André Bellavance

[Committees of the House, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the member just spoke about the lack of co-operation between the federal government and provincial governments, especially the Government of Quebec, and the famous 30-second $95,000 ads about a job training program that does not even exist, which are being run during the current playoffs.

There is a disconnect between reality and the government's line that it is willing to work with the provinces and Quebec in order to put programs in place. We have come to the conclusion that the federal government is interfering once again in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction, because labour training is the responsibility of Quebec and the provinces.

How is it logical for the government to claim that it is putting in place a program even though Quebec does not want it? Quebec wants support and it wants the funding that goes with the program, which is paid for by our taxes, but it does not want the federal government to impose conditions on job training, which is a provincial area of jurisdiction.

[Passport Canada, May 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the facts contradict the parliamentary secretary. A meeting was held yesterday for employees of the Jonquière passport office. The reorganization and possible closure of their office was on the agenda. That is a far cry from the promised improvement that the parliamentary secretary spoke about.

I imagine that employees at the Quebec City, Montreal and Gatineau offices were told the same thing. Publicly, the government talks about increasing the number of passport offices, but in its internal memorandum, it talks about administrative savings, attrition and job cuts. Canadians and employees are entitled to the truth.

Does the government plan on closing the Jonquière, Quebec City, Montreal and Gatineau passport offices?

[Passport Canada, May 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois has obtained a copy of an internal memorandum in which the government informs Passport Canada employees that Citizenship and Immigration Canada and Service Canada will be responsible for issuing passports effective July 2. More and more responsibilities are being handed over to Service Canada, which, because of the cuts, is already unable to adequately meet the needs of the unemployed and seniors, and which, in some cases, only provides a voice mail message as support.

How can the government ensure that access to passport services and the quality of those services will be maintained if it gives Service Canada more work to do?

[“MP for a Day” Competition, May 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to welcome Fabien Lavallée-Imhof to Parliament Hill today. He is the winner of the seventh “MP for a Day” competition, which I organize with Jean-François Léonard, a political science and geography teacher at the CEGEP in Victoriaville.

This non-partisan competition helps young people learn about the realities of life as a parliamentarian, while demystifying what a politician does and familiarizing them with how our democracy works.

Fabien will have an opportunity to meet with ministers, senators and members from all parties. He will see us in action, on and off camera. I am sure it will be an unforgettable experience.

I would also like to congratulate Virginie Parent and Paola Gonzales, who finished second and third in the competition, and to thank the partners who enabled us to give scholarships to the winners: the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste du Centre-du-Québec, the Équipe Sévégny-Baril, the UPA Centre-du-Québec and the Association générale des étudiants et étudiantes du cégep de Victoriaville.

[Intergovernmental Relations, May 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage has decided to meddle in history lessons in Quebec. This flagrant intrusion in a jurisdiction that belongs exclusively to Quebec is right in line with the Conservatives' desire to impose new Canadian symbols—military ones, especially—even if it means rewriting history. This move is even more ironic, since the federal government refuses to shed light on the repatriation of the Constitution, a pivotal moment in Quebec's history.

How can the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages justify this interference into teaching history when his boss, the Prime Minister, refuses even to speak to the Premier of Quebec about the 1982 repatriation of the Constitution?

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, May 2nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the member just reproached her for asking a question about something he failed to discuss.

I see that the two government speakers who spoke one after another were very careful to talk only about certain budget measures in Bill C-60, the budget implementation bill.

However, they avoid talking about any measures that are not budget measures and that are in the budget, particularly when it comes to the government's intention to interfere in crown corporations, CBC in particular.

Since the member did not talk about this in his speech, could he elaborate on what the government is planning to do exactly?

Why does the government want to meddle in negotiations at Canada Post, VIA Rail and CBC? Does it want to take over CBC?

It already has control over Sun News Network. What more does it want? Does it want CBC as well?

I would not have a problem if the government wanted to discuss Don Cherry's contract, but I do have a problem when it wants to meddle in CBC's broadcasting and other operations.

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, May 2nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned that Bill C-60 contains some poison pills, which suggests to us in the Bloc Québécois that a bill does not have to be huge in order to be filled with poison pills.

In particular, my colleague mentioned the government's interference in crown corporations. We had a taste of this—or should I say a bad aftertaste of this—during the most recent labour dispute, the lockout at Canada Post. There are other poison pills, and I would like my colleague to comment on one of them, namely the contentious Canadian Securities Transition Office. The government said that that office was supposed to cease its operations on July 12, 2013. However, under Bill C-60, that office will remain in place.

The Quebec National Assembly has adopted some unanimous motions, whether under the former Liberal government, the current PQ government or any other party present in the National Assembly. Other provinces have also expressed their displeasure at the Minister of Finance's plans to impose a Canada-wide securities regulator in Quebec and other provinces.

I would like to hear what my colleague's position and that of his party are regarding this direct attack by the Conservative government on Quebec's values.

[Ethics, April 30th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, after the political and legal double dealing involved in repatriating the Constitution, now we have a political organizer telling the Charbonneau commission that, during the 1995 referendum campaign, the "no" side received thousands of dollars in illegal funding—thousands of dollars that were used to get around Quebec’s public consultations legislation and to make undeclared expenditures. Even excluding the love-in involving Ottawa, the report commissioned by Quebec’s chief electoral officer mentions more than half a million dollars in unexplained funding.

Will the Prime Minister tell us here in the House where the hundreds of thousands of dollars came from to pay for the love-in?

[Employment Insurance, April 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, last February, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development refused to acknowledge the flaws in her employment insurance reform and simply said, “We're going to monitor the progress of the program and if there is a need for changes, we will make adjustments.”

Yet each time workers and employers have protested—in Sherbrooke, Rimouski, Saguenay, Trois-Rivières, Thetford Mines or elsewhere—no Conservative MP has shown up to take note of the devastating effects this reform is having on Quebec communities.

Will the minister attend tomorrow's protest in Montreal, or will she realize that her reform is in need of major, not minor, adjustments?

[Employment, April 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture has remained silent since the temporary foreign worker program made headlines because banks and other companies misused the program with the government's consent by replacing their employees with foreign workers earning lower wages.

Because of this misuse of the program, some people are calling for it to be overhauled or abolished outright, without any consideration for those who, like Quebec's farming enterprises, use it properly.

Will the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food wake up and finally stand up for Quebec's farming enterprises, for which this labour force is vital?