Pierre-Luc Dusseault

[Committees of the House, May 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, entitled “The Growing Problem of Identity Theft and Its Economic and Social Impact”.

I also present the eighth report of the the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, entitled “Main Estimates 2015-16: Vote 1 under Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying, Vote 1 under Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Votes 1 and 5 under Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada and Vote 1 under Senate Ethics Officer”.

[Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1, May 14th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a very specific question about division 18 of the budget implementation act, which grants amnesty from civil or criminal proceedings, among others, for any act committed by a public servant in relation to the destruction of the long gun registry.

Furthermore, the most important element with regard to division 18 is that the Conservatives are exempting the long gun registry from the Access to Information Act. This could set a dangerous precedent, as the government will be able to declare that certain information will be exempted from the Access to Information Act. It would no longer be available to Canadians who make access to information requests.

What does my colleague think of this precedent set by the Conservatives, who are exempting information that would otherwise be available through the Access to Information Act?

[Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1, May 14th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to ask my colleague a question after his speech on the Conservatives' new-found passion for balanced budgets in 2015.

In Bill C-59, they have introduced a balanced budget act to require the government to balance the budget under certain circumstances.

Is my colleague prepared to make this measure retroactive, so that it applies to the Conservatives' last seven deficit budgets? Five of them would not have been accepted, according to the circumstances outlined in the budget implementation bill that allow a government to incur a deficit.

Would my colleague be prepared to make this proposal retroactive, so that cabinet ministers would have to pay out of their own pockets for all the Conservatives' deficit budgets that did not comply with the bill they are introducing today?

[Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1, May 14th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible to see a finance minister who is so unfamiliar with the parliamentary rules in place that allow us 30 minutes to debate a time allocation motion. That is the motion being debated.

The only justification he gave for having a budget implementation bill with so many different measures is that the Liberals have done this before. I would like him to tell us if he has some more convincing reasons for having a budget implementation bill that contains so many measures and if he has an explanation other than the fact that the Liberals did even worse. I would like a more convincing explanation.

[Safe and Accountable Rail Act, May 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her speech.

Just this past weekend, a concern was raised in Sherbrooke, which is very close to Lac-Mégantic: we do not know what is in the infamous tanker cars that are behind the locomotives. Municipalities want to know what is in the tanker cars before they travel through cities so that firefighters, as first responders, will know what to do in the event of an accident. That also goes for several other areas, for the sake of prevention and ensuring that emergency plans are in place. One of the concerns of the City of Sherbrooke—and other Canadian cities, I am sure—is finding out what is on those trains in order to better respond in the event of an accident. At present cities do not know what the trains are carrying.

Does my colleague believe that ideally the government should create laws and regulations that require rail carriers to inform cities of what is on the trains so they can provide an appropriate response in the event of an accident?

[Privilege, May 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her contribution to this debate. A number of my colleagues raised the problem underlying both questions of privilege, which the Speaker ruled on this morning. The problem is that the government took control of the parliamentary precinct. This was raised by a number of my colleagues. When foreign heads of state come to visit, for example, the government seems to take Parliament, this building, for its office, but it is not. It is the House of the Canadian people. The House of Commons is in this building. It is the place where Canadians are represented and where they feel at home. The government seems to have taken ownership of this place, and the situation is only getting worse. It is using this place as a backdrop for state visits, when we are first and foremost in Parliament, the seat of the legislative branch. The government sits before us and is accountable to parliamentarians every day.

I would like my colleague to say a few words about the fact that the government is increasingly using Parliament as its very own office. I would also like her to say a few words about the chain of command with regard to the orders given to the security officers, who on a number of occasions were ordered to block everyone, regardless of whether or not they were a member of Parliament.

[Privilege, May 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech on this very worrisome and increasingly common problem. It is something we hear about more and more.

I would like some clarifications about the discussions that members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs will have if we adopt the motion we are talking about today, regarding the problem underlying these two breaches of privilege with respect to the member for Toronto—Danforth and the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley.

The underlying problem is that the government is taking control of the parliamentary precinct, and this will only get worse in the coming months with the implementation of new security measures on Parliament Hill.

Could my colleague talk about the risks associated with this? Is it important for the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to examine the fact that the executive is taking control and is trying to control everything that goes on, instead of Parliament itself having sovereign control over Parliament Hill and the parliamentary precinct as well as over the movement of members of Parliament within the precinct?

[Air Transportation, May 8th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, on April 29, 2015, the House unanimously adopted Motion No. 553, which I sponsored. This motion seeks to support the economic development of many cities and regions across the country. The House of Commons has spoken. Like the Prime Minister, the Minister of Transport must act as quickly as possible to set up a mechanism whereby non-designated airports, such as the Sherbrooke airport, can have access to security screening services.

Will the minister quickly introduce this new mechanism—and I do mean quickly—or will she continue to put off taking care of my region's economic development?

[Petitions, May 6th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by 382 residents of the wonderful riding of Sherbrooke who joined together to tell the Government of Canada and the House of Commons that they are committed to protecting small farmers and, most importantly, to protecting the right to use and freely exchange seeds.

I want to thank them for submitting this petition, and I am proud to present it on their behalf.

[Petitions, April 29th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by a number of Sherbrooke residents last Saturday. They are calling on the members of the House of Commons to support my Motion No. 553, which we will vote on this evening, because economic development in Sherbrooke is at stake.

If this motion is adopted and is acted on by the Conservative government, it will certainly help Sherbrooke acquire the tools it needs to develop the Sherbrooke airport. The petitioners urge all members to vote in favour of Motion No. 553 this evening.