SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 112

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 18, 2022 10:00AM
  • Oct/18/22 2:02:55 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Cercle de fermières de Saint‑Lucien is celebrating its 50th anniversary on October 19. Sixty-eight of the original members are still active in this organization, which was founded in 1972. They are all generous and committed women who make a remarkable contribution to the community. I want to recognize their commitment to promoting Quebec's cultural and artisanal heritage and passing it on to future generations. We have a rich story worth telling, and these women are extraordinary ambassadors. I want to recognize the incredible contribution of Francine Leroux, the organization's president, who in 2019 founded Maison Francine Leroux, a place of learning and sharing for farm women that is tailored to their needs. That is where they keep their nine magnificent looms and provide training to the younger generation in order to keep the organization and its mission alive. It is good to know that Drummond can count on such passionate women who are working hard to make Quebec a better place. I wish the Cercle de fermières de Saint‑Lucien a happy 50th anniversary and many more wonderful years to come.
197 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 2:04:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, investing in Canada's small and medium-sized businesses results in prosperity for all. It is not complicated. When people are given the means to realize their dreams, we can foster skills and innovation that grow our economy and create good jobs. That is why I want to highlight the extraordinary work of our economic development agencies, our CFDCs and BDCs here, in Quebec, who every day, every week, help flagship companies in my riding realize their entrepreneurial dreams and showcase the entire region. Together, we will build a green and prosperous economy, an economy that benefits everyone.
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 2:15:37 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebec City is not just about hockey. It is also about baseball. On September 18, the Québec Capitales won the Frontier League championship with a 2-1 victory over the Schaumburg Boomers. The Capitales previously racked up seven Can-Am League championships, but this win is extra special because it is the Capitales' first season with the Frontier League. What an electrifying debut. All season long, the players treated their fans to outstanding games, and the entertainment, along with Capi the mascot, was the icing on the cake. Capi is all about the hugs. We should talk to my office manager about that. Fans know they will always have an amazing time. Manager Patrick Scalabrini and president Michel Laplante are a big part of the team's success. We are already looking forward to next year. Congratulations to the Québec Capitales.
147 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 2:38:15 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, last week in Washington, the Deputy Prime Minister announced to the world Canada's new foreign policy with respect to energy. She announced that Canada will fast-track energy projects to export more oil and gas. Fast-tracking projects implies a certain number of things. She might cut the environmental assessment, forego consulting Quebec, the provinces and first nations peoples or skirt the whole issue of social acceptability. She might also do all of that simultaneously. What will it be?
82 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 2:41:21 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk for a moment about the green transition and the need for Canada to invest and attract private capital in this major transition. To do that, we need to build more. This is a very big challenge before us, and I think that it must truly be a national project, a project for Quebec and for Canada. In order to do that, we must work—
71 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 2:43:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, here is a fact for us: 15 LNG projects were proposed when the Prime Minister took office. Zero are completed. Even the one that we approved in our final days in office, he has still failed to bring to completion. Now, after the Prime Minister stood in the way of LNG Quebec and east coast LNG projects, Europe is totally dependent on Putin to keep the heat on this coming winter, funding that war. What has the government contributed? It has sent Putin back his turbines to help him pump his gas. Why are the Liberals funding Putin's war instead of paycheques for Canadians?
107 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 3:46:21 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for wanting to take a closer look at the bill. That is exactly what we can do if we vote for the motion today. We can go to committee and take the time needed to listen to experts to see how taking care of our children's dental health means taking care of their health in general. It avoids them having to go to the hospital for emergency surgery that would not be needed if they had access to quality preventive dental care. It is for all children who need it in Quebec and elsewhere.
101 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 3:56:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for allowing this debate. However, I do question the timing of this announcement, which was made in the middle of Quebec's election campaign, when seniors' groups were making their demands known to the Quebec government. The government announced dental care funding, but groups like Réseau FADOQ responded that this was not what they were expecting from the federal government. They are asking for health transfers to increase to 35%. Their request was for the government in Quebec. They understood that. When will the government understand it?
95 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 5:14:37 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He refers to provincial programs as though they were leftover programs and inadequate solutions, when the Quebec program already exists. What we are asking is not just to tell them to accept the program as it is and give us the money. What Quebec is asking for is the right to opt out with full financial compensation for programs with comparable objectives. I understand that they want to do something big that they call “national”. They say this is the Parliament of Canada and that this applies to all Canadians, but when it was time for the carbon tax, the provinces that performed like Quebec with its permit trading system, the government was very proud to allow Quebec to opt out because it was effective. Why does that work for the carbon tax but, suddenly, when the government has this desire to centralize everything, the principle of asymmetry no longer exists?
162 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 5:15:28 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, the member and I have spoken specifically on the carbon tax in the past and I have been very complimentary of Quebec's very aggressive position when it relates to pricing pollution. It understands it. It gets it. As it relates to this particular bill, conceptually I am very much supportive of ensuring that individuals under 12 years of age who are in families that make less than $90,000 a year get access to this funding. If the member is suggesting that we need to further look at the bill to ensure individuals are taken care of and that Quebec in particular would have an opportunity to realize some savings due to the fact that it is already doing this, then that is something that could come up in committee where the bill is going to next.
140 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, first, I would like to say that I am honoured to be able to speak today about national ribbon skirt day. I am honoured because I represent the people in my riding, but I also hope to lend my voice to other indigenous nations in Quebec. I am honoured because, today, I am wearing a ribbon skirt. I will come back to that later. My riding includes two nations, the Innu and Naskapi nations, and I am proud to be their spokesperson and their MP and to be able to wear these colours as I present these ideas this evening. I salute them. The Bloc Québécois is in favour of this bill. We have always sought to promote these relationships. In concrete terms, we have always taken action to be able to discuss and maintain a dialogue nation to nation. For us, it makes sense to showcase these symbols that are so precious and important to their traditions. We talked about it a bit earlier. The skirt itself is a statement on its own. I will come back to that later. I would also like to thank Élise Vollant, a proud Innu woman from Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam, an Innu community on the north shore or Nitassinan. Ms. Vollant made the skirt I am wearing today, a skirt that is very special to the Innu nation and particularly the community of Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam. It is a gift from the Innu nation, since it is a symbol that they want to see represented in all the traditional ceremonies and rituals, as it is usually done. For me, being white, it is truly a sign of trust and, at the same time, a request for me to walk with them. When wearing a garment like this, every step we take is for these people, these communities, these women, and it is their history that we think about. I say tshinashkumitin to Élise Vollant and the entire community of Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam for allowing us to think of them today and walk alongside them in a symbolic way in the House. I believe it is an important moment for the nation. As I said earlier, the garment is a statement. We described it in several ways. These are fabrics, bright colours that have been transformed and evolved over decades or even centuries as contacts were made. It is truly the product of the relationships between the nations themselves and of their own history. The statement is transformed. We see in the garment itself all that history that the women want to pass on through tradition, language and culture. It is also a way of taking action. Today, I am wearing a red dress. It is a colour that is particularly favoured among indigenous nations, and also among the Innu people. It has several symbolic meanings relating to the spiritual world and life. Again, the ribbons chosen by the Innu nation are orange, red and purple. Undoubtedly many people already see the strong symbolism of this skirt, in the orange that refers to the survivors of residential schools, to a painful history. At the same time, we want to move forward, heal and find the truth. Through this skirt, the Innu nation reminds us that it is important for them to highlight this element. Again, there is a call for us to take action. That was for the colour orange. There is also red, representing the missing and murdered women and girls. It is the famous red dress we have seen represented in recent years and that has also become a symbol. The skirt has therefore two symbols. Finally, there is purple, representing Joyce Echaquan. I believe people are familiar with the story of Ms. Echaquan, who, because of horrendous racism, experienced horrors that no human being should endure. Ms. Echaquan’s story is remembered on this skirt. For me, it is also a symbol of the fraternity between all communities. Ms. Echaquan was an Atikamekw woman and the Innu people represent her on their skirt. It is a symbol of the entire issue of the equity of fundamental human rights, the right to security and the right to life. This memory must be eternal. When we talk about truth, we also care about memory, because memory should help us avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. All these colours are symbolized in an image that I will quickly describe. We see a woman wearing the red skirt, eyes blindfolded, holding the scale, the symbol of justice. We also see purple. All the colours are there and they truly show the desire of the Innu nation, particularly the Innu of Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam, to move forward and to always remember the survivors of the residential schools, the murdered or missing women and girls and the story of Ms. Echaquan, to finally achieve reconciliation. Wearing a garment such as this is not about the fabric, the ribbons or the colours. It really sends a message. We are in a position where we can be interpreted and, at the same time, we can remember everything I have just said and remember that the nations are proud. For me and for others, wearing this skirt makes sense. Despite that, some have noted that, for many people, it is not easy to wear the skirt in public. In fact, children, particularly in Saskatchewan, have received racist criticism and comments because they were wearing this garment. For me and the members of first nations, it is also an affirmation, a recognition of the past and of the people who came before them. It really makes a statement. In short, I believe that we could talk about it for really long time, but it is more than just the garment. It is what I would like us to remember and I think and hope that the entire House will agree to make January 4 national ribbon skirt day, so we can remember our obligations and commitments to first nations and truly listen to what they have to tell us. These garments show that members of first nations are strong and proud, and also that Canadians, and we, the elected members, have much work to do to perhaps be worthy of wearing a ribbon skirt. I am very proud to do so, but it also gives me a sense of duty that is humbling.
1077 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 7:02:50 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I must admit that I am happy that my colleague finished his speech, because he was starting to get carried away. I was getting concerned. I like him a lot and want him to stay fit and healthy. That said, I congratulate him for his speech and I would like to ask him a question. I know the intention is good, because, obviously, no one is against virtue or against good intentions. However, I wonder why the federal government insists on implementing programs that it has to manage, when programs already exist in the provinces. As everyone knows, this is the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. Why not just make things easier and give the money to the provinces so Quebec and the provinces can manage their own health system, their own dental care? It would be much simpler. Quebec and New Brunswick, for example, already have dental care programs for children. They could have managed it themselves. The other provinces could do the same. Would it not be easier to make transfers, like the premiers of Quebec and all the provinces are calling for?
188 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 7:03:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very important question. I just want to remind him that only 4% of residents of the provinces receive the support they should be getting in terms of dental care. The federal government plays a supporting role, as it does with the health agreement. We are working together. Yes, health is a provincial jurisdiction, but that does not mean that we will not ensure that Canadians in Newfoundland, Quebec and western Canada benefit from the same health care standards and the same support. We want to ensure that that support is available to all children aged 12 and under, both in Quebec and across Canada.
112 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 7:16:44 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I also heard the question from my other colleague. As I already said today, this bill was announced on the same day that seniors' groups were addressing Government of Quebec health care officials, demanding assistance with dental care. We know that children aged 10 and under are already covered in Quebec. When the Government of Canada announced this bill, the seniors' groups said that it was not the right place. They wanted to speak to the Government of Quebec, which is responsible for dental care. What seniors in my riding want is for the federal government to increase health transfers to cover 35% of costs so that Quebec's department of health can take care of them and make decisions about dental care.
132 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 7:46:33 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, since the first half of the 1990s, provincial health care systems have been sabotaged, particularly in Quebec. They were sabotaged from the moment the transfers stopped. Since then, while the provinces have to hire staff, doctors, nurses and orderlies, the money stays in Ottawa. Is that acceptable? Is it acceptable that, after having sucked the lifeblood out of provincial health care systems and Quebec's health care system, Ottawa wants to use that money to create a pan-Canadian dental care system? There is nothing wrong with helping those who need it. However, since Quebec understands social programs and is going to do a better job than Ottawa, it would probably be much more acceptable if Quebec had the right to opt out with full financial compensation. My question is this. Is it acceptable, this vampiric system that encroaches on and invades Quebec's jurisdiction, or should Quebec simply get the hell out of this country?
158 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:08:07 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I know you have had a busy day. It is an honour to have you with us this evening and to see you in the chair until perhaps late into the night. I am pleased to participate in the debate on Bill C‑31. As everyone knows, this bill will make a benefit available to certain families with children, depending on their income, to pay for dental care services. It will also make a $500 lump sum housing benefit available to families who spend more than 30% of their income on rent. I am not going to do a deep dive into this bill's strengths and weaknesses because I think the members for Mirabel and Berthier—Maskinongé have eloquently made its flaws and weaknesses clear to us all. I want to talk about my experience as a health care professional, my knowledge of the Quebec health care system, its strengths and the improvements that could be made in the area of oral health. Beyond dental care, it is about the importance of oral health. It is about providing this care to as many people as possible who need it, especially to those who have limited resources and cannot afford the rather high costs involved in going to the dentist. In my profession, when investments are made in a program or measure, it is important to immediately consider how the results will be evaluated. It is important to look at how continuous improvement is being measured. Is there any evidence that the money invested is achieving the desired goals? Mr. Speaker, could those gentlemen speak more—
272 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:10:57 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, maybe it is because I am speaking in French that those who speak only in English are less interested. I wonder. The idea is that we have to wonder about the money that will be spent when we propose a measure that is fundamentally good. Will the money meet our public health objectives? In Quebec, we already have a body with the expertise to measure outcomes, and that is Quebec public health. There are researchers and scientists whose jobs it is to do this. I agree that there are dental care needs, but I am not sure that Bill C‑31 will achieve the hoped-for objectives. This came about quickly without any real exploration of the idea and without any way to measure the outcomes. From what I understand, people will have to file an application, register with the Canada Revenue Agency and submit a receipt that could potentially get lost. Some people will not have access to the Internet. As a member of Parliament, I expect to receive phone calls in my riding. I expect to be told that a claim was filed but the cheque never came, that the receipt was lost, or that an overpayment was made and now needs to be paid back. If the Minister of Health's objective truly is for children to have access to dental care, why did he not hand over the money set aside for Quebec so that Quebec could improve its own program? In Quebec, children under 10 years of age who are having problems with their teeth can simply use their health insurance card. They go to the dentist, show their card, and the costs are automatically covered. With this measure, we are introducing a more complex administrative process to allow parents to claim the costs for their children. It is not clear how many services will be covered and how this will be measured. I have many questions, which is why I am not so thrilled about this gag order. We all have a lot of questions, and normally these things are debated in committee and we can look into each aspect of a bill more thoroughly. When I was young, dental hygienists would come to my elementary school and show us how to brush our teeth. We know that oral hygiene is also a lifelong habit. The idea is to also invest in prevention. Our Quebec system is stretched to the limit. Since arriving here, the Bloc Québécois has kept repeating in the House that Quebec needs health transfers to improve all its health and social services programs as well as the safety net for its entire population. On another note, now that we have raised the issue of dental care, I am wondering about how quickly this is happening. Usually, consultations are held. When a measure is proposed, criteria are identified to assess whether the objectives are being met. Experts are consulted. At this point, I have the feeling that this step was skipped, and that the government only wanted to quickly seal the deal with the NDP so it could say that it fulfilled its commitment. We have until 2025, here is the cheque and that is done. I feel that this is a botched bill and that we did not have the time required to consult with civil society, scientists and experts. Regarding part 2 of the bill, which deals with housing, we cannot object to the most disadvantaged people receiving a $500 cheque. I would like to point out that in Quebec, we have had a great program since the 1990s called Allocation-Logement that provides a monthly benefit. For example, a single low-income person over the age of 50 who earns less than $20,800 can receive up to $170 per month to help with their housing costs. This is a significant program that enables low-income, disadvantaged or vulnerable people to make a budget. They know they will not receive a one-time single cheque, but they will get a certain amount each month to help them cover their rent. I am a health care professional, even though I am on unpaid leave while I do my job here in Parliament. I think it really would have been better for the government to transfer the money to Quebec's Allocation-logement program to enhance and improve it, rather than writing cheques to people who apply for this benefit. It would have been easier for those this measure is intended to help. In order to get the $500 provided for in Bill C-31, people need to apply for it. They also need to prove that they are spending more than 30% of their income on housing. That is a lot of work for the person applying and for those who have to review their application. We know that the federal government's services to the public are a real mess right now. I am not criticizing public servants; they are overworked. There is a labour shortage and the system is not working right now. The government wants to add to that, and I am worried that the people who need this $500 will not get it. I think that, if we really want to change things and make people's lives better in terms of things like dental care or housing, we need ongoing core measures, measures that will be around for a long time. People need to be able to understand that there is a beginning and that they can count on government help every month. In essence, the government's job is to create wealth and better redistribute it to the people who need it most. I feel that we could have used more time to debate this bill. Its substance is good, but the execution is flawed. Unfortunately, I am afraid it was not created for the right reasons. I believe this bill has a partisan, ideological purpose, one that is not necessarily intended to serve the community.
1011 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:18:19 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her speech. I certainly do not agree with her conclusion that our reasons for creating this bill were unethical. I think it is very important that we help people. I am sure that my hon. colleague will agree with me that it is important to help Canadian and Quebec families who are in an unenviable situation, who are less well off and whose children need dental care. I imagine we can at least agree on the importance of ensuring that these individuals can provide dental care for their children under the age of 12.
102 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:19:18 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. He is right when he says that we both agree that these needs exist. We agree that children throughout Quebec and the other provinces need dental care. We agree that people who are more disadvantaged, less fortunate, those who have a harder life, need support for housing. However, we disagree on the means being used. We do not think it is a good idea to pass such a significant bill that addresses such an important need so quickly. We think it is a bad idea not to take the time to first consult the provinces, since this falls under their jurisdiction, not to mention the experts, associations and dentists before passing this bill. It would have been better to hold consultations with the aim of achieving the desired result, which is to improve the oral health of children under the age of 12.
155 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Oct/18/22 9:20:26 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-31 
[Member spoke in Inuktitut] [English] I wanted to start by speaking in Inuktitut because I was quite offended by the member's comment that when she is speaking in French, she might not be heard. She has an interpreter. I was able to understand her because there are interpretation services. I want to ask her about the dental care program in Nunavik for Inuit in northern Quebec. What are the conditions of the dental care program? Would there be improvements from this bill?
83 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border