- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Drummond
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $108,134.67
- Government Page
- May/23/24 2:57:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today we are debating federal interference in the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. One striking example concerns research chairs. The federal government is meddling in higher education and dictating which fields of study our universities must prioritize if they want to receive their share of funding.
Worse still, with its equity, diversity and inclusion, or EDI, criteria, Ottawa is deciding not only what people will study, but also who will teach it. Ottawa is literally taking over our universities.
Why does the government not let universities decide who to hire, based on their qualifications and nothing else?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/23/24 1:25:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have the honour of warming up the crowd for my colleague from Terrebonne. I am pleased to do that.
I listened to a number of the speeches that were given by my colleagues before me. I would like to reread the text of the motion because, obviously, we are going to be talking about it all day. It states, and I quote:
That the House:
(a) condemn the federal government’s repeated intrusion into the exclusive jurisdictions of Quebec, the provinces and the territories;
(b) remind the Prime Minister that, despite his claims, it is not true that “people do not care which level of government is responsible for what”; and
(c) demand that the government systematically offer Quebec, the provinces and territories the right to opt out unconditionally with full compensation whenever the federal government interferes in their jurisdictions.
The last sentence is a bit contradictory because the federal government should never interfere in the jurisdictions of Quebec, the provinces and the territories.
I want to come back to paragraph (b) of our motion today, because earlier, the member for Lac-Saint-Louis referred to it and implied that it was a bit ridiculous. I want to reiterate the part in quotation marks, which states, “people do not care which level of government is responsible for what”. We did not pull that out of thin air. The Prime Minister himself is the one who said that. Members are calling into question the fact that that is not true, but 82% of Quebeckers who were polled in March said that they were concerned about respect for federal, provincial—in this case Quebec—and municipal jurisdictions. That is important. That means that people do care, to use the words of the Prime Minister.
Nothing annoys me more than someone who does not mind their own business and comes in and does something that is someone else's responsibility just so they can take credit for it. Imagine if today I decided to recognize a member rising on a point of order. You would tell me to sit down in short order, Madam Speaker, and rightly so. That is how Quebeckers feel when the federal government barges in on our jurisdictions. This tension between the federal government and Quebec over respect for jurisdictions is nothing new, and it is not just a matter of sovereignists trying to pick a fight. Robert Bourassa complained about it. Was there anyone more federalist and Liberal than him in Quebec provincial politics?
Federal interference is seen not only as a violation of Quebec's and the provinces' autonomy, but also as an obstacle to the development and vitality of the Quebec nation. Nearly all successive governments in the National Assembly have felt that way. I repeat: 82% of Quebeckers believe that the federal government should mind its own business. Elected officials are not the only ones who think so.
When we ask the government to mind its own business, it should start by doing what it is expected to do properly. For example, it should find out where taxpayers' money is going before it realizes that $1 billion has been wasted on consultants or small businesses that are not always competent and that are hired to do things like create an app to manage incoming travellers at the border during a pandemic. That is just an example, of course.
Minding its own business also means fixing the Phoenix fiasco. Even today, we members—I am not the only one—still have to help our constituents, who are often owed tens of thousands of dollars by the government. They live in the kind of hardship we would not wish on anyone, and which is certainly undeserved, given the efforts they have put into saving for retirement all their lives. They come to our offices because the government still owes them $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000 because of the problems with Phoenix, which it is unable to solve.
Minding its own business also means not trying to impose conditions on health transfers to Quebec and the provinces, because the federal government knows nothing about Quebec's health care system. In fact, by not contributing to the health care system in Quebec and the provinces, it has contributed to the health care disaster we are currently experiencing. Now, I am certain I am going to hear the NDP and the Liberals stand up and say that 600,000 Quebeckers are happy to have a dental plan. However, if the federal government had transferred adequate amounts to Quebec and the provinces over the years so they could fund their health care systems, and if Quebeckers wanted a dental plan that covered everyone, we would have the means to afford it, just as we have introduced pharmacare and child care. We are capable of creating social programs that reflect the richness of the Quebec nation and its values.
Minding its own business also means no longer pretending to care about seniors. I know I am hitting a nerve with my colleague from Shefford. People aged 65 to 74 are being left to suffer in poverty because the federal government does not want to include them in its plan to increase old age pensions. It is completely ridiculous, inexplicable and inexcusable. Not a week goes by that I do not receive emails and calls from my constituents aged 65 to 74, who are wondering what is going on. They are wondering if they are going to get the increase. The answer is no.
The Bloc Québécois continues to work on this issue. Seniors aged 65 to 74 can rest assured that we will always be on their side.
We will also be there for people aged 75 and over in order to ensure fairness. We do not want two classes of seniors. If the federal government would mind its own business and look after its own affairs like everyone else does, we would not be in this situation.
Minding its own business also means no longer pretending to care about defending French, considering the members opposite want to challenge Bill 96, a law that was democratically passed by the National Assembly of Quebec, which knows better than Ottawa how to counter the decline of French in Quebec, in Canada and even in North America. Quebec is the last francophone bastion in North America; it is the cradle of French culture and the French language. No one knows better than Quebec how to defend the French language and reverse its decline.
The concept of federal, provincial and municipal jurisdictions is taught in Quebec schools in grade 10. This means that in Quebec, 14- and 15-year-old students know what falls under federal jurisdiction, what falls under Quebec's jurisdiction, and what falls under municipal jurisdiction. They learn this at school when they are 14 or 15 years old. These young people learn that and take an interest in politics for a little while. They look at what is going on, and then they see that the Parliament in Ottawa is completely out in left field. It is not minding its own business at all. They scratch their heads and wonder why adults who have been elected to Parliament do not even know something they just learned at school at the age of 14.
There is an explanation for that. For some time now, we have been witnessing the exploitation of people's ignorance. The public is being bombarded with insipid, meaningless slogans. Crass disinformation is being propagated left and right—mostly from the right—but we see that it is working. People swallow it without asking too many questions. This is sad and dangerous for democracy.
One of the teachings of Socrates—this is going to make me sound learned—says that a democracy can only work if the people are educated. These are worrying times where politicians are exploiting ignorance rather than contributing to building a better-informed society and citizens capable of critical thinking. As parliamentarians, we have a duty to do the right thing, to respect the institutions, to respect our duty to our constituents. That means respecting the powers of each level of government and the fact that each level of government must do its job properly.
1404 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/23/24 1:21:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what I notice, when I hear the member's comments, is that there is a lack of understanding and a lack of a desire to fully understand the reality of Quebec, which is perhaps a society where the need for this sort of respect for jurisdictions is felt even more strongly.
I understand the reality of my colleague, who lives in a multicultural environment, where people are not as bothered by the federal government sticking its nose in everywhere. In Quebec, however, the reality is different. What I see is that my colleague does not seem to understand or grasp the distinct nature of the Quebec nation.
In terms of the federal government's responsibility for health care, for example, the problem is that the federal government is not fulfilling its obligations, which are to transfer money to Quebec and the provinces for the management of their health care systems. This failure to live up to its obligations is creating the problems that Quebec and the provinces are experiencing with their health care systems, and this is preventing them from being able to resolve them. The federal government comes clomping in with its big boots, saying it is going to interfere in the province's areas of jurisdiction and solve its problems.
I would like to hear from my colleague on this subject, but I would especially like him to reassure me that he does understand the distinct nature of Quebec and certain other regions of Canada that are not necessarily as multicultural as Canada as a whole.
260 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/22/24 5:08:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yet again we see the government seize an opportunity to block debate on an important bill. We could have analyzed the government's intention to once again interfere, through this bill, in areas of jurisdiction that belong to the provinces and Quebec. However, by blocking debate and cutting our time short with a closure motion, the government is stopping us from having these very important conversations.
It is one more opportunity for the government to encroach on health care, which is Quebec's jurisdiction. Quebec is perfectly ready and able to take responsibility for its own social, health care support and insurance programs.
I would like the minister to reassure us. I know this is a topic that the Bloc Québécois comes back to a lot, but interference in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction is a concern for many Quebeckers. Although the debate will be cut short, will the minister still listen to Quebec's demands? Quebec demands the right to opt out with full compensation from programs like the one we are discussing today, namely pharmacare, and any others that constitute federal interference in the jurisdictions of the Government of Quebec.
198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I congratulate the minister on her speech and on her fine efforts to speak French. We always appreciate that.
The Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this bill despite the fact that we feel that the federal government is once again trying to interfere to some extent with Quebec's and the provinces' jurisdiction. For example, family policy is not a federal responsibility; it is a provincial responsibility. It would have been so much easier to give the tools, by which I mean the money, to Quebec and the provinces so that Quebec could improve its very effective system and the other provinces could develop a system similar to the one in place in Quebec.
The predecessor to this bill was Bill C‑303. The previous bill included a provision, clause 4, that allowed Quebec to opt out of this agreement with full compensation. That is always a good way to ensure Quebec immediately accepts and supports federal government bills that encroach on the jurisdiction of the provinces and Quebec.
Can the minister guarantee that, despite the absence of that provision in Bill C‑35, the government still intends to respect Quebec's jurisdiction and Quebec's right to opt out with full financial compensation?
217 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/23 11:11:41 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech.
The motion before us deals with a matter that is clearly not a federal jurisdiction, but a provincial one. Health care systems fall under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. I listened to the speech by my colleague that covered a lot of things, which, once again, are the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces.
We are still somewhat in shock as a result of the agreement on health transfers reached between the federal government and Quebec and the provinces. There is an explanation for this. In a way, it is like someone who walks for such a long time in the desert that they really crave a good meal. However, they are certainly not going to turn down a glass of water. The federal government offered a pittance and the provinces accepted on bended knee, if I can use that expression.
I have a simple question for my colleague. The federal government considers itself to have an important role and responsibilities in health care, and I would like to know how many hospitals it manages, outside of Canadian Forces hospitals. I would like to know how many doctors, nurses and health staff the government has to hire as part of its usual responsibilities.
213 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/23 11:11:41 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech.
The motion before us deals with a matter that is clearly not a federal jurisdiction, but a provincial one. Health care systems fall under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. I listened to the speech by my colleague that covered a lot of things, which, once again, are the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces.
We are still somewhat in shock as a result of the agreement on health transfers reached between the federal government and Quebec and the provinces. There is an explanation for this. In a way, it is like someone who walks for such a long time in the desert that they really crave a good meal. However, they are certainly not going to turn down a glass of water. The federal government offered a pittance and the provinces accepted on bended knee, if I can use that expression.
I have a simple question for my colleague. The federal government considers itself to have an important role and responsibilities in health care, and I would like to know how many hospitals it manages, outside of Canadian Forces hospitals. I would like to know how many doctors, nurses and health staff the government has to hire as part of its usual responsibilities.
213 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/4/22 1:38:02 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague from Saskatchewan talking about the wait times experienced by francophone veterans and veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces in the processing of their cases. That fact really struck home. In my riding, one veteran has been caught up in red tape for a decade. To illustrate how ridiculous this situation is, he stated that if the government had put as much energy and money into solving his problem as it has put into constantly challenging his arguments, officials would probably have been able to help many veterans like him.
However, my question is about another matter. In Bill C-8, there is new interference in jurisdictions. We are used to seeing the federal government interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions, in particular health care. This time, however, it is interfering in another jurisdiction, which is just as astounding. The federal government wants to meddle in municipal jurisdictions by getting involved in property taxation. Would my colleague like to comment on that? Does my colleague believe, like me, that the federal government is taking its interference a bit too far?
185 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/4/22 12:07:32 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, like the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives often champion Quebec's and the provinces' jurisdiction and generally oppose federal interference in areas under their control.
Bill C‑8 would see the federal government claim a piece of the property tax pie, which is under municipal jurisdiction. That kind of interference is new. What are my colleagues' thoughts on the Liberals' interference in areas under municipal jurisdiction?
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/28/22 12:34:13 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill C-8
Madam Speaker, I have nothing against the idea of taxing vacant property, especially foreign-owned property, as the underused housing tax proposes, since that helps calm the overheated market.
However, this is the first time the federal government is so directly and so heavily encroaching on provincial jurisdictions—and even municipal ones, in this case.
Does my colleague not believe that instead of encroaching so blatantly on the jurisdictions of other levels of government, the government should instead sit down with the main stakeholders and determine the best way the federal level can help in this particular file?
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
