Sylvie Boucher

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 29th, 2018]

With regard to the Prime Minister’s trips to the riding of Saint—Laurent in February, March, and April of 2017: (a) what are the amounts and details of all expenses related to the trips; (b) what are the details of all official government business conducted on the trip; (c) what amount has been received by the Receiver General from the (i) Liberal Party of Canada, (ii) Official Agent for the Liberal Party of Canada by-election campaign in Saint—Laurent, (iii) Official Agent for the Liberal Party of Canada by-election campaign in Saint—Laurent for re-imbursement related to the Prime Minister’s trips; and (d) what are the details of any payment received in (c), including (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) description of expenses for which taxpayers were reimbursed, (iv) sender?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 29th, 2018]

With regard to contracts under $10 000 granted by by the Privy Council Office since September 16, 2016: what are the (i) vendors' names, (ii) contracts' reference and file numbers, (iii) dates of the contracts, (iv) descriptions of the services provided, (v) delivery dates, (vi) original contracts' values, (vii) final contracts' values if different from the original contracts' values?

[Employment, January 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the ability of an individual or a group to provide essential services does not depend on who they are or their personal beliefs.

The government recently acknowledged that by apologizing to the LGBTQ community, several members of which were removed from the public service.

Why then, in the case of summer jobs funding, does the government find it acceptable to impose a personal values test as a way of deciding who gets government funding?

[Canada Labour Code, January 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I must congratulate all members who are giving non-partisan speeches today. This is a matter that affects everyone, both men and women. First and foremost it affects human beings.

In this place, we are politicians and we work on legislation. However, we must not speak just to politicians, but also to ordinary people, the men and women who work for us, of course, and those who work in the public, parapublic, and private sectors. We must change the mentality. I want to congratulate my NDP colleague for her excellent speech.

I have read the bill and I completely agree that it needs to be discussed. However, we need to take action now. This bill is a good start, but now we need to beef it up in order to make it more substantial and ensure everyone can support it.

One thing bothered me, and I am wondering if it bothered you as well. Should exemptions be defined in the bill? I think that exemptions cause a lot of confusion, and this could mean losing the bill.

[Persons with Disabilities, December 13th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities does not have what it takes to be minister. A minister must listen to people, and be receptive and empathetic. The minister clearly does not get this, and has repeatedly acted inappropriately and made condescending comments to Canadians, like Kim Davis. What is worse is that the minister ordered his staff to publicly humiliate Ms. Davis.

Does the Prime Minister endorse his minister's actions?

[Salaries Act, December 12th, 2017]

No.

[Salaries Act, December 12th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my Liberal colleague a question, because the other member left.

If gender equality is the goal, we need to give men and women equal space.

I think the debate we are having today is somewhat meaningless. The Liberals would have us believe that they want gender equality, but they cannot seem to make up their minds over on the other side of the House. The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister of Small Business and Tourism said that this was meant to promote gender equality, although one of her colleagues said it has nothing to do with that.

I would like to know why the Liberal Party opposite is wasting our time with such a bill, when the Prime Minister himself refuses to make room for any of his ministers when he is here in the House answering all the questions.

I am a woman and I have always felt equal to men, and sometimes even superior to men, but that is another debate. I want to know why the Liberal Party introduced this bill, which is purely cosmetic. The Liberals cannot even agree on one explanation or one way of thinking about this.

[Taxation, December 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, whenever a simple question comes her way, the Minister of National Revenue could just answer with, “This is a recorded message”.

For weeks, she has been saying that the eligibility criteria for people with type 1 diabetes have not changed, but a memo from May 2 says the exact opposite. For her to mislead the House and Canadians is unacceptable.

When will the minister finally do the right thing and reverse her decision?

[Organizations in Charlevoix, December 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago, I attended the ceremony to distribute the Senate 150th anniversary medals. The medal was created by a special Senate committee to recognize the incredible contributions of individuals or organizations who stand out for their generosity and devotion and who often go unnoticed. I want to congratulate the Côte-de-Beaupré Optimist Club, which supports children in underprivileged neighbourhoods and helps many children remain integrated in the community in order to foster their development.

I also want to congratulate Ressource Genesis de Charlevoix, whose mission is to support the rehabilitation of people addicted to alcohol, drugs, gambling, and the Internet. It also provides support to the families of people affected. Its presence at the Charlevoix Casino as a resource in prevention is greatly appreciated. I am very proud of these two organizations in my riding for receiving this highly-deserved honour.

Merry Christmas, everyone.

[Ethics, December 7th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance's lack of ethics is becoming quite an embarrassment to the government. The person responsible for the country's budget has woven quite a tangled web for himself.

He is refusing to explain why he sold his shares just days before introducing a new tax policy. He is now the subject of a comprehensive investigation by the Ethics Commissioner because he introduced a bill that could benefit his family company.

Considering all of these developments, will the Minister of Finance do the right thing and resign?