44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 11, 2023 10:00AM
- May/11/23 10:37:22 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my leader for that excellent speech.
This week in the House, when we questioned the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship he said that he was not using the Century Initiative targets but was choosing his own targets for Canada, without relying on what was established by that same Century Initiative.
However, from 2023 to 2025, the federal government's targets are directly in line with the targets set by Century Initiative in that detailed 88‑page plan for 2023 to 2025.
My question for my leader is simple: Does he really think that the federal government is not using the targets set by Century Initiative? Is it using its own targets?
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague. I will never be able to congratulate him enough on the fact that his French is improving every day. It is a praiseworthy achievement. I think that it is the first time my colleague has spoken in French for 20 minutes, and I congratulate him.
My leader took the floor earlier and explained that there were three options before us. One of them is that they have their thresholds in Canada, we have ours in Quebec, and they are different. Looking at the thresholds as they are now, there is a difference between the demographics of Quebec and the demographics of the rest of Canada.
On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, the hon. member for Drummond tabled Bill C‑246, in which we asked the government to guarantee that Quebec's number of seats in the House never drop below 25%. The bill was rejected, however.
Prince Edward Island, for example, has four members, and apparently the rest of Canada is fine with that. When Quebec asks for 25% of the seats in the House because it believes it deserves them, the government says no.
Would that not have been a solution? We might not be having the same debate today.
216 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 11:19:54 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Conservative Party leader. He always makes me laugh. Actually, I want to congratulate him. Not only will he vote in favour of the motion, but, by doing so, he will be taking a stand against the position adopted by the former Conservative Party leader, Brian Mulroney, who supports the Century Initiative. I congratulate him on taking a stand against Brian Mulroney. I have to say that takes courage.
Throughout his speech, he talked a lot about common sense. I get it. He talked to us about approaches that should be different. I think the government is making the immigration department the most dysfunctional of all departments in the machinery of Canadian government.
He did not answer one of my questions though. What does common sense mean to him when it comes to yearly immigration targets for 2023 to 2025? Is it 500,000 people? Is it 400,000 people? Is it 300,000 people? Has the Conservative Party, which has lots of researchers and plenty of resources, come up with an appropriate number for immigration targets? What are the Conservative Party's numbers?
188 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 12:07:46 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I recognize how much work my colleague has done on the immigration file. Indeed, I congratulate her because I agree with much of what she said in her speech, including the parts about francophone immigration.
Now I would like us all to look at the motion before us. I kind of have a hard time believing the NDP could vote against this motion. My colleague mentioned first nations in her speech. The motion reads, “That...the House reject the Century Initiative objectives and ask the government not to use them as a basis for developing its future immigration levels.” One reason is that first peoples, not to mention Quebec, were never consulted with respect to the Century Initiative targets, which are determined purely on the basis of economics.
Based solely on the motion, I have a hard time seeing how a progressive party could vote against it. Essentially, it is an attack on McKinsey, a right-wing firm that considers only the economic aspects of immigration. No social factors came into play at all. Linguistic and cultural minorities were not taken into account.
I just want to understand why the NDP is going to vote against this motion.
202 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 12:13:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to note that I will be sharing my time with the excellent member for Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot.
I will start by saying this: I am pro-immigration, much to the chagrin of my detractors on social media and probably the member for Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie, who pride themselves on knowing my own thoughts better than I do. As I was saying, I am pro-immigration. The organizations I work with are aware of that. Together, we try to ensure the well-being of families in Quebec, including some families who entered the country through Roxham Road but would have deserved a proper welcome with dignity. These people should have entered Quebec through the front door. I repeat: I am pro-immigration.
Quebec is also pro-immigration. Quebeckers want to welcome newcomers with respect and dignity by offering them the resources and tools they need to make their immigration project a success so that they stay in Quebec. With the Century Initiative, it is impossible to do so.
People have heard me say many times what I am about to repeat, but I will do so once more. Newcomers are men, women, children and whole families who are looking for a better life. They are parents who want the best for their children. That is what we all want, in the end: to give the best to our children.
Many have decided to come to study and work in Quebec, charmed by the quality of life, the wide open spaces, the Quebec winter, of course, and Quebec culture. Others are attracted by better career prospects, a higher standard of living or educational opportunities. Their plans for the future contribute to Quebec society as a whole. From the bottom of our hearts, we wish them success. We hope they do well. Under no circumstances should their dreams be shattered by federal interests or lobby groups.
I will say it again: I am pro-immigration and so is Quebec, but not just any how and certainly not at any cost. As a small nation that speaks a minority language within North America, Quebec has a different capacity for integrating immigrants. Quebec's immigration policy has to take this integration capacity into account, as does Canada's. That is why Quebec's National Assembly unanimously condemned the Century Initiative targets. Just yesterday, the Bloc Québécois leader reminded us of a lesson from history when he said that those they intend to harm do not get consulted.
The Bloc Québécois strongly condemns the federal government's failure to consult the Quebec government, or the first peoples, for that matter, before increasing its new immigration level to 500,000 per year. The Bloc Québécois also condemns the thrust of the Liberal government's immigration policy, which includes targets that match those suggested by the Century Initiative lobby group to boost Canada's population to more than 100 million by 2100. The Bloc Québécois considers it imperative for the House to reject these targets and to ask the government not use them as the basis for developing its own future levels.
That is why we are calling on parliamentarians of all parties to firmly reject this irresponsible and unrealistic option. This project would seek to increase Canada's population to 100 million by 2100. Oddly enough, the federal government's new immigration targets directly correspond to the objectives of the Century Initiative.
I will say it again: Neither Quebec nor the first peoples were consulted. Still, tripling Canada's population has real repercussions. There are repercussions for the future of the French language in Quebec and in Canada, Quebec's political weight, the place of first peoples, access to housing, and health and education infrastructure. None of these were considered when developing this project.
Moreover, as stated by those who thought of and developed this initiative, social issues and demographic and language considerations were removed in their entirety from the assessment criteria. It is no secret that I enjoy debates. It is normal and healthy in a democracy, especially for important issues that shape the future. This discussion about the future of our nation is a democratic discussion that concerns all citizens of Quebec and Canada.
Unfortunately, because it is a part of Canada, Quebec is all too often faced with choices that are not its own. Too often, federal choices and priorities involve interests that have nothing to do with the interests of the Quebec nation, as it is the case with the Century Initiative. It is generally the case with the Liberal approach to immigration.
Let us talk about Liberal interests. In 2016, Dominic Barton, who still headed McKinsey, was appointed chair of the advisory council on economic growth set up by the Government of Canada, the Liberal government. Dominic Barton and his colleagues recommended substantial increases to immigration thresholds to increase Canada's population to 100 million people by 2100.
By Mr. Barton's own admission, some members of the committee felt that these levels were too high. Judging by the current immigration targets, however, the Government of Canada ended up following Dominic Barton's recommendation.
The former CEO of McKinsey is also the co-founder of Century Initiative, which is recommending gradually increasing immigration to more than one million permanent immigrants a year for a certain number of years, a calculation that is included in the detailed plan.
This lobby group is financially backed by many Toronto banks and corporations. Let us talk about lobbyists. The group is registered as a lobbyist. They are on the list of members of the board of directors. Some are Liberal Party donors and Conservative Party donors. I am not making that up, it is a matter of public record. Not surprisingly, the lobby group also wants Canada to continue oil and gas exploration and development. A lot of deposits are on first nations land. As far as we know, the lobby thinks that Ottawa should find a way forward. This is the lobby the motion is referring to, that we are talking about today. History tells us that we rarely consult those we might harm.
To sum it all up, the Liberal government decided, of its own accord, to exponentially increase immigration targets without any consultation with Quebec or the first nations and without any consideration for the particularities of the Quebec nation or Quebeckers' desire to appropriately welcome newcomers by providing them with access to decent housing, health care and a quality education.
Either I do not understand or the government does not understand anything. Either way, one thing is certain, and that is that we do not agree on the targets. It seems as though we will never agree. However, let us remember one thing. If the federal government does not want to hear what Quebec has to say, then perhaps it is because Quebec no longer has a place in the Canadian federation. The day when we can no longer agree with the federal government on anything at all, we can always become independent.
That would be a really great societal undertaking that I am sure people from all over Quebec would want to participate in because we love Quebec and we want to take care of the people who live there. Taking care of our people cannot be done any which way and especially not at any price. Taking care of our people involves letting them in through the front door, with dignity and respect, knowing that we have room for them and that they will be happy here. That is what the Bloc Québécois is saying.
1296 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 12:21:11 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, no, that is still the case. People in this party are always telling us the same thing: Quebec and Canada each set their own levels. If Quebec maintains its current levels and Canada increases its levels, Quebec will clearly lose demographic weight, and therefore political weight, within the Canadian federation. I am sure we agree on that. It is simple math.
The federal government voted down the bill brought forward by my colleague from Drummond, which asked that Quebec maintain 25% of the seats in the House. The Liberal government voted against it. We cannot seem to agree on anything.
However, one thing needs to be made clear: Every political party in the Quebec National Assembly voted against Century Initiative's immigration targets, which are now the federal government's targets.
There is a consensus in Quebec, and everyone is against it. We imagine that the Liberal government will vote for this motion since it always says it will work hand in hand with the Quebec government.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 12:23:15 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent question.
We have to face facts. Right now, greater regional immigration to remote areas would be welcome. My riding has wonderful immigration stories to tell. I was in Saint‑Thomas‑Didyme two weeks ago and took part in a Moroccan night. Saint‑Thomas‑Didyme is a long way from Ottawa. It is a small village with a population of about 600. Temporary foreign workers are currently working at the village sawmill and at another sawmill in the nearby village of Girardville. As I was saying, we had a Moroccan night. I am telling this story to show how welcoming and how open Quebec is to newcomers. We really need them to keep our small villages alive.
Unfortunately, the government is ridiculously dysfunctional when it comes to immigration. All the the opposition parties agree that we have immigration problems everywhere. The issue is a concern for employers, but also for small communities.
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 12:25:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would have a lot to say about that. I thank the member for his good question.
We first have to understand one thing. When we talk to certain African ambassadors to Canada, they say we must ensure that we do not drain their countries of all their talented people, because they need nurses, doctors and teachers. I have had discussions with certain groups. We need to be careful that we do not take all those fine people from Africa because that would cause problems for those countries.
I would really like to continue this discussion with my colleague, but I do not have enough time. It is a good question. Let it be known that we are not negative, we are positive. I support immigration.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 2:39:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the government can go ahead and say that it is not following the Century Initiative, but it is using the same targets. I said “the same”, but that is not accurate. The Century Initiative is recommending that Canada welcome 475,000 newcomers in 2025, but the government chose to go with 500,000. It is moving even faster, despite the unanimous opposition of the Quebec National Assembly, and without even consulting Quebec or holding a public debate.
The Bloc Québécois is calling on all parties, especially the Liberals, to listen to my question. If they want to copy the Century Initiative or even increase the level of immigration even faster, will they at least be honest enough to tell Quebeckers about it?
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 2:40:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, they reached their francophone immigration target once in 20 years and they are boasting about it. That is ridiculous.
Immigration thresholds are not an abstract concept or just a number in a notebook. They are not statistics that are just thrown around. Behind the numbers there are people with needs. These people need housing, they need health care, day care and schools for their children. They also need to integrate into their new society, learn its language and its culture. We cannot look at immigration from a strictly economic point of view. We are talking about human beings.
Will the government commit to rejecting this bad initiative and finally consider the ability to integrate these people when establishing these thresholds?
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/11/23 4:26:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think we were at questions and comments.
The member for Winnipeg North has made several interventions in the House in today's debate. One of the things he said was how proud he is of certain francophone communities in Manitoba and the vitality of French in Manitoba.
I would like to remind him that in 1870, when Manitoba joined the Canadian Confederation, the population was 50% francophone. Today, he would have to give us the numbers, but I think it is below 50%.
My question is the following. The member for Winnipeg North has a French-sounding last name, but as far as I know, he does not speak French. Maybe there is no connection, but should Quebec learn from what was done in Manitoba when it comes to protecting the French language?
136 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
