House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2011, with 32% of the vote.
Petitions February 25th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, I would like to present two petitions today.
The first petition follows another petition previously presented that called for increased monitoring of dangerous offenders. That petition contains approximately 5,000 signatures, to which I am adding more. The petition calls for an amendment to section 810 of the Criminal Code, in order to protect children from sexual predators.
National Defence Act February 25th, 2008
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-513, An Act to amend the National Defence Act (foreign military mission).
Mr. Speaker, the bill I am introducing today at first reading would amend the National Defence Act so that when a foreign military mission includes or might include an offensive facet, the minister in question must table a motion for ratification of the declaration of intention to place the Canadian Forces on active service before the House of Commons.
This essentially means that when any government decides to undertake a mission involving a military component, it must table a motion in the House.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
TV5 February 25th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, France has just unilaterally decided to take complete control of TV5 by affiliating it with its holding France-Monde. Quebec, Belgium, and Switzerland are questioning this decision, which threatens the future of an important voice for the Francophonie.
What does the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages have to say about the deafening silence of the Canadian government on this matter?
Petitions February 13th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, today I would like to table a petition that was started by two citizens from Ahuntsic regarding the case of Mr. Bégin and what happened in my riding.
I already presented a petition with more than 5,000 signatures in November 2007. I am now tabling, in the same spirit, this petition calling for stronger pedophile legislation.
Quebec Film Festival February 13th, 2008
Mr. Speaker, the successive governments in the House have had difficulty recognizing the existence of a Quebec cinema. When a minister manages to say the words Quebec cinema at all, he speaks as if it were a sub-genre of Canadian francophone cinema in general.
I would like to invite the hon. members, therefore, to the Rendez-vous du cinéma québécois, which will be held February 14 to 28. They will see how right we are to say that through its feature and short films, its documentaries and its animated films, our cinema is the reflection of our culture. They will discover that although Quebec cinema is mainly francophone, it can be anglophone and aboriginal as well. The films shown this year were selected from a record number of 550 and are very representative of the filmmakers in our movie industry, who do not sit around waiting to be recognized by some Canadian government.
For 26 years, the Rendez-vous du cinéma québécois has lent expression to life in Quebec and Quebec culture. Long live Quebec cinema.
Petitions December 5th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure today to table a petition from two of my constituents about dangerous sexual offenders. This petition was initiated because there is a dangerous sexual offender in our community. There has been much discussion of this in the media. Citizens and people interested in this issue realized that there is a flaw in the 1996 legislation on dangerous offenders and those under long-term supervision.
Even though legislation is not retroactive, the people who signed this petition are asking us to amend section 818, which makes conditional release available to dangerous sexual offenders. Furthermore, they are asking us to ensure that offenders like Mr. Bégin will remain in jail as long as they are still considered dangerous.
We collected about 5,000 names on this petition and it is my great pleasure to table it in the House today.
Committees of the House November 27th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I find what is going on in this House with the parliamentary secretary rather amusing. He is essentially telling us that culture is not important to him and his government. He is accusing us of trying to waste time to avoid debating their bill. But we voted in favour of the bill. What is he talking about? I do not understand.
What I understand from what he is saying is that culture is not important to him, to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages, to his government and to his Prime Minister.
Can he tell us more about the changes and the free market the minister mentioned in her speech? What exactly are the changes the minister wants to make?
We would like some reassurance on this subject.
Committees of the House November 27th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
The fact is that we have noticed that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages was using, to some degree, her power to issue directives to begin to sway the CRTC toward deregulation and the free market.
We are quite concerned about that. And this is not just Quebeckers. Indeed, fellow members on the committee who represent the other opposition parties also supported that motion, because even Canadian culture stakeholders are concerned about this deregulation process, which could result in more foreign productions taking a greater part of the market. In other words, we would have a free market. Whoever would be best positioned to sell cultural products would simply do it.
Currently, we have regulations which provide that there must be a certain quota in terms of Canadian content and production. Back home, we are talking about quotas for Quebec productions.
That is the reason for our concern. We noticed that the minister gets involved when it suits her, but only then. We felt that if the minister wanted to change things, she simply had to come and tell us in committee, so that we could report back to the House. This is simply democracy at work.
Committees of the House November 27th, 2007
Clearly, Mr. Speaker, we will never agree on this difference. Whether we like it or not, for the time being we are a nation, but the day will come when we will become a country that will be a powerful player on the world scene. It will not be a military power, something that Canada seems to be drifting toward and that we are forced to go along because we are not yet a country.
Is it not clear why we want to become a country? Because of all this. Because, as a country, we would not go into Afghanistan or Iraq, for example,we would avoid finding ourselves in situations that are non of our business. The fact of the matter is that we have different values, a different identity and a different outlook on the world.
Having said that, I disagree with my colleague when he says that the Quebec culture would be weaker in the event of a separation from Canada. That is false. Look at France, which is a state in and of itself. Is it weaker? Are the United States weaker? No, they are actually invading us with their culture. The difference and the strength of cultures does not come from independence then, but rather from what one decides to do with it; that is what gives a people its strength and its identity. We have resisted Canadian colonization for many years and we are still here. We still have our own identity, and our language has survived. Quebec is not bilingual, as Canada says; Quebec is French, it is intercultural and, one day, it will become a country.
Committees of the House November 27th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
I would say that culture is vital to every nation. If we study history a bit, we see that, when there has been the desire to destroy or eliminate a people, the first thing attacked is its culture and identity. Unfortunately, we have seen this here, in Canada, with events involving aboriginals. Attempts have been made to turn them into white people, to annihilate their own culture. At present, the culture of many aboriginal communities is still under attack.
I have visited some reserves and certain areas. For example, I went to Chisasibi, where the Cree live. They told me they could not raise their children because they were not allowed to be parents and their culture had been annihilated. I met with young people who told me that they were ashamed to be Cree. That is abominable. their culture and their identity have been taken away from them. For this reason, it is vital to not let our culture be swept away by market forces.
We now live in a country called Canada and we too are a different nation. To be able to manage our identity, we will not entrust it to others; we must manage it ourselves. That must be done in all areas, particularly in telecommunications and broadcasting, and hence the request for a Quebec CRTC. We are the only ones who can understand what we want in terms of culture and identity.
I do not wish to be meanspirited with regard to this matter. However, we need only think of the 18 organizations who spoke out, of which 17 were from Quebec, because they felt that their culture, which is different than that of Canada, was being attacked directly.
When we talk of recognizing the Quebec nation, there must be an acknowledgement that the term “nation” goes hand in hand with the terms “action” and “responsibility”. Then, we must be given the powers that rightfully belong to us, in all matters whether culture, immigration or protection and security.