Michel Guimond

[Petitions, October 24th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans and the greater Quebec City area, I am pleased to present a petition asking the government to enact a public inquiry, which, according to these petitioners, is the only way to get to the bottom of the close ties that exist between the Liberal Party, its ministers and certain advertising agencies that have received millions of dollars in government contracts in recent years, and the entire tendering system for federal government contracts.

[Mario Lemieux, October 23rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, this week the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste honoured Mario Lemieux by giving him the prestigious Maurice Richard award.

This great Quebecker, who was visibly moved by such an honour, was proud to revisit the arena where he first began skating, at the age of five.

This magnificent athlete, who is one of the best players in the National Hockey League and who has won two Stanley Cups and a gold medal at the Olympics, is not resting on his laurels and wants to win his seventh scoring championship.

His agility on the ice will undoubtedly propel him to the top. In fact, Number 66 showed us yesterday that he was at the top of his game by giving an outstanding performance, in spite of the health problems that have plagued him.

The Maurice Richard award is a reflection of the respect of Quebeckers and is testimony to a great hockey career that makes all of Quebec proud.

Bravo, Mario Lemieux. We, in the Bloc Quebecois, wish you a good health and hope that you will give us many more very exciting moments.

[Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, October 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Quebecois vote yes on this motion.

[Foreign Affairs, October 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the minister decided to intervene in the Seddiki case in Montreal and to suspend the deportation order, preferring, apparently, a case-by-case approach.

What we are looking for from the minister is consistency. On the one hand, the government is saying that a Canadian child of Algerian parents should avoid the country, yet it is saying the opposite to the parents by deporting them.

Does this example of inconsistency not justify reimposing the moratorium as soon as possible?

[Foreign Affairs, October 22nd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs recognized that Algeria was still an unsafe country, yet the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration said that the lifting of the moratorium on deportations:

--reflects the conclusions of our assessment that there is no risk to citizens of Algeria who are removed.

Will the Prime Minister tell us which of these positions most closely reflects his policy: that of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or that of the Minister of Foreign Affairs? Who is right?

[Foreign Affairs, October 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

How can he explain that the moratorium on deporting Algerian nationals back to their country of origin has been lifted, whereas Canadian nationals are being asked to avoid this country because of the indiscriminate killings of innocent civilians that have gone on for years and continue to this day, with at least seven more fatalities this past weekend?

[Foreign Affairs, October 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, at the latest Francophonie summit in Beirut, which the Prime Minister of Canada attended, the participants reaffirmed, in the presence of Algeria, their desire to work to maintain peace in the world, the francophone world in particular.

The Foreign Affairs web site identifies Algeria as a place Canadian tourists should avoid. Can the Minister of Foreign Affairs tells us whether he supports his department's warning?

[Resignation of Member, October 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues from the Bloc Quebecois, I would like to tell John—seeing that we may now refer to him by name instead of as the hon. member for Perth—Middlesex—that we appreciated sitting with him on various committees.

I remember in particular the very efficective job he did on the Standing Committee on Defence and Veterans Affairs. Personally, I had the opportunity to work with him on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. He was always a real gentleman.

I do not want to go on and on, but I want John and his family to know that the members of the Bloc Quebecois are behind him. We are sure the talent he demonstrated in this House as a real fighter will be put to good use and that he will win this fight.

We wish you the best, John, and good luck.

[Softwood Lumber, October 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, what we are saying is that the federal measures ought to have been targeted in order to help all softwood lumber workers. Yet, this is far from the case. In addition to leaving out softwood lumber workers in more than half of the regions in Quebec, the $71 million will be shared by all of the unemployed in the Gaspé Peninsula, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, the North Shore, the Lower St. Lawrence and Abitibi.

Rather than trying to kill two birds with one stone, will the minister finally admit that employment insurance needs strenthening, and that there also need to be special measures for all softwood lumber workers?

[Softwood Lumber, October 11th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, not only is $71 million not enough to help the thousands of workers affected by the crisis, but we have learned that not all affected workers will be able to benefit.

How does the Minister of Human Resources Development explain that most of the federal measures for workers will not apply in eight out of twelve of Quebec's regions, regions such as Lanaudière, la Mauricie, Beauce, and the Eastern Townships, despite the fact that the softwood lumber industry is vital to them?