Marlene Jennings

[Rights & Democracy, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Gérard Latulippe, the new president of Rights & Democracy, has been at the centre of a number of controversies, the most recent involving the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues.

As my Bloc colleague mentioned, the federation stated that Mr. Latulippe does not have the moral authority to head this organization.

This Conservative appointment has tarnished Canada's reputation abroad.

Does the government agree with Mr. Latulippe's racist statements about Muslim immigration to Quebec?

[Business of the House, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the government House leader, apart from the Speech from the Throne and the budget, what other business the government intends to bring forth, in particular, next Friday, March 12. The calendar that was provided to the House leaders does not indicate any particular intentions of the government for Friday, March 12.

As well, under the Standing Orders two supply days must be allotted by March 16. Could the government now inform the House which two days between now and March 16 will be designated supply days?

Finally, the House leader may be able to answer a question that we all have, which is will the government institute a special committee on prorogation?

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the minister takes the gold for skating.

The Conservative government always refuses to take responsibility for its actions, shifting the blame to public servants and to political staffers. The government cannot pick and choose which equality rights to respect.

The minister should admit that it was wrong to censor out this fundamental right or tell us whose rights are next on the Conservative chopping block: women, visible minorities, the disabled? Whose rights are next?

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming all too clear that the new citizenship study guide is really a guide to Conservative citizenship. I can understand that the minister is against same-sex marriage, but he cannot pick and choose which fundamental rights must be respected and which ones should be suppressed.

Can the minister explain why he voluntarily removed all references to the legalization of gay marriage in his partisan guide?

[Petitions, March 4th, 2010]

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a petition brought to me by Melanie Johannink, a former Nortel employee.

The petition calls on the federal government to amend the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act in order to protect pensions. She asked me to point out that a number of the signatures are of people from the riding of the Minister of Industry. I strongly urge the government to take swift action to resolve this situation.

[Petitions, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a few petitions today. First, I would like to table a petition signed by a hundred or so people who are calling on the House of Commons to pass animal welfare legislation. I am not supposed to say so, but everyone knows I am in favour of this.

I would also like to table two other petitions signed by a number of people who are calling on Parliament to adopt a universal declaration on animal welfare. We unanimously adopted the motion of my colleague from Scarborough Southwest on this issue during the previous parliamentary session. I am proud that our Parliament adopted it, and we have already seen an impact in the House.

[Address in Reply, March 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the government took almost three months, including the prorogation, to produce next to nothing.

For the meagreness in the content of this throne speech, for the thinness of the substance of this throne speech, the government could have tweeted it and it still would have had 12 characters left. It would have saved countless trees and our environment.

This is a rehash of the 2008 Speech from the Throne. Today's speech contains many sentences and statements that were in the previous one. We are told about recession and job creation but not about any new initiatives to help the workers or to create jobs. There are no such measures to be found. The Speech from the Throne contains nothing about investments in research and development, nothing to protect pensions, nothing for culture and nothing new for our veterans.

The Liberals had proposed three new incentives. Why did the Conservatives not take them into consideration? All the experts agree that these could have created jobs. We proposed incentives to hire young workers. We proposed increased support for manufacturers through the accelerated capital cost allowance and through tax incentives for investments in business startup.

The Conservatives seem to be just repeating their old Speech from the Throne. Even the title comes from the defeated Conservative prime minister of Australia. Quite frankly, the Canadian Conservative government shows no creativity at all.

I would then ask why it does not recognize its lack of innovation and creativity—

[Afghanistan, December 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence said, “The truth is there is no credible evidence to suggest that a prisoner was ever tortured.”

Yet the evidence shows that, in 2006, our soldiers began taking photos of detainees because they knew that the Afghan police had tortured or abused prisoners in the past.

How many cases of abuse or torture is the government trying to hide?

When will a public inquiry be called so we can finally learn the truth?

[Afghanistan, December 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the minister told us repeatedly that no allegations of mistreatment had been proven.

Yet the report released yesterday says that the Canadian Forces, “photographed the individual prior to handing him over, to ensure that if the Afghan National Police did assault him, as has happened in the past, they would have a visual record of his condition”.

How many cases of detainee mistreatment is the minister hiding and trying to sweep under the carpet?

[Business of Supply, December 10th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. Bloc Québécois colleague for his speech and for indicating that his party intends to support the official opposition motion.

I just want to emphasize one point, because the member mentioned that this is a minority government and, accordingly, that this government should not have done what it did.

In 2004, the Liberals formed the government and had a majority until the election at the end of June 2004. As hon. members will recall, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts began examining the Auditor General's report regarding the sponsorship program. The committee—I, personally, in fact, as a member and vice-chair of that committee—moved a motion demanding that the government hand over all documents from cabinet and the cabinet committee on the Treasury Board regarding the sponsorship program. The government, which had a majority at the time, acceded to the committee's request and provided all the documents. That was the first time in the history of the Confederation that a government handed over cabinet committee documents and reports, and we did not hesitate to do so.

I wonder what the member thinks of the Conservative government's behaviour, in light of that example.