Denise Savoie

[Government Contracts, November 27th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about the court case. I am talking about a well placed Conservative lobbyist interfering in a non-political procurement process reversing a decision that was won fair and square and deciding which region of the country gets federal contracts.

In the interests of coming clean, will the minister table in the House the dates, times, locations and subject of any meetings that national defence officials have had with Mr. Doucet?

Shipyard workers and their families deserve an answer.

[Government Contracts, November 27th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, shipyard workers in Victoria and Halifax are facing an uncertain future today because of the Conservatives' botched submarine maintenance contract. Canada's submarines cannot do their jobs patrolling our coastal waters.

The contract in question is in front of the courts, so why the government's interference? Is it because the name of Mulroney's confidant, Fred Doucet, is on the lobby register?

Will the minister confirm that this is the real reason the contract will be re-tendered?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 27th, 2007]

With respect to the Community Access Program and School Net programs: (a) what was the total planned and actual spending for each program in each fiscal year since their inception; (b) for each case in which spending was reduced from one fiscal year to the next, (i) how does the government account for the reduction, (ii) which organizations received reduced funding and how much less funding did each receive; (c) for the current fiscal year, (i) how many applications were received, (ii) how does that number of applications compare to the number of applications received in the past two fiscal years, (iii) how many applications were approved, (iv) how does that number compare with approved applications from the past two fiscal years, (v) listing all recipients, who was approved for funding in the current fiscal year, with approved funding amounts in dollars, (vi) listing all recipients, who received reduced funding this fiscal year compared to last fiscal year, what was the amount of the reduction and what was the rationale for the reduction, (vii) what impact has the reduced funding had on the recipient in each case; (d) does the government intend to renew funding for those programs beyond the current fiscal year; (e) when will the government make public its intentions regarding the future of these programs; and (f) what is the precise process for making a decision on the future of these programs and communicating that decision to the public, and which stage in that process has the government currently reached?

[Education, November 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I forgot. The government is generous only when it comes to the oil companies.

Struggling student borrowers need relief now. The government rejects over 10,000 applicants for interest relief per year and two-thirds applicants for permanent disability relief. Then it spends $180 million on private collection pit bulls to hunt down struggling student borrowers.

Why do big banks and big oil get billions in corporate tax cuts when young graduates, who actually drive our economy, get shafted with high interest on their student loans and a—

[Education, November 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is increasingly clear that the government is making a profit at students' expense. In fact, the government charges double what it pays the Bank of Canada. Double!

Given the growing student debt load and rising tuition fees, why is the government still planning to make more than $550 million dollars in profit at students' expense? Why not lower the interest rates on student loans?

[Tackling Violent Crime Act, November 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's comments very carefully and appreciated a number of them to the effect that the government's supposed tough on crime approach is actually an American style approach on crime that just fills up prisons and does not tackle the violent crime issue.

What about rehabilitation? What about housing? What about mental health? In comparison to the amount that the government is investing in the criminalization part of the bill, the amount for rehabilitation and the preventive programs for youth has been very puny.

What confuses me about the member's comments is that we are speaking to the amendment that places a reverse onus on convicted persons to prove that they should not be considered dangerous offenders. Of course, we had supported the other--

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the last petition is signed by many of my constituents in Victoria and many constituents across the country who are concerned about the constant floor crossings between Liberals and Conservatives.

The petitioners call on Parliament to strengthen democratic accountability by taking all necessary steps to ensure that MPs who switch party affiliation immediately resign and face electors in a byelection.

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is from many constituents who are concerned about the continued military arsenal buildup in the world and the danger that it presents to us all. The sale of arms has become a flourishing industry in Canada and now represents a large percentage of our GDP. Our government refuses to give leadership in establishing a comprehensive peace process in Afghanistan.

The petitioners are therefore calling on Parliament to establish a department of peace that would reinvigorate Canada's role as a global peace builder and that would have the abolition of nuclear weapons as a top priority.

[Petitions, November 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have three petitions to present on behalf of my constituents.

The first petition is from many parents in my constituency who are stuck on long wait lists for child care with costs that are rising out of reach. They face the threat of their child care centre closing because they cannot afford or find qualified staff.

The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to achieve multi-year funding to ensure that publicly operated child care programs are sustainable for the long term and to protect child care by enshrining it in legislation with a national child care act to be the cornerstone of Canada like the National Health Act, and to help end child poverty by using the $1,200 allowance to enhance the child tax benefit without taxes or clawbacks as is the case presently.

[Child Care, November 21st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative child care policy has failed working families. The Prime Minister talks about giving parents choice, but tens of thousands of parents are stuck on long wait lists. They watch fees rise out of reach or their local day care centres close because the centres cannot find or afford qualified staff. What choice do these parents have?

Working parents know the importance of quality child care for the healthy development of their children. What about their choice?

Today's vote on my Bill C-303 is crucial. The bill would guarantee affordable, high quality early learning and child care that working families need and want and that Conservatives could not take away.

I ask all Canadians to join me in telling the Conservative government to stop restricting parents' choices and standing in the way of our children's futures.