Pierre Paquette

[Points of Order, June 20th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert presented arguments about what went on at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

I would like to remind you, however, that in House of Commons Procedure and Practice, also known as Marleau and Montpetit, in chapter 13 entitled “Rules of Order and Decorum”, in the section on repetition and relevance, it states: “The rule against repetition can be invoked by the Speaker to prevent a Member from repeating arguments already made in the debate by other Members or the same Member.” That is on page 527.

With respect to relevance, it also states on page 530 that: “The Chair can use the rule to curtail prolonged debate by limiting Members’ speeches to points which have not already been made.”

Thus, the relevance of comments and repetition are factors that would allow a committee chair to put an end to a debate if all the arguments have been put forward one way or another by one or more committee members.

In my opinion, the decision made by the Chair of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics was perfectly compliant. If only other committee chairs—particularly those from the governing party—used existing provisions to help committee work move forward. This applies to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development over the past few weeks and months.

That is why the Chair of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics should not be criticized for having made that decision.

I would also like to point out that the committee had quorum and that the rules for quorum were followed. This committee deals with ethics, and it is not a stretch to suggest that the so-called “in and out” file has a lot to do with ethics issues. That is why it seems to me that the committee and its members should have the opportunity, as is customary, to decide what they want to work on.

Given that all of the rules were followed, it seems to me that the Speaker will not want to allow the point of order raised by the Secretary of State and Chief Government Whip.

In closing, I just want to say that the rules of procedure that guide you, Mr. Speaker, and that ought to guide the rest of us, should be followed. The Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics followed the rules.

[Canadian Multiculturalism Act, June 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois recently received the support of four major Quebec unions in its efforts to get the Prime Minister to move from words to action and give tangible expression to the recognition of the Quebec nation.

Today, it is the turn of Julius Grey to support the Bloc Québécois initiative. This lawyer specializes in matters of individual freedoms and urged members of the House of Commons to vote in favour of Bill C-505, which I introduced, to amend the Canadian Multiculturalism Act and thus allow Quebec to develop unimpeded its own model of integration for immigrants to Quebec.

The vote on this bill will be held tomorrow and will be a very revealing test of the sincerity of MPs and the Conservatives. Rejection by the Conservative government of Bill C-505, to exempt Quebec from the application of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, would send a very negative message as we approach St. Jean Baptiste Day.

[Film Festivals in Quebec, June 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, after 141 years in this Parliament, the Conservatives have yet to do something for Quebec, and this continues to be the case today.

The whole Quebec's cultural community is condemning the Conservatives' abysmal ignorance of the Quebec film industry. The Conservative ideology is simply not in accord with Quebec's culture. In fact, as is the case with the issue of community organizations' economics, the Conservatives are totally disconnected from the Quebec reality and the Quebec nation.

Will the minister ensure that Telefilm Canada's funding criteria will not unduly penalize Quebec's film festivals?

[Film Festivals in Quebec, June 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Telefilm Canada's new criteria ignore Quebec film industry's reality by requiring more Canadian content as a condition for film festivals to get funding. Because Quebec's feature films are released throughout the year, Quebec's film festivals will not be able to meet the required standards.

Does the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages realize that Telefilm Canada's criteria are threatening the survival of film festivals in Quebec?

[Canadian Multiculturalism Act, June 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, regardless of what the Conservatives, Liberals and New Democrats say about Bill C-505 which exempts Quebec from the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, we have reached a consensus in Quebec. Consequently, the Quebec Conservatives, Quebec Liberals and Quebec New Democrats here are at odds with the consensus we have reached, which is to encourage exchanges with the cultures and peoples who arrive in Quebec rather than ghettoizing them, as multiculturalism does. This preference for exchanges that enrich the common culture of the Quebec nation is shared by the stakeholders who help to receive and welcome newcomers to Quebec. It is also shared by the newcomers themselves.

I travelled around Quebec with several of my colleagues from the House to sound people out on this bill, the bill on the language of work and the bill on a Quebec radio-television and telecommunications commission. Everywhere we went the answer was the same: we do not want the kind of ghettoization advocated by the federal government and Canada.

We must face the facts. When Pierre Elliott Trudeau promoted multiculturalism, his intent was also to marginalize the Quebec nation by making Quebeckers just another ethnic group. Just like there are Chinese Canadians, in his view, there were also Quebec Canadians. We do not accept that any more in Quebec, regardless of whether we are federalists or sovereignists. I know this because we travelled all over Quebec. Not only is there a consensus in Quebec in favour of interculturalism, that is to say, exchanges among the original cultures in order to help strengthen the common culture, but this consensus goes all the way back to the 1970s.

I remember Robert Bourassa writing to Pierre Elliott Trudeau to tell him that multiculturalism was contrary to Quebec’s specific national character. Quebec government after Quebec government—regardless of whether federalist or sovereignist—has reiterated our preference for a different model from the Canadian one, and Canada should respect that. The Canadian nation should respect it.

People on all sides support it. I had a conversation last week with Julius Grey, who is far from being a sovereignist, but he told me that he fully supports Bill C-505. He too realizes that the integration model needed in Quebec has to be different from the Anglo-Saxon multiculturalism model.

We also have the support of the CSN, the FTQ, the CSQ and the Fédération interprofessionnelle de la santé. All these people gave us their support in the same spirit of openness so as to create social cohesiveness, to avoid ghettoization and to allow all Quebeckers, regardless of their origin, to contribute to the common culture of Quebec. Of course, this common culture is structured around one axis which is at the heart of the Quebec culture, namely French, our common language. We also have a common history.

The Canadian approach does not suit us. I believe that if this House was sincere in recognizing the Quebec nation, members have no other choice but to support Bill C-505. If not, it will be clearly understood that this was nothing but electioneering on the part of the Prime Minister not only when he gave his speech in Quebec City, but also when he tabled the motion in the House because of pressure from the Bloc Quebecois.

Members will have to vote on Wednesday and I would like to remind them, particularly those from Quebec, that should they vote against Bill C-505 to defend multiculturalism, not only will they be at odds with the Quebec nation and the consensus in Quebec, but they will also be going back on the decision they made when a vast majority of them voted in favour of the motion to recognize the Quebec nation. And we will certainly travel all over Quebec to denounce them.

However, that is not what I hope will happen. I sincerely hope, in a positive way, that all members of the House will support Bill C-505 and will make it law, following their words with action with regard to the recognition of the Quebec nation. That is what I and all Quebeckers are hoping will happen on Wednesday.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 13th, 2008]

As to the statistics compiled by Statistics Canada regarding the assets and liabilities of provincial and local governments according to national figures, for 2006, for all levels of government in Quebec, excluding the federal government, what were the: (a) total liabilities; (b) total financial assets; (c) total non-financial assets; and (d) net value?

[Public Safety, June 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is still reading from the script, and in that same script the Privy Council spokesperson and the House leader speak about security. But, once again, that in no way rules out the fact that the Prime Minister was informed of risks in terms of other concerns such as undue pressure or influence peddling.

Does the Prime Minister understand that he has not managed to sweep the Julie Couillard affair under the rug, and that he has no choice but to appear before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security?

[Public Safety, June 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Privy Council spokesperson and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons read from the same script, almost word for word. They said that the Privy Council was not advised of any security concerns about Julie Couillard by the RCMP. We are witnessing another attempted cover-up because this in no way proves that the Prime Minister was not informed of Ms. Couillard's shady past by the RCMP, the Department of Foreign Affairs or through other channels.

Instead of getting tangled up in unlikely explanations, will the Prime Minister admit that he knew of Julie Couillard's shady past long before this affair hit the news?

[Raymond Laliberté, June 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it was with much sadness that we learned of the passing of Raymond Laliberté. This great man was one of the pillars of the union movement in Quebec's educational sector during the pivotal time of the Quiet Revolution. He was a person of strong conviction and dedication and left a lasting mark on the Centrale des syndicats du Québec.

From 1965 to 1970, he was head of the Corporation générale des instituteurs et institutrices catholiques du Québec, which became the Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec and then the Centrale des syndicats du Québec. He oversaw the process to make this organization non-denominational and bring it more in line with the entire Quebec labour movement.

Raymond Laliberté was a genuine pedagogue, a progressive man and a remarkable humanitarian. Known for his discretion and humility, this trailblazer nonetheless laid the groundwork for the modern, educated society that is Quebec today.

[June 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, naturally the Bloc Québécois gives its consent to this motion.