- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Drummond
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $108,134.67
- Government Page
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/8/22 7:03:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to say that it is an honour to rise to speak to Motion No. 63, which seeks to condemn anti-Asian racism and address it. I know that this motion is very important to many members of the House, and rightly so.
I congratulate the member for Scarborough North for moving this motion. I know that a similar version of this motion was tabled last year at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage by our colleague from Don Valley North. This is also particularly important to our colleague from Vancouver East, who I believe also wanted to move this motion.
First, I think it is obvious that we cannot be against apple pie. I often say this. We naturally support a motion that seeks to condemn racism and also to prevent it and raise awareness about it. I can confirm that the Bloc Québécois supports Motion No. 63. We will condemn all forms of hate speech and hate crimes in the strongest possible terms, at every opportunity and as often as necessary.
I would also point out that Asian people in Canada were racially segregated from the 19th century until after the Second World War. It took us a long time to wake up. There were all sorts of discriminatory laws and policies. Some policies were aimed at exclusion. Asian people are still the target of hate crimes today. In recent years, there has been a notable increase in the frequency of race-based harassment and attacks. This especially true since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Everyone applauds and everyone agrees when anti-racism policies are brought in. That makes perfect sense, but there is one pitfall to watch out for. It is important not to exclude any form of racism. Policies must be implemented in a way that does not exclude any group that might be discriminated against. I ask this question in all earnestness. We wholeheartedly support this motion, but should Canada not have a strong general policy that condemns all forms of racism and raises awareness of all forms of racism, regardless of the group targeted?
I do not mind doing this work bit by bit. Today we are condemning anti-Asian racism. If another member moves a motion to condemn another form of racism or racism that targets another group, we will surely support that too. However, sooner or later, we have to acknowledge our history and learn from it. We need to implement something comprehensive that covers all forms of discrimination.
I will read the motion:
That, in the opinion of the House: (a) the government should (i) condemn anti-Asian hate and all forms of racism and racial discrimination, (ii) ensure all anti-racism policies and programs address the historical and present-day racism, discrimination, stereotyping and injustices faced by people of Asian descent, (iii) highlight the lived realities of racism and barriers to inclusion experienced by people of Asian descent in national consultations on issues of anti-Asian racism; and (b) the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security should conduct a review of anti-Asian hate crimes and hate-motivated incidents across the country.
Earlier I talked about this country's history of deliberately discriminatory and racist policies against people of Asian origin, including those who were Canadian citizens. In the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, particularly in British Columbia but, really, across Canada, there was opposition to Japanese and Asian immigration in general.
Thousands of people came from Asia to Canada to help build the railroad. It was an historic event, and we are extremely grateful to them.
How did Canada thank them for their contribution to building the Canadian Pacific Railway? It brought in laws against Chinese immigration. It denied them certain privileges, including the right to vote. It denied them certain basic rights, such as the right to housing. It allowed some landlords to refuse to rent to people of Asian descent.
In 1872, British Columbia passed an election law that prohibited Japanese Canadian citizens and indigenous people from voting in the province's elections. One would think the rest of the country would rise up against this, but no, that did not happen. In 1920, the Dominion Elections Act was passed, which meant that racial groups who were disenfranchised at the provincial level were now also disenfranchised at the federal level.
When policies are put in place, they should be designed to last. They should be drafted with the future in mind; they must be strong and robust. We do not want to encounter a situation or climate at some point in the future where a desire to revive these horrible discriminatory policies comes back into the equation or is considered.
I will not dwell on the dark chapters of the Second World War, when the decision was made to intern Japanese-Canadian citizens. I will also not dwell on how they were expropriated and sent back to Japan when, quite often, those people were born here. History is rife with these types of examples.
As I said before, it is important to remember history and to learn from it. One such example was COVID‑19. Before that, however, in 2003, there was the SARS outbreak and people of Asian origin were subject to a dramatic increase in racist comments and even hate crimes.
During the first year of the COVID‑19 pandemic, in 2019-20, the Vancouver police reported a 700% increase in hate crimes against the Asian community. My colleague from Vancouver East is certainly aware of those statistics. That happened because of the misinformation and mistaken notions going around about the origin of the virus.
In closing, I would say that, in Quebec, we are fighting against hate and racism. We are working to break down stereotypes originating from old Canadian laws that are racist, restrictive and segregationist. We are doing it by stressing the equality of citizens of all origins and by focusing on the shared identity and the feeling of belonging to the Quebec nation of Quebeckers of all origins.
We will sincerely and enthusiastically support Motion No. 63. It is a big step. It is also important because it recognizes a phenomenon we must condemn and combat. I hope this snowballs. I hope we will see more motions like it.
Once again, I congratulate my colleague from Scarborough North on his initiative and on this motion.
1086 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 11:31:29 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, namaste.
I am very pleased to rise in the House as the my party's critic on living together to speak to Motion No. 42, which would declare November Hindu heritage month.
The motion, for the benefit of my colleagues, reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should recognize the contributions that Hindu Canadians [and Quebeckers] have made to the socio-economic development of Canada [and Quebec], and their services to the Canadian society, the richness of Hindu Heritage and its vast contribution to the world of arts and science, astronomy to medicine, and its culture and traditions and the importance of educating [this is very important, I will come back to it] and reflecting upon it for our future generations in Canada [and Quebec] by declaring November, every year, Hindu Heritage Month.
First, I want to say hello to my colleague from Nepean who moved this motion. It has the support of 14 other members, so it must be relevant. I will state right away that, for many reasons, and I will not go into them all today, we will be voting in favour of this motion. I would nevertheless like to explain why we, in the Bloc Québécois, are the sort of people who appreciate this kind of initiative.
The reason is that this is an era of extremes. These days, people are so afraid of offending anyone that they are constantly walking on eggshells. Victimhood activists everywhere are monopolizing the public debate to the extent that many people hesitate to speak up out of fear of inadvertently making a faux pas. This silences voices that would be more worth listening to than the ones we hear nowadays, which yell but, of course, do not listen.
I recently learned that I, a white man in my fifties—by the way, I am turning 54 tomorrow, for those who would like to know—am not allowed to talk about racism or social injustice, or even express an opinion on certain situations, not even to defend the oppressed. The simple reason is that as a white man in my fifties, turning 54 tomorrow, I am privileged, which means I do not know what I am talking about. My opinion is immediately considered to be patronizing for the individuals or groups who define themselves as victims of oppression, injustice or inequality.
However, I call myself a progressive. I consider myself to be someone who has actively worked on opening doors and removing barriers so that immigrants can join our society as smoothly as possible, with respect for our respective values, both their values as new Quebeckers and ours as Quebeckers of all origins who have been in Quebec for one generation or many.
My generation played a role in making progress for groups that have been oppressed and discriminated against. My generation recognizes that there is still a lot of work to be done before every person is included and respected. However, the pendulum is swinging so far the other way that it seems people in my generation would no longer be included in these efforts.
I object to how people like me and many of my colleagues are being shut out of the discussion. It upsets me because this is a divisive, not to say polarizing, debate that serves as a distraction from what I feel is the most obvious point when we are talking about cultural diversity and the integration of immigrants in Quebec and Canada.
The only reason that intolerance and racism are still an issue in 2022 is ignorance. The only way to combat ignorance is through education, which is precisely what Motion No. 42, which we are debating today, would allow for, and that is why I support it, as I said. Activism is not what will help swing that pendulum back to the other end of the spectrum. As I said earlier and as we can see, when the pendulum moves so swiftly, there is no time for any nuance, for discussion or for education. If people are to learn, they need education. They need to be taught. People need to be able to speak up, talk to each other and explain things without having others constantly take offence. As members know, everyone has a thin skin these days, but it has not always been this way.
I would like to take a moment to look back on the past, my past. Let us imagine that it is 1971 in Quebec City. I am a little boy. My brother and I are excited because we are about to welcome our little sister, who my parents just adopted. This baby, who was born in Jamaica, is going to become part of our family, and our lives are about to take a rather unexpected turn as a result. It is important to understand that there were not a lot of Black people in Quebec City in 1971. I always joke that, besides my sister, the only Black people in Quebec City in 1971 were one or two African professors at Laval University and a guy who got lost trying to find his way back to Montreal and ended up staying.
I was lucky. I had a sister who opened our minds and helped us become aware of the issue of difference at a very young age. I am not yet talking about racism. As we grew up, we felt the disconcerting sidelong glances that people gave not only my sister, but us as well, her family members. Although we did not feel as hurt by this as she did, we were still targeted.
I heard every kind of comment imaginable, from derogatory remarks to things that were less hurtful but that clearly showed that ignorance and fear of the unknown were the cause of the resulting intolerance and racism. Ignorance does not always manifest itself in a disparaging or mean way. Sometimes, it can even be a bit funny.
Here is one example. My sister was probably about two years old when a woman approached my mother to ask, intrigued, how she would understand my sister when she started talking. Had my mother learned the language of my sister's native country? My mother gave me a little wink and told the woman that she was completely fluent in the language of my sister's country.
All through my childhood, I answered questions about my sister. How long was her hair when she straightened it? Could she get a sunburn? It was naive ignorance. Unless it is addressed head-on with education and discussion, that kind of ignorance can grow and morph into intolerance, racism and fear of the other.
I feel that I did a pretty good job of educating people around me about my sister at the time because, a little later, when we were teenagers, my friends' questions about my sister changed. Was she single, and would she mind if they called her?
I just wanted to share that story to illustrate how important it is to be open-minded and to educate each other. That is the secret to a diverse society in which people of all different backgrounds must and can live together and integrate while upholding the host society's basic values and still honouring their own culture. In my ideal world, all these diverse cultures actually help strengthen Quebec society's guiding principles with their customs, flavours, music, poetry and traditions.
I am not talking here about Canadian‑style multiculturalism, which I think is more like a Tower of Babel than an integration model. I am talking about my dream society, where all cultures converge and become part of a strong tree whose roots serve as a foundation for each one to thrive in a context of mutual respect. It is about opening up, and learning from and about each other.
Just talking about Hindu heritage month made me learn 100 times more than all I knew or thought I knew about the culture and Hinduism. One of the things I learned is that we have architectural treasures. In Dollard-des-Ormeaux, for example, there is an absolutely majestic temple that is worth a visit for its architecture, as well as the history of its design and construction.
I also learned a lot about certain rituals that had to be adapted because events cannot always be celebrated outside, as they are in India or in other places in the world where the weather allows it. The dates of celebrations and events have even been moved during the year to adapt to the weather in Quebec.
I was fascinated to learn so much in so little time while doing a bit of quick research for my speech this morning. If I could learn so much in the little time I had, imagine what an entire month could do if used properly.
What will we do that month?
We are often asked to devote months to different cultures or different themes. I am certainly open to declaring November Hindu heritage month, but my one hope is that the month will be used for communicating, sharing and promoting the culture, because that is how these months become relevant, in my opinion.
I will quickly close by congratulating Sunil Chandary, a constituent in my riding who made a lot of sacrifices to come here. I know that he is watching today. I want to tell him how glad I am to have him here and how much I appreciate the advice he gave me for my presentation this morning. I want to assure him that we will help him and be there for him throughout the process to get his wife and son here from India so they can join him in Drummondville and enrich our society, just as people from all backgrounds do.
1657 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
