Robert Aubin

[Transport, May 4th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, the difference is that we in the NDP know how to fulfill our responsibilities.

Lands owned by CN and CP are under federal jurisdiction. The government has the power and the responsibility to take action to help the parties reach an agreement. A direct shuttle from the airport to the downtown core would help reduce congestion and greenhouse gases. It would be good for the environment and Montreal's economy.

My question is simple: will the federal government get involved in the negotiations so that the project costs do not go up?

[Transport, May 4th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, 15 years have passed since the Mirabel airport was closed and airport traffic was reassigned to Dorval, yet there is still no fast shuttle between Dorval and the airport.

Yesterday we learned that negotiations with Canadian National and Canadian Pacific, which own the route that the shuttle would use, appear to be stalled. As a result, the bill will be delayed and costs will surely go up.

Will the federal government take the lead and facilitate negotiations?

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 4th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I listened closely to the hon. member's speech.

Obviously I understand that he chose, among the innumerable pages of this bill, the passages that seemed most appropriate to him. However, unfortunately, I am going to have to ask him a question about some of the elements that he did not cover, including the appointment of a unilingual anglophone Auditor General, something we have been disagreeing about for weeks.

What is more, under this new bill, the Auditor General's authority will be diminished considerably. In fact, this bill does away with the obligation to audit the books of at least 12 agencies.

This budget contains what the Conservative members are saying it contains, but there are also many other things hidden throughout this bill that the Conservatives never mention.

I would like to hear what the hon. member has to say about the role of the Auditor General and about the duties that he will be relieved of under this bill.

[Petitions, May 2nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this afternoon to present to the House a petition that was signed by dozens of constituents in my riding.

They want to do more than just criticize. They are engaging in tangible political involvement by signing a petition and calling on this government to reverse its policy on funding old age security and the guaranteed income supplement.

[Air Canada, May 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this evening, thousands of Aveos workers and supporters are going to march in the streets of Montreal. They will not be asking the government for special treatment or money. They will simply be asking Ottawa to apply the law and stop offering phony excuses not to do so. They will be asking to be treated with dignity and respect by this government.

Will the government listen to them and intervene, or will it continue to ignore its own legislation?

[Air Canada, April 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we are sitting across from a heartless government that refuses to enforce the law while Canadian workers are having trouble making ends meet. While the highly skilled employees of Aveos are on forced leave, Air Canada is relocating jobs to Germany, Italy, Ireland, Hong Kong, and the list goes on. Canadian expertise is being snubbed.

When will this government finally decide to enforce the law so that it becomes part of the solution rather than part of the problem?

[Language of Work in Quebec, April 24th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP came up with a solution to protect francophones working in federally regulated businesses in Quebec. The Conservatives voted against it. What is their solution? To create a puppet advisory committee, which we have yet to hear from five months later.

Can the minister of conflict of interest tell the House what mandate he gave the committee, how frequently it will meet and when we can expect a report?

[Financial System Review Act, March 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully to the hon. member's speech, since his knowledge in this area far surpasses my own.

I agree with his criticism about the minimal amount of public consultation—the Conservatives could have easily done better than making a few telephone calls—and, after reading various documents, I would like to get his opinion.

I would like to make a comparison, even though sometimes comparisons can be clumsy. There was a time when the decision was made to separate church and state because these two entities should not sleep in the same bed. But, when I read that decisions on major foreign acquisitions will now be made based on ministerial approval rather than on approval by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, it seems as though we are back to square one and that these two things should not sleep in the same bed either.

I would like the hon. member to clarify his position on that.

[Official Languages, March 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member says there is no problem in Montreal. So why did the Supreme Court quash one decision?

Bilingualism is considered merely an asset when people are applying for the job. It should be an essential requirement for the Montreal office. In this kind of environment, language skills are extremely important. One cannot understand a case if one cannot read the file. That seems pretty straightforward to me.

When will the Conservatives respect both the letter and the spirit of the Official Languages Act?

[Official Languages, March 28th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, there was one. Now there are two: two unilingual anglophone immigration board members in Montreal. Do I have to point out that Montreal is in Quebec, and that the Quebec nation is francophone? This situation is unacceptable not only on the surface, but at the core, because it makes the board members' work inefficient, questionable and perilous.

When will the government fix the problem and show this country's francophones the respect they deserve?