- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Joliette
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 68%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $132,165.46
- Government Page
- Apr/18/24 12:07:05 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Nepean for his multi-pronged question.
First, we recognize that the federal debt-to-GDP ratio is among the best, except that goes back to what the Parliamentary Budget Officer said. Members will recall that, in the 1990s, the federal government solved its debt problem by increasing the fiscal imbalance, or in other words, by reducing transfers to the provinces. The provinces are struggling because the federal government chose to increase the fiscal imbalance rather than dealing with it.
When it comes to the various sectors of the economy, I would remind the member that the Minister of Innovation finally promised an aerospace policy. Canada is the only country with an aerospace industry that does not have such a policy. Is there anything about that in the budget? No. There is zip, zero, zilch.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/21/23 6:37:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her question, which she asked in French. I congratulate her. It means a great deal to me.
The problem is being stuck in the 20th century with a 20th-century economy. The money going to prop up the oil industry should be used for the transition. We must not let workers in Alberta down. We must support them in transitioning to the sectors of the future.
I am convinced that if all the support that is currently being provided, including a large part of the $80 billion that has been announced, were used in a smart way to develop the economy of tomorrow with Alberta's valuable workers, we would be able to succeed with flying colours.
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois wants to make sure that Quebec gets its fair share. When Ottawa decided to save the auto industry with $10 billion in 2008, we noted that Quebec did not receive the equivalent. When Ottawa decided to save Muskrat Falls with $10 billion, we noted that Quebec did not get the equivalent. When the Liberals chose to buy the pipeline in western Canada for tens of billions of dollars, we noted that Quebec did not get its share. We want to make sure that Quebec gets its share.
Quebec specializes in green energy and the green economy, that is, the economy of the future. Quebec had all the expertise it needed to have a successful battery plant, but that was not how it played out. To add insult to injury, it was the minister from Shawinigan who made this announcement with great fanfare in Montreal to say that the plant would not be in Montreal or the surrounding region, but in St. Thomas, Ontario. Good for them.
Could Quebec get some of these structural investments to develop its economy? The proof remains to be seen, unfortunately.
197 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/23/23 11:34:24 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first, I want to pay tribute to and thank the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for her strong commitment to the planet. The IPCC's recent report reminds us of the urgent need for action, and I salute her commitment, her life's work, as we were saying earlier in a private conversation.
In my opinion, the government made the wrong choice for both the environment and the economy. That is why we were opposed, as was my hon. colleague. The time has come for the government to step from the 20th century into the 21st century and to support the green economy. It needs to stop supporting the oil economy. We still need it, but there must be a gradual, clear transition. For goodness' sake, subsidies to billionaire oil companies need to stop.
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, what I was saying is that with the pandemic, we saw the fragility of global supply chains.
Honestly, I expected the government to come up with strategies quickly to help the industries in the Canadian economy overcome this problem. To my knowledge, nothing or practically nothing has been done to help these companies.
Does my hon. colleague believe that Bill C‑34 addresses that a little bit or not at all? What should the government do to promote the economy here as it pertains to the supply chain problem?
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.
With the pandemic, we saw how fragile the global economy is when it comes to supply chains. I really expected the government to propose quicker, more constructive solutions than what it is proposing, which is almost nothing at all.
According to my colleague, will Bill C‑34 help to address the supply chain issue? If not, what does the government—
71 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois are still reeling from the sale of Rona to the American company Lowe's and all the negative consequences that followed.
In my hon. colleague's opinion, if Bill C-34 passes as is, will the interests of our economy be better protected with respect to potential transactions?
59 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/6/22 12:10:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend from Beauport—Limoilou for her question and for the excellent and tireless work she does in the House.
The Competition Bureau is not doing enough at the moment. Obviously, it is up to the government and the House to tell it to do more, to take on more cases, conduct more studies and intervene more.
Competition is very important. I will remind members of the time Rona was sold to the American company Lowe's. The Competition Bureau had the power to do something about that but chose not to, and, in my view, that deal was bad for the Quebec economy.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Sep/29/22 5:02:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, even though it was not asked in French. Perhaps he will try next time.
The trickle-down theory, which refers to the notion of creating wealth before distributing it, was popular in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. I would say that it was possible to continue embracing the theory up until the 1990s. It was an ideological vision. Since the 1990s, however, this theory has been clearly debunked. Nothing ends up trickling down, so it is not a theory that can be supported.
As for the second part of my colleague's question, I will use the example of England, which is really not doing well right now. The Bank of England has adopted a restrictive policy, but the government has adopted an expansionist budgetary policy. Together, these short-sighted policies cancel each other out and result in debt.
It is wishful thinking to believe that cutting taxes will significantly stimulate the economy, especially at a time when the economy is overheated and inflation is high. When I taught in CEGEP, we taught the Laffer curve, which espoused this theory and was developed by an American economist. It never worked. It is a myth. Experience has shown that it does not work.
211 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/16/22 8:50:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I thank the member for his speech.
My question has come up a lot in this evening's debate.
Farmers from here who bought Russian fertilizer, who placed and paid for their orders before the war, will have to pay a 35% tariff that is supposedly meant to punish the Russian economy. We agree with the general principle of punishing Russia's economy for the invasion, but in this case the Russian economy is not being punished at all because the fertilizer was bought and paid for before the war. This government is imposing a 35% tariff on farmers.
Does my colleague think the government should remove the tariff in this specific case?
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
