Claude Gravelle

[Protecting Victims From Sex Offenders Act, June 14th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her very good answer. She used the word “show”, which I find intriguing. I would like her to comment on this. My colleague from Welland moved a motion today that would have prevented Karla Homolka from receiving a pardon, but the Conservatives voted against it. Did they vote against this motion because they want to use pardons for criminals like Karla Homolka as an opportunity for grandstanding?

[Protecting Victims From Sex Offenders Act, June 14th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague from the Bloc Québécois on her speech. Bill S-2 was formerly Bill C-34, if I am not mistaken. The government is reintroducing it as Senate Bill S-2. If Parliament had not prorogued, Bill C-34 could have become law. Now we are back at square one.

Can the hon. member explain to me why the government has chosen to introduce this bill as a Senate bill and not a government bill?

[Hanmer Knights of Columbus, June 14th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, on July 6, Knights of Columbus Council 5005, which is affiliated with Saint-Jacques Parish in Hanmer, will celebrate its 50th anniversary.

I would like to invite the House to join me in wishing a wonderful anniversary to this organization, which has done so much for the community.

The generosity of its members has benefited countless people through fundraisers for the food bank, schools, charities, service groups and Saint-Jacques Parish.

For example, last December, the Knights of Columbus Council 5005 helped distribute Christmas hampers to 142 needy families.

This parish's suppers are legendary in Hanmer: they attract hundreds of parishioners and citizens.

On behalf of the riding of Nickel Belt and the House of Commons, happy 50th anniversary to the Hanmer Knights of Columbus Council 5005.

[CANADA-COLOMBIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT, June 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am baffled that the so-called law and order government wants free trade with Colombia. There is a big difference between fair trade and free trade. We are certainly not against fair trade. However, with Colombia, it is a national pastime, killing trade unionists, raping women and children and kidnapping people.

The interesting thing is the product that we import the most from Colombia is beef. We are a beef producing country.

First, why would we want to deal with a government that believes in killing and raping women and children? Second, why would we want to import its beef when we have lots of beef in Canada? That certainly would help the beef industry in Canada.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my Bloc colleague for his good question.

He is absolutely right. The government is going to spend $1 billion to ensure the safety of the heads of state who are coming to Canada for three days and we do not know exactly why.

He raised another good point: employment insurance. The deregulation of Canada Post and the sale of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited are going to result in more layoffs. The private companies that are going to buy these corporations for just a few million dollars will want to make more and more profits and it is the workers who will be the first to pay the price.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 4th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, the government does not want to split the bill to take out Canada Post and the AECL because it knows it will lose that debate. It has already lost it twice.

As far as remailers are concerned, as the critic for the Liberal Party for the post office, she knows full well that there are remailers existing in Canada that are doing it illegally.

Will the member support the NDP motion when it comes time to vote on this bill and defeat Bill C-9 so we can bring back a real budget that excludes all of the heinous issues that the Conservatives have put in this bill?

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 4th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of splitting Bill C-9, the government's latest Trojan horse bill.

Once again, the two core issues at hand are transparency and accountability. It seems that every time we turn around, we find this secretive Conservative government trying to sneak things past Canadians. It is almost as if it is allergic to transparency and accountability. Shine the light and the government will run for cover.

This allergy is quite severe. The Conservatives have sneaked into their budget implementation bill clauses that would permit them to sell Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for a mere pittance and weaken Canada Post's ability to provide universal affordable service to Canadians.

On the first issue, the sale of AECL, it is important to note that while the government is busy bragging about its supposed fiscal prowess, it wants to sell a publicly owned corporation, which has benefited from $22 billion of public investment, for possibly a few hundred million dollars. It is the Mulroney era all over again, ballooning deficits, mismanagement and poor public policy. Once again, secrecy surrounds this issue. We need public consultation and we certainly need more substantive debate on the merits or risks of selling these crown corporations.

I call on my Liberal and Bloc colleagues to support the NDP in an attempt to remove these heinous elements from Bill C-9. A budget bill should be about the budget, point final, as we say in French. Why is the government so opposed to acting in the best interests of Canadians? We have seen this behaviour when it comes to foreign investment in Canada as well.

That is why the NDP proposed three key ways of strengthening the Investment Canada Act: one, lowering the threshold for public review; two, holding public hearings in affected communities when a Canadian company is being sold; and three, publishing the reasons for the government's decision to approve a takeover, as well as the conditions that a foreign company must meet in order to get federal approval.

The decision to sell AECL cannot be taken lightly. We are talking about nuclear technology. As signatories to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, we have committed to do our part in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear fuel. We have also committed to ensuring nuclear technology does not get into the wrong hands. We know that India is a nuclear superpower today, in part, because it bought several nuclear reactors from us and used that technology to develop nuclear weapons.

Surely, keeping AECL as a crown corporation would give Canada greater control over how and what we do with civil nuclear technology. Should we not have a more substantive public debate on this issue? We believe that the risk of selling this corporation warrants much more debate and separate legislation.

The second element noteworthy of discussion is the removal of Canada Post's exclusive privilege to collect, transmit and deliver international letters. Denis Lemelin, president, Canadian Union of Postal Workers, stated the issue perfectly when he presented to the Standing Committee on Finance on May 11. He said:

In Canada, letter mail is regulated for a reason. Canada Post has an exclusive privilege to handle letters so that it is able to generate enough money to provide affordable postal service to everyone, no matter where they live in our huge country. This privilege includes both domestic and international letters.

We know that Canada Post is already forgoing revenues to illegally operating international remailers. If we erode Canada Post's exclusive privilege with respect to international mail, there is no doubt the remailing business will grow in Canada and Canada Post will lose more of its international letter business.

A significant portion of my riding of Nickel Belt is made up of dispersed rural communities. Each community is rich in its cultural makeup and traditions. Each community is a gem. I am so honoured to represent these communities. My riding is a perfect representation of Canada as a whole. We have so few people relative to the size of our geography and, as a result, there is a cost to ensure that all Canadians have relatively equal access to mail service.

Canada Post serves a purpose that we deem important to us and to our communities. The government's move to undermine Canada Post's exclusivity in the area of international letters is the beginning of the deregulation of Canada Post. It is betraying the wishes of Canadians and it is jeopardizing that corporation's fiscal capacity to deliver mail remotely at a reasonable cost.

In addition, the government's own strategic review of Canada Post found that there was virtually no support for deregulation. The December 2008 “Strategic Review of the Canada Post Corporation: Report of the Advisory Panel to the Minister” noted:

There appears to be little public support for the privatization or deregulation of Canada Post, and considerable if not unanimous support for maintaining a quality, affordable universal service for all Canadians and communities.

In fact, municipalities were especially adamant in their opposition to deregulation. Five hundred and forty-three of the 653 municipalities that made submissions during the strategic review of Canada Post said that they opposed deregulation. Another 26 municipalities said that they were concerned. Only one municipality supported deregulation.

Municipalities oppose deregulation because they understand the nature of our country. Rural and remote parts of our country account for over 90% of our land mass but only one-fifth of our population. We have a unique characteristic in that we need to equip our public postal corporation with the fiscal capacity to serve these regions at a fair cost to the citizens.

Here we have an instance where the company does not want it, the workers do not want it, Canadians do not want it and even municipalities do not want it. What does the government do? It sides with the remailers and their lobbyists. It does not have the gumption to bring it in a stand-alone bill. It sneaks it into the budget bill. What a disgrace. It can still do the right thing and split this bill. It is not too late.

[Petitions, June 4th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, the second petition is also from dozens of Canadians right across Canada who draw the attention of the House of Commons to the fact that nine million sockeye salmon have disappeared during the summer's migration to the Fraser River, the lowest return in 50 years; that this crisis is similar in magnitude to the collapse of the Atlantic cod stocks; and that the Conservative Party promised in its 2006 platform to establish an independent judicial inquiry to determine the cause of the collapse of the sockeye salmon stocks on the Fraser River and has not yet delivered on its promise.

The petitioners urgently call upon the government to establish an independent judicial inquiry under the federal Inquiries Act that would fully explore all the facts, consult with scientists and stakeholders to determine what went wrong with this year's sockeye run and present a public report with findings and solutions within six months.

[Petitions, June 4th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present two petitions.

The first petition is from dozens of Canadians who are calling upon the House of Commons and the Government of Canada to support Motion No. 383 and vigorously participate in the international effort urging the government of the People's Republic of China to ensure the safe passage of North Korean refugees to South Korea.

With the tensions right now in South Korea and North Korea, this petition is very important.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Bloc member on his speech. I have a question for him about Canada Post, since he spoke extensively about the corporation. The Conservative government has already tried to make changes several times, with Bill C-14 and Bill C-44. This time, it included the changes in and Bill C-9, in this massive volume.

I would like the Bloc member to tell us what he thinks will happen to Canada Post if Bill C-9 is passed by the House of Commons.