So V ote

Feb/8/24 11:00:51 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in recent days and weeks, we have seen a significant number of highly credible economic and banking institutions point out that current immigration policies go beyond our capacity for economic integration, and compromise issues of an economic nature. This did not come from the bad, leftist Bloc separatists. So I have no problem asserting that. We have always recognized the economic importance of immigration. I mentioned it clearly when we talked about temporary foreign workers. There is something I find extraordinary in this morning's survey. People were asked a number of questions, including whether they thought there was additional pressure on housing and inflation. Some people, without malice, answered in the affirmative, but Quebeckers, and even Canadians, overwhelmingly said that yes, it does contribute to the economy. However, there is one thing the Liberals do not understand, and I am going to explain it to them simply: Let them do this properly and it will work.

159 words

Feb/8/24 10:59:07 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am having a hard time being objective because, last week, in my absence, the Minister of Immigration blatantly lied in the House when he said that I had compared immigrants to heat pumps—

37 words

M. Yves-François Blanchet

Feb/8/24 10:54:44 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is an intriguing question. It raises the issue of numbers wars. We can opt for the ideological extreme of the Century Initiative proposed by the McKinsey firm, which has been paid to take de facto control of Canada's immigration department. The people in that department are so eager and are moving so fast right now that the figure of 100 million Canadians by the end of the century will be completely blown out of the water. This raises the issue of numbers. Right now, numbers wars are being waged because it is easier to talk about a figure in the media. In reality, we need tools to measure—after one, two, three or four years—the quality of integration and overall quality of life of people who decided to come and live in Quebec. It is a set of variables. For these people, it is not enough just to know how to speak French. Is their degree recognized? Do they have a decent job? Do they have reasonably priced housing? Here we have the other extreme. We are so focused on numbers and so keen to open everything up that people who came here as asylum seekers are sleeping in the streets of Montreal, without housing. This is the most obvious example of the government's heartless failure.

225 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Feb/8/24 10:33:38 a.m.
Watch

moved: That the House: (a) recall its unanimous vote of November 1, 2023, calling on the government “to review its immigration targets starting in 2024, after consultation with Quebec, the provinces and territories, based on their integration capacity, particularly in terms of housing, health care, education, French language training and transportation infrastructure, all with a view to successful immigration”; (b) call on the Prime Minister to convene a meeting with his counterparts of Quebec, the provinces and the territories in order to consult them on their respective integration capacities; and (c) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a plan for revising federal immigration targets in 2024 based on the integration capacity of Quebec, the provinces and the territories. He said: Madam Speaker, I was afraid that I would never get a chance to speak because my esteemed colleague read about four cereal boxes. It was quite interesting. As La Fontaine would have said, it is the fable of the Liberal who was afraid to let the Bloc speak. My colleague thought that he would speak for as long as possible, to take up time on opposition day. Like everyone who reads francophone newspapers, he saw a Leger poll this morning showing that Quebeckers and Canadians basically strongly disagree with the immigration policies of what is left of this government. However, this gives me the opportunity to repeat in the House what I had the chance to say in other places. Anyone who lives in Quebec and who wants to be a Quebecker is a Quebecker. No matter where they come from, how many generations or how many days they have been in Quebec, they are as much Quebeckers as anyone in the House. The world is going to get smaller and smaller, not necessarily geographically—although the surface area of the continents will shrink marginally as the oceans rise—but because there are more and more of us on the planet and resources are going to become less and less abundant, it is going to force more and more people to seek a better life elsewhere. The “elsewhere” refers primarily to the northern hemisphere, America and Quebec. We will have to manage this responsibility toward the people who choose to settle in Quebec with generosity, but also responsibly. I am tempted to say that this must be done in accordance with the rules and the rule of law, which is also a variable that the government does not really understand. This is something that Quebec society, an extremely generous host society, must carefully consider, bound by duty and tradition. Some people come to this continent on the basis of misrepresentation, to some extent. They arrive in Quebec, but their dream was to come to America. When people think of America, they tend to think of the United States, as opposed to Canada or Quebec. In many cases, they are told that Canada is an English-speaking country, but they arrive in Quebec, where French is the language that is spoken. They wonder what this crazy place they have come to is. They are told that it is a French-speaking place in an English-speaking country. They arrive at Dorval, where everything is in English. They are told that they can speak the language of their choice, because everyone will adapt. However, it is suggested that they choose English if they are on the Island of Montreal, because they will be understood wherever they go. They wonder, “What kind of crazy place have I landed in?” It is a little frustrating. They are given mixed messages, which ultimately misrepresent the situation. When these people get informed and consult the media, it is a shock for them to see that there is a whole debate surrounding language: They hear about Quebec and Canada, about French and English. They realize that anglicization is persistently being funded. The message being sent to them is completely ambiguous at best. The systemic part of this debate are the accusations against Quebeckers who want to preserve their language while offering a generous welcome. The primary responsibility of a society is to teach the language. If you settle in Italy, you are encouraged to learn Italian. If you settle in Sweden, you are encouraged to learn Swedish, even though a lot of people there speak English. In Quebec, we are mean if we tell people that it would not be a bad idea to learn French. Speaking French can be useful at work or when buying a litre of milk at the corner store. This is not an anomaly. The anomaly is making people feel guilty when they make that request. It is a very clever, but frankly vicious, strategy. That said, the issues related to asylum seekers are of concern to all Quebeckers and, I imagine, all Canadians. When I say “all”, I am including Quebeckers who are more or less recent immigrants. People of all backgrounds must participate in this discussion because they are part of the “us”. I sometimes wonder whether recent immigrants are all that keen to take in refugees who are not truly refugees. Currently, the numbers being what they are, people from all over the world, including certain hot spots, are arriving in Quebec and in Canada—especially in Quebec, despite the childish arguing going on over numbers—under just about any pretext and with just about any type of visa, primarily a visitor's visa. They plan to claim refugee status because they know that, even though they are not actually refugees, at worst, they will get a few good years living in peace. What a boon. Soon, as part of a quick tour of Quebec, we will be speaking with Quebeckers who are immigrants. I wonder whether those Quebeckers think that this is right. I wonder whether they are asking themselves the same questions we are. We know full well that there are people who slip through the Canadian sieve, people who engage in criminal behaviour here, primarily human smugglers, but also car thieves, whom we have been talking about lately, gun smugglers and drug smugglers. Immigrants must be wondering the same things. That is not to say this applies to everyone. I think it is a very small minority. The people who choose to move to Quebec and Canada seeking a better life are just as honourable as those who already live here and more honourable than quite a lot of them, naming no names. I wonder if the immigrant Muslim community is happy that we are foolishly letting in radical extremists who promote violence with the blessing of the government, which refuses to take action and hides behind the fig leaf of religion. I wonder if these people have opinions similar to just about anyone else. I think they do, and I think that our duty is to promote successful immigration. I want to debunk the myth that immigration is monolithic, that all immigrants were the same. That is not at all true, and I am going to show that there are different categories of immigrants, although my classification system is not absolute. Of course, there are international students. There are a lot of them. Not only are they an important source of funding for Quebec's universities and post-secondary institutions, but they are also a source and a vector of knowledge and culture. In fact, that is their primary purpose. This is a category that Quebec welcomes and wants to continue to welcome generously. There are temporary foreign workers. There are some major economic sectors in Quebec where those workers are desperately needed. There are abuses happening, where work permits that were supposed to be temporary are being automatically renewed for years. These people are completely integrated into our society, but rarely in the regions and rarely in French, so that system needs improvement. The immigration of temporary foreign workers is extremely important. As I mentioned before, of course, there is the temporary immigration of asylum seekers. The arguments over numbers aside, we can see that Quebec is doing a lot more than its share. It is almost certain that over half of those immigrants are settling in Quebec, which has resulted in about $470 million in spending. The federal government told Quebec to pay for that and said that it would pay Quebec back. However, when it came time for the federal government to pay up, the Minister of Immigration made comments that were crude at best, and I am still waiting for him to apologize for saying that I was comparing immigrants to heat pumps. That is vulgar, irresponsible and untrue, and he should apologize. I am sure the Speaker will agree with me. What is more, when it came time to pay the debt, the Liberals said that they would not pay it but that they would give us $100 million for temporary housing. We do not know where they came up with that dollar amount for temporary housing for the future. Quebec is taking in half the people, but it is not getting half the money. Meanwhile, Toronto is doing fine as usual. That funding does not cover the past debt, but the government is trying to sell people on that solution. In short, Canada is a deadbeat when it comes to Quebec, but we already knew that. Taking in asylum seekers temporarily is not economic immigration. We welcome asylum seekers not for economic reasons, but for humanitarian reasons. That makes the abuse of the system even more heinous. Some people really need help, but others swoop in and take the help those people need. They try to claim it for themselves under false pretenses. It is a humanitarian contribution, and every resident pays for the spending it requires, regardless of where they come from or how long they have lived here. We are talking about spending on education, health care, child care and basic income. This is just looking at the number of people. There is inflationary pressure. Demand goes up but supply does not follow suit when there is inflationary pressure. No one is being singled out. This is just about the number of people. There is also pressure on the housing crisis. Again, no one in particular is to blame. My kids in university who want a place to live put just as much pressure on the rental market as someone arriving from Mexico. The pressure comes from the total number of people looking. No one can deny that. We have an obligation to do well, or at least to do better, but we are not doing it. The result is that we get weaker. In Quebec, of course, there is the linguistic variable. The Quebec nation is getting culturally and economically weaker. We are slowing that process down by being here. If we were not here to defend Quebec or to speak out what is being done in Ottawa, I do not want to imagine the tsunami that would swamp us. Thank goodness we are here. In recent days, Quebec's minister of immigration, francization and integration has not denied the possibility of a referendum, which had already been mentioned by the Government of Quebec, to ask Quebeckers whether all immigration powers should be repatriated. I thought that was funny, because we have been fed nonsense about “working hand in hand” so many times. Every time we rise to ask a question about immigration, we are told that the two governments are working hand in hand. The federal government pulled the same trick with health care, talking about how they are working hand in hand. They work hand in hand so much, they must be getting calluses on their palms. The reality is that, if Quebec is considering a referendum to withdraw all immigration powers from Ottawa and repatriate them to Quebec City, it is certainly not because it is happy. It is a disavowal of the federal government's immigration policies. It is a disavowal of the government's failed immigration policies, and it is a disavowal of this government's immigration minister. I think it is a great idea, especially because it is normal for a government to consult its population through a referendum. What is more, it helps stop the demonization of the very word “referendum”. Last fall, this House unanimously adopted our motion calling on the government to consult with Quebec and the provinces when setting immigration thresholds. It was a unanimous motion of Parliament, which is the sovereign voice of the Canadian state, if such a thing exists. The government could not have cared less, however. There was no consultation. It is pushing ahead with its policies, like a steamroller that is going to roll right over the Quebec government and the Quebec nation. The Prime Minister is above the law. In fact, the Prime Minister is a bit above everyone else. It is cultural and perhaps a little genetic. In this Parliament, almost everyone is ready to put their ideology ahead of statecraft or popular wisdom. However, today, we are back at it. We will have to vote on it again. This used to be a Quebec thing. People used to say that Quebeckers were against immigration because they were racists. Now, people in Toronto are saying that they are having problems managing the volume of immigrants. If they were put in Montreal's shoes for two minutes, they would really understand. Other major Canadian cities are facing similar challenges, so the problem is no longer that Quebeckers are xenophobic. Now, it is a Canada-wide issue worthy of the most serious consideration. Everyone is being crushed by health care costs, education costs and other costs, as well as by this government's failed immigration policies. Even Quebeckers and Canadians who immigrated here are footing the bill for the immigration minister, who is kind enough to grace us with his presence from time to time, though he does not pay his debts. I suggest that he pay his debts like any other person with the slightest sense of honour. He needs to pay up, especially since he is the one who told us to pick up the tab. I do not want to hear him repeat that stupid and offensive joke about me comparing immigrants to heat pumps. I hope that he will honour us with an apology for insulting people in such a crude manner. The motion calls on the Prime Minister to convene a meeting with everyone to discuss immigration. Since it would be an invitation from all of Parliament, the premiers and the provincial immigration ministers could then sit down to discuss immigration levels that take into account the capacity of the provinces and Quebec to manage and take in newcomers. Yesterday, the Prime Minister told us, with characteristic perspicacity, that countries have responsibilities. If being a country is the only way for Quebec to fulfill its responsibilities, then I am all for it. The best way to welcome immigrants to the Quebec nation is to have a Quebec nation, with a generous and caring tradition and culture. A Quebec nation will not need to constantly fight and oppose Canadian policies that conflict with its wishes, interests, language and survival on a continent where it plays a key role. Yes, certain things are a country's responsibility, so let us make Quebec a country. In the meantime, I want and urge the government to show a modicum of decency and responsibility and to convene all premiers and immigration ministers to jointly set immigration levels that take into account the ability of Quebec and the provinces to accommodate and pay for immigrants.

2639 words

Context: House Hansard - 277 - Feb/7/24

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Feb/7/24 2:45:53 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we agree, Quebec should be a country and should have all the power. We will get there. In the meantime, the Prime Minister and his minister are saying that they are working hand in hand with Quebec. The Minister of Immigration says that he is working hand in hand with Quebec. However, Quebec's immigration minister wants to hold a referendum to repatriate all immigration powers. Does the Prime Minister realize that this is a repudiation of the Liberals' immigration policy, a repudiation of their failure in immigration, and a repudiation of his immigration minister?

97 words

Context: House Hansard - 272 - Jan/31/24

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Jan/31/24 2:42:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, take a good look at his hand. The only hand he is holding belongs to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. Does the Prime Minister really want to make that commitment in an election year? Does he want Canadians and Quebeckers to think that when he gives his word, it cannot be believed? Does he want to make them question whether his word is worth anything, whether he is reliable or trustworthy?

75 words

Context: House Hansard - 270 - Jan/29/24

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Jan/29/24 2:28:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is going to take a while. The House unanimously adopted a motion calling on the government to consult Quebec and the provinces on immigration targets. However, the government seems to be using the policies suggested by McKinsey and the Century Initiative, and even more, because at this rate, the population will hit 100 million by the end of the century. Is the government disregarding the House's unanimous vote and injunction or will it review its policies with Quebec and the provinces?

85 words

Context: House Hansard - 257 - Nov/28/23

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Nov/28/23 2:42:41 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, over the past few days the Minister of Immigration has made disrespectful comments about members of the Bloc Québécois who are asking questions, which is our job, and has even impugned Quebec, which is highly questionable. Can we put all this behind us? Can the minister show the high-mindedness he is known for, which his office demands, and acknowledge that based on his own government's commitments, he owes Quebec $460 million for refugee intake?

83 words

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Nov/2/23 2:29:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is the way it has always been, in health care too. The government claims that it has talked to the provinces, but it never really listens to them or makes any changes based on what they say. However, yesterday, the government voted and said yes. It said that it would consult Quebec before setting the immigration targets that the minister was in the process of announcing. For consistency's sake, the government ought to talk to someone in Quebec City because, if it does not, it needs to realize that Quebec will no longer be able to ensure that immigrants who settle there are taught French. In other words, the government will be reducing Quebec's weight within the Canadian federation. We will draw our own conclusions.

130 words

Context: House Hansard - 245 - Nov/2/23

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Nov/2/23 2:27:33 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Government of Quebec announced its immigration targets, in other words, how many people Quebec believes it will be able to integrate and teach French, and the federal government did the same. The two governments are not at all on the same page. In the meantime, however, I asked all members, including the Minister of Immigration and the Prime Minister, whether they would consult Quebec before setting the 2024 targets. The Prime Minister said yes and the Minister of Immigration said yes. Am I to understand that the targets announced yesterday are temporary and that they will speak to Quebec?

103 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Oct/31/23 2:32:33 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I will not get to hear any more details. We are debating a motion on successful immigration that would require the Minister of Immigration to consult Quebec, the provinces and territories, which is perfectly appropriate by the way, to establish targets starting in 2024. Dare we hope that, if the House votes in favour of the motion, the minister will not announce targets given that he cannot know the targets until he has consulted Quebec and the provinces? That would be a responsible act of good faith.

93 words

Oct/31/23 1:39:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member's question should have been addressed to her federal colleague, because family reunification is a federal matter. However, what I would say is that family reunification is one of the priority criteria for immigration to Canada and Quebec. That is obvious for humanitarian and basic reasons. As to the specific issues in my colleague's riding, there are indeed labour problems. Those problems exist in her riding and elsewhere because it is a highly agricultural riding. It is important to have an all-encompassing vision for immigration policy that is not focused solely on as many as possible, as fast as possible, with no consideration for the rest.

112 words

Oct/31/23 1:37:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we have to talk about everything. We absolutely have to talk about the consequences of having roughly two million immigrants with no specific status in a population of 40 million. I will bring up housing as an example. Recently, we saw a debate about a legislative slap on the wrist for municipalities that engage in odd zoning practices or that did not subject themselves to federal government rules that have nothing to do with municipalities. It is as though the government is putting pressure on municipalities—which have the problems my esteemed colleague described—although they are the most ill-equipped to manage it because their tax base is tightly controlled and they have very little leeway. Immigration is a fundamental policy, and the immigration policy of a country of Canada's demographic or economic stature requires a global vision. From our perspective, there also needs to be a vision for Quebec's policy, for the country it should be.

166 words

Context: House Hansard - 198 - May/16/23

Oct/31/23 1:35:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am not sure whether the member wants to hear my views. He had his own case to make. That said, the observation about the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is very real and very relevant. All of these people come to Quebec and to Canada in search of a better life but are forced to endure unreasonable waiting times because of an overloaded machine. The size of this machine has ballooned a lot faster than the people brought on board could be trained to run it. These people are also expected to follow directives that will place the Department of Citizenship and Immigration under even more pressure. That in itself is reason for the government to take a big step back and get control of the rate of integration, intake and granting of permanent resident status for people who choose to settle in Canada or Quebec.

149 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

May/16/23 2:28:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we have an expression in Quebec that essentially means people need to walk the talk. I will explain that some day. That being said, this government has messed up on immigration, with one million cases being backlogged. The Liberals are incapable of managing the foreign students file. They are incapable of managing the temporary foreign workers file. In a year and a half, they have been unable to do it. What would make us think that a year and a half from now they are going to suddenly be competent enough to deal with 500,000 immigrants?

99 words

Context: House Hansard - 195 - May/11/23

Context: House Hansard - 195 - May/11/23

May/11/23 10:40:11 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have always had a soft spot for people who know it all. Our political agenda is not exactly a secret. All we have to do is explain it, and the rest kind of takes care of itself. I feel like asking my relatively esteemed colleague this question: Why is he using immigration as a tool to entirely wipe out Quebec's desire to assert itself as a people, as a nation and as a country?

79 words