SoVote

Nov/7/23 2:43:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, 547 people working at TVA lost their jobs on Thursday, the darkest day in the history of Quebec television. The federal government has to realize that Bill C-11 and Bill C-18 will not be enough. The government has to launch a $50‑million emergency fund for news media. It has to hold a summit next spring at the latest with all industry stakeholders to find long-term solutions to ensure the survival of our media outlets. Their future is at stake, and the time to act is now. Will the minister create an emergency fund and hold a summit?

104 words

Context: House Hansard - 248 - Nov/7/23

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Nov/7/23 5:47:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I was a little reluctant to participate in this debate because, as we find ourselves saying over and over to make sure our Conservative colleagues from Quebec remember and understand, the carbon tax does not apply in Quebec. Quebec has its own carbon exchange. That option is available to all the provinces. Any of them can set up a carbon pricing system like Quebec and British Columbia have done in partnership with California and other U.S. states that are in the process of joining. Earlier, my colleague from York—Simcoe talked about his region's unique circumstances. That is the case everywhere in Canada. I wonder if my Liberal colleague thinks things would be a lot simpler and we could avoid a lot of dissent in the House if every province adopted a carbon pricing system that suits its own circumstances rather than having to accept the federal government's carbon tax. I would like to hear my colleague's comments on that.

167 words

Context: House Hansard - 248 - Nov/7/23

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Nov/7/23 6:15:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith on her speech and her remarks. I am struck by the argument that women make up about 50% of Canada's population but they are under-represented here, in the House of Commons. Although we are talking about the electoral system, I am sure that a lot of other factors play a part in the fact that women may be less interested in politics. It may be the way that we practice politics. Perhaps we should dig a little deeper, specifically to try to attract people who better represent the demographic landscape of Canada and Quebec. I would like to know what my colleague thinks on this matter, because I am not sure that reforming the voting system alone is enough to ensure that more women or under-represented groups will end up here, in the House of Commons.

149 words

Context: House Hansard - 248 - Nov/7/23

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Nov/7/23 6:36:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to applaud Motion No. 86, moved by our NDP colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith. It is an interesting motion. This is not the first time that proposals to reform the electoral system have appeared on the political landscape, whether at the provincial government level, in Quebec, or here in the House of Commons. We rarely see these reform projects accomplish anything, and the reason is simple. It requires a little something that is often lacking in politics: courage. It is clear that our electoral system inevitably favours the party that wins the election. Consequently, the party that wins an election thanks to this system is unlikely to announce that it will immediately change the system for the better, switching to a formula that may put it at a disadvantage in future elections. We saw a bit of that in 2015 when the Liberals came to power, saying that the country had just seen the last election with this first-past-the-post voting system and that they were going to reform it. The government held consultations and received a report afterwards. It did not take long for the government to install a brand new shelf to toss the report on and forget about it. I find it very interesting that this is being proposed today, and that we have the opportunity to debate it. I hope that members will have a little more courage this time and that we will heed this call. Many groups and communities in Quebec and Canada have been calling for this for one very simple reason: Many citizens, many voters, do not feel properly represented. That is true. As the mover of the motion pointed out earlier, only 30% of those elected to the House of Commons are women, even though we know that the proportion of women in Canada's population is much higher than that, probably around 50%. There are reasons for this. Obviously, this is not just about the voting system. As long as we are opening up the debate and studying the issue, we must also ask ourselves some other questions. We have to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves how we are engaging in politics. Is our system still suited to life in 2023, 2024, 2030 and beyond? Perhaps we could look at how debates are conducted. Perhaps we could examine whether time is being used effectively in the House of Commons. I fully support having a citizens' assembly to review the electoral system, but at the same time, let us have a citizens' assembly to hold consultations on how we should engage in politics. I will give the example of young people. It is nothing new that young people are not interested in politics, but they are getting less and less interested and that is no small thing. We must be doing something wrong. There must be something we could do better to ensure that young people are better represented in politics at every level. A citizen's assembly that would look at the issue and focus on listening and coming up with solutions would certainly be beneficial. This would be a way of making politics more interesting and attractive to groups of people who are currently not interested because they do not relate to or are concerned about the debates being held and because these debates are not properly communicated to them. This breeds cynicism and we all end up paying the price, because in a democracy there is nothing worse than cynicism. That is why the Bloc Québécois is going to vote in favour of Motion No. 86. It may not be perfect, but it will start a debate, a discussion, that I think will be highly beneficial. Of course, as soon as the consultation ends and the report is presented in the House, we must not rush to put this report on the shelf right beside the one produced in 2016. We would be making the same mistake twice. It would be a terrible shame to repeat this mistake time and time again simply because we lack the courage to undertake a major reform of our existing system. A while ago I was talking about young people's disengagement from politics. That bothers me, and I am sure it bothers every one of my colleagues in the House. In fact, when we meet with young people in our ridings, we see something different; we see that they are interested in politics. They are interested in all kinds of issues, like social inequality, the environment, the homelessness crisis, the current housing crisis and problems related to our health care systems. Young people are wondering what kind of society we are leaving for them. They say they are going to be stuck with a great big mess when it is time for them to take the reins, and they are absolutely right. They take a stand and often make their voices heard at demonstrations. When I meet these young people and hear their comments and concerns, I tell them straightaway that they are being political. They are taking a political stance. They tell me that no matter how much they complain and want to change things, the current political system means that things will not change. They really feel that the system will not do anything to help them fulfill their dreams or implement the changes they would like to see in society for their own future. This idea of holding consultations to ask people how they see things and how we can get them interested in getting more involved so that there will one day be better representation of all the different communities here in the House of Commons, as well as in other legislatures across Canada and Quebec, is a golden opportunity. I am very hopeful that some of the things in the motion will come to fruition once we get to the committee stage. Earlier, during the speech of my colleague from West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, a riding whose name I love to say, I believe I heard him say that the Liberals are going to support Motion No. 86. I am happy about that because it shows that we are going to end up in committee discussing, debating and improving it. There are certainly a number of things that will need to be clarified. I am very happy to see that, again, we are acknowledging that the participation of the first nations will be necessary during this consultation. However, I think we will need to take into account the characteristics of Quebec. Not every voting system will ensure that Quebec's specificity is protected and will allow Quebec to be well represented in a model like the ones that might be proposed. These are things we will certainly have an opportunity to discuss in committee. I am confident that common sense will prevail and that, when all is said and done, we will end up with a process that benefits democracy. Let us hope so. Maybe I am a bit of an idealist or over-optimistic. I get called out on that sometimes. I may have a natural inclination to see the world through rose-coloured glasses, but I think this process could really generate more public interest in what we do here. I sincerely hope so. I hope that this motion will be adopted. I am confident that it will. Once the recommendations have been presented following the consultations, I hope that the government in power at the time will have the courage to implement them. I hope that this common-sense initiative will see the light of day thanks to the courage of the politicians who are in the House of Commons on that day.

1314 words