Robert Aubin

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, March 23rd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my colleague's speech.

In her introduction, she outlined the fundamental principle of gender equality in Canada, a principle that we obviously subscribe to.

In that sense, Bill S-7 seems to contain a tremendous number of measures that deal with what happens after the fact, in other words, the way the Canadian government or the court must react once the action we wish to avoid is committed.

Can my colleague explain what measures in Bill S-7 deal with prevention, support or education to ensure that what the bill seeks to criminalize simply does not happen in the first place?

[Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, March 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my hon. colleague's speech.

I admit that although I agree with many points, my greatest reservation about Bill S-7 often concerns the surrounding discussion, the way it is presented and even its title, which refers to barbaric cultural practices. All the presentations implied that the Criminal Code does not currently apply to a good number of these situations.

My colleague spoke at length about, among other things, the limit of the defence of provocation for the express purpose of prohibiting honour crimes. The courts have already established that the culturally defined concept of honour does not represent a valid defence of provocation under the Criminal Code.

We have all the means already available in the Criminal Code to fight these practices, and what Bill S-7 will add. However, there is also everything that Bill S-7 does not address. For example, at their arrival in Canada, how do we inform women and young girls, who are often the first victims, of their rights guaranteed under the Criminal Code?

Could we take an approach to this bill that is a little less sensationalist and that focuses a little more on promoting the real rights that women should be aware of so they can exercise them?

[Regional Economic Development, March 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, regional airports in Quebec like the Trois-Rivières airport generate over $3 billion in economic activity.

The Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec wants the government to invest in regional airports to turn them into real engines of economic development. Unfortunately, our airport facilities have been underfunded for years under the Liberals and Conservatives.

Will the minister finally do something to support economic development in the regions of Quebec?

[Official Languages, February 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians learned a long time ago to judge politicians according to their actions and not their fine words.

The Liberals are all talk and no action.

When he learned that the new Minister of Foreign Affairs was a unilingual anglophone, the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie said that it was not the end of the world.

The member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville is outraged that ministers do not tweet in both official languages, even though only 22% of the questions asked by his own party last year were in French.

Over the past four years, no Liberal member has introduced a bill on official languages.

However, thanks to the NDP, progress is being made. Officers of Parliament must now be bilingual; the Quebec City marine rescue sub-centre, the only bilingual sub-centre in Canada, was saved; and we are the only ones to have made a firm commitment to restore the CBC's funding.

People of real conviction have learned the importance of being able to walk the talk. They can trust the NDP to fix the damage done by the Liberals and the Conservatives.

[Respect for Communities Act, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to speak to the bill itself because now is not the time, but it is the time to ask why a time allocation motion is being moved for the 89th time. Our procedural rules allow us to use a few exceptional measures in urgent matters, but that does not really apply here.

My question is quite simple. After 89 time allocation motions, are we still talking about exceptional measures or a way of governing?

[Petitions, February 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, last fall, in a show of solidarity, people in my riding circulated a petition calling on the government to support a project that would bring children from the Gaza Strip to Canada for care. I am pleased to table the fruits of their labour, signed by over a hundred people.

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, in which I heard him talk many times about the importance of a broad consultation—something I can only agree with, as long as a broad consultation does not mean an Internet survey.

The question I would like to ask is this: with a topic as important and sensitive as this, does he not think that the approach taken should be parliamentarian rather than governmental, so that the next government, regardless of its political affiliation, is bound to it, if only ethically?

[Business of Supply, February 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have been following this morning's debate very closely. I have no doubt that the Government of Quebec led the way here and that we would all do well to look to how the process was carried out in recent years.

However, I was almost pleasantly surprised to hear the parliamentary secretary say this morning that he wanted broad consultations. I think that is a good starting point. Where I became disillusioned was when we heard that broad consultation meant an Internet survey. Perhaps my colleague can alleviate my concerns.

I think that in dealing with such an important issue, the quantitative aspect—the number of people consulted—is important, but the qualitative aspect is especially important. No Internet survey, as objective as it may be, will allow us to see the people we are talking to. We cannot see their faces and read their body language to understand their feelings about this issue. Moreover, I am not sure how objective such a survey could be.

Is an Internet survey truly an appropriate way to conduct this consultation?

[Petitions, February 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I did not think it was possible, but it is. By the hundreds, people in my riding are still signing petitions calling on the government to intervene and restore Canada Post services.

Once again, on behalf of all of my constituents, I am tabling this petition, which calls on the government to review the situation at Canada Post.

[Employment Insurance, February 17th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to employment insurance, it looks like the arrival of a new minister does not herald a new approach. First the Conservatives imposed harsh restrictions on employment insurance, and now they are telling departmental officials to make it harder for unemployed workers to get the benefits they are entitled to. Officials who are a little too helpful are getting slapped on the wrist. That makes no sense.

Instead of attacking unemployed workers and public servants, why do the Conservatives not attack unemployment by creating jobs?