Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

[Business of Supply, May 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from LaSalle—Émard for her passionate speech on the subject of co-operatives. I know that she is very involved in her community and the co-operatives there.

I find it very interesting that, at the end of her speech, my colleague suggested ways of finding solutions, that is, how we can go further in supporting these co-operatives that are important players in the economy and that provide services that suit the needs of communities.

Could my colleague tell us a little more about what the co-operatives are asking? Perhaps she is aware of the needs and requirements of co-operatives at this time. How can we promote the development of co-operatives in Quebec and Canada?

[Petitions, May 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition signed by people from Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord. The petitioners are worried about proposed changes to old age security.

The petitioners wish to point out, first, that the proposed changes will affect the poorest people most, and second, that experts agree that our old age security program is sustainable.

Considering those two facts, the petitioners are calling on the government to refrain from making any changes to old age security. Furthermore, they are calling on the government to improve the guaranteed income supplement, since the current amount is not enough to lift seniors out of poverty and is a disgrace to Canada today.

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

Mr. Speaker, we know that a pension scheme like the one announced in the bill we are debating today clearly puts women at a disadvantage, unlike the NDP's solution of enhancing the public plan.

Given the hon. member's remarkable commitment to causes that affect women specifically, I would ask her to briefly comment on this matter.

[Petitions, May 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition signed by residents in the riding of Alfred-Pellan in response to the measures announced regarding old age security.

The petitioners believe that these measures are an attack on the poorest seniors and wish to point out that experts agree that the old age security system is sustainable.

First, the petitioners are calling on the government to leave the old age security program alone. They are also calling on the government to increase the amount of the guaranteed income supplement, since the current amount is not enough to lift seniors out of poverty and is a disgrace to Canada today.

[Petitions, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to present a petition from people in Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie.

The petition is signed by 368 people from Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie who are asking the government to maintain the status quo for funding because, according to experts, the old age security program is viable.

The petitioners would also like to see an increase in the guaranteed income supplement in order to end seniors' poverty.

[Government Spending, May 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we have seen examples where the Conservatives' lack of transparency led to abuses. Look at the G8 slush fund. Indeed, there is cause for concern when the government announces its intention to cut the auditing powers of the Auditor General.

We have even seen the Conservatives refuse to allow the Auditor General to testify before the parliamentary committee. They want to silence the person responsible for ensuring that taxpayers' money is spent properly.

Why do the Conservatives want to take away the Auditor General's powers?

[Government Spending, May 10th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as a result of the budget cuts, 12 different government agencies will lose their internal auditors. That is Conservative-style transparency.

The role of the auditors is to ensure that taxpayers' money is spent properly. The Conservatives are therefore in favour of allowing millions of dollars to be spent without any oversight. They are leaving the door wide open to abuse.

Why do the Conservatives think that government spending does not have to be supervised? Are they hoping to spend money however they want?

[World Press Freedom Day, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, today is World Press Freedom Day, and the NDP would like to pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives while keeping us informed.

Even now, around the world, many publications are censored or banned because of their content or because they campaign for greater freedom and democracy.

Freedom of the press is the cornerstone of every democratic society, and Canada is no exception. In fact, Canada should be a leader in respecting basic rights, such as freedom of the press.

Unfortunately, the Conservatives are venturing into dangerous territory. They value ideology over facts and refuse to listen to environmental and financial experts. The Prime Minister's Office protects information as though it were the crown jewels.

Never has a government allowed journalists so little access to information. Maybe it is trying to prevent all of its scandals from being exposed.

The NDP is against such a blatant lack of transparency toward journalists and, by extension, the Canadian public.

The NDP will remain vigilant to ensure that journalists' freedom of expression is respected and protected.

[Petitions, May 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as the NDP critic for senior citizens, I have the honour to present a petition signed by people from Beauport—Limoilou who are concerned about recently announced changes to old age security.

Old age security is an important program. Experts agree that it is sustainable and that there is no need to cut back or change the program. That is why the people who have signed this petition are urging the government to maintain funding at current levels and not make changes to old age security. They also want the government to increase the guaranteed income supplement so that the people who rely on these pensions can live above the poverty line.

[Pensions, May 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians feel betrayed by the Conservatives' decision to increase the age of eligibility for old age security from 65 to 67. Canadians themselves are saying so, not just the opposition.

The Prime Minister's Office is being inundated with complaints from unhappy people, and they have good reason to be unhappy. Even though the PMO may have already gotten rid of this embarrassing correspondence, it does not change the fact that the announced changes to old age security will affect the most vulnerable members of our society.

Why are the Conservatives targeting people who are unable to save for a comfortable retirement?