SoVote

Jean-Denis Garon

Member of Parliament
Member of Parliament
Bloc Québécois

Mirabel
Quebec
Voting Attendance: 64%
Expenses Last Quarter: $114,073.56

Government Page

Context: House Hansard - 321 - May/30/24

May/30/24 7:12:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there are dissenting voices in every society. There are debates in every society. However, Quebec's voice is heard in the Quebec National Assembly, which is made up of 125 members who are elected by the people. My NDP colleague's leader had the nerve to send a letter to Quebec's health minister. He literally told the health minister that he wanted a meeting with him, that he wanted to educate him and teach him how pharmacare works. Do members know how Quebec's democracy responded? First, he was told to take a hike, because it was deeply disrespectful and ridiculous. Then, Quebec's democracy unanimously passed a motion in the National Assembly denouncing this kind of paternalistic attitude, which is, and always will be, unacceptable.

129 words

Context: House Hansard - 214 - Jun/15/23

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Jun/15/23 7:27:44 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague and I worked together at the Standing Committee on Health, and he knows that I appreciate him. I know he is a democrat. In his speech, he discussed the importance of having a well functioning democracy. He believes that the new rules could help us to enhance the way democracy functions. I am wondering if he does not see that there is a certain paradox in the fact that, to enhance democracy with the new rules, we are violating democracy, we are violating the parliamentary tradition, we are violating the tradition of unanimity. We are dismantling a long tradition and setting a precedent that will allow any government, especially a majority government, to henceforth have the moral sanction to change all our operating rules as it pleases. Does the member not find that strange to want to enhance the way democracy functions in a completely undemocratic way?

151 words

Context: House Hansard - 202 - May/30/23

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

May/30/23 5:37:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am astounded by the member for Vaughan—Woodbridge's convoluted logic. He started his speech by telling us Canada is known for the quality of its democracy and that people trust it. Then, he went on for 10 minutes talking about generalities just to end up telling us that we do not need a public inquiry. Basically, what he was saying is that Canadian democracy is like good wine. Since it is good, we can pour some vinegar in it until it spoils. Then, he had the gall to conclude by saying that we must do better. Can he explain to us why an independent public inquiry, which a majority of members has called for, would not enable us to perhaps do better?

128 words

Context: House Hansard - 150 - Jan/31/23

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Jan/31/23 2:41:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, 2100 is a long time from now. I am not sure which party will form the government, nor whether the parties here will still be around, but I do know two things: In 2100, Quebec will be a country and McKinsey will still have a contract or arrangement with Canada. This raises important questions. Regardless of which party governs here, regardless of who voters elect, McKinsey will still be there by virtue of a contract or an arrangement, as the minister says, without any clear mandate. Is that what we want in a democracy?

96 words

SoVote

Member of Parliament

Jean-Denis Garon