Francine Lalonde

[Afghanistan, April 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the minister heard the witnesses who, according to him, made unsubstantiated allegations. He might want to try really listening to them.

Mr. Gosselin's reports were never turned over to the military police complaints commission. They are probably too incriminating for the government. Because the government's negligence and mismanagement are at the heart of this affair, the public should have access to all the documents, in their original, uncensored version.

When will the government show some transparency? When will it stop—

[Afghanistan, April 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in spite of the new agreement that was supposed to solve all the problems with transfers of Afghan detainees, Canada kept on handing over Afghan detainees, who were often innocent, to be tortured. Diplomat Nicholas Gosselin documented at least eight cases of torture between January and August 2008.

How can the government claim to have done its duty when the torture of detainees who were transferred to the Afghan authorities never stopped?

[Rights & Democracy, April 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the members of Rights & Democracy's board of directors must account for their management to Parliament, and it is our duty as parliamentarians to get to the bottom of what is going on in that organization.

In the name of transparency, will the government hand over copies of the contracts they have granted, specifically to Samson Bélair/Deloitte & Touche? We want the contracts, their cost and the accounting reports.

[Rights & Democracy, April 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, on the pretext that Rights & Democracy was being mismanaged, the government took control of that organization. Interestingly, in recent months, compensation paid to the board of directors has doubled. Its president, Jacques Gauthier, works five days and bills for 11. Contracts are being awarded to friends without calls for tender. Along the way, the reputation of the former president, Rémy Beauregard, is being tarnished because someone leaked a false report, which should be withdrawn.

Will the government acknowledge that it is turning a blind eye because it agrees with these actions?

[Rights & Democracy, April 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, these are the same people who, without any proof, invoked Rémi Beauregard's supposed poor management and who did not hesitate to award an accounting contract to their friends without a tender, while playing ignorant when asked about the contract and the price of it.

Does the government not feel that the farce has gone on long enough and that a public inquiry is needed?

[Rights & Democracy, April 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the widow of Rémi Beauregard, the president of Rights & Democracy who died at work, has stated that the members of the board of directors appointed by the government have done everything possible to tarnish his reputation and take control of Rights & Democracy in order to align its policies with the government's pro-Israel stance. Ms. Trépanier is calling for a public inquiry.

Will the government rein in the board of directors of Rights & Democracy until an independent inquiry can shed some light on the organization's shift in mandate?

[Rights & Democracy, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, according to Marco Navarro-Génie, a Rights & Democracy board member appointed by the Conservative government, the committee hearings are a waste of time. He even told parliamentarians to look elsewhere. As if it were his business.

What is the government waiting for to remind the one doing the dirty work that Rights & Democracy was created by Parliament and, therefore, that the opposition is just doing its job by calling for accountability?

[Rights & Democracy, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, at the committee hearing, witnesses confirmed that relations between staff, management and the new board members had deteriorated to the point that harassment had escalated, employees were gagged and key senior managers were finally fired. The organization was also threatened with closure if criticism of the government did not stop.

Does the evidence of former employees not confirm that the government's intention is to discredit the organization in order to have a better case for closing it?

[Shell Refinery in Montreal East, March 31st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, over 600 of us marched together on Sherbrooke Street on Sunday, carrying signs that read “Save the jobs” at the Shell refinery in Montreal East. Union members, community groups and citizens, the president of the union, Jean-Claude Rocheleau, the secretary of the FTQ, the mayor of Montreal East, Richard Deschamps from the City of Montreal, and almost all federal and provincial political parties, including the Leader of the Bloc Québécois and myself, came out to show our support.

In closing one of the two remaining refineries in Montreal East, Royal Dutch Shell is taking away 800 direct jobs from Montreal and the province of Quebec, jeopardizing our petrochemical industry and threatening Quebec's energy independence. It is even worse that RDS wants to supply its 281 service stations—with more expensive gasoline refined elsewhere—from a terminal supplied by ships with the risk of environmental disaster on the river.

Closing one refinery in East Montreal will not help save the environment; to do that, we must change consumer habits.

[Aboriginal Affaires, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, do we really need a reminder that indigenous peoples live on the Arctic coastline? It is interesting to note that the countries that have not signed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples were in the majority at the Arctic summit. It is hard to not see the Conservative government 's intentions with that.

How can the Minister of Foreign Affairs seriously discuss the future of the Arctic in the absence of the member countries of the Arctic Council as well as indigenous peoples?