André Bellavance

[Elliot Tardif, March 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, today a funeral is being held for Elliot Tardif, a young boy who suffered from a rare disease and whose struggle led to the creation of a foundation called Les Amis d'Elliot. The foundation's mission is to help sick children in the Bois-Francs-Érable region by supporting organizations that provide physical, mental and social health services to children.

Since its creation, the foundation has raised and distributed over $800,000 in the community, with significant donations to J.-P.-H. Massicotte school, Suzor-Côté CLSC, Centre de stimulation L'Envol, Maison de répit L'Amis-Temps, and Centre de réadaptation InterVal, just to name a few.

Over the years, several local celebrities have been involved in fundraising campaigns to help improve children's quality of life and give their parents a bit of respite and support.

I wish to offer my sincere condolences to Karine and Jérôme, Elliot's parents, and to Samy, his little brother. Their love and courage are a true source of inspiration. I hope they know that their little champion's short time with us has left an invaluable legacy that will go on to help many other sick children.

Thank you, Elliot.

[Agriculture, March 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, although we have reached the last stretch of the free trade negotiations with the European Union, now the United Kingdom is lining up behind France to take its turn to call for a weaker supply management system in order to boost its own dairy product exports. If the United Kingdom has any hope of making any gains, it is because the Conservative government left supply management on the table and did not completely close the door to making concessions. Quebec is clear on this: supply management has to remain intact.

Does the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food intend to support the will of Quebec and supply-managed producers by respecting the Bloc Québécois motion adopted unanimously by this House in November 2005?

[Protecting Air Service Act, March 14th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, the Bloc Québécois agrees and is voting against.

[Protecting Air Service Act, March 13th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, in 2008, this Conservative government did not even recognize the looming economic crisis. The Americans were grappling with an economic crisis, but we were supposedly protected. Today, the government is claiming that the slightest pressure, the slightest demand could upset Canada's entire economy. That is what the government is saying now in 2012, but the people are too smart to believe that. They know that this government is out to bust unions and take away the right to make demands and negotiate. That right is enshrined in the Constitution. This government is sending a very clear message to the people and to federally regulated companies: there is no need to negotiate with employees or to make concessions, because the government will always be there, taking aim at flies with its sledgehammer, ready to impose special legislation. Companies have nothing to worry about because the employees are the ones who will always have the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads.

That is what happened with Canada Post. There were a few pressure tactics, starting with rotating strikes. The government said that the economy would be hurt by the rotating strikes, but the whole point of the strikes was to avoid hurting the economy or the people. Service was interrupted briefly, then resumed, to be followed by a service interruption in another region. That was what employees did to avoid undue harm to the people, because they knew that they had the right to make demands and employ certain pressure tactics.

The government stopped everything by imposing special legislation. It even told Canada Post Corporation ahead of time that there would be special legislation, which did encourage it to negotiate with its employees. It did the same thing with Air Canada. Already back in June, the minister hinted at the possibility of imposing special legislation. And now they are saying that negotiations are at an impasse, that a lockout or strike is possible. The idea of asking the Canadian Industrial Relations Board for its opinion was not bad at the time, but the minister did not even wait for that opinion. Why bother having a Canadian Industrial Relations Board? It serves absolutely no purpose these days. There is not really any point to anything, with this government. All this government is doing is proving that it rules with an iron fist.

No one has any rights anymore, either in Canada or Quebec. For this government, it is “my way or no way”. Employers understand this. They understand that it is no longer a question of making concessions or bargaining, because the government will simply impose special legislation and even some conditions. In the case of Canada Post, the government offered lower wages than Canada Post Corporation had offered its employees. Air Canada is about to suffer the same fate. Its employees have been agreeing to concessions for the past 12 years. They have had no salary increases and some have seen their pensions decrease. This government has no heart. It said it would impose conditions, thinking that the people would go along with that.

Since winning a majority, the government seems to think it was given a blank cheque to do what ever it wants, when it wants, and to impose the laws it wants. Canadians are beginning to realize that what is going on is unacceptable. There are protests everywhere. The people are going to demonstrate in the streets and this government will suffer the consequences. But for now, unfortunately, workers are the ones being penalized by the situation.

We will still be here. I am asking the minister to do the right thing, to promote negotiation and not impose conditions and closure on bargaining. It is one thing to impose closure in Parliament; we can take it even though it is unacceptable and we represent the public. However, these workers have rights. That means nothing. This government needs to adjust its attitude.

[Protecting Air Service Act, March 13th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it was said earlier, and ever since the dispute with Canada Post we have come to realize, that workers no longer have the right to negotiate, plain and simple.

In her speech, the hon. member mentioned that the minister dealt with the Canadian Industrial Relations Board. The CIRB serves no purpose anymore either. I want to have the hon. member's opinion on the following: it looks as though workers will no longer have the right to negotiate or even make a simple claim or use pressure tactics.

What type of government are we dealing with now that it has taken away all the rights of the public and workers who are simply exercising their constitutional rights? We now have a Conservative majority government that is in the process of changing all the rules.

[Air Service Operations Legislation, March 13th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, with this government and its time allocation motions, we as parliamentarians are starting to become used to being knocked around and to our rights and privileges not being respected.

Now, with what this minister has just done, a precedent has been set in labour relations. Before there is even a conflict in an enterprise under federal jurisdiction, is she going to hang a sword of Damocles over labour relations, over the heads of the workers and even the employers, by bringing in special legislation every time? Is that her intention?

At the moment, that is exactly the message she is sending. She did it with Canada Post; she did it, with even more malice, in my opinion, with Air Canada. Is it the government's intention to no longer respect labour relations?

[Emergency Debate, March 12th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is true that the federal government does not have much to do with health care, but what little it does, it should do properly. Transfers to Quebec and the provinces are one thing, but the list of unavailable drugs is also within the federal government's purview. Right now, drug company participation is voluntary. The minister can respond, but I believe that her government is receptive to the idea of making the list mandatory. That would help. A system to alert stakeholders about shortages is clearly within federal jurisdiction.

I would like to ask the minister one simple question. The FDA found a problem with one single product at the Sandoz plant, so why did it conclude that the entire pharmaceutical company was compromised? The government could talk to the U.S. government about that. There was a problem with one single product, a product that is not even used in Canada or Quebec. That is unbelievable.

[Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, March 12th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we now know how this government operates. To this government, winning a majority spelled the end of debates and the beginning of installing its ideology. It figured it had four to four and a half years to pass everything it was unable to pass when it had a minority. We know that.

Now, the public is suffering the consequences. Workers are seeing their rights violated. We see what the government did with Air Canada. It has gotten to the point where special legislation is introduced before there is even a dispute. That is pretty bad; it is unheard of.

I imagine this government will never cease to amaze us, even if, here in Parliament, we are less and less surprised.

My question for the minister is quite simple. He was the one who ensured that the opposition parties and his government could manage to work together to draft a bill on refugees, namely Bill C-11, that was acceptable to everyone. Then he simply decided to scrap the whole thing and come up with Bill C-31.

He accuses the opposition of wanting to stall, but why did the government not reintroduce Bill C-11? Everyone agreed on it and there would have been no systematic obstruction.

[Elections Canada, March 9th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, deception is the order of the day, from fraudulent calls during the 2011 election to the Prime Minister's attempt yesterday to mislead Canadians when he said that he supported enhancing Elections Canada's investigative powers. Today's statements by the Prime Minister's spokesperson make it clear that the government's support for the opposition motion yesterday was merely a bid to bury the affair and that it has no real intention of amending the legislation to give Elections Canada the tools it needs.

Rather than try to dodge the issue, will the Prime Minister commit to amending the Canada Elections Act?

[Business of Supply, March 8th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary was almost moving when he spoke to us of the Conservative volunteers. We have volunteers in my constituency. The people who work the phones are there for the entire duration of the campaign, and sometimes they get paid in pizza. What is increasingly evident with the Conservatives is that it is not volunteers we are talking about. The unscrupulous tactics that were used were used by RMG and RackNine. Those companies are paid; they are not volunteers. There is a direct connection to the Conservative Party. The parliamentary secretary made a link to the sponsorship scandal. When he was in opposition, he was most vocal in calling for a public inquiry into the sponsorship scandal.

What happened with the Liberals was successfully brought to light, but why does he not want to shed light today on what happened with the Conservatives by conducting a public inquiry and providing more powers to Elections Canada?