Nicole Demers

[International Bridges and Tunnels Act, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I also thank my colleague for his speech, which was very lively, as always. However, I wonder if he is concerned about another point. Last year, when we debated the Quarantine Act, we talked a lot about laws concerning domestic traffic and difficulties, the problems and risks of transmission of potentially endemic diseases.

Does my colleague think that, in the international bridges and tunnels act, we should also take into consideration the risks inherent to communicable diseases? As he was suggesting earlier, should we really have skilled personnel at these locations, that is, people who are very knowledgeable about such issues?

[National Organ and Tissue Donation Awareness Week, April 28th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, April 23 to 30 is National Organ and Tissue Donation Awareness Week. The green ribbon symbolizes life and promotes organ donation.

On January 16, in Quebec, the Chambre des Notaires established a list of people who have agreed to donate organs and tissue. This list is available on line to authorized individuals 24 hours a day.

Thanks to the list, people's last wishes concerning organ donation will be easier to respect, and patients waiting for transplants will have quicker access to the organ or tissue that could change their life. This is a very smart initiative that demonstrates, yet again, Quebec's innovative spirit.

I invite all of my colleagues to wear the green ribbon and to convince as many of their friends and acquaintances as possible about the importance of organ donation.

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. Indeed, this colleague is quite young and he probably does not have a large family yet. Perhaps he does not know how a large family works. When you have to take care of several children and you want them to tell you the truth, it is not a good idea to offer them compensation for providing information on how their brothers and sisters are behaving. I think the same is true in business.

The Bloc does not doubt that Bill C-2 currently has some very interesting and very important aspects for protecting whistleblowers. We agree, that is true. However, the shortcoming is the suggestion of compensating people for blowing the whistle. That is not normal.

[Federal Accountability Act, April 27th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud as a parliamentarian to rise in this House today to debate accountability and ethics and especially to express my opinion on certain clauses in Bill C-2 which aim to make us responsible for our actions. However, as I do not yet have a lot of experience in matters of government, I looked at the points that are easier for the general public to grasp.

This is a huge bill. It contains 317 clauses. It amends some 40 acts and creates two new ones, namely the Conflict of Interest Act and the Director of Public Prosecutions Act.

Some of the clauses correct situations that have gone on for too long and that we have always criticized, such as the appointment of returning officers on the basis of merit. It is a very important clause, because there have been horror stories in this regard in the past. In the latest election, in the riding of Alfred-Pellan, which is next to mine, there were irregularities and a partisan returning officer. He boasted of being a friend of the Liberal candidate, having served as his organizer provincially and that payback was normal. It is important to have issues such as these addressed in this bill.

Some clauses go too far, such as the provision that whistleblowers could receive cash awards of up to $1,000. That would be rewarding someone for doing his or her duty. But it is important to protect whistleblowers, which should have been the case for Shiv Chopra, Margaret Haydon and Gérard Lambert. They were fired by Health Canada in June 2004 because they criticized the approval process for drugs in general and in particular the approval process for growth hormones and antibiotics.

There was also the case of Pierre Blais who was fired a few years ago, also by Health Canada, because he would not stop expressing reservations about silicone breast implants. He wrote memos on that subject. He reviewed reports that expressed grave concerns about the safety of those breast implants and, sometime later, it was realized that he was right. The damage, however, had already been done. They would not listen to him and he was dismissed.

Nevertheless, we must not commit the monumental error of developing a culture of whistleblowing based on monetary incentives. Justice Gomery also made a plea for responsibility to be accepted at every level of the hierarchy. That approach will do more to prevent fraud than a culture of informers.

Let us not forget that when the parliamentary committee examined Bill C-11 on protection of whistleblowers it rejected the principle of paying them.

Finally, some clauses do not go far enough, for example, on the subject of appointments.

The bill proposes a public appointments commission within the Prime Minister’s portfolio, in particular to monitor the selection process for appointments. Most appointments come from the Privy Council Office or the PMO. Is this not a little like asking the fox to protect the chickens? It is rather strange

The Bloc Québécois is also concerned that the Prime Minister has nominated Gwyn Morgan, a fundraiser for the Conservative Party, to head the new public appointments commission. Mr. Morgan, who will receive only a token salary, will ensure that those who fill positions have the necessary qualifications. This commission is not really necessary.

Last year we denounced the fact that foundations escaped public scrutiny. This year, they are starting to be included in this bill. Unfortunately, many of them will continue to escape public scrutiny. I am quite concerned about this. We know that these foundations have a lot of money and billions of dollars are kept in reserve there. I believe it is important for all the foundations to be covered in Bill C-2.

The bill proposes that only three of the nine foundations be covered by the Access to Information Act. Yet, the Conservatives election platform announced that a Conservative government would “expand coverage of the act to all Crown corporations, officers of Parliament, foundations and organizations that spend taxpayers' money or perform public functions”.

Why then exempt the foundations that have received hundreds of millions of dollars? Barring the elimination of these foundations, the Bloc Québécois is calling on the government to no longer be able to exempt transfers to foundations from the Treasury Board policy. The Treasury Board prohibits payments from being made before the funds are needed. Furthermore, all the foundations should be covered by the Access to Information Act.

In closing, the Bloc Québécois is in favour of the principle of Bill C-2. Nonetheless, major amendments will have to be made before the Bloc can give its approval.

[Armenia, April 24th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker,

[Member spoke in Armenian as follows:]

Parts rashnon serpazan hayr sirelli hay kebektsiner.

[Translation]

Today, April 24, we commemorate the 1915 Armenian genocide that claimed 1.5 million victims. The first genocide of the 20th century wiped out more than half of the Armenian population.

Two years ago, the House passed the Bloc Québécois' Motion No. 380 recognizing the genocide.

The Conservative government must do its utmost to ensure that recognizing these barbaric acts means more than just passing a motion. We should adopt an act of formal acknowledgement out of respect for families who lost relatives under horrible conditions and to show that we will never again accept genocide.

There are 18,860 Quebeckers of Armenian origin, 5,880 of whom live in Laval. I am speaking on their behalf today to express the hope that nobody will ever have to experience such a tragedy again.

[Member spoke in Armenian as follows:]

Guetse high jogovourthe.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

Here is my concern. It is good to have appropriate legislation to give us some assurances with respect to the accountability of members of Parliament and ministers of the crown, hence the governments. At the same time, it is important to go beyond that. Good government does not involve only good legislation to ensure that governments are accountable. It also means ensuring that our fellow citizens, the people, those in need, have all they need to live with dignity. It means providing social housing, pension indexing, health care, all that people need, and not only accountability.

I am certainly very pleased that thought was given to accountability, so that scandals such as the sponsorship one never happen again. But that is not enough. Efforts have to be made to ensure that every citizen has what he or she needs to live with dignity.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the provincial governments are wise enough to be aware of what seniors face and to be able to make good use of transfer payments, investing the money in programs to benefit seniors.

[Resumption of debate on Address in Reply, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the voters of Laval who participated in the democratic process, particularly those who placed their trust in me for a second time. I would also like to thank all of the volunteers who helped me throughout the campaign. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate you on the honour bestowed upon you in your appointment as Deputy Speaker of this House. I would also like to give my regards to an 86-year-old Vancouver woman whom I had the pleasure of meeting. She confided in me that her greatest wish in life now is to learn French. Ms. Margaret Davies, I raise my hat to you.

Several things were missing from the Speech from the Throne. However, I would like to devote my time here today to talk about our seniors. In the throne speech, only nine words were dedicated to the 5,598,223 Canadian seniors and the 1,448,719 seniors in Quebec. Those nine words were, "It will work to improve the security of seniors". Only nine words to recognize the five billion volunteer hours worked by Canada's seniors. Economically, that corresponds to a financial contribution of $60 billion annually. Only nine words to recognize that 77% of seniors made charitable donations in 2004, totalling $854 million.

The population of the world is undergoing extremely significant and profound changes that are unprecedented in human history. In 2050, there will be more seniors than young people in the world. The increase in the number of seniors will affect family relations, intergenerational equity, lifestyles and family solidarity. It will also have an economic impact on health, medical care, family composition, living conditions, housing and immigration.

Demographic changes will affect politics, the vote structure and representation, because seniors read, watch the news and stay current. More seniors vote than any other age group.

If we want to have a healthy democracy in years to come, young people also have to get involved and start learning about politics and keeping up with the news.

In 1950, there were 12 people in the labour force for every senior. By 2000, this ratio had declined to nine to one, and in 2050, there will be only four labour force participants for every senior. This will directly affect the social security system. That is why the UN has held three major conferences on aging in the past 25 years.

The most recent conference, which took place in 1999, focussed on implementing principles developed in 1994. These principles call for giving seniors greater autonomy, creating conditions to improve their quality of life, enabling seniors to work and lead independent lives, creating health care systems and economic and social safety nets for seniors and introducing social support systems to make it easier for families to care for seniors.

The Bloc Québécois includes these values in its platform. This is increasingly important, because in 2001, 44% of seniors in Quebec had incomes under $15,000 and 80% had incomes under $25,000. The guaranteed income supplement accounts for 20% of the incomes of people who earn less than $15,000. This is not very much. Retired women have incomes ranging from $11,000 to $17,000. The guaranteed income supplement is very important to them. Out of their incomes, seniors have to pay rising amounts for housing, which represents between 21% and 30% of income, as well as for food, transportation and taxes. People who earn $15,000 a year pay taxes. These four items account for roughly $20,000 annually, and that does not include medication.

In Quebec, 58% of low-cost housing is occupied by the elderly. These people are very poor and have no financial or other resources. This is why I am so surprised that more was not said on this matter in the throne speech. The Canadian Council on Social Development states that:

Economic security refers to an assured and stable standard of living that provides individuals and families with a level of resources and benefits necessary to participate economically, politically, socially, culturally and with dignity in their community’s activities. Survival is more than just mere physical survival and includes a level of resources that fosters social inclusion.

With an income of $11,000 or $12,000 per year and all manner of expenses totalling $10,000, there is not a lot of money left over to be part of the social network. Yet, 19% of seniors live just below the low income cutoff. Despite all this, the former government did not deem it advisable to refund the Guaranteed Income Supplement, with full retroactivity, to those seniors entitled to it.

We know that in 2001, some 68,000 seniors in Quebec and 270,000 seniors in Canada were deprived of income as high as $6,600 a year. Thanks to a broad operation put in place by the Bloc Québécois, 42,000 of these seniors have been found so far. These efforts represent roughly $190 million that have been redistributed to the least fortunate in our society.

The fact remains that the seniors who were duped by the federal government still need to be reimbursed. My colleague, Marcel Gagnon, who is now retired, presented Bill C-301 calling for full retroactive payment to seniors who were entitled to it. On November 23, 2005, the hon. members of this House voted unanimously in favour of passing the bill at second reading in order for the government to reimburse the $3.2 billion it has owed seniors for a number of years now.

In short, this Speech from the Throne includes only nine words to acknowledge those who built Canada and Quebec; just nine words to acknowledge those who defended our rights and freedoms during two great wars; nine words to acknowledge those who, despite having major financial difficulties, made many sacrifices in order to feed and educate their family; nine words to acknowledge those who continue to take part in our lives and agree to babysit our children at the last minute, to do our laundry when our washing machine is on the fritz, to cook our roast beef when we are too busy to do it ourselves.

I am referring to my mother, Jano Demers, to whom I am eternally grateful. Thank you, maman. It is true that when we have a busy schedule we often have to call on our elders to get us out of a bind.

The Speech from the Throne includes a mere nine words to refer to all these hours spent passing down our history—to us, to our children and to our grandchildren.

Eight words are not enough. This government must do better than that. It must ensure that seniors can live out their remaining years with dignity and respect. The government can do so by ensuring that those who are entitled to the guaranteed income supplement receive it and by paying $3.2 billion in retroactive payments to those who have been cheated in recent years. The government must ensure that the old age pension and guaranteed income supplement continue to be fully adjusted for inflation and the specific realities that seniors must face. It must offer the option to opt out for compassionate leave with full financial compensation in Quebec, which already has the health and social service infrastructures in place to support caregivers effectively. It must act quickly to establish the program to assist older workers.

Lastly, it must do everything it can to adapt government services and crown corporations to the reality of our seniors.

[Cancer, April 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Daffodil Days, a fundraiser for the Canadian Cancer Society, was held this past March 30 to April 2. This year, I had the privilege of being the honorary chair for the City of Laval. Over $100,000 was collected, surpassing the fundraising goal of $80,000.

As a survivor of breast cancer, now in remission, I know the importance of funding research. I have experienced the anxiety, pain and suffering that this disease inflicts on individuals and their loved ones. These daffodils are a symbol of hope.

In 2005 alone, there were 149,500 new cases of cancer and 69,500 deaths attributed to this illness. Great strides have been made in research, but we must continue to support it in order to eradicate this disease. I would like to thank everyone who contributed to the success of this fundraising campaign.

[Fabory Metrican, November 28th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, founded in 1947 by a Montrealer who foresaw the move to metric, Fabory Metrican, which manufactures and distributes metric fastenings, is now part of a worldwide distribution network.

The company offers services relating to the three different aspects of fasteners: the product, the fastening technique and the cost effectiveness of operating procedures.

Thanks to the expertise of some fifty employees in Laval, Fabory Metrican can take over the management of the inventories of its clients, including Bombardier, provide expert technical advice and provide on-site delivery according to production schedules.

With sales of $22 million in Canada, Fabory Metrican helps many companies increase their production and contributes significantly to the labour market and to Laval's economic development.