House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2015, with 31% of the vote.
Employment February 28th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, people are looking for jobs; it is as simple as that. From employment insurance claims processing to the Job Bank, automation has been nothing but problematic. Unemployed workers need more. They need to get their employment insurance cheques quickly. They need to find new jobs using tools like the Job Bank. They need someone to answer the phone.
Canadians pay for these services. Where are the services they have paid for and are entitled to?
Canada Labour Code February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, I rise today to support Bill C-315, introduced by my NDP colleague from Trois-Rivières.
The purpose of this bill is to amend the Canada Labour Code regarding French as the language of work in Quebec, in federally regulated businesses. I repeat: French as the language of work in Quebec in federally regulated businesses.
Why is it important for me to discuss this issue today? For over 15 years I helped to negotiate collective agreements in an effort to improve the lives of those around me. I came to realize that there is a flagrant omission in the Canada Labour Code, which affects thousands of workers. Although the majority of the population in Quebec speaks French, many francophone workers do not have the same language rights at work as their neighbours. This is incredible in 2012, but true.
Here is a concrete example: Aéroports de Montréal, an interprovincial and international transportation company, is subject to the Canada Labour Code. In 2004, Aéroports de Montréal carried out construction work and security guards were hired for surveillance purposes. In order to get the job, francophone workers had to complete unilingual English documents; there was no French version available. Another prerequisite: the guards had to be able to speak English. Yet, on the construction site, the language of work was French. All activities took place in French.
At around the same time, in 2004, workshops for municipal vehicles were built in Hochelaga. The City of Montreal is—obviously—not an enterprise that is subject to the Canada Labour Code. No francophone workers involved in the project were asked to complete forms in English, nor did they have to know English to work on the construction site where, again, all activities took place in French.
Fortunately for the Aéroports de Montréal security guards, the employees took a stand and contested these pointless practices. However, they had to defend their rights themselves because the Canada Labour Code did not offer them this protection.
Why did these two groups of employees working in the same city, at the same time, and in similar situations, not have the same rights? Because labour relations for employees of Aéroports de Montréal, whose activities are federally regulated, are governed by the Canada Labour Code and the Charter of the French Language and its consequential language rights do not apply. Quebec's labour relations laws do not apply to the employees of Aéroports de Montréal, while they do apply to employees of the City of Montréal, and the different codes have different rules. For example, unlike the Quebec code, the Canada Labour Code has no anti-strikebreaker provisions, more commonly known as “anti-scab” provisions. This is a great injustice that needs to be corrected as soon as possible.
Let us come back to the clauses related to language of work. Here is another example, a situation that many people can probably relate to. Madame Pelletier—an imaginary person—works in a chartered bank in Montreal east. Her cousin, Madame Aubé, works at a credit union a block away. Both cousins have the same training, work in similar jobs and work in completely francophone environments, but while Madame Aubé continues to advance her career, Madame Pelletier cannot apply for management jobs because she does not speak English. However, English is rarely spoken at her branch. Nevertheless, her bank requires that executives speak English. That is rather unfair, is it not?
Imagine a team working for a large telecommunications company in Amos, in the Abitibi region, that receives the text of an arbitral award rendered following a grievance that affects the team, but they receive it in a language that the team does not understand, because that language has never been required for their work in a francophone community. What do they do?
Bill C-315 will protect the linguistic rights of Quebec's francophone majority working in enterprises under federal jurisdiction. I already gave some examples of companies under federal jurisdiction—and so have other members: mills, radio and television broadcasters, interprovincial and international transportation companies, including rail, road, marine and air.
This would affect several thousand workers in Quebec. In his statement on Wednesday, the hon. member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice talked about “making Canada a strong...country in which Quebec has an important place”.
And yesterday, the Minister of Labour said:
Our government is committed to promoting and protecting the French language in Canada.
Our government is proud of Canadian bilingualism and our cultural diversity, and we remain fully committed to promoting the French language in Canada and abroad.
If they truly believe in this, here is an opportunity for the Conservatives to prove it and demonstrate that this is not just empty rhetoric. As my NDP colleague from Outremont often says, they need to walk the talk.
Recognizing the Quebec nation must not be merely symbolic. We do not need an advisory committee to examine the matter. We already know there are problems. While the intentions may have been good, it was money wasted. Other studies have already shown this. It is now time to act.
Bill C-315 proposes concrete results for Quebeckers without taking away the rights of other workers. It simply supports the rights of the francophone majority in Quebec, in the same way that the rights of the anglophone majority are protected outside Quebec .
Federal institutions, governed by the Official Languages Act, are not affected by this bill, because both official languages are already protected by the act. This is the case, for example, with the Port of Montreal, located partly in my riding, Hochelaga.
Nor would a business that provides services only to anglophone communities be asked to have all its documentation translated into French. That would not help anybody. This bill, however, would greatly improve the working environment for a great many francophone Quebeckers. On average, people spend at least a third of their lives at work—in our case, it is a little more—and an even higher percentage of their working lives. When you are not happy at work, the days seem long, and that obviously has a bearing on life outside work.
Having good working conditions is important to people’s mental and physical health and to the quality of their work. Even the Conseil du patronat du Québec is trying to convince businesses in the province that promoting the use of French in the workplace will actually benefit them. Bill C-315 is extremely important, therefore, on several levels: it provides a concrete and realistic solution to an increasingly evident problem; it confers rights upon thousands of workers without taking any rights away from anyone; it helps to create more healthy workplaces; it helps to foster more productive workplaces; it helps to protect and promote the French language; and it reaffirms the place of the Quebec nation in a fair and united Canada.
I therefore congratulate my colleague from Trois-Rivières for having taken up the cause in an effort to close a flagrant loophole in the Canada Labour Code, by proposing a fair and concrete solution.
I would strongly encourage members from all parties and provinces to show their solidarity with francophones in Quebec by supporting this bill.
Standing Orders and Procedure February 17th, 2012
Madam Speaker, my Conservative colleague is accusing us of wilfully, as he said, delaying passage of a bill. Unless he has a crystal ball, how can he know this even before debate gets underway, because a time allocation motion is sometimes presented before the debate starts?
Persons with Disabilities February 9th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, that may be so. By the way, we voted against Duplessis's patronage.
With so few Conservative MPs in Quebec, we are not surprised to learn that Quebec is not receiving its fair share. Less than $2 million has gone to the 75 Quebec ridings, but more than $57 million has gone to Conservative ridings.
Where does it say that their strong mandate gives them the right to ignore and neglect thousands of Canadians living with a disability? Why are the Conservatives attacking the vulnerable? Why the double standard?
Persons with Disabilities February 9th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, according to a document obtained by the NDP under the Access to Information Act, 85% of the money in the enabling accessibility fund has gone to Conservative ridings. Coincidence? Not at all.
Time and again successive governments have punished the people who did not vote for them. People are tired of the same old story. The Prime Minister promised to govern for all Canadians. When will he start doing so?
Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act January 31st, 2012
Mr. Speaker, we have said a number of times that we think the plan was full of good intentions, but it has one huge problem: it is tied to the stock market. The past few years have been full of fluctuations, losses and the collapse of markets. So this is very risky.
What will the government say to a woman in my riding of Hochelaga who struggles to put aside some savings and then loses up to 10% of her income? That would be enough to determine whether she can afford groceries from one week to the next.
Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act January 31st, 2012
Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to listen to my colleague speak. He is so spirited and really believes in what he says. That much is evident. I would like him to elaborate on alternatives to the Conservatives’ plan and talk about initiatives that would really help Canada's seniors.
Housing January 31st, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the affordable housing situation in this country is in full crisis mode, and it is not just the NDP that has been saying so for years now. A new study released today by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities supports what we are calling for. The construction of affordable housing would boost the country's economy and provide jobs for Canadians.
In these tough economic times, too many families are having trouble finding affordable housing. When will this government realize the extent of this crisis and invest in building affordable housing?
Employment January 30th, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the situation is just as bad in Montreal, where appliance manufacturer Mabe Canada has announced the closure of its plant. As a result: 700 high-quality jobs have disappeared. The very day of this sad announcement, the Prime Minister was in Davos to brag about the strength of Canadian economy.
That same region was hit by the closure of the Shell refinery a few years ago. If the Prime Minister thinks the economic situation in Montreal East is so great, then instead of going to Davos, why does he not come to Hochelaga and explain that to the employees of Mabe Canada who have just been laid off?
Government of Canada December 15th, 2011
Mr. Speaker, it is official. The Conservative government has stopped pretending that it is open and transparent, and the Prime Minister's Office is bent more than ever on silencing anyone who dares to oppose it.
They have muzzled the backbenchers in the House.
The government would now like to hold committee meetings in camera.
I would like to remind members that, in 1995, this Prime Minister spoke out against in camera sessions when he stated, “In my opinion it is in the best interests of the public for the information to be readily available. It will affect who is elected. That will affect the quality of government.”
He was right. It does affect the quality of government.
Illicit lobbying, a $50 million slush fund, the use of military resources as a personal taxi—Canadians have seen it all, but the ministers remain unscathed.
In 1995, this Prime Minister came to Ottawa to change things, but Ottawa has changed him.