Alexandrine Latendresse

[Ethics, November 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we will certainly not be lectured by a party whose headquarters were raided by the RCMP.

The Federal Court documents do not lie. The president of RMG confirmed that his company called voters and used a script provided by the Conservatives. These calls notified voters of poll changes in ridings where there were actually no changes. Last spring, the NDP motion to give more investigative powers to Elections Canada was adopted. Since then, the Conservatives have done nothing, probably because they are too busy figuring out which Republican trick to use next time.

When will the Conservatives give the Chief Electoral Officer more powers?

[Protecting Canada's Seniors Act, November 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, who is doing an excellent job on this file.

I very much liked her speech and would like to pick up on one aspect of it that can apply to many issues the Conservatives are dealing with quite poorly, in my opinion.

Once again, we have a bill that deals with a serious issue by targeting people after the harm has already been done. There is no mention of prevention. As my exceptional colleague from London—Fanshawe said a moment ago, one of the best ways to prevent elder abuse is to help seniors stay at home as long as possible, be independent and not have to rely on anyone else. That is one of the best ways to make sure such situations do not arise.

The Conservatives took the same approach with bill C-10, that focused on punishment and added new sections to the Criminal Code. That is all well and good, but should we not spend more time talking about prevention and make it so that situations such as these do not arise in the first place?

I would appreciate my colleague's views on that.

[41st General Election, November 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, such an absurd response to a serious question shows some disturbing and tacit complicity on the part of the Conservatives.

Elections Canada has been investigating these fraudulent calls for a year and a half now. This is the worst fraud in Canada's election history, and yet no charges have been laid. If Elections Canada had more power, then perhaps this would have already been sorted out. The NDP had a motion on this subject adopted last spring, but the Conservatives are still dragging their feet.

Why are they not fulfilling their promise to give Elections Canada more investigative power?

[41st General Election, November 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives did not hesitate to throw Michael Sona to the wolves in the Guelph robocalls case. Since then, we have not heard a thing. But yesterday we learned from CBC that Andrew Prescott, a Guelph campaign worker, was identified as the individual who downloaded the voter data that was used to commit this fraud.

Can the Conservatives confirm that it was indeed Andrew Prescott who had access to this data and that they have handed over the information about this individual to Elections Canada?

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech. It is very interesting to hear the point of view of someone who has extensive knowledge of technology.

Having worked in research and development in a corporate setting, I know that the field desperately needs more support. Clearly, that is not what the Conservatives are prepared to offer.

I have a much more general question for the member about the form of today's bill. The Conservatives across the way keep telling us how important it is to do things the way they are because there is no time, because these measures must be taken as quickly as possibly, because they are minor measures and no big deal.

If these measures are so simple and obvious, and if these ideas are so good, then why not have a proper debate about them and hear from real experts? I do not see why we cannot treat each element separately. That would give all of us a better understanding of what is in this bill.

What does my colleague think the Conservatives are afraid of? Why did they introduce an omnibus bill like this?

[Official Languages, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that is not enough. Supporting bilingualism goes beyond promising bogus committees on French in businesses under federal jurisdiction, as they did a few months ago, without ever delivering the goods.

According to La Presse, the Prime Minister confirmed to the Conservative caucus that he would vote in favour of my bilingualism bill. This does not mean that his colleagues will also support francophone communities across the country.

After the uproar caused by the appointment of a unilingual judge and a unilingual Auditor General, we have every reason to wonder whether they have learned from their mistakes. Can I expect widespread support from the Conservatives for my bill or not?

[Official Languages, October 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, since the Conservatives came to power, they have had little regard for official bilingualism. A bunch of key positions in this country are currently held by unilingual individuals. The Prime Minister acknowledged his error at a meeting of the Conservative caucus. To turn things around, here is what they should do: vote in favour of my bill, which would require that the individuals appointed to 10 key officer of Parliament positions be bilingual.

Can the Conservatives publicly confirm that they will support my bill?

[Democratic Reform, October 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in response to yesterday's decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Prime Minister suggested that changes should be made to the electoral process.

One of the most important reforms was to have been made seven months ago. The Conservatives promised to give the Chief Electoral Officer more power to examine in detail the financial statements of parties. The Conservatives promised to take action within six months. That deadline passed several weeks ago.

They have introduced nothing and so the NDP is doing their job instead. Will they support our bill?

[Member for New Brunswick Southwest, October 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in his only statement since this fall session began, did my colleague from New Brunswick Southwest talk about the negative impact the Conservative changes to EI will have on the many workers in his riding? No.

Did he mention how proud he is of Ronald Rees, one of his constituents whose most recent book about New Brunswick's early roads offers a fascinating and unique look at the history of that beautiful province? Apparently, that is not good enough for the hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest. Instead, he chose to act like a parrot, reciting the nonsense concocted by the lackeys holed up in the Prime Minister's Office who have nothing better to do.

There is nothing forcing my colleague from New Brunswick Southwest to continue his gradual transformation into a docile puppet. Instead of making up stories about the NDP, he could be his own man and talk to us about his constituents and what they are doing. If his constituents do not deserve his recognition, why is he even sitting in this House?

In 2015, the people of New Brunswick Southwest can put their faith in the NDP.

[Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

In fact, it is not that we do not trust them in this case. Rather, it is because these people absolutely must be completely independent. We are talking about grievances. The person must be external and not biased about the situation, in order to be able to have an overall picture and hear both parties.

In any case, we are not proposing that no military personnel be involved. Approximately 40% would come from the military community, which would be more than sufficient to ensure that their perspective is included. However, the majority would come from outside the military.