44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 28, 2023 10:00AM
- Nov/28/23 10:27:55 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what we are seeing again today is not only intimidation, as my colleague pointed out, but also disinformation. I have heard the leader of the official opposition tell the House that people wanted medical assistance in dying because they had nothing to eat. The leader of the official opposition has also said that the ballot issue in the next election will be the carbon tax even though he is well aware that tax does not apply in Quebec.
I have one very simple question for the leader of the official opposition. Does he even believe himself when he says things like that?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 10:45:42 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think we are going to hear the two words “disinformation” and “bullying” over and over again today. We are going to hear those words a lot today.
What happened to the two senators in recent days is exactly what the Conservative Party tried to pull with the member for Richmond—Arthabaska: to tell people to call his office and voice their discontent. They are trying to fire up the worst in people for political reasons.
Does my colleague agree with me on that?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it was rather funny to see my whip “whip” the House leader of the official opposition. What a thing to see.
First of all, defending an argument does not mean bullying someone; debating does not mean spreading disinformation; sharing political views is never to be done by pitting people against each other.
I say that because I get the impression that, more and more, the danger I have seen lurking in Canadian politics is becoming all too real. It is the use of polarizing strategies like we have seen in the United States. Far too often the purpose is to disinform and intimidate, strategies that replace reflection and democratic dialogue. I get the feeling that is what we are facing today with the Conservatives' motion.
Essentially, if people have watched the events of the last few days with Bill C‑234, what the Conservatives are saying is that not only are they not too shy to heckle, but they are moving a motion to show us that they will keep heckling and that is what they want to do.
I will not reiterate what my whip said earlier in her speech. Unfortunately, we all know that the leader of the official opposition and the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle posted some nasty tweets about two senators to encourage people to intimidate them. My colleague explained it in detail earlier. A Conservative senator had to apologize for saying ridiculous things. We know all that.
We are seeing more and more examples of the Conservatives' intimidation and disinformation strategy. It all seems to come down to one thing for the Conservatives: their fixation on the carbon tax. The Conservatives have a passionate love affair with oil, which makes the carbon tax a cardinal sin in their eyes. This is version one million of my opposition day carbon tax speech. This has got to be the millionth time I am giving a speech on this topic. It is the Conservative obsession. It is a constant.
Speaking of disinformation, In recent days and weeks, we have seen the Conservatives vigorously defend the notion that the carbon tax applies in Quebec, even during oral question period. There is no credible political player in Quebec who would say the carbon tax applies in Quebec.
Furthermore, during oral question period, I recall seeing the member for Bellechasse-Les Etchemins-Lévis, brandish a sheet of paper, insisting that the infamous carbon tax existed and that she had an invoice. Afterward, we clearly saw that the invoice referred to the Quebec carbon exchange. There are people in Quebec who would say this kind of behaviour is illegal. The oddest part is that the member for Bellechasse-Les Etchemins-Lévis was herself a minister in the Quebec government when the carbon exchange was implemented. This is part of the disinformation, much like the many false ads we have seen, that is, the carbon tax ads that often play in Quebec and that everyone ignores. This is part of this disinformation approach.
They scraped the bottom of the barrel this week, when the leader of the official opposition refused to clearly say, when he spoke of a terrorist attack, that he was likely citing one of his favourite media sources, Fox News. He accused CTV and scolded journalists, saying it was their fault, that CTV was confused, not him. He will not even admit to his own mistakes. Not to belabour the point, but let us recall the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, where they used the carbon tax as an excuse, saying they voted against the agreement because of the carbon tax.
I believe this only proves that the leader of the official opposition—I will not be overly harsh—is not prime minister material. A good chief and leader usually brings out the best in others. They inspire people to excel and, most importantly, follow one of the basic tenets of politics, which is to never mix lies into political discourse—a truth that should apply to everyone—and to never get careless with the truth.
What we have been seeing for the past several weeks is a leader of the official opposition who plays fast and loose with the truth. Then, if anyone disagrees with him and resists his lies, he bullies them.
I will say it: People have talked to us about this. Alarm bells are ringing about how the member for Carleton operates, and those warnings are coming from none other than the Quebec Conservatives. Keep in mind that, during the Conservative leadership race, seven out of ten MPs from Quebec did not support Mr. Poilievre, sorry, the leader of the official opposition and MP for Carleton. Why did they not support him?
There were some rather puzzling quotes. I am talking, for one, about the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent. He said that Jean Charest, who was a candidate in that race, was likely the godfather of the Liberal family. He was even ordered to retract his statement. He also described Mr. Charest as one of the most corrupt politicians in Quebec. That said, he preferred to support Mr. Charest over Mr. Poilievre. One wonders why. I—
881 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:43:17 a.m.
- Watch
I apologize, Madam Speaker. I am talking about the member for Carleton. Sometimes I get carried away and make mistakes.
Why did the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent make that decision? It is because he is well aware of how the member for Carleton operates.
The member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier was also very informative on this point. He said that, if the member for Carleton became the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, he would have some thinking to do.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Mario Simard: Madam Speaker, I am hearing some noise.
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:43:35 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, before I heard the noise, I was saying that the member for Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier stated that he would think long and hard about his future if the member for Carleton became the leader of his party. He said, “I will resign, or join another party in the House of Commons, or sit as an independent, or help form another party.” In other words, he was well aware of how the member for Carleton operates.
Here is another quote by my colleague for Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier, who said, “I had a lot of respect for Stephen Harper as an economist, and I have a hard time understanding how he could support a candidate who wants to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada and base the economy on Bitcoin.”
Here is a final revealing quote by the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier. He said, “I have never seen such an aggressive race or such vicious personal attacks”.
That is why I say that even members of the Conservative Party from Quebec warned us about the Poilievre approach, which consists of two main elements, intimidation—
199 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:44:58 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we were told about the Carleton doctrine, which is based on intimidation and disinformation.
The same goes for Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais, who said that he was going to tear up his membership card, affirming that the Conservative Party of Canada was putting its entire future within the Canadian political landscape on the line in the last leadership race. He referred to Marine Le Pen's France and Donald Trump's United States, and then concluded by asking whether we really wanted to have this person, the member for Carleton, as prime minister.
To top it off, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska was the victim of a hateful campaign. Members will recall that he left the party after the leadership race. When he left the Conservative caucus, he was being bullied by his colleagues. They called his office and told people in his riding to do the same, to pressure him. People like the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles even personally contacted his constituents to suggest they demand his resignation—
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:46:34 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would say to my friend that when the truth strikes a nerve it can sting sometimes, but it is for the best. It is better to tell the truth—
33 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:46:53 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska said that he was the victim of intimidation, pure and simple, and that the member for Carleton is the one who came up with that tactic. I am quoting the member for Richmond—Arthabaska.
What I am saying is that the members from Quebec themselves know that the member for Carleton was using what we might call the Carleton approach. The members from Quebec themselves warned us that there was a danger, that there was cause for concern. Today we are seeing it become all too real.
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:47:55 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I was referring to an article in which the member for Richmond—Arthabaska said that he had been the victim of what I would describe as rather unorthodox treatment. My aim was not to smear anyone. I simply stated the facts. It is a fact that Conservative MPs preferred to support Jean Charest in the leadership race. It is a fact that Conservative MPs said it was irrational to make Bitcoin Canada's currency. I was simply referring to—
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:49:48 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what I told my colleague is that some newspaper articles refer to calls he allegedly made to the member for Richmond—Arthabaska's staff at the time, asking him to resign. I could send him the newspaper references.
Not more than half an hour ago, I asked the leader of the official opposition if he was prepared to repeat comments he has made many times in the past, that people are asking for medical assistance in dying because they have no food. He said that his remarks were based on a newspaper article he had read.
If my colleague is unwilling to live with quotes from newspaper articles in the House, then the same also applies to his leader.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is rather confusing.
My colleague is telling us that the carbon tax applies but that it applies indirectly. It is hard to see what he is getting at.
If we really want to help farmers in Quebec, then we need to defend the supply management bill. My advice to my colleague is to talk to the Conservative senators and ask them to pass Bill C-282 and move it forward a bit more quickly. I am sure that all farmers in Quebec will be much happier with him for doing that than for fiercely defending a tax that does not apply to us.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:53:34 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have to agree with my colleague from Winnipeg North, which rarely happens. Not only that, but I would use another metaphor, one borrowed from my colleague from Winnipeg North.
He often talks about the Homer Simpson awards. The big winner of the Homer Simpson award in recent weeks is definitely the member for Carleton. He lambasted CTV, saying it was the network's fault that he said there had been a terrorist attack, when it was later proven that that was a terrible lie. He can say that he will be voting against the Canada-Ukraine agreement because of the carbon tax, except that it will be easy to demonstrate that the carbon tax does not apply to that agreement.
We have a double nomination today. There is the Donald Trump award as well as the Homer Simpson award, which could be handed out at the end of the day.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:55:18 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. Then again, the best course of action would be to abolish the Senate altogether.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 11:56:13 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as always, my House leader said it best. That is what I called the Carleton method.
That is it.
21 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am always surprised to see how the Conservatives bring everything back to the carbon tax. The conflict in Ukraine is all about the carbon tax. Now, the Conservatives are saying that the problems farmers are having are because of the carbon tax. The Conservatives' common sense boils down to one thing: eliminating the carbon tax, even if it does not apply in Quebec.
All of the Conservatives' efforts over the past 18 months have been focused on the carbon tax. I have a very simple question for my colleague, who says he wants to help and support farmers. If that is what he wants to do, then there is a very worthwhile bill that is also sitting in the Senate, the supply management bill. If the Conservatives want to help farmers, why do they not focus their efforts on Bill C-282?
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
