Denis Coderre

[The Budget, February 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that everyone knows she wanted to say hypocritical, which is unparliamentary.

[The Budget, February 26th, 1998]

That is all right.

[Property Rights, February 23rd, 1998]

That is the former Liberal showing through.

[Pro-Démocratie Coalition, February 19th, 1998]

We must call a spade a spade. Let us hope that the group's members have the courage to reveal whom they are working for. I am keen to see how the Conservative leader is going to handle that.

[Pro-Démocratie Coalition, February 19th, 1998]

Pro-Démocratie has nothing democratic about it, since its source of funding advocates separating Quebec from the rest of Canada.

[Pro-Démocratie Coalition, February 19th, 1998]

The cat is out of the bag. Now we can clearly link these people with a particular persuasion, that of the separatist government.

[Pro-Démocratie Coalition, February 19th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the Parti Quebecois government has just given a $300,000 subsidy to Pro-Démocratie, a group of individuals of various political stripes opposing the reference to the Supreme Court.

[Monique Vézina, February 17th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, a number of separatists switch sides over the years. They call that progressing, except that in certain instances, there is a certain lack of subtlety.

For example, a former minister in the Conservative government of Brian Mulroney and a friend of the current Conservative leader, Monique Vézina, yesterday said she never had been a federalist. So what was she doing in the Conservative government? What was she doing in a party that was promising to bring Quebec back into the constitutional fold with honour, as former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney put it? Was Ms. Vézina a separatist while she was representing the Conservative government as part of her duties abroad?

That is the essence of the separatist coalition, which comprises individuals who will try to obliterate their past to make way for their proposal to separate Quebec from the rest of Canada. If that is democracy, I far prefer commitments by people who speak frankly, coherently, with their past—

[Canadian Wheat Board Act, February 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I will never allow my legitimacy to be called into question. I was duly elected. My constituents elected me by over 9,000 votes and I will not stand for—

[Canadian Wheat Board Act, February 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I was merely pointing out what I have heard in the last four Reform speeches. One thing that is certain, I think that the former producer of—

The “Rocky Horror Picture Show” might have a sequel after all. We have heard about that place because it is a horror show.

Some people here have just told me that, as a Quebec MP, I have no right to talk about wheat. Some people here have just told me that, since I am from Quebec, I have no right to take a position on a bill. Some people from the Reform tell me that, since I am from Quebec, I have no right to give proper representation to my constituents, who are involved through their taxes in the Canadian Wheat Board, to the tune of $5 or $6 billion. Does this mean that, from now on, when fish are being discussed, the Saskatchewan Reform gang will not be allowed to speak? Really now. That's pathetic.

Once again, this pack of dinosaurs are showing us how they try to create division, to play on division. We have just been given a definition of what the Western bloc is. That gang is no better than the Bloc Quebecois. Good for nothing but creating a diversion.

Now to get down to business. The people of Bourassa understand the significance of Bill C-4. They have understood the importance of democracy. They have understood the significance of transparency. They have understood the significance of this bill because we are taking a position on behalf of the agricultural producers.

One thing that is certain, looking at this board, 10 of the 15 directors are elected by producers, which means this is good, extraordinary. For once we had something of direct assistance to producers, but the Reform Party changes its mind once again and starts talking a lot of nonsense, that the government will control the Board.

Not only are there only five appointments, but the board can vote on the president's remuneration and even recommend his removal. Is that not democracy with a capital D ?

Now they are back whining again. And because they have no idea what to say, they have produced a list of appointments. I am glad that was the gang appointed, those people have qualifications. No one from the Reform Party was on the list because none of them has any qualification.

Transparency and democracy are essential, as is representativeness. Through this bill we have showed that for once we have taken a stand for farmers and the members opposite should be applauding us. There should not even be any talk of an amendment. Bill C-4 should receive unanimous approval.

We decided to take a stand for farmers. They decided to take a stand for certain obscure lobbies I have never heard of. One thing is certain, and that is that, when it is known how transparent this board will be, as the member for Bourassa I am extremely proud and happy to be a member of this government and I have no hesitation in rising to vote in favour of this bill. Instead of hurling insults, and constantly tarnishing the reputations of people who were duly appointed and whose qualifications will be of extraordinary benefit to the Canadian people, the members opposite should be thrilled with Bill C-4.

When they do not have much to say, they hurl insults. One thing is certain and that is that, after members have examined Bill C-4 point by point, they should unanimously rise in their places and applaud the minister and the government for the stand they have taken.

I have taken a stand on behalf of producers. They have taken a stand on behalf of the lobbies. Ladies and gentlemen listening today, it is truly pathetic. The record has been set straight. Instead of trotting out your litanies again, I hope you are going to take a stand for farmers. Enough of your constant refrain that, because we come from the east, we are unable to represent you. If I had to rise in my place every time I thought you were unable to represent us, you would not be on your feet very often.