44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 7, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.
I would remind him that, to achieve sovereignty, he should get himself elected to Quebec's National Assembly, if that is really what he wants.
For now, here, we are trying to defend Quebec and, above all, Quebeckers. I think that the NDP has represented Quebec by keeping Quebec from losing a seat. That is a victory.
With respect to the Bloc Québécois's bill, I would invite my colleague to listen to my speech. He will find all sorts of interesting information in it.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the Bloc was upset it was going to lose a seat, and the NDP protected that seat. I think that is a pretty simple thing.
If Bloc members have other plans, they can come to us and we can negotiate on their behalf with the Liberals, but since they just want to sit on the sidelines, I do not know whether they are bringing forward anything or they are just upset, but if they need any help, they can just call us.
We defended that seat; we will defend other rights too.
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the province of Quebec today has 78 representatives here in the House of Commons. This legislation would ensure that they will have 78 seats going forward. The member makes reference to the needs and desires of the people of Quebec, and I believe that this legislation meets them. However, I do not believe that it will ever meet the needs of the Bloc Québécois because the Bloc Québécois wants to play a destructive force for the federation. The Bloc Québécois does not see what a vast majority of Canadians and a majority of people in Quebec want. They want to see a strong, healthy government that provides progressive services through things such as health care, interprovincial trade and international trade.
I am wondering if my friend could be honest by telling members of the House that there is nothing we could do that would ultimately appease the Bloc, other than the breaking up of Canada.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will not even thank my colleague for his question, because it is nonsense.
It is nonsense when the parliamentary secretary says that we are not in the House to agree with others. I will answer that I have been the House leader for two and a half years and that it is his government's leader he should be talking to. He should ask him how many times in the past two and a half years my party and I have sat down with them. When it was good for Quebec, we agreed with them.
If he thinks we are not good to them, maybe it is because they are not good to Quebec. Maybe that is the problem. When he says that the Bloc Québécois is destructive when it comes to the government, he is saying that he thinks Quebeckers are destructive.
All the Bloc Québécois does in the House is defend Quebeckers and do what Quebeckers want us to do. When the parliamentary secretary speaks out against the Bloc Québécois, he is speaking out against Quebeckers.
193 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I feel like I should remind my colleague that the Bloc Québécois is not Quebec as a whole. The Bloc represents hundreds of thousands of Quebeckers, like other political parties, including those in the House, like the NDP.
We took advantage of the government’s minority status to secure gains for Quebeckers, written in black and white in the agreement we negotiated, including a guarantee that Quebec will retain its 78 seats. Is that enough? Could we do more? Of course we can.
However, we were facing a very clear threat, the loss of a seat for Quebec. I know that he would rather have a root canal than admit this, but does my colleague not agree that, this time, it was the NDP that defended Quebec’s interests?
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, last spring, my colleague, who is a member from Quebec, voted in favour of the Bloc motion recognizing Quebec as a nation with French as its only official language.
The Bloc Québécois believes that if Quebec is a nation, it should have special political weight to protect its specificity. Under this bill, Quebec will be allowed to keep 78 seats but, unfortunately, that will be out of a total of 343. Its political weight in this federation will therefore drop from 23.7% to 22.74%.
As a Quebecker, how can my colleague accept this drop in Quebec's political weight?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my Bloc Québécois colleague's question is very important. I sincerely think that we need to be having these discussions in the House.
I remember that a similar proposal was made in the context of an accord, the Charlottetown accord. A 25% minimum representation was proposed at the time.
I did some research and looked into what the position of the Bloc Québécois and its leaders was at the time with respect to that accord, which sought to maintain a minimum representation of 25%. I discovered that the Bloc's position at the time was to vote against the accord.
Today I am being lectured, but in the past there was an attempt to maintain this 25% representation and the Bloc contributed to the defeat of that accord. I think that some of my colleagues should do their homework and do some research. They should see the citations I have in front of me. I would be happy to share them with everyone, but I will restrain myself because I am very happy that Quebec will be able to keep 78 MPs for now.
If we want to open a new constitutional debate, it is up to the House. I hope that the Bloc Québécois will think about it this time before making decisions based only on preventing the Canadian confederation from working.
237 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
