André-Gilles FORTIN

FORTIN, André-Gilles, B.A., B.Ped., Br.A.

Personal Data

Party
Social Credit
Constituency
Lotbinière (Quebec)
Birth Date
November 13, 1943
Deceased Date
June 24, 1977
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/André-Gilles_Fortin
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=62c671a6-e471-4999-aee1-17376a7ee1b2&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
professor

Parliamentary Career

June 25, 1968 - March 31, 1971
RA
  Lotbinière (Quebec)
April 1, 1971 - September 1, 1972
SC
  Lotbinière (Quebec)
October 30, 1972 - May 9, 1974
SC
  Lotbinière (Quebec)
July 8, 1974 - March 26, 1979
SC
  Lotbinière (Quebec)
  • Social Credit Party House Leader (January 1, 1976 - January 1, 1976)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 450)


August 4, 1977

1. Did M. L. Bombardier employees, on Wednesday, April 25, 1977, occupy the UIC office located at 1441 St. Urban Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, in order to find out the decision made regarding their claim for benefits and, if so (a) was a request for disqualification submitted before they were notified by UIC officer, Mr. Jean-Guy Cote, that a decision had not yet been rendered (b) on what date was the decision made?

2. Does UIC management in Quebec make a habit of hiding the truth and, if so, does this behaviour have a negative effect on the unemployed?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink

August 4, 1977

Under the H-PEVAIC programme and in compliance with code D-15, have any persons drawing unemployment insurance lost their right to benefits, in accordance with clause 55(6) of the Unemployment Insurance Act and, if so, by region, how many and on what date?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink

August 4, 1977

1. Does the manual used for training claim control officers at the Quebec regional office of the UIC specify on page 45, that it is better not to inform the claimant that any statement he makes might be used against him, in spite of the intimation of the court that enquiry officers must give a statutory notification to the individuals they are going to question and, if so, for what reason?

2. Does the manual also state on page 46, that the claimant has to declare that he has read the unemployment insurance booklet which accompanies the claim form in order to bring it to the attention of the court if the accused pleads his ignorance of the law and, if so (a) does the UIC suggest that the booklet is complete enough to enable a person who has read it to know all the provisions of the Act (b) in view of the complex nature of the Act and of the fact that the claimant could be intimidated by the presence of the enquiry officer while being asked whether he has read the booklet, could the use by UIC of the answer to that question be considered malicious and even fraudulent?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink

August 4, 1977

Was a grievance filed by 167 employees of the UIC regional office in Montreal in December 1976, to protest against the lack of ventilation and humidity and, if so (a) during the hours which preceded the tests conducted by

August 4, 1977

Order Paper Questions

the Departments of Public Works and National Health and Welfare on December 21, 1976, did the administration order a manual ventilating system "to recreate a normal situation" (b) did the complainants win their case and, if not, for what reason?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink

August 4, 1977

1. At the employer-union meeting which was held on December 8, 1976 and in which six UIC managers in Quebec participated with Mr. Pierre Gadbois, Director, heading their group, and five regional union officers led by Mr. Robert Goyette, Regional President, did the five managers accompanying Mr. Gadbois admit that they had not read the document entitled Cadre des rencontres patronales-syndicates submitted by the union on May 26, 1976, and did they refuse to have it inserted in the minutes of the meeting?

2. Was the only item on the agenda of the meeting the document mentioned in Part 1?

3. Did Mr. Gadbois in regard to invitations for consultation extended by the union on May 26, August 30, October 17, 1976, consider the document submitted by the union as an obstacle to the meetings?

4. On December 8, 1976, upon reading the document, did Mr. Gadbois indicate he agreed almost completely with the union paper, except for a matter of little importance?

August 4, 1977

5. Did Mr. Michel Fortin, Chief of the UIC Labour Relations in Quebec, admit to Mr. Robert Goyette, the Quebec President of the Union, that the management refused to study the paper because they thought the union was demanding co-management?

6. Was Mr. Goyette dismissed under these circumstances, even though it was not in keeping with the reasons put forward by management?

7. Since December 8, 1976, has the union invited management to employer-union meetings on particular dates and, has management refused to take part in such meetings?

8. Is the prevailing atmosphere in employer-union relationships in the UIC in Quebec favourable to changes such as the merger proposed in Bill C-27 now before the House and, if so, what are the future intentions of the government?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Full View Permalink