Michel Guimond

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague from Pickering—Scarborough East has been interested in this issue for a number of years. However, when he was in government, it was difficult to know which side his bread was buttered on. It was difficult to—

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the tactic or strategy of the Conservatives consists in constantly saying that the Competition Bureau does investigations. This week, answering a question asked by the Bloc, the Minister of Natural Resources said that there had been many investigations to check if there was collusion between oil companies.

Mr. Speaker, please explain something for me. There are very busy commercial streets in your riding. At some intersections, it is not rare to see four gas stations: one Esso, one Petro-Canada, one Shell and one from another company. How come when one station raises its price by 5¢ a litre, it only takes a few minutes for the other three to do the same? Is this real competition?

The guy who sells refrigerators or furniture in your area does not raise its prices when his competitor does. If he wants to remain in business, he must keep his prices as low as possible to convince you to buy in his store. Why do the four gas stations raise their prices at the same time? That shows that there is collusion. Those companies all sleep together. In fact, refining is done by only one company for a whole region. In Quebec, one company does the refining, in the Maritimes it is another one and in Ontario, there are others too.

So, to give a specific answer to the hon. member, I will say that we need a real petroleum monitoring agency that has teeth and is able to take action.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say first of all that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Shefford, who is the Bloc’s deputy critic for industry. I want to thank him for letting me speak first because we had planned it the other way around.

It is my pleasure to rise today on this Bloc motion regarding a matter of vital concern to our economy: the surge in the price of gasoline. I can say, and it is probably true for all of us, that when we attend events on the weekend in our ridings or happen to bump into people in shopping centres or variety stores or even when getting a fill-up, we are often recognized by our constituents.

I do not know whether others have noticed, although it can hardly be missed these days and has been going on for far too long, but people are complaining about the sharp increase in the price of petroleum products. The government seems to take it for granted that absolutely nothing can be done and the free market should simply be allowed to work the way the oil companies want.

We are going to have a holiday in May. In Quebec, the holiday on the third Monday in May is called the Fête nationale des patriotes. Elsewhere in Canada it is Victoria Day, and it used to be called the Fête de Dollard. The third Monday in May is a holiday, and today I would like to make a prediction: just before this long weekend starts, the price of gasoline will go up.

In Quebec, construction workers have a holiday the last two weeks of July. Many working people, and not just in construction, take their holidays at this time.

The weather is usually nice, although there are no assurances, and people take their holidays. They go all over Quebec and sometimes even drive to other Canadian provinces or the United States. People also take advantage of this period to go camping. So there is a lot of travel. Why, then, just before big vacation periods like this or the big summer holidays, does the price of gasoline always go up?

The government is trying to tell us that it is just chance or the free market. This is not the first time, however, that the government has shown its strong attachment or affection for the oil companies. Who benefits and who pays? In the end, it is honest citizens who pay for this, ordinary people who often have to use their cars to travel.

There is always public transit, of course, in the major centres. Unfortunately, in my riding in the Côte-de-Beaupré area, there is some public transit but the schedule does not necessarily suit everyone. It is the same story in Charlevoix and the upper north shore, where there is no public transit. People have to use their cars, therefore, in order to travel.

People in the regions have an additional problem. Major hospital centres offer specialized medical services, but to see a doctor in Quebec City, people from Forestville, in my riding, or La Malbaie have to travel. The same is true in other regions such as the Lower St. Lawrence, the Gaspé peninsula and Abitibi, where people need a vehicle to get around and to travel to larger centres for treatment, services or specialized medical consultations. They have no choice.

Another group affected by rising gas prices includes people who need a car for work. I am thinking about people who work hard and put in long hours for a miserable wage, sometimes earning $1.22 an hour. I am also thinking about taxi drivers and employees of small private trucking companies who have had to cope with the huge increase in the price of diesel. It used to be that there was always a large gap between the cost of diesel and the cost of regular or super gas, but now that difference is much smaller. In fact, the prices are almost the same.

When trucking costs go up, producers and processors tend to pass the higher gas prices on to consumers. There is a common thread running through all the examples I have given: ordinary Canadians are still paying the tab and the big oil companies are still profiting from these gas price increases.

Before, we were told that there was instability in this or that oil producing country or that such increases were expected. Apparently, the gas people put in their cars on their way home today was processed over 60 days ago. So how is it that this morning, prices rose almost instantly even though refiners paid for today's gas 60 days ago?

These examples are proof of a major con job on the part of the oil companies. I want to be clear: when I say these things about oil companies, I am not blaming retailers or the people who operate stations for big companies, such as Petro-Canada, Shell and Esso. When people fill up, they might tell the attendant that this is crazy and ask why the price of gas just went up 10¢, but the price increase does not mean that the retailer is making more money. Some gas stations that also have mechanic shops have decided to get rid of their gas pumps because there is no money in it.

Rising profits do not trickle down to gas station owners; they line the pockets of big oil companies, which rake in huge profits on refining. Apparently, refining margins were supposed to be on the order of five to seven cents, but we have seen profits as high as 23¢. It seems to me that I read somewhere that big oil companies have been making as much as 27¢ a litre on refining.

I see that I have less than a minute remaining, so I will conclude by saying that this government, which takes so much pride in saying that it listens to taxpayers, must accept its responsibilities. I urge citizens living in Conservative ridings to ask their members of Parliament how they plan to vote on the Bloc Québécois' opposition motion and what they really intend to do to stop oil companies from getting rich at the expense of taxpayers who have had enough of rising gas prices.

[Afghanistan, May 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the case of torture reported by Colonel Noonan was in official Canadian Forces reports.

In light of these revelations, how could members of this government stand up in this House one after the other and say there was no torture in Afghanistan, unless they were knowingly trying to hide the truth from the public?

[Afghanistan, May 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, despite what the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons might think, the new agreement reached yesterday on the monitoring of Afghan detainees does not resolve everything, especially in light of Colonel Steve Noonan's testimony in court this week revealing a documented case of torture. Noonan maintains that the Afghan police had beaten a transferred detainee. The Canadian troops were concerned about the detainee and asked that he be given back.

How could the Prime Minister say that this was nothing more than allegations, when the army had in its possession documented reports confirming that Afghan detainees were being tortured? Does he call that allegations?

[Petitions, May 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition signed by nearly 300 people from the riding of Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, mainly people from the Île d'Orléans and upper north shore areas, who denounce the cuts made to the summer career placement program.

This is a program that is very important to young people. It often helps them land their first job. It also helps them financially by enabling them to work through the summer and earn money. Let us not forget that, when a young person gets a summer job, this provides relief to his or her parents at the same time. So, we are asking that the government restore, maintain and even enhance the summer career placement program.

[Committees of the House, May 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this motion.

[Canada Elections Act, April 24th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the members from the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of the motion.

[Canada Elections Act, April 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague was not even present when I made the comment. He arrived at the last minute and —

[Canada Elections Act, April 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that does pose a problem in terms of balance.

We were faced with accepting a bad amendment and the possibility of the government using that to delay adoption of the bill. It is all about perception. The government patted itself on the back and boasted that this bill required it to go ahead with fixed date elections. Now, if it uses delaying tactics to postpone adopting the bill, the government will have to bear the blame.