- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Mirabel
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $114,073.56
- Government Page
- Oct/25/23 6:31:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have turned everything off around me. For once, I am the one who is disconnected. That is a first.
I wanted to thank my colleague for moving this motion because airport safety is so important. What we read in the motion is rather shocking. It first talks about how there are significant regulatory shortfalls concerning emergency responses at our airports. That is a matter of passenger and employee safety, but it is also a matter of the country's international reputation, since Canada is known for being a safe place to fly.
Here is what the motion calls for. It says that we need to change the safety standards in Canadian airports so that airport firefighters can reach any part of the runway in less than three minutes. Those are international standards, and Canada is lagging behind in terms of International Civil Aviation Organization, or ICAO, standards. Right now, Canada requires firefighters to be able to reach the mid-point of the runway in three minutes, rather than all points on the runway. The three-minute time frame is very important. We know that some runways are very long, particularly those at the Mirabel airport in my riding. That time frame can extend to four, five, six or even seven minutes.
We are talking about airport safety, and it can seem as though fires in and around airports never happen. Let me remind members that a tragedy took someone's life at the Mirabel airport on October 18, 2022. A vehicle caught fire at the airport. Aéroports de Montréal, the supposedly independent Crown corporation that manages the facility, decided not to send firefighters and instead waited for municipal firefighters to arrive.
A second call was made to notify the firefighters that there was a fire, and Aéroports de Montréal again decided not to send their firefighters. They have to come from far away. When Mirabel's municipal firefighters arrived, the individual had died inside his car. Municipal firefighters are not trained for that. These things happen. People often do not know that airport firefighters exist. However, when they are needed, it is a matter of life and death. They have to act quickly.
I would like to take advantage of today's debate to salute the 31 valiant firefighters who work at the two airports, located in Mirabel and Dorval. Nine are in Mirabel, and the other 22 are in Dorval. Just think, there are nine firefighters for one airport. These people risk their lives, and all they ask is to do their job; all they ask is to save lives. I salute these people, who put the safety of passengers and airport staff first.
I am thinking in particular of Philippe Gagnon, president of the Syndicat des pompiers d'Aéroports de Montréal, and of Alexandre Bertrand, vice-president of the Syndicat des pompiers d'Aéroports de Montréal. I am also thinking of Yvon Barrière and Jonathan Choquette from PSAC‑Quebec. For his bravery, I salute hero Francis Labrie, a firefighter who was suspended because he took the fire truck, went to the scene and tried to save a life. This is no laughing matter.
Aéroports de Montréal tells us that municipal firefighters are to intervene inside an aircraft. Canadian airport firefighters can hose down a plane from the outside, but they are not allowed to go inside the plane. This is against the rules of the ICAO, which is headquartered in Montreal a few kilometres from our airports. To be able to intervene in an aircraft, they need to have completed 333 hours of training. Municipal firefighters do not have this training, and they cannot get there in time. They lack the necessary resources.
In his motion, my colleague says quite rightly that firefighters need to be able to reach the mid-point of the runway in three minutes. However, under municipal standards, firefighters arrive in 25 minutes.
People inside a burning aircraft die after three minutes from the smoke. It is extremely serious. Airport firefighters who follow international rules are needed because there are inherent risks to aircraft fires.
For example, aircraft fires release toxic gases that are specific to airports. There are chemical, physical and thermal dangers, the combustion of composite materials, the oxygen and halon tanks, the sulphur, the exhaust from the running engines, engine fires, the hydraulic systems, and radioactivity.
I do not want to hear that Montreal firefighters are trained for these specific types of risks. Think of the hot brakes, tire fires, flammable synthetic oil, door openings, deployment of emergency slides that are specific to planes, batteries that produce hydrogen gas and lead to a risk of fire and explosion, radar systems, the inflatable cushions, and so on.
We need to have trained firefighters who arrive on time. In France, Great Britain and most industrialized countries, the international standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization, or the ICAO, apply. In Montreal, where the ICAO headquarters are located, these standards are not used, which is rather ridiculous. It is shameful. Our colleague is giving us an opportunity to take note of these shortcomings today.
For example, the Canadian aviation regulations, called CARs, require only three trucks. Unlike the rules at most airports around the world, personnel is not specified, and Aéroports de Montréal takes advantage of this omission to excuse its understaffing.
For six years now, firefighters at Mirabel airport have not received any medical training. The Canadian aviation regulations say that medical training must be up to date. However, since Mirabel no longer has the required number of passengers and is supposedly a cargo-only airport, they say medical training is not required. All they are trying to do is save money at the expense of human lives, when we know that chartered planes, flight schools and general aviation operate out of Mirabel. The situation is extremely serious.
One of the main problems we are having in my riding has to do with the airport administration structure. It is a non-profit organization that essentially leases the land the airport is on for a very long time. These folks are being asked to make money, to make their activities profitable, to open shops and to break even.
At one point, Aéroports de Montréal got a new president. The first thing he did was cut the number of firefighters, the number of trucks available to respond and firefighter training. I guess this means that if there is ever a fire with radioactive elements, the airport firefighters will respond with three trucks and three firefighters. There are even cases where there are so few firefighters that the support truck carrying the equipment cannot even get to the plane. Firefighters are then told to hose down the outside the plane, to get there in three, four, five or six minutes, but to wait for municipal firefighters before boarding the plane. Now we are relying on the municipalities.
I commend the initiative of my colleague who moved this motion. He took action instead of waiting for dozens of deaths in a crash landing or fire. He is looking ahead. The people, the passengers and the staff come first for him.
There is an urgent need to act and amend the outdated Canadian aviation regulations. There is an urgent need for greater transparency in the management of our airport facilities. These facilities belong to the taxpayers, to Quebeckers, Canadians, the people of Mirabel.
At some point, these people need to be held accountable for their actions.
1289 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/23 11:38:50 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am not really comfortable answering this question. Not that I want to avoid it, but it makes me uncomfortable because the people running the country at this moment are sitting across the aisle. Am I terrified at the thought of a Conservative running the country? I sure am.
That being said, until they drop the NDP and maybe call an election, the Liberals are at the helm. They are running the deficits. They have to get the country back on track. I know that they say that things are not so bad here compared to other countries who run things like dummies and never get better, but I always find their lack of ambition surprising. Things need to improve here. First off, the government needs to stop infringing on provincial jurisdictions, because there are real people waiting in hospital corridors. That is real life.
While we are here in this completely disconnected bubble, there are people on gurneys. The Liberals seem to forget that, and they are the ones in power.
174 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased today to share my time with my hon. colleague from Longueuil—Saint‑Hubert.
When I was asked to come to the House today to talk about Quebec's political weight, I wondered if I would be here for 10 minutes, because it is so simple; we take Quebec's weight and we maintain it. On reflection, though, I thought that if it had not been understood by now, I might have more to say than I thought in the end.
I thought I would use a bit of an educational approach. Let us go back in time to 2006. That year, the Harper government recognized Quebec as a nation in the House. After that, however, not much happened until 2021, except for the decrease in health transfers.
Last June, the House passed a motion that gave Quebec the right to amend its constitution to enshrine in it that Quebec is a nation and that its only official language is French. This meant that the Quebec nation, as well as its history and specificity, were once again recognized.
However, recognizing a nation means recognizing that it has the right to express itself in the House of Commons. It means walking the talk. The House cannot recognize a nation the way it recognizes that it is a nice day outside, that it is a beautiful Monday and that it is humid. When the House recognizes a nation, it has to act accordingly.
Now the government has introduced Bill C-14. At first, I thought that there was hope and that this bill seemed to be a step in the right direction. Still, it is a bill seeking to protect Quebec that was introduced by the Liberals and that may be supported by the NDP, so based on my experience, I had some doubts.
I opened Bill C‑14, and I read that it would guarantee Quebec a certain number of seats, specifically 78, compared to the 77 seats provided for in the last electoral boundary readjustment, which reduced the number of seats for Quebec.
I would like to mention that, without the repeated interventions of the Bloc Québécois, we would not be debating this in the House today. The Liberal government would not have woken up one morning and decided that it was going to protect Quebec's weight. It took the Bloc Québécois to convince it to take a step in that direction.
The problem with Bill C‑14 is that it states an intention, but does nothing to accomplish it. It does not meet its own objective.
Let us continue the lesson. March 2 was a Bloc opposition day. The government knows we use these days wisely. That day, by a vote of 261 to 66, which is decidedly not a close result, since almost everyone voted in favour, apart from a certain pocket of resistance, the House adopted a motion saying the following:
That, in the opinion of the House:
(a) any scenario for redrawing the federal electoral map that would result in Quebec losing one or more electoral districts or that would reduce Quebec's political weight in the House of Commons must be rejected;
I want to point out that number of seats and political weight are not the same thing. The motion also states that the formula for apportioning seats in the House must be amended in accordance with the spirit of the motion, which was adopted by the vast majority of duly elected members.
However, we have before us a bill that does not achieve this goal. The bill does not protect Quebec's political weight because it protects the number of seats, not the proportion of seats reserved for Quebec.
I figured that either the government was acting in bad faith or it did not understand what the word “proportion” meant. My colleague from Beauport—Limoilou used to be an elementary school teacher, so I called her to ask what grade kids start learning fractions and division. She told me that it was usually in grade 3, but if the members of Parliament went to a good school, they might have learned about fractions in grade 2. I do not know whether the government is acting in bad faith or whether it does not understand.
I began listening to the Minister of Finance, thinking she must understand, because she has talked about the debt-to-GDP ratio, saying that she does not want to reduce debt, but rather the debt-to-GDP ratio. She understands that there are two components to a ratio. The Minister of Finance understands that. The same applies to per capita GDP: The ratio of per capita wealth can differ based on wealth and the number of people.
It is the same when the NDP talks about fuel-efficient vehicles. What they care about is how much fuel a vehicle uses to travel 100 kilometres, which provides its fuel efficiency. The NDP understands that concept when it comes to winning votes in their riding and for their base, but not when it comes to the issue of Quebec's weight.
When they are talking about hourly wages, the NDP does not tell people to earn $5 an hour and work 70 hours a week. They say that what is important is the wages that a person earns for each hour worked. The NDP understands ratios, logic, elementary school concepts. With this bill, however, all of a sudden, the NDP members have forgotten what they learned in elementary school. They say that Quebec's political weight is not calculated as a given number of seats divided by a total number of seats, but simply as the numerator, the number of seats. I have trouble understanding that.
I see the hon. member for Winnipeg North. The Liberals know how much I appreciate them and their intelligence. Since I cannot believe that they do not understand, I figure they may just be doing half a job. I will give them an even more concrete example.
The number of seats for Quebec rose from 65 in 1867 to 73 in 1947, to 75 in 1976, to 78 in 2015. The number of seats increased, which is a good thing. During that time, however, the size of the House of Commons also increased, and the percentage of seats belonging to Quebec dropped from 36% to 28.6% to 26.6% to 24.9% to 23.1%.
My colleagues can surely see that the number of seats is irrelevant if the size of the House of Commons is increasing. This shows that the bill does not achieve its goal and that it does not live up to its title.
There are special clauses that provide some protection for the weight of the provinces. I have here the Canada Elections Act, and I see that New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island have a senatorial clause. Nova Scotia also has a grandfather clause, as does Manitoba. Even Newfoundland and Labrador has a grandfather clause, after deciding very late in the game to become a member of the federation, and after three referendums that yielded three different answers to the question.
It is therefore not unheard of for the government to protect the political weight of a nation. Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and Yukon have constitutional protection. We are not reinventing the wheel.
This is the government's idea of protecting Quebec. The same thing always happens, and the Liberal members say nothing. Maybe they are too busy protesting Bill 96 to have time to think about this bill.
The federal government's idea of protecting Quebec is to introduce a law on bilingualism that gives equal weight to English and French in Quebec. We know that when given the option, companies choose English. It is the same thing with Roxham Road. Quebec is told no. It is the same thing for health transfers. The federal government is unreliable. We cannot depend on it.
Our seniors needed money before the election. They got a $500 cheque before the election. However, when it comes time to protect our seniors after the election, what do they get? They get zero, zip, nada, just a pretty graph in the budget that shows that they are not doing so bad. They are drowning in inflation, but all the government will say is that it hopes they know how to swim. The Liberals are unreliable when it comes time to protect Quebec in any way whatsoever.
It is the same story with the Synergie Mirabel seniors' home project in my riding. Sixty people with diminishing abilities are waiting for the Minister of Transport to give them the right to housing. We are still awaiting an answer. The Liberals are still mucking about.
When it comes time to protect Quebec, the federal government is always unreliable. The Liberals' and the federal government's efforts to protect Quebec make me think of a saying: Put a fox in charge of the henhouse and you'll have chicken for dinner every time.
Well, we will not allow ourselves to end up on the dinner table. Quebec's history in the federation is a history of declining political power. That is enshrined in this bill, which is incomplete and does not do what it is supposed to. Quebec needs 25% of the seats in the House, but that is only a temporary measure.
What we ultimately want is for Quebec, as a nation, to have the right to all the tools that a nation should have. Once Quebec is independent, it will have 100% of the seats and will not be reduced to crossing the border to beg Ottawa for scraps.
1643 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
