Carole Lavallée

[International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, October 19th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, for the past 13 years, October 17 has been recognized by the UN as the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.

Each year, since 1987, Quebeckers are invited to reflect and to take tangible action to fight poverty.

The International Day for the Eradication of Poverty is celebrated all over the world through various events that emphasize pride and promote the efforts and courage of the poorest in our society.

In Saint-Hubert, the activities held on that day are organized by the Comité du refus de la misère, which was set up by Saint-Hubert's Table d'entraide, and are coordinated by Jean-Marie Girard, who also heads Action-Dignité. This year, the committee inaugurated a huge symbolic slab in the city's main park. That slab was laid right next to the tree planted by the committee last year.

While there may be only one day of the year set aside to express our outrage at poverty, there will be two major symbols in Saint-Hubert, namely the slab and the tree, that will serve as permanent reminders.

[Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec, October 7th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, on July 15, 1965, the Government of Quebec passed Bill 51, which created Quebec's deposit and investment fund, the Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec.

The fund has expanded over the years to become the largest institutional investor in Canada and, obviously, Quebec. It now manages net assets over $102 billion.

Maximizing the return on investment for its depositors and ensuring Quebec's economic development and international presence have remained at the heart of the fund's mission and commitments.

The fund's presence in Quebec over the past forty years has encouraged the development of several generations of financial experts and entrepreneurs, as well as giving Quebeckers more control over their own finances.

The Bloc Québécois is proud to pay tribute to the founding visionaries, developers and individuals who ensure the future of such a powerful development tool as the Quebec deposit and investment fund.

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, October 5th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, first I want to thank my colleague for his excellent presentation, his great sense of analysis and his speech, which made his ideas come across so clearly. Congratulations to my colleague from Chambly—Borduas.

He raised some particularly interesting points on the Liberal government's attitude toward protecting workers. He mentioned, among other things, the fact that the Liberals did not support the anti-scab bill the Bloc Québécois introduced in April. The bill was defeated by 12 votes. It should be noted that those who contributed to its defeat were Liberals from Quebec. We were very hurt by this, but workers were hurt even more.

In 2003, when our colleague from Winnipeg Centre introduced a similar bill on protecting workers, the Liberals defeated it.

In December 2004, when the same NDP colleague from Winnipeg Centre introduced another bill on protecting workers, the Liberals did not seem in favour of it whatsoever.

Now all of sudden, a few months later, they reach into their magical hat and pull out a little rabbit with small ears and presto, we have Bill C-55. And they seem quite attentive to the needs of workers and quite sensitive to workers who lose their jobs when their companies go bankrupt.

This change of heart is welcome. It is a step in the right direction. We see that they have thought about this. We also see that every action taken by our colleague from Winnipeg Centre and by the Bloc Québécois was seen through all the way to the Minister of Labour and Housing. As I said, this change of heart is welcome. We hope to find the same attitude when we present amendments on student loans in committee.

I have a question for the hon. member for Chambly—Borduas on the program for older worker adjustment, whose importance he illustrated so eloquently. Does he believe the Bloc Québécois should propose an amendment in committee requiring the government to include in the Wage Earner Protection Program some aspects that would allow POWA to be implemented?

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, October 5th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, I listened closely to the speech by the member for Newton—North Delta. I was pleasantly surprised by his remarks on student debt and bankruptcy by former students.

People are often prejudiced against former students. They think that declaring bankruptcy is easier for graduates than for other socio-economic groups. They also believe that students are more eager than others to get rid of their debts by declaring bankruptcy. However, as the member for Newton—North Delta said, it is not easier for graduates than for anyone else. In reality, this must be a very psychologically and emotionally difficult process.

No doubt the member for Newton—North Delta would be willing to support an amendment that the Bloc Québécois intends to move in committee on this particular aspect of Bill C-55. Why make former students wait seven years before they can discharge their student debt when declaring personal bankruptcy? This waiting period is so arbitrary, as was the ten-year waiting period set out in the previous legislation. Why not five, four or three years, or even nothing?

In keeping with its commitments in recent years, particularly those set out in its 2004 election platform, the Bloc Québécois will move an amendment in committee to eliminate this mandatory waiting period before former students can discharge their student debts during a personal bankruptcy.

I want to hear what the member for Newton—North Delta thinks about this.

[Centre d'action bénévole Les p'tits bonheurs, October 5th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, something major is happening in the riding of Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

The former Les p'tits bonheurs volunteer action centre in Saint-Bruno was demolished on Saturday so work could begin on a new, modern and larger building. Obviously, it was a very emotional time for everyone in the community.

Next spring, Les p'tits bonheurs volunteer action centre will re-open on the same site in order to continue its mission. In the meantime, services will be provided at the community centre and the clothing bank will be relocated to the former train station.

This project would not have been possible without the $170,000 raised by the organization. Only another $30,000 is needed.

I want to highlight the work done by these men and women, under Gaby Bouvrette, who, day after day, help those in need.

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, September 29th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague the hon. member for Vancouver Island North for this excellent speech.

However, there is one element of Bill C-55 which he did not address. This concerns students faced with bankruptcy. Bill C-55 proposes a change to the rules governing the bankruptcy of former students, since at present the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act says that persons reduced to bankruptcy cannot be discharged from a student debt if they are still at school or if they finished their studies less than 10 years previously. Bill C-55 would bring that period down to seven years.

The Bloc Québécois has for a very long time been committed, although more formally in its 2004 election platform, to abolishing the waiting period during which students cannot be released from their debts through bankruptcy. We believe that there are prejudices that cause certain persons to believe that it is easy to declare bankruptcy, even though we know that a judge has to rule on that question, and normally a judge would dismiss any far-fetched applications. There are also prejudices which hold that students are more inclined than other social groups to try and shirk their commitments, such as student debt. Yet no study has ever proven this.

Furthermore, the change from ten years to seven is very arbitrary. This bill speaks of seven years, but it could well be five. And why not four? Why not three? While we are at it, why not zero? So the Bloc Québécois could be expected to submit an amendment in committee to abolish this waiting period before students can include their education debts in a bankruptcy.

The hon. member from the Conservative Party said that all the parties here present have their hearts in the right place in terms of wanting to defend wage earners. Former students are also wage earners. I was wondering if the party represented by the hon. member for Vancouver Island North would forget about these prejudices and support the Bloc Québécois amendment that will be submitted in committee.

[Wage Earner Protection Program, September 29th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from the NDP for having made this presentation on Bill C-55.

Regarding students faced with bankruptcy, I understand as well that he is very sensitive to their debt problems. Bill C-55 proposes a major change to the rules governing this debt.

At present, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act provides that people who go bankrupt cannot be discharged from their student debt before ten years have passed. Bill C-55 would reduce this period from ten to seven years.

The Bloc Québécois has been trying for a very long time, and more formally in its election platform of 2004, to abolish this waiting period. It is a period based on prejudice. The first is that it is easy to go bankrupt. We know, however, that a judge must normally make a ruling and reject frivolous requests. This waiting period is also based on the belief that students are more inclined than any other social group to want to go bankrupt in order to rid themselves of their student debt and start over. Well, there are no studies that show this.

The change from ten to seven years seems rather strange to us. It is very arbitrary. Why seven years? Why not six or five years? While we are at it, why not just make former students citizens like everyone else and state that all their debts are included when they go bankrupt?

Obviously the Bloc will propose an amendment in committee. I would like to know what the NDP member thinks in this regard. Will he support the Bloc amendment?

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, September 29th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I too wish to add my voice to this chorus of praise, and at the same time reassure my colleague from Verchères—Les Patriotes that we have only praise for him.

Incidentally, as labour critic, I must tell him that I feel quite honoured by this diversion of the debate. We were debating Bill C-55. I view as a privilege the fact that the member for Verchères—Les Patriotes would chose to make this very touching announcement while we are considering a bill dealing with the interests of workers.

My colleague from Shefford, who is the deputy labour critic, is asking me to convey the message to him that he too feels very honoured.

It is very likely that the member for Verchères—Les Patriotes had a good reason for choosing to make this announcement during the debate on Bill C-55. The fact is that he is himself an indefatigable worker. I have known him personally since 1993, when we had the pleasure of working together. He has always worked very steadfastly and rigorously.

As we know, rigour is the trademark of Bloc members. Our batting average is very high, still our colleague from Verchères—Les Patriotes outdoes us. He has always had dignity as a leitmotif in whatever he did.

Finally, I must add that he was the Bloc Québécois whip—I do not remember for exactly how long. And a highly efficient one too. My colleagues and I are grateful to him for that.

I know that the Bloc will find the time and place to pay tribute to him more appropriately. At this time we will just tell him how much we all regret his departure.

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, September 29th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Vancouver Centre for her comments. I want to ask her a question about student loans. She did not mention this subject once. Yet, student debt is a very significant part of this bill. The government is prepared to reduce the waiting period from ten years to seven years, so that former students can discharge their student loan debts in bankruptcy.

The Bloc Québécois committed long ago to totally eliminating this waiting period. In reality, having a waiting period for student loan debts makes no sense. First of all, it is based on prejudicial belief that declaring bankruptcy is easy, that anyone can do it and that students are immature enough to decide to finance their education with loans and then say, “No problem, I will just declare bankruptcy and get out of debt”.

Very few students would even think such a thing. A judge could dismiss an application based on such nonsense. In fact, we know that, in the event of a bankruptcy, a judge must rule whether to allow or dismiss an application.

Furthermore, we are wondering why the change from ten years to seven years? Why not five years or three years, or even zero years while we are at it? I want the member on the government side to tell us what she thinks about this.

[Wage Earner Protection Program Act, September 29th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member from the Conservative Party for his presentation. However, I would like him to explain his take on the section of bill dealing with bankruptcy related to student debt.

As you know, the Bloc Québécois has long been committed to abolishing the period of eligibility before a former student can be discharged of his or her debt through bankruptcy. We believe there is a lot of prejudice on this matter. We believe that people think it is easy to declare bankruptcy. However, everyone knows that a judge has the final say. There are others who think that students are more likely to declare bankruptcy in order to be discharged of their student debt, but there is no study to prove it.

Furthermore, they think that changing the eligibility period from 10 years to 7, as proposed in Bill C-55, is completely arbitrary. People do not understand the reason for 7 years. Why not 6, or 3, or any other number? Why not nothing at all?

I would like my colleague from the Conservative Party to share his opinion on student debt.