- Member of Parliament
- Leader of the Bloc Québécois
- Bloc Québécois
- Beloeil—Chambly
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 56%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $98,385.23
- Government Page
- May/23/24 10:37:13 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it is wonderful to see the NDP recommending and hoping that the Canadian government will outsource public programs to the private sector, which will make a profit from the public program.
I will repeat the fundamental principle to the unions, the NDP and the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie: There is nothing that a Canadian can do that a Quebecker cannot do, except perhaps extracting oil. Therefore, I invite everyone to commit to improving services in Quebec. We must invest in services in Quebec. The government does not need to negotiate with Quebec. It is supposed to transfer money unconditionally. That is what is missing.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/23/24 10:33:02 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in a way, the answer is in the question.
I would like Quebeckers to hear someone stand up in Parliament and tell them, in English, to look at what the rest of Canada is doing better than they are, and to tell them that they are so bad that the federal government needs to develop programs that will be imposed on them with their own money. I think it is completely ridiculous to say that a Canadian is intrinsically superior to a Quebecker.
If good ideas are implemented in one place, they can be implemented in other places. Take, for example, child care services, whose model originated in Quebec, or pharmacare, whose model originated in Quebec. If the Canadian government feels entitled to copy what Quebec is doing right, I hope it will at least acknowledge that this is because Quebec is capable of doing it.
148 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/23/24 10:22:50 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, over the past few years, the Government of Canada has developed a way of doing politics that follows a clear and heavy-handed approach, including an egregious abuse of the so-called fiscal imbalance. This means that the federal government is receiving more revenue than it needs to fulfill its roles and responsibilities, whereas Quebec and the provinces are collecting and receiving less than they need to fulfill their respective roles and responsibilities.
The government is taking that money and using its constitutional spending power to intrude into areas under the exclusive jurisdiction of Quebec, the provinces and the territories, as set out in the Constitution. What is emerging more and more is the government's persistent, clear and ideological push to centralize powers, in the sense of the responsibilities specific to a level of government. I certainly do not mean powers in the sense of ability or the faculty to do something. These powers are being centralized in the federal Parliament.
When we take a close look, it is pretty clear this is a failure. It is one failure after another. I would like to take this opportunity to say that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Jonquière. I could list a whole series of the federal government's failures when it comes to interference, but I could go on for days, so I will just name a few.
I will use a recent example, namely the government's desire to intrude in the area of dental insurance. At first glance, this seems ideological. Then they decide to hand it over to the private sector, with the support of the NDP. Now it seems no one can make heads or tails of it. It is a failure in the making. It is clearly the result of their refusal, for many years, to make the health transfers that Quebec, the provinces and the territories are unanimously calling for.
In this context, the federal government claims to be working hand in hand with Quebec and the provinces. However, no serious person with a third-grade education still thinks that this is not some kind of a never-ending conflict with the provinces.
There are the conditions imposed by Ottawa on municipal infrastructure. There are the conditions imposed by Ottawa on social housing. There is the colossal failure of immigration: Ottawa is incapable of handling visas, there is a years-long backlog of case files, and the Minister of Immigration has lost track of hundreds of thousands of people currently on Canadian soil. There is the sub-contracting of immigration policy to a highly questionable company such as McKinsey, an ideological aberration that ultimately weakens Quebec. The federal government has failed across the board.
There was much talk about language over the last few days. The vulgar language we have heard is essentially a panic reaction. It betrays a lack of an intelligent response, because there cannot be an intelligent response to what we have seen. We cannot invite people to appear in committee only to treat them in a way that would shame a schoolyard bully.
However, the numbers speak for themselves when it comes to the situation of the French language, both in Quebec and across Canada. The Liberal government does not care all that much about the decline of French, but it sure cares when someone points it out. This is the same government that intends to support a Supreme Court challenge of Bill 96, which seeks to strengthen the French language in Quebec.
I am talking about setbacks, failures and intrusions galore. I am talking about a lack of respect.
Of course, I could talk about secularism, but I will merely say that a secular state would never conceive of imposing Islamic mortgages on a level of government such as the Quebec government, which endorses state secularism. Quebec would not hesitate to eliminate the religious exemption that allows the worst hate speech to spread under the guise of religion.
I repeat, these are failures. In fact, the only good thing the Liberal government ever did with respect to language and secularism was convincing the Conservative Party to basically share its views, views that are extremely unpopular among Quebeckers.
The Phoenix pay service, a terrible failure, will now be replaced. This will not get us our money back. There is also the ArriveCAN failure. The repercussions, the spin‑offs, if you will, have now reached the billion‑dollar mark. This money has come out of the pockets of the Canadian state. It is one failure after another.
Consider the tens of thousands of businesses that were abandoned after receiving assistance from government programs during the pandemic. Given the labour shortages, inflation and interest rates, those businesses faced a highly complex situation. Many of them—we will never know the exact or the real number—had to declare bankruptcy and close down because of this government's ineptitude. This is another failure.
One failure on the international stage, which again is repeated and ongoing, relates to a lack of credibility. It is the inability to have a plan to reach the 2% investment target. It is the position on the war in Gaza and the inability to take the normal and increasingly internationally recognized step of recognizing the Palestinian state. Once again, it is a series of failures.
Bombardier, for example, is missing out on $5 billion in spin-offs. Meanwhile, Boeing will award contracts worth $400 million with the co-operation of the governments of Quebec and Canada. I doubt whether we will ever find out the real reasons behind that whole mess. It is one failure after another.
The government is incapable of doing its own work properly, yet it wants to do the work of others in their own areas of jurisdiction. The people have given it a mandate, but it is a minority mandate. This minority government, as I said, is a failure. Interference always takes longer, always costs more and never improves things. It is done at the cost of a series of subcontracts, whether we are talking about McKinsey, ArriveCAN or others of the kind. It is done at the cost of 109,000 more civil servants. That is on top of the subcontracts and the increasing duplications in Quebec and provincial jurisdictions. There is also the $40-billion deficit, which is no small matter.
To govern as a majority, purely for the sake of power, the government joined forces with the NDP. Rather than receiving its mandate from the people, the government receives its mandate from the NDP. It is a fool's bargain. If the NDP does not act soon, it will bring about its own demise. The government has two choices then. It can hold off on its aggressive centralization agenda, its abuse of the fiscal imbalance and abuse of spending power until the end of its mandate, which would normally run until late 2025, or it can call an election now to try to obtain that type of mandate, which I strongly doubt that Quebec will consider. It has no right to dupe Canadians or the parties in the House. As I said before, if the Prime Minister is so interested in the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces, he can go off and pursue a career in provincial politics, preferably in Ontario.
At the very least, however, what the government must do is acknowledge in every one of its actions the right to opt out with full compensation, with no conditions for Quebec and the provinces. At least its centralizing ideology could then be properly circumvented in a way that respects the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. The main goal—and this is the spirit of this motion—is for the Canadian government to put an end to its increasingly numerous and increasingly crude and misguided abuses that fail to respect the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. If the government does not do so, since it will have fun raising the issue in the next election, it will see how useful the Bloc Québécois really is.
1371 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 2:45:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, a brand new study by the Office québécois de la langue française shows that the proportion of young Quebeckers who use French as their language of work 90% of the time has dropped from 64% to 58%.
Will the Prime Minister admit that his language policies are not slowing the decline of French one bit, and that his opposition to Bill 96 is weakening the French language, or will he in turn start hurling vicious and vulgar insults at Quebec scientists?
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/1/24 2:48:13 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers want this law, and the money they have put into the Liberals' staggering deficit is going to pay for a Supreme Court challenge to a law that they want.
In short, can he rein in Ms. Elghawaby, tell her to stop attacking Quebec and respect the right that Quebeckers have to live in a society with a secular state?
62 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/24 3:05:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if you have 10 minutes, I would ask you to explain to the Prime Minister what purpose the opposition serves in Parliament, especially since it comes so naturally to a Quebecker.
The Prime Minister is interfering in all of Quebec's jurisdictions, and yet the Liberals think it is outrageous for Quebec to want to use a tiny piece of the Constitution, the notwithstanding clause, to protect its own jurisdictions. The Prime Minister is abusing his power at Quebec's expense, and I will continue to speak out against that.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/24 3:04:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I refuse to believe that the Prime Minister is working hand in hand with Quebec. On the contrary, I believe he has his hand in Quebeckers' pockets. He is blatantly abusing the fiscal imbalance. He is blatantly abusing his spending power. Furthermore, he is racking up an appalling deficit that Quebeckers will be paying off for a long time to come simply to save his government's skin, and his own skin, in the next election.
Does he understand that I am condemning this government and this budget as it concerns Quebeckers?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/24 2:48:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Ottawa is working so hand in hand with the Quebec government that the Conservatives are recruiting from the CAQ.
Will the Prime Minister admit that, by failing to meet his obligations, he is responsible for a $6-billion deficit in Quebec City, that he is responsible for making Quebeckers shoulder $8 billion out of his $40-billion deficit, and that he has just put Quebeckers $14 billion in debt in one year?
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/17/24 2:33:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am not convinced that the Quebec government is saying the same thing as the Prime Minister. I myself am very proud to be a Quebecker. I am so proud, in fact, that I have confidence in Quebec. I believe it should be a country. I am not sure whether the Prime Minister has the same level of confidence.
Does the Prime Minister recognize that all of his meddling in areas under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces is funded exclusively through the never-ending fiscal imbalance?
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 2:46:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we sensed a little vulnerability, but it is just that we do not know whether they will be sitting at this end of the House or that end.
If the government really wants to get Quebeckers' attention, it will make adequate health care transfers. It will transfer immigration powers. Judges will be appointed. Things will get done the right way. So far, the government is not getting anything done, and its members are reading from cue cards in the House.
Will the Prime Minister at least go through the motions of doing his job for Quebeckers?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 2:45:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I do not put much stock in polls. Polls should not dictate a government's choices. That said, before he says who is speaking for whom, the Prime Minister ought to know that the Bloc Québécois has been ahead of the Liberals in every poll for longer than I can remember.
If the Prime Minister is doing that poorly in the polls, so poorly that even the Conservatives are outperforming the Liberals in Canada, perhaps it is because he does not respect Quebec, Quebeckers or the National Assembly.
Does he think that treating Quebec with contempt is a good idea because he knows he will never gain any seats in Quebec anyway, or because trashing Quebeckers will at least win him votes in Canada?
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/24 2:32:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister is here to deliver for Quebeckers, then that is another epic fail to add to his record.
The Government of Quebec has paid for education, health, income security, child care and all government services. The Liberal government told Quebec to pay for it and said that it would pay Quebec back. The bill has reached $1 billion, but now that Quebec has a huge deficit on its hands, the Liberal government is saying, “Find the $1 billion yourself. I will not be giving it to you because we are such good friends. Now scram”.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/19/24 2:27:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we will give him a chance, we will not get into a debate on Quebec sovereignty, but he owes Quebec $6 billion in health and $1 billion in immigration for welcoming refugees. That makes $7 billion out of a total deficit of $11 billion. People stand unanimously against him and he is literally choking Quebec.
Will he use $1 billion in immigration and $6 billion in health to rein in Quebec and turn Quebeckers into Canadians like everyone else, and Quebec into a province like all the others?
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/28/24 2:31:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I agree that there are likely many Canadians who do not have this service, but Quebeckers do. That is why Quebeckers are talking about the right to opt out with compensation.
Should the NDP and the Liberals not have made sure that they were on the same page? Before deciding whether to go into a tango or a nice slow dance, maybe partners should renew their vows by being clear with each other.
Can the Prime Minister, in one of his oh-so-clear answers, tell me whether Quebec has a right to opt out, yes or no, as my friend from Richmond—Arthabaska would say?
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/7/24 2:31:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, indeed, there is a solution to consider. With the support of the Quebec National Assembly, Quebec has proposed that the Liberal government's legislation include a conditional provision allowing Quebec or any other interested province to authorize advance requests for medical assistance in dying. If that happens, the three-year extension would then be acceptable because Quebec could proceed according to the values of Quebeckers.
Is the Prime Minister willing to agree to Quebec's proposal?
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/23 2:52:13 p.m.
- Watch
That was not so hard, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps we can almost agree. The creation of a national culture involves bringing people in and being welcoming. It does not involve excluding people or undermining the host society. A few dozen immigrant Quebeckers will be attending a Christmas celebration that I am hosting in my riding in a few days. Do I have to cancel that event because the Canadian Human Rights Commission thinks that celebrating Christmas is racist? That is my question for the Prime Minister.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/28/23 2:45:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers should take note of the fact that, according to the Minister of Immigration and his friends who applauded him, an elected Liberal member is worth more than an elected Bloc Québécois member. I invite him to take note of the fact that the federal government has an agreement with Quebec. Quebec spends $460 million and honours its part of the agreement, which is essentially to do the work of the minister. The minister says that he does not want to pay too much.
We speak through the Chair, but we also use our brain.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
