Gilles Duceppe

[Firearms Registry, September 20th, 2010]

In short, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government wants to put more people in jail and have more guns in circulation. What a fine attitude. It is paradoxical, to say the least.

Will the Prime Minister admit that one of the objectives of his anti-gun registry campaign is to please his military supporters, and too bad for safety?

[Firearms Registry, September 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, the Conservatives announced that, in this new session, law and order would once again be their priority. This morning, however, the President of the Treasury Board reiterated that he would continue to fight for the abolition of the firearms registry, no matter the outcome of Wednesday's vote. Yet, everyone agrees that the registry is a vital tool. That is what the RCMP, police chiefs and women's groups are saying.

Will the Prime Minister finally admit that his stubborn attempt to abolish the firearms registry is driven only by ideology?

[Quebec Nation, June 17th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, that principle has been applied very generously in the case of Prince Edward Island.

Federalism has been bad for the Quebec nation both politically and economically. The government is refusing to give Quebec the $2.2 billion it is owed for harmonizing its sales tax, despite having compensated the Atlantic provinces, Ontario and British Columbia.

Is that not further proof that the Prime Minister could not care less about Quebec, its priorities or its National Assembly?

[Quebec Nation, June 17th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, 20 years after the failure of the Meech Lake Accord, the Conservative government has proven over the course of this parliamentary session that it will never back up its recognition of the Quebec nation with concrete measures. The government's bill to reduce Quebec's political weight in the House of Commons is evidence of that.

Will the Prime Minister admit that, for him, recognizing the Quebec nation was merely symbolic and that what he really wants to do is marginalize it?

[Committees of the House, June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government's position is clear, but it clearly contravenes the authority of Parliament. With his stubborn refusal to appear before a committee, Dimitri Soudas could be charged with contempt of Parliament.

Does the Prime Minister realize that, by supporting his press secretary, he is complicit in the contempt for Parliament and democracy? Such action is unbecoming of a prime minister.

[Committees of the House, June 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel to the House of Commons was very clear: ministerial responsibility does not limit the power of parliamentary committees. They therefore have the right to call political staff members, if needed to advance their work.

Why does the Prime Minister continue to support his press secretary, Dimitri Soudas, who is refusing to testify before a parliamentary committee? Is he above the law?

[G8 and G20 Summits, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, that was not my question. He has decided to put climate change on the agenda.

My question is this: when the topic of maternal health comes up, why will abortion not be part of that discussion?

Will the Prime Minister take a firm stance on abortion and include this option in discussions on maternal health?

[G8 and G20 Summits, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in response to pressure from the international community, the opposition and environmental groups, the Prime Minister has finally listened to reason and has put climate change on the agenda for the G8 and G20 summits. We have known for a while that maternal health would be a very important subject discussed at these summits.

If the Prime Minister was able to change course with climate change, why does he not do the same with abortion and include it in the maternal health program that will be discussed at these summits?

[G8 and G20 Summits, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the environment and the economy cannot be separated because they are so closely linked. Moreover, if climate change is going to be discussed, it should be on the agenda. The Prime Minister is not hesitating to take advantage of the G8 and G20 summits to invite heads of state and discuss different issues with them.

Why not broaden the scope of the meeting and invite Yvo de Boer, the senior climate change official at the UN, and officially put the environment on the agenda for the two summits?

[G8 and G20 Summits, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister paid lip service to the idea of putting climate change on the agenda for the G8 and G20 summits. Recently, Mexican President Felipe Calderón and six Nobel peace prize laureates stressed that it is important to use these international summits to talk about the environment and climate change.

To clear up any doubt, will the Prime Minister put climate change on the agenda for the G8 and G20 summits?