Thomas Mulcair

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, all Canadian children deserve an equal opportunity in life.

The House voted unanimously to close the funding gap for first nations schools. Why will the Prime Minister and his government not fulfill that promise?

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, a good way to move forward, a good concrete action, would be to recognize that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is right, that this was an attempt at cultural genocide.

It affected 150,000 children. They were subjected to horrible and depraved physical and sexual abuse, and 6,000 of them died.

Residential schools left their mark on seven generations of aboriginal children, but to this day, aboriginal children receive 30% less than other Canadian children.

Would the Prime Minister accept such a thing for his own children?

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, intentions are not enough. An apology is only meaningful if it is accompanied by real action.

There were 150,000 children taken from their homes and from their parents in Canada. They were mistreated and horribly abused. As many as 6,000 of them died. That is 6,000 children dead in Canada.

Does the Prime Minister agree with Justice Sinclair and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that the residential school program was nothing short of cultural genocide?

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2015]

“Aspirational”, Mr. Speaker.

Seven years ago, the Prime Minister officially apologized to Indian residential school survivors and first nations. He promised reconciliation.

To that end, will he acknowledge that aboriginal peoples are entitled to a nation-to-nation relationship with the Government of Canada, as our laws have stated for over 250 years?

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge that we are on unceded Algonquin territory.

My colleague, the member of Parliament for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, presented a bill to fully implement the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a United Nations document that my colleague actually helped draft. The Prime Minister and all Conservatives voted against it.

In light of today's report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is the Prime Minister willing to vote to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

[Pensions, May 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, let us see what has been said before about the Prime Minister's idea of a voluntary new CPP. I quote:

...some sort of voluntary new CPP method...would not work and...the CPP would be unable to administer it.

Who said that? It was Jim Flaherty, the then finance minister.

Given that 60% of our youth are going to be poorer than we are today, rather than study half measures on the eve of an election, why does the government not change the budget today so that people can retire with dignity at 65 instead of 67?

[Pensions, May 27th, 2015]

Peter Pena, Saulie Zajdel, Michael Sona, Dean Del Mastro, all Conservatives, all convicted, Mr. Speaker. That is what happens when they go to a real court.

The Prime Minister's record on pensions is clear. He has blocked every effort by the provinces to increase CPP. He even rejected our calls for real action. If he is re-elected, the Prime Minister says he is going to raise the OAS age from 65 to 67, taking $14,000 out of the pockets of every senior. Instead of a deathbed conversion, how about simply bringing the retirement age back to 65 right now?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, of course the courts are looking at the actions of Mr. Duffy, but Canadians are looking at this House to find out about the actions of their Prime Minister. Again, it is up to the Prime Minister. He can answer now, or he can answer during the debates.

Before it was tampered with, the Senate report on Duffy's expenses said clearly that claiming P.E.I was contrary to the plain meaning of the word “primary”. No wonder they changed it. It was actually the Prime Minister's Office that provided Mike Duffy with the primary residence loophole that he is now trying to use as cover.

Was that the essence of the PMO's backroom deal with Mike Duffy to begin with?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Mike Duffy's actions are indeed before the courts, where he has to answer for them. Here in the House, the Prime Minister is normally the one who has to answer. He can answer us now or during debate.

The audit report on the Duffy affair was modified seven times by the Prime Minister's staff. Five separate drafts were concocted. Now they are trying to block the full details from becoming public. They are doctoring the report. Now they are trying to cover up their cover-up.

When will the Prime Minister order the full Duffy audit released?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said in the House that Mike Duffy was a resident of Prince Edward Island because Mr. Duffy himself signed a declaration to that effect before he was appointed to the Senate.

Does Mike Duffy's written declaration still exist? Did it ever exist?