Mr. Speaker, my last petition is about Bill C-473, which seeks to achieve gender parity in federal crown corporations where ministers appoint individuals.
House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2015, with 20% of the vote.
Petitions June 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, my last petition is about Bill C-473, which seeks to achieve gender parity in federal crown corporations where ministers appoint individuals.
Petitions June 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions calling on the Government of Canada to reverse its decision about Bill C-38 and the devastating changes to employment insurance made in the spring of 2012.
Employment Insurance June 10th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, today, Le Devoir reported that if an employment insurance claim is rejected, the review process does not allow for claimants to provide new information.
The Conservatives do not want additional information, for fear that they will have to pay benefits. Reviews will now be conducted with only the documents that were originally provided.
Job seekers who apply for EI benefits deserve the opportunity to present all the documentation that supports their claim.
Why do the Conservatives not want to hear them?
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the hon. member for Churchill, who gives her all every day defending aboriginal peoples, among others. She is the NDP caucus leader at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. We just came from our review of Bill S-2, and she was able to share her vast knowledge on the subject.
Earlier, the hon. member talked about the importance of information. This concept was also raised this morning by the hon. member for Mississauga South. In her speech, she said that since we do not have enough trained people to do the work in the communities, such as installing sewers and water systems, which requires rather technical skills, we would train people there, either aboriginals or other people.
One of the challenges we are dealing with in the committee studying Bill S-2 has to do with money. People on site are being given responsibilities, but not the means to carry out those responsibilities.
I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about that.
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the hon. member's speech.
She spoke in particular about the consultation process. Conservatives often say that they held broad consultations that cost so many millions of dollars. Yet, oddly enough, first nations, among others, often say they were not consulted as they would have liked.
In committee, while studying Bill S-2, for example, I heard the Conservatives say totally absurd things. They said they had talked to their husbands, their sons or their sisters. This was the kind of comment that kept cropping up. There seems to be a need to define what constitutes real consultation.
I would like the member to talk about this. If she is saying that there has not been enough consultation while the Conservative Party says the opposite, there may be a misunderstanding. Could the member tell us more?
Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives curtailed debate twice this morning, once again limiting members' speaking time. We want to talk. Enough is enough. There are problems with the manipulation of public opinion. The members opposite are saying we do not want to discuss this issue. Hold on a minute. We do. The minister and the teams are in the process of discussing this matter.
Sable Island is a wonderful place. There was even a film made on this island, where birds come to nest. I think it is called Les oiseaux des prés or something like that. The island also has wild horses.
Of course we completely agree that this island must be protected. Environmental groups and aboriginal people also agree.
Where can we discuss this type of issue if not in the House? We must discuss it here, and the Conservatives must stop limiting members' speaking time.
Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, once again, it is sad to see that the government is cutting off debate by imposing a gag order reducing the time allocated to members.
For those of us who are not on committees, the House is often where hear about these bills. The same is true for our constituents.
I am aware that the minister was appointed to this position just a short while ago. Maybe he has not had the time to visit the aboriginal communities, which is perhaps unfortunate.
I know that these communities need drinking water and that they live in dry areas. Often, people have to collect drinking water from rocky places between other bodies of water. It is very difficult. It is essential to take a close look at this because the technologies must be good, otherwise there will be problems. It is important that the members have a chance to discuss this.
Will the minister reconsider his proposal to reduce the time for debate?
Petitions June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present three petitions calling on the Government of Canada to reverse the devastating changes to employment insurance contained in its mammoth bill. The consequences of these changes have been felt since the spring of 2012.
Employment Insurance June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, we have a dichotomy here because we seem to be talking about two different subjects.
The minister is convinced that these people have the qualifications needed to fulfill their role on the Social Security Tribunal. They were appointed publicly, and we would like the minister to commit publicly to providing us with copies of the test.
The response that the Conservatives have jobs to offer and that they want to connect EI claimants with employers has nothing to do with what we are talking about here. People have been appointed to the Social Security Tribunal. They are party friends and donors. They took tests and exams, and we would like to see those tests as proof that these people are truly competent.
We at least want the Conservatives to admit that these were partisan appointments. We would also like the minister to assure Canadians that they will have the right to a fair appeal process. We know that, in the previous process, unemployed workers were represented by members of a board made up of three people, whereas now just one person will make the decisions.
Employment Insurance June 6th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am taking the time to follow up on a question I raised in the House. We feel that the response the government gave Canadians is absolutely pathetic.
As I recall, I was talking about a case in New Brunswick and who can or cannot be an employee of the public service. The parliamentary secretary responded that they had put forward employment insurance reforms to better connect Canadians with available jobs, which had absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.
Canadians expect their administrative tribunals to be just, fair and accessible, not a haven for defeated Conservative candidates and party donors who pocket fat salaries paid with taxpayers' hard-earned money.
However, instead of having an employment insurance system that is accessible and an appeal system that workers can trust, the Conservatives are completely destroying the legitimacy of appeal bodies by obviously stacking them with their best friends.
Among the candidates appointed so far to the Social Security Tribunal we have Valerie Parker, who donated $1,450 to the Conservative Party; Leroy Legere, a former MP and provincial Conservative minister in Nova Scotia; Pierre Lafontaine, a defeated Conservative candidate in Jeanne-Le Ber in the 2011 election; Jean-Philippe Payment, a defeated Conservative candidate in Terrebonne—Blainville in 2011; Claude Durand, a defeated candidate in Trois-Rivières in 2008, Alcide Boudreault, a defeated candidate in Chicoutimi—Le Fjord in 2004 and 2006; Shane Parker, who fought for the Conservative nomination in Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar in 2008; Kelley Sherwood, a Reform Party activist since 1997; Mr. Provo, a former provincial Conservative candidate in Nova Scotia during the 2006 and 2009 elections.
I could go on like that until the end of my speech, but I would run out of time. All these people are now working for a tidy figure somewhere in the neighbourhood of $100,000, courtesy of the Canadian taxpayers.
How can the minister explain the so-called merit on which these appointments to the Social Security Tribunal are based? We want justice for employment insurance claimants at a time when the training people are being asked to take has nothing to do with the work they are being asked to do.
Other than contributing to the Conservative Party coffers, what merit do these people have?