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 4 of 450)


August 4, 1977

1. Since March 1976, at UIC, Quebec area, has section B5, indicating job designation date in most of TBCT 360-15 (REV. 1.76) 7540-21-870-7234 forms commonly referred to as OALO and used to describe the linguistic situation of a job in the Public Service been filled and, if not, does the UIC infringe the Official Languages Act which states that the designation date of a job has to be known when the job is identified as bilingual?

2. Does this practice allow the Commission to delay the designation of jobs whose unilingual incumbent should receive language training, to have more bilingual jobs than the authorities intend to designate and to reject illegally any dispute with respect to bilingualism allowance and, if so, who is responsible for this situation?

3. Since the appointment of an Official Languages Officer at the Unemployment Insurance Commission, Quebec area (a) who filled the job on (i) an interim basis (ii) a permanent basis (b) in each case, for what period, indicating the interim period or other and the permanent period (c) was anyone appointed to that job without competition (d) what became of each ex-employee?

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

June 29, 1977

1. Following an inquiry by the Unemployment Insurance Commission in Quebec, which revealed that more than 40 per cent of the claimants did not attend H-PEVAIC interviews when they were summoned in writing as compared to those summoned orally, did the Department of Manpower and Immigration decide to summon candidates in writing despite the study and, if so, for what reason?

2. Did the decision of the Department take into account (a) the intelligibility of the UIC forms (b) the fact that, according to the Centrale des enseignants du Quebec (Quebec Teachers' Union), 40 per cent of the adults of the Province have only an elementary level education and thus the most deprived are the ones who are victims of exclusions and, if so, has such a procedure been adopted across the country?

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

June 29, 1977

1. Under the H-PEVAIC Programme and according to code D-28, did persons drawing unemployment insurance lose their right to benefits under section 40(1 )(d) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, for having failed to attend an interview pursuant to section 107 and, if so, how many (a) in Quebec, from April 1 to June 30, 1976 (b) in each region of Canada over the same period (c) in each region of Canada, during the implementation of the section involved?

2. Did the persons drawing unemployment insurance thereby excluded regain their right and were they reimbursed and, if not, for what reason?

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

June 20, 1977

Mr. Fortin:

Mr. Speaker, 1 was expecting this position as I was sufficiently aware of the rules, but 1 wanted to demonstrate that the opposition has in fact no chance to cast light on the past activities of solicitors general as they often move to another position and as the present Solicitor General admits on page 4 of his statement, that people in this position do not know anything about their letters and their inquiries from the RCMP. Consequently, I direct my question to the right hon. Prime Minister. Considering the unbelievable recognition by the present Solicitor General that it is customary for ministers not to inquire about investigations or claims made against the RCMP nor about the letters to be signed, can the Prime Minister tell us whether there is any direction from cabinet to put an end to this unusual practice where a responsible minister is eventually irresponsible?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   BREAK-IN AT L'AGENCE DE PRESSE LIBRE-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT BY MINISTER OF SUPPLY AND SERVICES
Full View Permalink

June 20, 1977

Mr. Fortin:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a supplementary question.

I am sure the Prime Minister realizes how difficult it is for opposition members to address questions on activities arising from an old responsibility of the former solicitor general. So, given the difficulties that arise from questions which opposition members are entitled to ask on behalf of the Canadian people, would the Prime Minister, since all opposition parties are unanimous, agree to review his decision and allow such an inquiry so we might question the former solicitor general and have the matter cleared up?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   BREAK-IN AT L'AGENCE DE PRESSE LIBRE-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT BY MINISTER OF SUPPLY AND SERVICES
Full View Permalink