Claude Guimond

[High Tides in Eastern Quebec, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, last week's devastating high tides are indicative of an increasingly frequent challenge facing coastal communities, including those on the east coast of Quebec.

In light of the increase in such natural phenomena linked to climate change, can the government assure us that it will do everything possible to combat increased shoreline erosion and that it will provide funding for regions along the river to adapt to climate change?

[High Tides, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, last week, high tides combined with high winds caused a great deal of damage in eastern Quebec in particular.

To make matters worse, on December 9, the helicopter transporting Government of Quebec experts, namely from the public safety and sustainable development department, over the Gaspé Peninsula to assess the damage crashed in Cap-Chat. Among the passengers was Pascal Bernatchez, geography professor at UQAR and Quebec research chair in coastal geoscience. Fortunately, thanks to the pilot's experience, everyone survived and no one has any life-threatening injuries. In any event, we wish them a speedy recovery.

As people assess the damage and begin reconstruction, the Bloc Québécois wants to commend the courage of all the victims affected by these high tides and the efforts made by municipal authorities and volunteers to lend a helping hand.

[Byelection in Kamouraska—Témiscouata, November 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the victory of the Parti Québécois candidate, André Simard, in the riding of Kamouraska-Témiscouata, which had been held by the Liberals for 25 years.

As the leader of the Parti Québécois said, the voters rejected cynicism and voted for change at a time when the Liberal government in Quebec City has been rocked by a crisis of confidence. Last week, five out of six people said they did not trust the Charest government, and nearly two-thirds of the voters turned their backs on him yesterday. We only hope that Jean Charest has gotten the message and that he will finally call a public inquiry into the construction sector.

Once again, the Bloc Québécois would like to sincerely congratulate André Simard and his volunteers, as well as Pauline Marois and the entire Parti Québécois team, on this hard-fought battle in Kamouraska-Témiscouata that ended in a victory for integrity.

[Questions on the Order Paper, October 27th, 2010]

With respect to the Department of Finance's analysis of the establishment of a personal sylvicultural savings and investment plan and other similar tax measures to encourage woodlot owners to reinvest all or part of their logging revenues in forest management: (a) what are the various terms and conditions the department has considered; (b) what terms and conditions have been chosen for such a plan; (c) what are the advantages and disadvantages, both for owners and for the government, of introducing such a plan; (d) how many owners does the department estimate could potentially benefit from such a plan (i) across Canada, (ii) by province; (e) what would be the estimated revenue loss to the government if the plan were introduced; (f) what are the estimated economic benefits (i) for Canada as a whole, (ii) for each province; (g) what are the estimated environmental benefits (i) for Canada as a whole, (ii) for each province?

[Jean Pouliot, October 27th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the riding of Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques is known for its abundant natural resources, but it is also known for its human resources. On September 11, a Rimouski citizen, Jean Pouliot, the CEO of PMI Steel Products became president of the Association de la construction du Québec, the Quebec construction association, which represents some 15,000 businesses and over 100,000 workers.

Mr. Pouliot is a man of action and conviction, as demonstrated by his achievements. His main goal now is to enhance his industry's image. Mr. Pouliot is also very involved in the rebuilding of Haiti, which was ravaged by an earthquake in January. He went to Haiti in April to teach the local people about modern construction techniques.

I am proud of this Rimouski native and of his many contributions. I wish Mr. Pouliot the best of luck as president of the Association de la construction du Québec.

[Canada-Panama Free Trade Act, October 26th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his comments and his question.

Yesterday afternoon, we talked about this at the Standing Committee on International Trade. Indeed, the Doha Round negotiations are causing problems and leading us to sign more bilateral agreements. I think we should ask ourselves why there are problems in the Doha Round negotiations and then try to resolve them. We know that the biggest problem has to do with everything that is happening in the agriculture sector. Why not bring everyone to the table to resolve the problems in the Doha negotiations and then sign multilateral agreements?

[Canada-Panama Free Trade Act, October 26th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her excellent question.

I was elected to sit in this House two years ago. I have had to take a stand on a number of issues, the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement in particular. The Bloc Québécois thinks it is unfortunate that the government, which the Liberals are supporting more and more, insists on concluding bilateral agreements knowing that this will lead to situations like the one we experienced with Colombia and the one we are currently going through with Panama.

Quebeckers are in favour of free trade. We were the first to want a free trade agreement with the United States. The Bloc Québécois was one of the first political parties to support NAFTA. Our political party and the Province of Quebec support free trade, but we prefer a multilateral approach in order to avoid thorny problems arising every time.

[Canada-Panama Free Trade Act, October 26th, 2010]

Madam Speaker, a few weeks ago, the Bloc Québécois and I spoke out against Bill C-46, the Canada-Panama free trade agreement. The Conservatives' eagerness to ratify this agreement was one of the reasons we could not support it. About a month ago, while we were considering this bill in the House, we found that it was not in line with the Bloc Québécois' values and beliefs or those of Quebeckers.

Our position remains unchanged because we have seen no indication that neither workers' rights nor the tax haven situation in Panama has improved since then. My Bloc Québécois colleagues and I will never be able to support any agreement, treaty or government decision that does not respect these fundamental rights. We will never accept such an agreement unless we can be certain that these rights will be respected.

Before going any further, I would like to answer a question that was asked by the Conservative member for Abbotsford. After my last speech on this subject, he asked why the Bloc Québécois would not at least allow this agreement to go to committee to ensure that amendments are made that would satisfy the Bloc. I would say that if some of these problems could be fixed in committee, we would be in favour of sending the bill to committee. However, some of the problems with the agreement or relations with Panama are beyond Canada's control. For example, there is the issue of police repression of unions. As my colleague, the member for Joliette said, although we could study the issue in committee, we would be wasting our time if the Panamanian leaders have no interest in examining and addressing the situation.

That said, since I have the honour of speaking on this topic today, I think it is important to briefly reiterate the Bloc's position on bilateral agreements. The Bloc Québécois is not a protectionist party. Quebec exports 52% of what it produces, and our businesses, especially cutting-edge businesses, could not survive in the domestic market alone. That is why the Bloc Québécois supported NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and was the first party to propose entering into a free trade agreement with the European Union. Clearly, our party supports free trade.

We believe that in order for trade to be mutually beneficial, it must first be fair. This would be easy if the Conservatives were willing. A trading system that results in exploitation in poor countries and dumping in rich countries is not viable. Members can be assured that the Bloc Québécois will never tolerate a system of free trade that would result in a race to the bottom. We simply want to increase wealth and not poverty, in Quebec, Canada, and in the countries with which we are signing agreements.

We are well aware that the absence of environmental or labour standards in trade agreements puts a great deal of pressure on our industries, especially our traditional industries. It is very difficult for them to compete with products made with no regard for basic social rights. We are in favour of a real policy of multilateralism, not the shameless pursuit of profit at the expense of people's living conditions and the environment, which is all too often the case with the bilateral agreements that the government wants to sign.

I would like to remind the members of an aspect of this agreement that the Bloc Québécois finds very worrisome, and that we proclaim loud and clear every time we have the chance.

Panama is still on the OECD's grey list of tax havens, and it is even on France's blacklist of tax havens. Yes, I said France. Obviously Panama poses a problem.

While major European corporations are leaving that country because of its lack of banking transparency and its promotion of tax evasion, Canada wants to send its companies there. Does that make any sense? We need to think about this. The fact that France is pulling out of the country and we want to go in needs some serious consideration.

The Bloc Québécois feels it is imperative that, before concluding a Canada-Panama free trade agreement, the Conservative government sign an information sharing agreement with Panama. Nonetheless, this agreement must not exempt subsidiaries located in the targeted jurisdictions from paying income tax.

I want to repeat that, even though the free trade agreement signed on May 14, 2010, comes with a comprehensive agreement on labour co-operation, protecting labour rights in Panama remains a serious concern.

President Ricardo Martinelli's right-wing government passed Law 30, legislation that is considered anti-union, just a few months ago in June 2010. It is unbelievable. Basically, the law criminalizes workers who demonstrate to defend their rights. Here we are in 2010 and that government is still passing that kind of legislation. Once again, this certainly gives us something to think about.

We also know that Panama was shaken in recent months by crackdowns described as anti-union. Between two and six people were killed and about 100 were injured during violent demonstrations that were held after Law 30 passed in June 2010.

As a member who comes from the agricultural labour movement, I naturally believe that workers' rights are universal rights, and no trade agreement, no free trade agreement—and I mean none—should be entered into without absolute assurance that workers' rights will be respected. That is a fundamental principle of fair trade. That is how fair trade begins. It is not rocket science.

Accordingly, we rigorously apply that principle to all of our actions and the decisions we make. That is one of the reasons we simply could not support the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement recently. Our party acts in accordance with our values and policies.

Even though on August 5, 2010, the Panamanian government agreed to review this law, we nonetheless have cause for concern about the Martinelli government's true willingness to respect the International Labour Organization conventions. Why is the government in such a hurry to ratify this agreement? Should we not ensure that the Panamanian government is backing down on Law 30 before we make any commitment? Why not make sure the Panamanian government reverses its decision and supports labour rights in that country instead?

Without any assurance that workers' rights are respected in Panama and considering that this country is still on France's blacklist and the OECD's grey list of tax havens, it is not possible for the Bloc Québécois to support this bill.

[Women in Politics, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, as part of the festivities surrounding the World March of Women, including the large gathering in Rimouski, three women received the National Assembly medal for their exceptional commitment as members of Parliament.

I too would like to pay tribute to Monique Vézina, member of Parliament from 1984 to 1993, Suzanne Tremblay, member of Parliament from 1993 to 2004, and Solange Charest, member of the National Assembly from 1994 to 2007. They left their mark on the political landscape of Bas-Saint-Laurent and distinguished themselves on the national and federal levels. I mostly want to pay tribute to them for their important contribution to the advancement of women in politics.

I agree with what Irvin Pelletier, a member of the National Assembly, said and hope that the journey of these pioneers will inspire future generations of women to become involved in politics and bring us closer to the much desired gender parity.

[Business of Supply, October 21st, 2010]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Hochelaga on his excellent speech, and I thank him for his contribution to our party and to Quebec over the years and particularly since his election, last year.

My colleague is the Bloc Quebecois finance critic. Immediately after his election, he met his fellow members and toured Quebec, to fully understand our needs and our interests.

I represent a rural riding where regional development is very important, and we are noticing incredible interference on the part of the federal government in this area. I would like to get my colleague's take on this. If Quebec had total control over its regional development, what difference would it make for a region like eastern Quebec or the Lower St. Lawrence?