years' worth of benefits, instead of two, meaning that the fund, which now stands at $39 billion, would have to reach $135 billion by 2007.

I feel like saying that the federal government is showing good sense in the bill we are looking at, even if it comes a bit late, as I have said. That has not always been the case in the past, for example with the employment insurance fund. Under the pretext of wanting to be prepared for the eventuality of dramatic rises in unemployment, and therefore in the number of claims for benefits, the federal government instituted employment insurance, with a fund which will reach $13 billion by the end of 1997, and $19 billion by 1998.

Although the government has given workers and employers a little break with employment insurance premiums, the employment insurance fund surplus is still indecent and, as we all know, is being used only for the government's accounting purposes. But that is another problem, and another debate.

In order to increase the funding or capitalization of the plan, the bill creates a Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, a sort of Canadian version of the Caisse de dépôt. The mandate of this new institution differs somewhat from that of the Caisse de dépôt et placement. Its mandate will be to earn the best possible rates of return. As for the Quebec fund, it also has an economic mandate we must not forget, namely to invest the money in the pension fund wisely and to use it as a tool of economic development.

It should be mentioned that, at the present time, the CPP policy takes the form of assets placed by the provinces in non-negotiable bonds. Those provinces so wishing may borrow this money at the rate of federal government bonds. As we can see, this is not a very good way to make the money of future Canadian pensioners grow.

I would like to say a few words about Quebec's Caisse de dépôt et placement in the hope that the new Canada Pension Plan Investment Board might one day take a page from its book. The Caisse de dépôt et placement manages the savings of all Quebeckers, but it should be emphasized that its mandate includes the important requirement that it serve as an economic lever, something not found in the CPP's mandate. This measure has allowed Quebec to develop and become competitive over the past 32 years. For example, the Caisse put up $16 billion to fund the James Bay project, thus helping create tens of thousands of jobs for Quebeckers.

Under the terms of its economic mandate, the Caisse de dépôt et placement must meet the financial needs of businesses as effectively as possible, invest profitably, provide support for the growth of Quebec businesses abroad, promote exports, and maximize use of the international network of financial and industrial partners.

Quebeckers are proud of their Caisse de dépôt et placement. They are leaders in the field and have supported hundreds of projects that contribute to the economic development of Quebec and the creation of jobs. The Caisse de dépôt et placement is also the largest fund manager in Canada and ranks among the top 100 in North America, investing in North American, European and Asian markets. It also has the largest real estate portfolio in Canada's commercial, residential and office sectors. This flagship of Quebec's innovation now has close to $62.4 billion in assets and has generated investment income of over $47 billion since it was first created.

It was a decision by the people of Quebec that gave the Caisse de dépôt et placement its mandate. In creating the investment board, the federal government has preferred to stick to improving the plan's performance and protecting Canadians against premium increases. That is its decision.

As we mentioned, the major changes introduced by this bill are vital if the plan is to be viable, affordable and equitable.

It should be remembered that the plan will be subject to a review by the federal government every three years and that the ministers of finance will be meeting every five years to set the contribution rates—

United Nations Mission In Haiti December 1st, 1997

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations mission in Haiti ended yesterday. The soldiers and police officers from Quebec and Canada taking part in this mission have begun to return home and will all be back by Christmas.

As we know, their mission was to maintain security and stability in Haiti and to support the Haitian police in its activities. They also provided humanitarian assistance by building schools and orphanages and by distributing medical and educational material.

The Bloc Quebecois would like to thank the soldiers and police for their efforts in democratizing Haiti. I would particularly like to draw attention to and express our gratitude for the work done in Haiti by the police officers from Laval.

While much remains to be done in this country ravaged by poverty, it is on the road to democracy. The international community must continue to provide help and support for Haiti's reconstruction efforts.

Apec November 26th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, the summit of the leaders of the 18 members of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum was held this week in Vancouver. APEC is a forum for discussions focussing on freer trade.

APEC does not include representatives of civil society or permit discussion of any controversial issue and defines itself more as an association of economies rather than countries, thus ensuring that its decisions are not subject to any control. Furthermore, since 1989, APEC has not drafted a single economic or political principle its members can claim to share.

We find it deplorable that the Canadian government has not encouraged the leaders of APEC to examine rights and freedoms and the progress of democracy.

On the other hand, the Bloc Quebecois recognizes and supports the parallel people's summit, which dealt with the social aspect of APEC countries' trade policies. It was a summit where real things were discussed.

Supply November 25th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat surprised by the answer the hon. member just gave to my colleague.

I will ask her a question along the same lines. When the hon. member says that Quebeckers absolutely want the federal government to get involved in areas of provincial jurisdiction, in areas that come under Quebec's jurisdiction, is she implying that every Quebec government in the past 30 years was wrong in making traditional claims regarding Quebec's areas of jurisdiction, including education? Is the hon. member telling us that all Quebec governments of the past 30 years were wrong?

Anti-Personnel Mines Convention Implementation Act November 24th, 1997

Mr Speaker, I would like to say right off that I rise to speak with great interest on Bill C-22, which concerns the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction.

I do so as well with considerable compassion for those, often innocent individuals, whom death has claimed or whose quality of life has been significantly reduced through the explosion of a mine. There is another important element to this too, that of de-mining and the effort expended by the international community in this regard.

One fact remains, and it represents an important step. In a few days, in Ottawa, we will witness the signing of the convention prohibiting anti-personnel mines. Unfortunately, this treaty will not resolve the problem once and for all, because certain major countries will not be signatories. It will, however, help to limit the terrible effects. The Bloc Quebecois recognizes the leadership of the Government of Canada and its Minister of Foreign Affairs in this matter along with the efforts of the public and the NGOs.

I will now give some background on anti-personnel mines. These mines are cheap weapons. Each costs somewhere between US$3 and US$50 and has as its sole purpose the mutilation of the enemy. Despite its low purchase cost, this is a pernicious weapon that continues its destruction long beyond the end of wars and conflicts, as we will see.

Inexpensive, easily produced and effective, these weapons were used in a good many conflicts. It will be recalled that the war between India and Pakistan, the war between Iraq and Iran, the Gulf War and the domestic conflicts in Cambodia and Angola demonstrated the destructive power of anti-personnel mines. First used as defensive weapons in international conflicts, they formed a protective barrier essentially designed to slow enemy progress. That is what mine fields were used for originally.

However, the use of such mines was expanded. Today they are used in domestic conflicts and in civil wars, they are used by police forces as well as by insurgent, guerrilla and paramilitary groups.

The saddest thing about all this is that some governments use these mines against their own population. In Kurdistan, the Iraqi government is said to have mined the fields of several villages, to terrorize the villagers into submission. Anti-personnel mines thus become tools to control population movements and to create fear within the population, the main goal being, sadly, to kill and maim civilians.

As we can see, the use of anti-personnel mines has many very serious consequences. And as if the situation were not terrifying enough as it is, civilians are now faced with this problem, as anti-personnel create war-like conditions in peacetime.

Anti-personnel mines make no discrimination between men, women and children, innocent victims of cruel wars taking place in their country. Those mines that are left behind cause human tragedies of untold sadness. Most of the time, mine victims who are not killed lose a limb. However, let us remember that countries having to deal with anti-personnel mines are almost all developing countries, poor countries that cannot provide adequate care to the injured because of a lack of human and financial resources. These heavily handicapped victims are unable to participate in the local economy, to work to provide for their families.

And what about the economic tragedies caused by anti-personnel mines? In some countries, farmers are unable to cultivate their lands or to put their cattle out to pasture because their fields are mine-ridden. We have seen previously self-sufficient farming areas that now depend on external food aid. For example, it is estimated that in some areas of Angola anti-personnel mines have reduced food production by more than 25%.

Furthermore, it is quite often impossible to deliver food, because truck drivers will not venture out on roads that are strewn with mines. At the same time, besides causing terror, mines prevent post-war reconstruction by interfering with the work of humanitarian organizations and peacekeeping forces.

However, if there is something horrifying and unacceptable when it comes to anti-personnel mines, it is the physical and psychological harm done to the children who are the victims of these barbaric weapons. The images of innocent children horribly burned by napalm caused universal consternation. The effects of anti-personnel mines are every bit as devastating.

For this reason, and it is not the only one, as we have seen, governments that have signed this convention must pursue their persuasive efforts with non-signatory governments. As I said earlier, however, the problems caused by anti-personnel mines will not disappear overnight with the signing of this convention. Their impact will be greatly diminished, it is true. The issue of mine clearing will, however, remain intact.

Worse yet, for every mine removed from the ground, 20 new mines are being laid at the present time. At this rate, it is estimated that it would take 1,100 years and over $30 billion to completely eliminate the anti-personnel mines now scattered throughout the world.

It is therefore imperative that mine clearing be approached effectively and with tools as modern as those used to lay them. We know, however, that mine clearing is an expensive operation. In 1994, the UN spent $70 million US to clear fewer than 100,000 mines. As a matter of fact, it costs between $300 and $1,000 to remove a single mine.

The international community can claim that it does not have the resources necessary to remove all mines. The fact is, however, that, in the 1980s, exports of heavy and of light arms to third world countries represented 70% of the world trade of rich countries. There is an obvious international responsibility here with respect to countries that have become poor to the advantage of rich countries and arms lobbies.

But, despite a large drop in heavy arms exports to developing countries, we have been seeing a worrisome proliferation of light arms in the 1990s. An analysis reveals, and I quote “From 1980 to 1995, ten African nations with a total population of 155 million were torn apart by civil wars. Between 3.8 and 6.9 million people, or 2.5 to 4.5% of the population of these ten countries, died, almost all of them killed by light weapons. It seems that the leaders of western nations are increasingly preoccupied by arms stockpiling in third world trouble spots, in the very areas to which they are being called to send ceasefire monitoring groups. An awareness seems to be emerging from this fundamental contradiction: on the one hand, rich nations are trying to end conflicts while, on the other, they are continuing to supply arms to belligerent nations”. History is repeating itself.

Here again, action must be taken and solutions do exist. This is why the successful implementation of the Anti-Personnel Mines Convention is very encouraging and gives us hope that a multilateral agreement on light weapons can be reached.

In conclusion, the Bloc Quebecois reaffirms its support to Bill C-22. The Ottawa process has become essential. However, as I said previously, we still have a long way to go. At first, our purpose was to deal with tanks and other armoured vehicles, but now we want to protect the civilians whose lives are threatened by these anti-personnel mines, the people who have suffered the most from war.

The signing of the Anti-Personnel Mines Convention, next December 3, will hopefully reduce the number of these human tragedies. However, de-mining remains a sensitive issue that the world community has yet to address seriously.

That is the price we have to pay to give some meaning to the words justice and fairness. It is also the price we have to pay for peace and security.

African Industrialization Day November 20th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, we are celebrating today African industrialization day, as proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly.

In this resolution, the international community commits itself to supporting Africa's efforts to achieve faster growth and sustainable human development.

There is still much to be done to eliminate poverty, to promote democracy, to strenghten civil society, to enhance the status of women, to find solutions to the debt problem and to encourage the development of the African economy.

Canada's efforts in these areas leave much to be desired. Canada's contribution to poor countries over the next several years will fall below 0.2% of GNP. In 1998, Canadian international assistance will be at its lowest level since the 1960s.

The Bloc Quebecois strongly disagrees with Canada's withdrawal from poor countries and especially from Africa. We urge the government to respect its commitment to earmark 0.7% of its GNP for official development assistance.

Egypt November 18th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Yesterday's attack in Egypt sent shock waves around the world. The safety of tourists and foreign travellers is at risk throughout the country.

Could the minister tell us what measures he has put in place to guarantee the physical safety of Canadians currently in Egypt?

St-François-De-Sales Parish Church November 3rd, 1997

Mr. Speaker, this year we are celebrating the 150th anniversary of the building of the oldest church in Laval, the church of the parish of St-François-de-Sales.

This magnificent example of Laval's heritage is located in the riding of Laval East. Through its relics and architecture, it stands as a tribute to the talents, creativity and aesthetic sense of Quebec craftsmen and artists.

The church of St-François-de-Sales is also a symbol of the sense of belonging to a community, to values of faith, sharing, solidarity and openness to one another. It is a tangible sign of the ties woven over time by its parish community, to whom I wish to pay tribute today.

It is also, without a doubt, a reflection of our culture and history, and one of the symbols of the enduring nature of the people of Quebec.

Child Labour October 29th, 1997

Mr. Speaker, a meeting is being held this week in Oslo, where ministers, and leaders of labour organizations and NGOs are discussing the serious problem of child labour.

Representatives of more than 40 countries will be trying to find solutions to the most serious forms of child labour: slavery, prostitution and unsafe work. The Bloc Quebecois salutes and fully supports this endeavour.

The Bloc Quebecois is aware that forced child labour is primarily the consequence of poverty and underdevelopment. The drastic cuts to government aid to development imposed by the Liberal government are not likely to lead to any improvement in this situation.

We call upon the government to act promptly to follow up on the report by the Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade on the exploitation of child labour and to conclude development pacts to eliminate what we consider a blot on the record of humanity.