Marcel Proulx

[Saint-Rédempteur Elementary School in Gatineau, May 29th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, April 30, the Saint-Rédempteur elementary school in the Hull sector of Gatineau celebrated its 50th anniversary. A huge reunion held at the school gave former students an opportunity to renew friendships and share memories. Built in 1959, Saint-Rédempteur's story is very special. It may be small in terms of the number of students, but it has achieved greatness through its choices and actions. Over the past 50 years, the school has done such wonderful job of shaping its students that it deserves our admiration and attention.

The school on Saint-Florent is a place of learning where the curriculum goes beyond numbers and letters to values. The school is proud of its past and its ongoing work. The current principal, Catherine Dubuc, and the teaching staff go above and beyond to carry out the school's inspiring educational mission.

I would like to congratulate all past and current students and teachers who have been a part of Saint-Rédempteur school's wonderful story.

Bravo!

[Automotive Industry, May 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government imposed restructuring conditions on General Motors that resulted in the closure of 240 dealerships in Canada. Those closures will cause the loss of between 10,000 and 20,000 jobs in this country, but the Conservatives could not care less about workers.

Did the Conservatives also force GM to disregard the performance of the dealerships it decided to close and to get rid of francophone dealerships, which GM seems to be doing in the urban parts of the national capital region and in Quebec?

[Automotive Industry, May 25th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the government's incompetence when it comes to the auto sector crisis is not just hurting communities with auto plants. It is having a direct impact on all of our communities starting with the announced closure of 240 GM dealerships across the country.

The Conservatives have done nothing to help consumers get credit to buy cars and now we hear that they demanded the closure of these GM dealerships as a condition for any financial support.

Why would the Conservative government rather push thousands of workers on to EI, if they can even qualify, instead of providing direct support for auto dealerships?

[May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague obviously is trying to change the channel.

With regard to job creation, last week at committee the government's officials said that they were not tracking the creation of jobs, so the Conservatives do not have much to say about that.

Through their ideology, the Conservatives have made an enemy of the public service. They have abandoned our employees and made them bear the costs of this financial crisis, a crisis that they have both denied and ignored.

The Liberal Party has the utmost respect and admiration for our hard-working public servants and for what they do for Canadians every day. They have set an example by being willing to work with the government to enter into reasonable agreements.

Neither the Liberal Party nor I will forget the goodwill the public service unions have demonstrated.

Will this government recognize the efforts of the public service and enter into new equitable, reasonable collective agreements? Will it give Government of Canada lawyers their due and adjust the salary bases?

[May 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on March 13, I asked a question about negotiations with the Association of Justice Counsel.

Let us go back to the presentation of the last Conservative budget and the introduction of Bill C-10, Budget Implementation Act, 2009.

The Conservatives have resorted to an underhanded strategy. They have tabled an omnibus bill that includes amendments to other legislation such as the Navigable Waters Protection Act and measures to restrain government spending, particularly in the area of pay increases.

We, Liberals, supported that budget reluctantly to help Canadians in need pull through this financial crisis as quickly as possible.

The Conservatives have taken advantage of an opportunity to penalize their public service. The bill limits pay increases for federal public servants to 1.5% annually, from 2008-09 to 2010-11, despite the collective agreements in effect.

What is the impact of these provisions? It is extremely important. The Conservatives are being sued by two unions: the Public Service Alliance of Canada, and the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.

These two unions represent over 215,000 members. Their voice is important and we must listen to them. What do they have against the Conservatives? They are upset by the Conservatives' decision to restrict the power to fully negotiate the salaries and wages of public servants. This would violate the freedom of association guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the right to collective bargaining recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada.

That situation is unfair to our public servants, but it is even more so in the case of the over 2,000 lawyers who work for the Government of Canada. Let me explain. In 2003, the lawyers and notaries obtained from Parliament permission to negotiate a first collective agreement. Unfortunately, because the parties could not agree, they resorted to mediation. Since that did not work either, the parties went to arbitration.

The problem is that the two sides could not agree on a fair remuneration before Bill C-10 was passed. This means that the union is now forced to accept salary increases that are based on a scale that goes back more than 20 years.

That situation is unfair. It puts Government of Canada lawyers in seventh place, in terms of salaries. For example, the starting salary of a federal government lawyer is 37% lower than that of his Ontario counterpart. Even though most Government of Canada lawyers live in Ontario, their salary is between 40% and 60% lower than that of their colleagues with the Ontario government.

How can the government attract young lawyers if it refuses to give them fair and equitable pay? Similarly, how can it keep its experienced professional lawyers, so that they will continue to protect our values and our rights?

Finally, this situation, which is unfair to begin with, exists in the context of the fight against crime, of which the Conservatives claim to be the standard bearers. On the one hand they create new offences, while on the other hand they reduce the resources allowing us to prosecute criminals. That is nonsense. It is a fundamental contradiction and it is sheer hypocrisy.

My question is still valid: will the Conservatives reconsider their decision and change the salary base for counsel, on which salary increases provided under the 2009 Budget Implementation Act are based?

[World Red Cross Red Crescent Day, May 6th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, has it really been 100 years already?

A century ago, the parliamentarians who came before us passed the legislation that established the Canadian Red Cross Society, which today also operates under the name of Red Crescent. The Red Cross was already active in Canada prior to that, but under the aegis of the British Red Cross.

I invite my colleagues to think about the countless Canadians who have benefited from the support, security and comfort provided by the Red Cross under the most difficult circumstances. We only need to skim through the newspaper to read about any number of disasters that our citizens face every day. The Red Cross might not always make the headlines, but there is an excellent chance that, in most cases, it is there.

If there is a need for clothing or temporary shelter for people forced out of their homes in the middle of the night because of fire or flood, the Red Cross is there.

On behalf of all my colleagues and all Canadians, I would like to express the profound gratitude we owe to all the staff and volunteers who work for the Red Cross and Red Crescent, and I hope they will continue to be there to provide relief for centuries to come.

[Criminal Code, May 5th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, could you delay the vote a little so we can obtain a final, word-for-word copy of the motion? In that way we will be able to make an enlightened decision.

[Government Expenditures, May 4th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this is the commission that the Prime Minister created and then cancelled himself when Parliament would not let his top party bagman chair the commission.

If Joe Public got a job and then quit before doing any work, he would not be paid. Why is this any different? Plain and simple, this is another example of the Conservative government's ability to waste money.

One million dollars would provide some 3,000 EI payments for Canadians who could really use the help right now.

Why did the government spend taxpayers' dollars so irresponsibly?

[Government Expenditures, May 4th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, more taxpayers' money is being wasted.

Last week, we learned that the government had wasted $50,000 paying American consultants to do the work of staff of the Prime Minister's Office. Today, we learn that the government wasted more than $1 million to fund a public appointments commission that does not even exist.

A million dollars could have helped a lot of families in difficulty in this Conservative recession. How can the government justify this waste of money when so many Canadians desperately need help now?

[April 27th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, this government has simply abandoned the forestry industry. It has also abandoned forestry workers laid off in small forest communities hard hit by this crisis.

The Conservative government had said that the softwood lumber agreement would put an end to the disputes with the Americans, but that is not true. This government is using that agreement to refuse to give loans to forestry companies. It is sitting on its hands while workers suffer and rural communities deteriorate.

The Conservatives are wrong. The government must defend the interests of the forestry industry and the thousands of people who work in that industry.

Why does this government have nothing to offer forestry workers, and when will it submit a real plan to help the forestry industry to this House?