Francine Lalonde

[Foreign Affairs, June 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this week at UNESCO headquarters in Paris, there will be another meeting to promote the objectives of UNESCO's Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.

Will the minister assure us that Quebec will speak for itself and clearly indicate whether Quebec will be allowed to express any disagreement with Canada's position in UNESCO debates?

[Foreign Affairs, June 15th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, at the March 2009 meeting of the UNESCO committee on cultural diversity, Canada expressed some reservations with respect to the call by the International Organization of la Francophonie for francophone visas enabling artists to travel freely among its 60 member countries. This same attitude was observed during the celebrations of the 400th anniversary of Quebec City.

Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs explain why Canada has refused to follow up on this initiative?

[Foreign Affairs, June 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, when asked about Nathalie Morin's case, lawyer Julius Grey said:

I will be filing suit against the Government of Canada, which ... has been completely unsympathetic. ... They are not doing anything. They are hiding. They are hiding behind all kinds of excuses.

In the case of Nathalie and her children, sections 6, 7, and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are being ignored. Will the minister bring them home soon or not?

[Foreign Affairs, June 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Quebec's National Assembly unanimously adopted a motion calling on the federal government to bring Nathalie Morin and her children home as soon as possible. Nathalie Morin and her children are being held against their will and are being malnourished and mistreated.

In this case, there is no reason the government cannot negotiate their return with Saudi Arabia.

[Justice, June 8th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, for two years, Jatinder Sandhu, a woman from Saint-Hubert, has been trying to have her husband, Gulvinder Singh Sandhu, transferred to a Canadian prison from the United States. The correctional services in the United States have agreed, but Canada is refusing. This situation has made Mrs. Sandhu serious ill, and she can no longer care for her three children.

Why does the government refuse to let this Canadian citizen, who is incarcerated in another country, be transferred to Canada so that he can be closer to his young family?

[Justice, June 4th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Federal Court just ruled that the Canadian government breached Abousfian Abdelrazik's right to return to Canada. Consequently, the court is ordering the government to arrange Mr. Abdelrazik's return to Canada.

Will the Canadian government promise, right here, right now, not to appeal, to comply with the Federal Court's ruling and to allow Mr. Abdelrazik to return to Canada without delay?

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Act, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I spoke earlier about children born in the forest compared to those born in urban areas. The situation has perhaps improved somewhat. However, the situation of children in these work areas, in general, is totally unacceptable. The problems caused by the use of chemical products, the fact that they are thrown out onto the streets, the fact that their parents cannot work and earn a living in healthy and safe conditions—all of this affects them. Children are the ones who suffer the most.

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Act, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I see no reason why things would be any different. Canada wants this agreement because of the provisions that favour investors. I did not discuss chapter 11 of NAFTA, which we fought, but which is basically copied in this agreement. It is hard to understand why a developing country would sign such an agreement, and that is not just our opinion.

If a company is harmed by any law seeking to improve working conditions or social laws and can calculate the impact on its bottom line, it can sue the government. It does not have to wait for one government to take up the matter with the other. No, the company itself can go to court to have its case heard. That has happened a number of times. Not only does that lead to the consequences I mentioned earlier, but it interferes with the government's ability to improve workers' living conditions and other social conditions.

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Act, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is an interesting question. As I have often said, as the Bloc has often said, and as others have no doubt written, free trade agreements are negotiated between countries and among groups of countries that are more or less similar economically and socially. They are not negotiated between a rich country and a poor one. If they were, it is likely that the country benefiting would not be the one that ought to in terms of social justice.

Upon closer examination of the two agreements in question, what stands out is the fact that we are committing to increasing mining investment. One might think that would help develop the country, but we have looked at a number of cases and it is clear that groups of people are often displaced and forced to give up their traditional livelihoods, after which they cannot find new ways to make a living. Either there are no provisions restricting investors' actions or there are none protecting workers and allowing them to unionize. Even if there were, it is extremely difficult to make sure that the rules are being followed when we are so far away.

My colleague used some strong language, but he was right. This situation is a kind of new colonialism.

[Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Act, June 1st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is an interesting question. I cannot say that I have an exact answer. However, the logical answer is important, since it is the American policy that seems to be driving this. It is clear that the Prime Minister wanted to negotiate a free trade agreement on the heels of the American agreement. Now the conditions have changed and I hope that Canada will revise its policy. The Bloc Québécois does not want this agreement to be ratified.