Ève Péclet

[Foreign Affairs, May 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, right now, a tragedy is unfolding, one that has gone on for too long. Thirteen new bodies were found yesterday in eastern Syria. Since the beginning of this conflict, there have been over 10,000 victims and hundreds of thousands of refugees. Because it has no seat on the Security Council and too often shows no international leadership, Canada is on the sidelines watching this disaster.

Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs tell us what diplomatic efforts he has made to urge Russia to support a ceasefire?

[Youth, May 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot about what is in the 2012 budget, but little is said about what is not in it.

I want to talk about those most neglected in this budget, namely our youth, my generation, those who will have to bear the consequences of the changes to employment insurance and to old age security, and of the blatant lack of good faith of the Conservative government.

The NDP believes that the federal government has a role to play in post-secondary education, as it used to do before the drastic cuts in federal transfers to the provinces, made in 1995 by the Liberal government. Education is a pillar of our society. It is a right and it should be accessible to all, so as to provide our youth with all the opportunities that it deserves, as well as a chance to develop its full potential.

The Conservative government talks about job creation, but what about the training of future workers and their debt load? This government has ignored our youth for too long, and to ignore our youth is to ignore our future. I am rising today to be their voice and to tell them to have confidence, because the change will come in three years.

[POOLED REGISTERED PENSION PLANS ACT, May 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, a number of spokespeople came to talk about the Canadian system and about the fact that there are already a number of private savings plans on the market right now. Yet, it is no secret that the government is in the process of creating a new private savings plan when such plans already exist and are underused. Most Canadians do not contribute to such plans.

Why create a new plan instead of investing in providing information to Canadians about the existing systems? Why not improve the existing systems instead of creating another one when we do not even know what effects it will have on Canada's private savings plan market?

[POOLED REGISTERED PENSION PLANS ACT, May 29th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, as the hon. member knows, a better plan, although similar to the one being discussed here today, has already been tested in Australia. Australian institutions realized that, after 10 years, the plan was producing results that showed that it had very high fees and costs, but gave rather low returns on investments.

Given that the Australian plan was mandatory and the one before us today would be voluntary, can the government provide any assurances that this will really work?

[Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act, May 29th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by expressing how grateful I am to the government for allowing us to debate this bill for 13 days. Indeed, we have here a budget implementation bill that amends roughly 70 Canadian laws in 430 pages, and we debated it for only one week. I understand that to the government, 13 days is a long debate.

The minister was talking about a filibuster. Apparently we had a filibuster during consideration of Bill C-31. I would like to know his definition of filibuster. Indeed, to him, holding a democratic debate in the House, listening to public opinion and studying bills are part and parcel of a filibuster.

I would like the minister to rise and explain to us the meaning of filibuster and the difference between a filibuster and a democratic debate on amendments he made to his bill.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the member needs to stop making assumptions and claiming certain things. We are not talking about a carbon tax here. We are talking about a Conservative bill that eliminates a number of environmental regulations.

If, as he claims, economic and environmental principles are not necessarily mutually exclusive, he will have to agree that, in addition, protecting the environment and creating jobs are not mutually exclusive either.

How does eliminating the protection of fish habitat create jobs? Will it create jobs? Can the member tell us how many jobs will be created by completely wiping out all fish habitat protection? How many jobs will be created by this policy?

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague has been a member of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans for a very long time and that he is quite familiar with the issues.

Yesterday evening was something else and today really takes the cake. Yesterday evening I was here until 2 a.m. and I watched as the Minister of the Environment was unable to answer the questions. Today, an hon. member called the UN a radical organization because it has criticized the government's positions.

What is it going to take to make the government understand the consequences of its decisions?

[Iran, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, they got two first, we have two now, so we are all equal.

In my speech, I focused on the rights of women, and of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. I have here a copy of the UN Human Rights Committee report, which says that it is very concerned by the fact that homosexuals, bisexuals and transgendered people are being subject to harassment, persecution and cruel punishment, and may even be sentenced to death for a number of reasons. I talked about three cases in which people were hanged. They also face discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation, especially with regard to access to employment, housing and health care. These people are often completely excluded from society and often cannot work.

The committee recommended that the state repeal any law or legislative measure resulting in discrimination against women—who also do not have the right to hold political positions—and against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people.

What does the hon. member have to say about the recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee?

[Iran, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, Canadians were saddened and shocked to learn of the death of the photojournalist Zahra Kazemi following injuries she sustained during interrogations during her detention in Iran. The story made the headlines for several months. It was a highly publicized case. Justice has still not been done in this affair. We are therefore extremely concerned for the safety of Canadian citizens, such as Hamid Ghassemi-Shall, who are currently on death row in Iran.

What is Canada doing to defend its citizens?

[Iran, May 14th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, torture is illegal in Canada. The death penalty was abolished in Canada. So I do not see why Canada—an ardent defender of freedom and democracy and a committed abolitionist when it comes to the death penalty—would not act just as firmly when it comes to pressuring other countries regarding their policies.

No one is asking Canada to go and intervene in Iran. Canada is simply being asked to use its power, because it does so when it wants to. We have a Minister of Public Safety who claims that torture can be used more or less legally on occasion. It is time for the Canadian government to realize that torture has been illegal in Canada for quite some time, that the death penalty was abolished years ago and that, since it claims to be such an ardent abolitionist regarding the death penalty, it must speak out at every opportunity, in Iran and any other country.