44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024 11:00AM
- Feb/26/24 1:20:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in the last election, Canadians clearly indicated that they wanted a minority government like the one they had between 2019 and 2021. They wanted to keep an eye on the government. That is the message they sent. That was the will of the Canadian and Quebec electorate. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. The government thumbed its nose at the will of Quebeckers and Canadians and chose to disregard its minority status and form a majority with another party. The result was the marriage of the Liberal Party with the New Democratic Party.
This marriage comes at a huge cost, both financially and democratically. Usually, when people get married, they pay for their own wedding. Sometimes their parents pay. It depends on the culture. In any case, we expect the happy couple to pay for the wedding. However, that is not what is happening here: Canadians and Quebeckers are paying for the huge cost of the wedding. That is what we are seeing now. We are paying for the two lovebirds. At some point the government needs to explain itself, and the Liberals claim that they need the NDP with them, that it is important. Earlier, the government leader said that there was obstruction, that this was chaos. It does not take much to throw him off if he thinks this is chaos.
I have been the opposition House leader for over four years. I can say that I have seen many things, but I have never seen chaos. I am concerned for the government leader. It does not take much to throw him off. I do not know if he watched The Walking Dead but, if he did, it must have given him a heart attack.
On top of that, he says it is chaos because the Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois ask too many questions. Of course, the NDP does not do that. The Conservatives and the Bloc take too much time debating issues in the House.
If we were spending 50 days debating a bill, I might agree, but representatives of the government would sometimes come to me to say they were imposing a gag order because they were tired and we had been debating a bill for too long. I answered that we had been debating the bill for five hours. They said they could not take it any more. Oh, brother.
The bills we were debating were not small bills. They were big bills, some of them economic updates, and the government quickly put a stop to the debate because they knew very well that there was no chance of my agreeing with them. Yet they knew that the New Democrats eat at the same trough. They knew that the NDP would be there for them. So it often happens that, after three, four or five hours of debate, the discussion is closed. Is that good for democracy? Is that good for members of Parliament? The only weapon we have to defend our constituents, our fellow citizens, is time. It is the time we take to explain our position, propose changes, solutions, amendments, discuss better ways of improving life in our communities. That is what the government is always stopping us from doing here in the House.
Since 2021 alone, the NDP has supported 14 closure motions and eight super closure motions. They have also supported 23 time allocation motions. Never in the history of Canada have members of the opposition been subjected to so many gag orders. It is as if we had nothing important to say and they decided to gag us. That is what it looks like.
Today we are discussing motion No. 35 aimed at extending sitting hours. We usually work by consensus. When we change parliamentary rules, we seek consensus. All four parties have to agree and give their reasoning. That is not, however, what is happening here. With a majority, the government is constantly changing parliamentary rules.
Earlier, the government leader even boasted about it. He said that the Liberals had done so three times in two years, and boasted about it. I want to circle back to something terrible. The two parties did something terrible when they decided on the hybrid Parliament rules. That was unprecedented. They changed the parliamentary rules, knowing full well that some parties did not agree. It is not because we were freaks. The Bloc Québécois never said that it was a ludicrous idea, but we were not even consulted.
Those parties just came along and said that, from now on, this is how the hybrid Parliament works.
The leader of the official opposition correctly said earlier that, if that is how they change the rules, that means that any majority government will be able to change the rules of Parliament.
I do not know if my colleagues have seen the polls, but I have. There is a small chance that a Conservative government will be elected, and there is a small chance that it will be a majority government. Let us say Canadians elect a majority Conservative government. That means that the Conservatives will be able to say, “These are the rules from now on”. When that happens, the NDP will get up and say that that is not right, yet they did it themselves in 2022. The Liberals will also get up and say that that is not right, yet they and the NDP did it themselves. The only party that will be able to stand up in the House and credibly tell the Conservatives that what they are doing is not right is our party, the Bloc Québécois.
There is now a problem with the way we operate, because the government has created a fake majority. That is what we are faced with again: procedural changes that reduce the opposition parties' speaking time and steamroll discussions, because they are going to limit the opposition's ability to stand up and defend their position. That is unacceptable.
They want to change the rules, but I think we have a perfect example here of a government that is incapable of respecting Parliament. It seems unwilling to discuss its own bills. The bills are not always good, of course, but discussion is the way to improve them.
That has always been the Bloc Québécois's goal. Our goal is to be a constructive opposition and to tell the House that we are always thinking of Quebec and only Quebec. Oftentimes, Canada feels the same way Quebec does, so everyone is happy. Other times, we may disagree on a bill for whatever reason, so then we work to amend it in good faith. The only two tools we have for convincing the government are time and the parliamentary process. If our only tools are damaged, it diminishes the power of democracy in Parliament. It is a little strange that Parliament is working to reduce the power of democracy within its own walls.
I always feel a bit uneasy when it comes to the NDP. When members of the NDP rise in the House after question period, they wag their fingers and talk about how appalling ArriveCAN is. They rant and rave. It is not a pretty sight. They also say that this government is focused on oil production and that it is the worst government in history when it comes to Canadian oil production. They claim to be environmentalists and so on. When there are Liberal scandals and when the Prime Minister is caught red-handed, they rise to express their outrage. However, when the lights go out, what we see is that the NDP always supports the Liberal Party. In all honesty, I would feel really uncomfortable with that, if I were a member of the NDP.
The Bloc Québécois will therefore vote against the motion. We are simply going to do what it takes to defend the interests of Quebeckers, even though our right to speak is being undermined.
1351 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:30:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I made a mistake. I wanted to table an amendment, but I forgot to do so. Do I have the unanimous consent of the House to table it?
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:30:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I cannot thank my colleague for supporting my initiative because he did not, but I thank him for at least asking a question that is very easy to answer.
He spoke of the official opposition, which we are not. He refers to our neighbours in the official opposition, who engage in filibustering. I would say that, most of the time, gag orders are imposed after very few hours of debate. Based on my limited experience, there was nothing here to justify that. I do not have my colleague's experience. I have been here for four and a half years. I have rarely seen a situation where the opposition party caused the Liberal government to lose control of its legislative agenda. I have not seen that happen very often. Most of the time, it is because the Liberals poorly manage their legislative agenda. They should look in the mirror.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:33:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I honestly do not think that this government will go down in history for how well it manages the House. Consider the strategy it used to create an artificial majority government and how it manages its legislative agenda. I honestly do not think it deserves a medal. It should focus more on how to effectively manage its legislative agenda than on ways of muzzling Parliament. That would be better for everyone.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:36:16 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his many questions. I will answer a few of them, but first I want to point out that the member for Salaberry—Suroît is certainly the biggest champion in this place for the interpreters. I think any interpreter, if asked, would say that the person who works the hardest to protect the health of interpreters is the member for Salaberry—Suroît, a Bloc Québécois member.
If I tell my constituents that we are going to have dental coverage, someone will stand up and point out that we already have it. My constituents are not stupid. I will reply that, thanks to the NDP, they will have two dental insurance plans, but with the same service, and they will pay twice as much.
If I tell them that we are going to have pharmacare, someone will stand up and say that we already have it. I will reply that we may end up having to pay for Canadians to get it, without getting any more for ourselves.
If I tell them that we are going to have anti-scab legislation, someone will ask me when it is going to come into force. I will reply that it will take a year and a half to get any confirmation, but since we see the Conservatives closing in, the anti-scab legislation might never see the light of day.
This means that the folks back home might not vote for the NDP.
256 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 1:38:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague. Her French is excellent. I tip my hat to her.
This comes back to what I was saying earlier. They created a majority government by combining two parties. Their marriage is so tight, they are not even bickering. They get along very well. It is unheard of.
The government is acting like a majority government because it has a partner that allows it to do that. I think that is a shame because Quebeckers and Canadians did not vote for that.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 2:26:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, anyone worried about the relationship between the NDP and the Liberals can rest assured that this courtship will keep going strong until 2025, even if it is costly. The top priority is making Canadians happy. It is not about Quebec's priorities.
Quebeckers did not ask for day care, they already have it. Quebeckers did not ask for dental insurance, they already have it. Quebeckers did not ask for drug coverage, they already have it.
How much will the “majority insurance” of these two lovebirds cost Quebeckers, even though it ignores our priorities?
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 2:28:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if only the Liberal-NDP “majority insurance” could improve care. A year after the forced deal on health transfers, Quebec has not received a single penny. Ottawa keeps imposing its conditions.
Eleven months have passed since Quebec demanded the right to opt out of federal dental coverage, and still nothing. Today, our lovebirds are having their third long-term spat, this one on pharmacare. In the meantime, not a single Quebecker is getting better care.
Instead of playing games just to stay in power, why not give Quebec the money it needs to take care of our people?
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
