Matthew Dubé

[2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, September 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to acknowledge the performance of our Canadian athletes at the Olympic and Paralympic Games in London this summer.

As citizens of this great country, we should be proud of what our athletes accomplished at these games. Our Olympic and Paralympic athletes, with their courage and determination, are an inspiration for all Canadians.

During these games, many of our athletes had the pleasure of reaching the podium; others just missed medals by mere seconds or millimetres. But they all inspired us with performances worthy of the best athletes in the world.

We can all be proud as Canadians of the performance of our athletes. To see women and men from every part of this great land performing under the Canadian flag makes us all proud.

I thank all who, with courage and determination and through the core values of excellence, respect and teamwork, showed the world what Canada is all about.

On behalf of all of my colleagues on this side of the House, I congratulate them and thank them for those great and memorable sporting moments. They gave their everything and Canadians are proud of them.

You gave it your all and Canadians are proud of you.

[World Autism Awareness Day Act, June 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House in support of Bill S-206.

On a personal note, I too would like to commend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry for sharing his personal experience. I think stories like those are rather exceptional, especially for someone like me who has never had this personal experience. I want to commend the hon. member and wish him well.

It is exactly this type of situation that makes a seemingly symbolic gesture so important because, like many mental or brain-related illnesses, there are many unknowns. Increasing public awareness gives us the opportunity to do more research and more work to help the friends and family of individuals with autism. Their family members become their caregivers for their entire lives. It is not like other situations where people become ill at a certain age and their family needs to care for them at that stage. In this case, we are talking about children whose families want to watch them grow like any other child in this world and in our community.

I would like to take a more personal approach to this topic by looking at the work of Emergo, which is located in my riding. This organization is very well known in Quebec and provides respite services. One of their summer respite camps is located in my riding of Chambly—Borduas, in Otterburn Park.

A very long time ago, when I was in elementary school, I had the opportunity to visit this camp because Emergo shares this land with the public. The elementary school I went to had rented part of the camp for us to celebrate the end of the school year. It was in Les Bosquets. That was my first experience meeting kids with autism. It really opened my eyes, because I saw people and the organization working with them. Even at a young age—I do not want to delude myself by saying that I understood the complexity of the issue—I thought it was something special to see. That really helped me much later when I became the member of Parliament for the region. I was able to return to Les Bosquets and visit this organization, this time to work with them and help them with their work.

The respite service they offer gives parents and family members of children with autism the opportunity to take some time off in the summer because caring for an autistic child is a major challenge. As I said at the beginning of my speech, we can never truly understand what parents and families in this situation are going through. We can never understand and speak on their behalf because this is such a unique challenge. Emergo is one of the organizations that has the courage and conviction to help these people, and the work it does is very important.

When I had a chance to meet with representatives of the organization, they had a lot to say about their efforts to raise awareness. During the most recent election campaign in Quebec, people were very interested in the interviews with the political party leaders on Tout le monde en parle. During one episode featuring an interview with a party leader, there was another guest, Roxanne Héroux, a former LCN reporter, who has two autistic children. She had a lot to say about the importance of community, family, parents and others working together, raising awareness among themselves and supporting people who are coping with these problems.

She talked not only about autism, but about all kinds of problems and crises that families may go through with their children. It was extremely touching as testimony to this experience and a powerful interview. When I talked about the interview with people from Emergo, they said it was very interesting that I was touched by this interview, because this demonstrated to me just how much more awareness is needed among the general public so that we can provide those affected with the help they need. There is nothing glamourous about Emergo's work. Unfortunately, it gets very little recognition in the community. This is not because of bad faith, or because the community does not want to recognize that work.

It is primarily because people are simply not aware of everything that goes on or the various services that are available. The very fact that people are unaware undermines Emergo's work, because it makes it difficult for that organization to secure funding.

I must say very sincerely that I would not dare play politics with this. In my opinion, the funding problem is not necessarily the problem of any one level of government or any one political party. I think this is a collective problem that we must all face together.

People do not understand, and it is the responsibility of parliamentarians, the members who represent various communities, to educate them. That is the purpose of this bill. Members from all political parties realize that this is merely a first step, but it is an important step, because it opens such an important dialogue.

April 2 is already recognized as World Autism Awareness Day elsewhere around the world. I think it is very important that we follow suit and do the same here in Canada. Some degree of coherence and consistency is needed in the message in order to continue this work.

I would like to talk about another very personal example, one not necessarily related to autism. However, it relates to caregivers, who face similar challenges. I spoke a little about this when I talked about a Liberal colleague's bill to establish a national epilepsy day, which was also intended to promote awareness.

I do not want to make too many comparisons because, as I said earlier, I plead ignorance. I do not know very much about the two disorders. I have heard from caregivers and families who courageously deal with these challenges. I am going to share these stories because, although they unfortunately show how little I know about these challenges, they are the reason why I support the bill.

I will not name the man in question, to protect his privacy. I met this man just before Christmas, during the holidays, when I was grocery shopping in my riding. It is sad that it was at that time of year. This man is a family friend. He told me that his wife had suffered from a malignant brain tumour at the end of her life and that he had become her caregiver. He had to take care of her at the end of her life. It was very difficult because brain cancer can affect “normal” life in different ways. The word “normal” is in quotes because it not the right word in this case.

What society considers to be normal behaviour is not the norm. In my opinion, a parallel can be drawn with the situation we are discussing today. Once again, I am being very careful. I am not saying that these are not normal behaviours, but those are “society's rules”.

The man in my example said that it was a very trying experience. What I want to bring to the debate today is that the man told me he did not blame any political party or ideology. The issue is that there is a certain lack of understanding behind our way of proceeding.

Such occasions allow people to rally behind a non-partisan issue and make an initial symbolic gesture in order to improve our understanding in the hope of providing better assistance. That is what our society does best.

That is why I am very pleased to support this bill. This is not an issue that I fully understand, but I commend the work of Emergo, an organization that does so much for my riding and with which I want to continue working. I am committed to continue supporting it and to continue supporting, in a broader sense, my colleagues who will introduce similar bills. This is a very important issue.

I also want to take this opportunity to commend my colleague opposite, who lives with this situation, and all Canadians going through this experience, this challenge, in the shadows. I commend their courage and I want to thank Senator Munson and the hon. member who introduced this bill in the House.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I would like to give my colleague a chance to speak some more about the unease felt by the people of Gatineau, where many people work for the public service. Considering what is happening in my riding, I can just imagine what is happening in hers. I wonder if she could talk about that.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

I am happy to hear questions like this because it shows the passion we have for our work in our communities and our ridings.

The hon. member talked about health. It is extremely important, because, as I said in my speech, we have already had to deal with the consequences of our errors. We have already seen what can happen when there is no adequate, in-depth process in place.

Once again, we do understand the importance of proceeding rapidly. No one is against that. But, when the environment is at issue, we must be aware of projects that might, if poorly designed and constructed, have a devastating impact on the communities where they are built. That is especially true in first nations communities, as my colleague mentioned. When the impact is considerable, it is important not to rush things, because we are not just talking about short-term benefits, but about long-term reality. We are talking about long-term impact. That is not true just for the environment and health; it applies to everything. It applies to old age security. When we talk about people my age who want to retire, we have to know what the long-term impact will be.

The government likes to talk about responsibility and making choices. Making choices and taking responsibility mean more than considering the impact for just the next year or two and saying it is no big deal, because people who are retiring in two years will not be affected. They need to think 10, 20 or even 30 years into the future.

When we think of it that way, this is definitely a mistake. It is important to think outside the box. That is the real duty of governance. An NDP government would take on that duty.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

As she explained so eloquently, her work also brought her into close contact with the community. Anyone working with the community and talking to people knows that this will have a serious impact. That is why I thought the story was so important to tell. As she said, we have to put a human face on the work we do here. Bill C-38 does not have a human face.

We often think of those who feel disconnected from the political process because of what the government has done. It is important to talk with people.

Earlier, my colleague from Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher asked a member opposite a question about whether he not only heard, but also listened. The member opposite seemed to find the question insulting, but that is how things are. People learn that lesson when they are very young. We cannot just hear people.The point of consultations is not—

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, when I found out I was going to have an opportunity to speak to Bill C-38, I re-read an almost endless number of emails and letters I received at my office in which people spoke out against the bill.

Obviously, as a member of Parliament, delivering a speech before the House is the best way to represent the support or criticism—in this case the criticism—of the people of Chambly—Borduas. Unfortunately, with all the dissatisfaction of my constituents over this bill and all the measures in this Trojan Horse bill, I have decided to take a different approach to describing how it will affect my riding.

Madam Speaker, if I may, I will relay an anecdote. On the weekend, on Saturday, I took part in an activity that gave me the opportunity to travel down the Richelieu River, which splits my riding in two. It is the heart of my riding. In travelling down the river, I truly saw to what extent Bill C-38 would harm my community. The point of departure was Chambly. Our canoes had not even touched the water and I could already see that my riding would be adversely affected in a number of ways.

I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance a question last week, but unfortunately she did not give a satisfactory answer in her speech.

This bill will initially affect the tourism sector. As I have said many times in this House, I was pleased to learn in committee that Fort Chambly is one of the most popular Parks Canada sites in Quebec. Unfortunately, its operations will be reduced because of the cuts to Parks Canada. That is interesting because it is a very important site that commemorates the War of 1812. Colonel Salaberry, one of the greatest heroes of the wars, was from Chambly, Quebec. A statue of Colonel Salaberry is located in front of the town hall and a street has been named after him. And yet, the hours of operation at this heritage site will be reduced.

I am just at the beginning of my story, and I have already pointed out very significant repercussions. Obviously, this will have a negative effect on all businesses in the region, such as restaurants and local organizations. All these places, all these people and the services they provide to the community will be adversely affected by these cuts.

We could talk about the Festival Bières et Saveurs, which is held at Fort Chambly, and which allows people to visit the fort at the same time. Parks Canada officials have told me that these cuts will first affect events held in the fall. That is a very significant repercussion.

We then got into our canoes and passed by two very large signs that said “Caution: pipeline”—the Montreal-Portland pipeline to be exact. My predecessor said that there will be a number of problems with this pipeline because the flow of oil is going to be reversed. The infrastructure is 60 years old, and the integrity of the structure could be affected, which would cause a disaster. This pipeline runs under the river; we canoed over it. When we think about the heritage value of this river and its economic and environmental value, we come to realize just how devastating the repercussions could be.

You will surely ask me what the connection is between a 60-year-old pipeline and Bill C-38. It is not complicated: it shows how important it is to have operational, adequate, in-depth environmental assessment structures to ensure that we will never have such a situation again, where the infrastructure is unable to contain an oil spill under a river. We all agree that environmental regulations are not the same as they were 60 years ago. The reason regulations were improved was to ensure that these problems would not occur again.

Representing a community that faces such a problem, I realize the importance of these procedures and I realize that destroying and removing all these measures in order to expedite a process would have negative repercussions. We cannot hurry environmental protection, because it will have repercussions for many generations. We have seen this at home in my riding for 60 years. This is not a new pipeline, like that proposed by Enbridge; this is a 60-year-old pipeline. That is almost a lifetime.

We continued our canoe trip and stopped to attend a first nations ceremony. I should mention that this Festival des voitures d'eau was organized to celebrate the Iroquois's journey with Samuel de Champlain from Lake Champlain to Quebec City. In making this journey to celebrate this heritage, we participated in prayers with the first nations peoples, people from the Maison amérindienne in Mont-Saint-Hilaire in my riding.

During these prayers, as my colleague from Churchill and a number of other colleagues pointed out, I realized the negative impact that this will have on our aboriginal communities because of the lax environmental procedures that will result from the proposed changes in Bill C-38, or because of various funding shortfalls and cuts to social services and health services. My colleague next to me is our health critic for aboriginal communities. Services will be affected, but that is not all.

When other cuts are made, it puts more pressure on the provincial governments that might want to help their aboriginal communities, but will be less and less able to do so. In praying with these communities, I realized more and more the impact this will have on the communities.

Let us continue on our journey and pay a visit to the Résidences Richeloises in the municipality of McMasterville in my riding. Last August, I had the pleasure of celebrating the sun festival with the residents there, who are seniors. I could not help but think of how this will affect them. They told me how proud they were of us, and of our new leader, the member for Outremont, but also of Mr. Layton. Why were they so proud of him? Because he talked about our seniors' dignity, which was improved by this celebration and this residence. Unfortunately, their dignity is not being improved at all by the cuts and measures proposed in Bill C-38.

I thought of these people and of the fact that they asked us to fiercely protect their dignity and their rights. As a little aside, that is why it does not bother me in the least when members opposite, the government members, talk about how we tried to stop this bill, to prevent this undemocratic act, and to allow real debate by separating this bill into the various pieces of legislation that it should have been in the first place. Clearly, these measures should have been introduced in several bills, rather than a single budget implementation bill.

Last week, when we rose almost 160 times in this House, I was not at all uncomfortable that we had launched this process and that we were fighting in this manner. Indeed, I knew that the people I met last summer would be pleased, because this is how we defend their dignity.

So we continue our canoe trip on the river. We finally arrive at our destination. I thought once again about the environment as we reached Pointe-Valaine, which is a woodlot in the town of Otterburn Park that people are fighting for. We could raise the same issues that I already raised regarding the protection of our environment.

On my way back home, I also went by several businesses that provide seasonal work. The workers and owners of these businesses came to see us in our office to explain the impact of all that. I find it very interesting and I will conclude on that note. Obviously I would not have had time to go through all the emails I received, since I do not even have time to finish my story.

These people came to see us, which proves, contrary to what the government claims, that it is not just citizens and workers who are affected. It is also employers, people who help, through team work with employees, to improve our economy, our heritage and our environment. They work to create beauty in the region that I am so proud to represent.

That is why I oppose Bill C-38, why we will continue to do so, and why I am proud of the actions that we have taken so far as the official opposition.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech. I appreciate the fact that he began by talking about people who work hard, especially those who work physically hard, every day of their lives.

I am thinking of a constituent I met during the consultations on old age security. Sometimes people like him who work in the mines lose their jobs when they are in their late 50s or early 60s. By increasing the age of eligibility for OAS and the GIS, the government is giving those people no choice but to work longer.

I would like my colleague to expand on the government's lack of respect for those workers, who have worked so hard their whole lives.

[Sports, June 15th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, we know that the Trojan Horse, Bill C-38, will have serious implications for future generations. The Minister of State for Sport now has the discretionary power to stop registered Canadian amateur athletic associations from issuing tax receipts, even though they promote participation in sports and the associated health benefits. We know that our young people are spending less and less time playing sports, but the Conservatives are not taking the situation seriously.

When will the Conservatives come up with a credible plan to promote physical activity among our young people?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 13th, 2012]

With regard to all contracts issued by each department, agency and Crown corporation to Wavertree (3252906 Canada) since January 1, 2009: (a) what was the content of the order; (b) what was the date of payment; (c) what was total amount awarded; (d) what was the event or reason for purchase; and (e) were these contracts open competitions?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 13th, 2012]

With regard to all contracts issued by each department, agency and Crown corporation to Marketeks (6066356 Canada) since January 1, 2009: (a) what was the content of the order; (b) what was the date of payment; (c) what was the total amount awarded; (d) what was the event or reason for purchase; and (e) were these contracts open competitions?