Anne-Marie Day

[Combating Terrorism Act, October 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we all recall the terrorist attacks of 2001. It was difficult for everyone. I was attending a rural university. Everyone was appalled by what we saw on television.

I would like to know what the member thinks about the following comments by Mr. Barrette:

The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group and the Ligue des droits et libertés believe that the provisions dealing with investigative hearings and preventive arrests, which are intended to impose recognizances with conditions, are both dangerous and misleading [for a liberal society].

[Petitions, October 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition signed by hundreds of people, most of whom are from my riding, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, strongly condemning the government's drastic cuts to Canada's international aid budget.

Canada ranks among the stingiest donor countries for international aid and is now ruthlessly slashing partnerships with NGOs despite their proven track record with regards to efficiency and quality of results in the fields of development and peace.

This International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, I present this petition calling on the government to set clear policy objectives regarding official development assistance and to meet these objectives once and for all.

[Employment Insurance, October 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is always quite something to witness the government's ability to toot its own horn.

The Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development has announced major changes to employment insurance that will result in lower salaries, have serious consequences for seasonal workers, and limit access to the program. The Conservatives have made changes without consulting anyone: not the workers or the employers who pay for employment insurance, nor the provinces that will have to fill the gaps with social assistance.

Will the minister finally commit to consulting Canadians instead of making unilateral decisions that are wreaking havoc on employment insurance?

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, not so long ago, the government gave a speech about the omnibus bill that we will support, a speech about the carbon tax. That has nothing to do with today's debate.

An omnibus bill is a catch-all that allows the government to deal with a number of issues at the same time. Often, we cannot morally support them. That is why we often vote against an omnibus bill. It is sometimes disgraceful, and we cannot move forward.

Does the member believe that introducing an omnibus bill is another means of reducing the amount of time members have to speak in order to represent their constituents and to voice their opinions on matters of importance in their daily lives, such as old age security or the environment?

[Employment Insurance, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture is not the only one who has a complicated relationship with the public.

Let us look at the facts. First, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development said that all workers would benefit from the new working while on claim project. Then, she admitted that, in fact, all workers would not benefit. Unable to offer a solution to all unemployed workers in Canada, she split them into two groups: those who would be entitled and those who would not.

It is all smoke and mirrors with the minister. When will she fix the program so that it benefits all unemployed workers?

[Employment Insurance, October 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the method will only apply to those who received benefits between August 2011 and August 2012. All others will be taken hostage by the new program. Experts and workers are confused. In addition to choosing the program that suits them right now, workers must choose a program for the next two years.

If the minister is really listening to the people, why is she making the program more complex rather than solving the real problems?

[Employment Insurance, October 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture is not the only one improvising. The Minister of Human Resources is no slouch in that department either.

Not so long ago, the Conservatives declared that the new working while on claim provisions were not in any way detrimental to Canadians. The Conservatives finally admitted that there is a problem the Friday evening before Thanksgiving. However, instead of solving the problem, they decided to apply a band-aid to a deep wound.

When will they come up with a real solution instead of a two-tiered system?

[Increasing Offenders' Accountability for Victims Act, October 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Conservatives this question, but they are not making any speeches. I am not quite sure why. I wonder if this is a new way for them to block the debate. We will see in the end.

I would like to ask the member a question, but I do not know if he will be able to respond. Perhaps the committee will respond. Will the money from the fines that are being doubled go straight to victims of crime and the groups that represent them? Does my colleague know the answer to that question?

[Increasing Offenders' Accountability for Victims Act, October 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. The government has a strong tendency of taking away judicial discretion. That is what we have noticed in a number of their bills and here in the House. The NDP is calling on the government to restore judges' ability to choose and to have a certain flexibility when they hand down a sentence to an offender and in other situations. I would say that this is a dangerous trend. Judges are intelligent and capable of discernment and handing down a sentence that is commensurate with the crime in order to protect society.

[Increasing Offenders' Accountability for Victims Act, October 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. Funding is often the lifeblood of community organizations that support victims. We have to really make an effort. Taxes and surcharges are not going to meet the needs of all these organizations.

My answer to the hon. member is quite simply this: yes, organizations that help victims of violence should receive direct funding.