- Member of Parliament
- Conservative
- Louis-Saint-Laurent
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 64%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $128,105.00
- Government Page
Mr. Speaker, that is a debate for the provinces. It falls under the issue of health care funding, which, as we know, is a provincial responsibility.
I will let the provincial legislatures debate the ongoing funding for medical assistance in dying, especially for palliative care.
46 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/21/23 3:07:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years in power, unfortunately, ethical issues are a defining trait of this Liberal government. Unfortunately, the most recent example is the $1-billion fund for a green economy.
The Auditor General is conducting an investigation into the $40 million in mismanaged funds. The chair of the fund also gave her own company a $200,000 subsidy. She resigned because she was caught red-handed.
Canadians who are watching at home want a clear answer from the government. When and how will the government hold these people to account and pay back the money that they used to line the pockets of Liberal cronies?
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 3:08:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, according to the report, whistle-blowers are very disappointed at how slow the federal government is to act. Again in the report, a senior official states that this is about “sloppiness”, “laziness” and “outright incompetence”.
That is how this senior official describes this management of public funds by this Liberal government. After eight years of this Liberal government, here is more evidence that it is not worth the cost.
What interest did the Prime Minister have in dragging his feet in this case, which, unfortunately for all Canadians, brings up sad memories, namely the sponsorship scandal?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 3:07:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years of this Liberal government, another Liberal scandal involving the mismanagement of public funds has come to light. This time, it has to do with the $1-billion green fund that is currently under investigation by the Auditor General.
That fund comes from the money collected through the carbon tax, which the Bloc Québécois supports and wants to radically increase. Today, Daniel Leblanc reported on CBC that a senior official said, “That is almost a sponsorship-scandal level kind of giveaway.”
Will the Prime Minister rise in the House and clearly indicate which Liberal friend benefited from this misplaced generosity?
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/9/23 11:25:04 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect for my colleague, the reality is that if he says that to people who are on the verge of losing their homes, they will laugh in his face or ask him whether he is prepared to take their keys because they can no longer pay for their home. That is the reality facing Canadian families.
If the member wants to quote studies, I could point out that the International Monetary Fund says that Canada is the country at the highest risk of mortgage defaults. This week, the Governor of the Bank of Canada said that mortgage payments could rise by 40%. This is the daily reality for Canadian families. Why does the government refuse to come up with a plan to balance the budget?
131 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/22 12:54:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Calgary Midnapore.
I am very pleased to participate in this debate, which centres on one of the main reasons I got involved in politics 14 years ago today, first at the provincial level and then at the federal level. That reason is the sound management of public funds.
Not a single dollar that the government has in its hands has fallen from the sky. Someone has gone to work, produced something and saved that money, and the government has gone and taken that money through taxes so it could manage it responsibly. In this case, however, its management was anything but responsible.
I will get right to the point. We are talking about the infamous ArriveCAN affair, which started out as a typical tale of a government wanting to bring people into its country. People coming to Canada have to pass a test to ensure that there are no issues. That makes sense.
However, the leadership of this Liberal government—which spends lavishly and has never, in the last seven years, shown the slightest interest in reining in its spending, yet boasts about its lofty principles while generating huge debts and deficits that our children, our grandchildren and our unborn great-grandchildren will have to repay—has given rise to the financial disaster that is ArriveCAN.
Let us review the facts. About a year ago, the government began this process to allow people to come to Canada and fill out the questionnaire.
I do not want to get into my life story, but my brother is an engineer and a Canadian citizen, and he now lives in Portugal with his family. Unfortunately, as fate would have it, he had to come to Canada last spring. My brother is an engineer. As a student, he was among the first computer programmers at Laval. The point is, he is pretty comfortable with computer stuff. When he got off the plane, one of the first things we talked about, after personal and family matters, was ArriveCAN. He asked me what was up with that. He said it took forever to fill out, it was complicated, it did not work, there were lots of pages and so on. If my brother, who is an engineer, who studied engineering and knows a lot about this stuff, had problems, let us imagine what it was like for average citizens who were not used to doing that kind of thing but, all of a sudden, had to.
It was fundamentally poorly designed, but when we look at how it was managed, that was even worse. The Canadian government spent $54 million of taxpayers' money, which Canadians saved and set aside, for which they worked and for which companies worked by producing products. The government collects taxes in order to run things properly, but that has definitely not been the case here. This app has been a fiasco from day one, considering that it almost never worked. It was not at all user friendly for people who had to enter their information. It was a fiasco because more than 10,000 people had to quarantine because of it. Worst of all, however, was the financial mismanagement, because it cost $54 million.
As we have heard, a programming expert said he could have made it in his basement over a weekend or a Saturday night for about $250,000. The Liberal Canadian government spent $54 million on this. That is why our motion today states:
...it is more important than ever for the government to respect taxpayer dollars and eliminate wasteful spending...
No one can be against that. Our motion goes on to demand that:
...the House call on the Auditor General of Canada [a neutral and objective entity] to conduct a performance audit, including the payments, contracts and sub-contracts for all aspects of the ArriveCAN app, and to prioritize this investigation.
How can anyone be against transparency? How could anyone even think of voting against this motion, which asks the Auditor General to do her job with respect to a matter that has affected hundreds of thousands of Canadian families?
Many people did not want to travel because of this. Some 10,000 people ended up in quarantine. More than $53 million seems to have been poorly invested, because someone could have done the job for $250,000 rather than $54 million. That is our job here in the House of Commons.
All 338 of us, regardless of political stripe, were elected to see to the sound management of public funds, among other things.
This is a prime example of mismanagement of public funds. We have a golden opportunity to get to the bottom of this business and find out exactly why things did not go as planned, so we can avoid making similar mistakes in the future. That is why I do not see how anyone in the House could be against us doing our job and asking the Auditor General to do hers.
Government members are likely to be a bit embarrassed when we start analyzing their management of public funds, and rightly so. Let us not forget that, seven years ago, right after the election, this party, led by the member for Papineau and current Prime Minister, boasted that it would run very small deficits and a zero deficit in 2019 because it wanted to stimulate the economy. The result was anything but. It ran one large deficit after another, missing the target set by the former minister of finance three times. Then, it ended its first term with an accumulated debt of more than $100 billion.
The Liberal Party was elected on a promise of running small deficits and then eliminating the deficit entirely. That is not at all what happened. The government ran four deficits in a row. That was the Liberal government's record even before the pandemic and current economic problems caused concerns.
When the pandemic happened, we all realized that an emergency situation called for emergency measures, which was likely to bring about deficits. When we were in power in 2008, 2009 and 2010, our country, like every other country, grappled with the worst economic crisis since the great recession of 1929. Very reluctantly, our government ran deficits because we had no choice under the circumstances. However, starting in 2015, our government managed to balance the budget. Canada was the first G7 country to get back in the black thanks to sound management of public funds. That is what responsible government looks like.
They Liberal government ran massive deficits during a period of growth. When the pandemic happened, emergency measures were needed and money had to be spent. We knew that would result in deficits, but we did not know the deficits would be this big.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer recently concluded that $205 billion of the $500‑billion deficit had nothing to do with COVID-19. In other words, over 40% of the debt accumulated under the current government over the last seven years was in no way related to the pandemic. Those folks over there say that these were emergency measures and no one knew for sure what was going on, so it was important to be vigilant.
A few months into the pandemic, when there was a bit of a lull in the summer, I remember very clearly talking to people in my riding, as we probably all did, and when I spoke with entrepreneurs or business leaders, I was always asked why parliamentarians had decided to pay people to stay at home and do nothing. People commented on the fact that CERB, which served a purpose during the emergency, was paying people $2,000 to stay at home, even though activities had resumed in the summer and workers were needed. That was the sad reality. That was the reality, but it was also our responsibility to sound the alarm about it. The government was attacking us and calling us names, but that was the reality.
That is why we now know that the inflation that is hitting people rather hard all started with the current government's mismanagement.
I hear my friends across the way say that the entire planet is experiencing a period of inflation. That is true, of course, but let us not forget that the future leader of the Liberal Party, Mark Carney, said that it was mainly a national issue, and therefore a Canadian issue. The Minister of Finance finally opened her eyes and said that the government may need to tighten its belt a bit and cut down on spending.
I sincerely hope that this government will vote in favour of our motion so that Canadians can learn the truth behind the ArriveCAN financial fiasco.
1485 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, indeed, I am the member for Louis‑Saint‑Laurent. Louis St. Laurent was the prime minister of Canada during the 1950s. He was the one who, among other things, balanced the budget after the Second World War.
I make that historic reference today because I want to talk about the issue of public finances, the direct repercussions they have on Canadian families, and the management by this Liberal government, for seven years minus two weeks now, of Canadian public funds. Their management is really very different from that of one of their Liberal predecessors, the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, who balanced the budget after the Second World War.
The bill we are considering today has in its title the words, “cost of living relief”. The Liberal approach is not the best one, in our point of view, since the best way to relieve the cost of living for Canadians is not so much by giving them money, but by leaving more money in their pockets, which is exactly the opposite of what these people have done for the last seven years minus two weeks.
What have we seen in the seven years the Liberals have been in power?
Seven years ago, during the 2015 election campaign, they promised to run three modest deficits and then achieve a zero deficit in 2019. Instead, there were three major deficits that kept growing and, in 2019, the zero deficit promise was thrown away. We are paying for it today with staggering debt and high deficits.
Some people will point out that the Liberals had to deal with a pandemic. Yes, of course, but they were already having a hard time being economical and responsible with the economic prosperity that we left behind after our time in government. Do not forget that we left them a balanced budget and the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. However, they took advantage of that and spent lavishly.
It is becoming clear that inflation is the number one problem for all Canadian families. This government has not done the one thing that all other industrialized countries, particularly our G7 partners, have done. Whether it is Japan, France, England, Italy, Germany or the United States, under Joe Biden, the current Canadian Prime Minister's good buddy, the other six G7 countries have all lowered taxes and the tax burden on their citizens at some point in recent months. All the G7 countries have done so, except Canada under this Liberal government.
That is not the right approach.
The more money people have in their pockets, the lower the cost of living. The more money is printed, the more inflation rises. This is a fundamental economic principle, but one that this government has not wanted to embrace. For months now, we in the official opposition have been calling on the government to follow the lead of all the other G7 countries and lower taxes. It did not do that.
Worse, the very least the government could do to ease the burden on Canadians during this inflationary time is not increase taxes. On January 1, there will be an extra charge for employment insurance. This will affect everyone.
To be clear, we are in favour of setting money aside at the right time, but we are against taking money out of taxpayers' pockets for additional spending today. That is the principle we should be respecting.
Worse yet, on April 1, the government plans to increase the Liberal carbon tax. It does not want to increase it by a little bit. It wants to multiply it not by one or two, but by three. The Liberal government wants to triple the Liberal carbon tax on April 1.
Every Canadian family is struggling because inflation is increasing, and now the government wants to take advantage of this horrible situation that Canadian families are going through and raise taxes. That is outrageous.
What planet do these people live on? Not only are they not cutting taxes as the leaders of every G7 country have done, but they are going to triple them. Some will say that that does not apply to Quebec. Just a minute. The Liberal carbon tax did not apply until now.
That is because Quebec has a cap-and-trade system. I should know that because I voted for it when I was a member of the National Assembly. Thus, in Quebec, the Liberal carbon tax does not apply because the revenue generated is about the same. However, what will happen in four or five months when the Liberal government triples the Liberal carbon tax?
My colleague asked that question yesterday. The minister replied that he would give him a briefing since he did not understand how it works. However, it was a very simple question. Does tripling the Liberal carbon tax affect Quebec, yes or no? We have been unable to get a clear and precise answer. It is not looking good for Quebeckers. We will have an opportunity to discuss this again with the Quebec government that was re-elected just two days ago.
Increasing taxes, increasing the tax burden, is not the best way to reduce the cost of living. The best way is to let Canadians hang on to more of their money to mitigate the impact of inflation, which is affecting us all.
Facts are facts, and the facts are disturbing for sure. As we speak, Canadians are paying, on average, 43% in taxes, which is more than they spend on food, housing and clothing.
What worries me most in all this is food. If there is one basic good we have to protect, it is food. This is not about indulgences, sweets and treats. This is about a basic need, the need to eat. I talked about that in the House on Monday. Last Friday, the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, I attended an event in support of Comptoir Agoshin, a food bank in Wendake. I also attended the grand opening of a community fridge in Val‑Bélair. The fact is, these two organizations exist to provide food aid for people in need. The people in charge told me they cannot source enough to meet demand. People who used to donate not that long ago are now coming in for help.
For a G7 country, that is just terrible. Canada is rich because of its people, its resources and the work done by its citizens. If a G7 country's food banks cannot meet demand, that is bad news for all Canadians. When butter costs 17% more, bread costs 18% more, pasta costs 30% to 32% more, and soup costs $20 more, basic needs are being taken away. There is a reason that, unfortunately, four out of five Canadians are trimming their food budget because of inflation. That is not a good thing. It is very concerning.
That is why we must tackle the inflation problem directly, in a positive and constructive manner. We know that it is a global problem. I am sure my friends across the way will say that inflation is not just happening in Canada, it is everywhere. I would reply that taxes have been cut everywhere except in Canada.
This government is greedy. This government is all too happy to take money out of Canadians' pockets, even when it comes to food. People will say that gas has nothing to do with food. On the contrary, the food on our supermarket shelves does not fall from the sky. It is transported. It comes from somewhere. When it is transported, it is highly likely that the vehicle that transported it consumed energy, which is often gas. The Liberal carbon tax has a direct impact on that.
The same goes for production. There is no agricultural production in my riding, but all my colleagues who have farms and farmers in their ridings are telling us about the real and painful consequences that the higher gas taxes will have for farmers, especially with what is coming in April.
We have to watch this government and make sure it does not triple the Liberal carbon tax. That is what it plans to do.
That is why we have serious reservations about this government's approach to the management of public funds and the inflation crisis. We seriously urge the government to rethink its position and to lower taxes.
1414 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/5/22 12:37:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as we gather here in the House of Commons, in Ottawa, to debate funding for national defence, our thoughts are with the people of Ukraine, who, for the past 41 days, have been suffering, although very courageously, the agonizing pain inflicted by the terrible aggression of Putin's Russia. I want to emphasize that I said “Putin's Russia” because it is not the same thing as the people of Russia. We will talk about that a little later.
We are here to talk about funding for national defence and how to meet the target of 2% of gross domestic product, or GDP, set by NATO in 2014. As we debate this, we are just a few days away from commemorating the 105th anniversary of Canada's capture of Vimy Ridge. The hon. Minister of Veterans Affairs and the hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo will be in attendance to commemorate the event.
On April 9, 2014, at 5:30 in the morning, 15,000 Canadian soldiers attacked the German enemy to take Vimy Ridge, something our allies had failed to do during the many years of war. According to Brigadier-General Alexander Ross, a nation was born as a result of that battle.
In 1917, Canada engaged in direct, co-ordinated combat on a military battlefield with troops from across the nation for the first time. The four divisions of the Canadian Expeditionary Force deployed to Europe, to France, during the First World War included people from all across Canada, including British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec.
In all, 15,000 Canadian soldiers participated in this terrible battle, including Cree soldier Henry Norwest, a sniper who received the Military Medal, and Jeremiah Jones, a Black Canadian soldier who singlehandedly captured a unit of German machine gunners. For many historians, Canada was born on the Vimy battlefield.
During the Second World War, Canada once again played a major role in liberating the world from tyranny. A few years later, in 1949, NATO was created to bring together European countries, Canada and the United States to monitor, but not fight, the Soviet empire, whose intentions were becoming worrisome, to put it mildly.
In 2014, at the Wales Summit, a very important and historic conference and the reason behind today's debate, NATO's 30 members committed to allocating 2% of their GDP to national defence by 2024. The objective was to support the military and to ensure that it would be ready if something went wrong and war was to break out again.
Unfortunately, war did break out. A war is currently being waged, and we did not meet this NATO target. It is embarrassing for Canadians to see that we are lagging behind. Of the 30 NATO countries, Canada ranks 25th in terms of defence spending as a share of GDP.
That brings us to the crimes currently being committed by Putin's Russia in Ukraine. Just a few days ago, the entire world was shaken; men and women of goodwill were sick to discover the tragedy of mass graves and civilians killed in Bucha. We saw, in all of its ugliness and horror, the extent to which Putin's Russia went there crassly to exterminate this very strong people who are very proud and very protective of their sovereignty.
Unfortunately, war criminals will always want to conquer countries in the worst way, whether by attacking schools and hospitals or by literally sending civilians to slaughter—I am deeply sorry to use that word.
It has been 41 straight days, but fortunately, we are all moved by the extraordinary resilience of this people who are standing up for themselves. We were very proud to welcome, here in the House, President Zelenskyy, who delivered a speech that will remain etched in my memory and in the memory of all those who attended. Obviously Putin wants to recreate the power of the Soviet empire. That is where we as member countries of NATO have a responsibility. I would remind the House that NATO had its equivalent, the Warsaw Pact.
Where do things stand in Canada? Currently 1.36% of Canada's GDP is invested in national defence. That is not enough. As I mentioned earlier, we rank 25th out of 30 countries. We are seeing a decline and delays in funding but also in equipment and military force, which we should honour. We will always be indebted to these men and women who dedicate themselves to the Canadian army and put their lives at risk every day for our freedom here at home and abroad.
The government has really dropped the ball on the aviation file in recent years. Last week it announced that discussions would finally be held, over seven months, to determine whether it would buy the F-35. Need I remind members that this is the same government that made a huge fuss in 2015 about never buying the F-35? After seven years of dithering, it has finally made the right decision. However, after all this time, it wants another seven months of discussions, even though this is what we need to do. Unfortunately, it is Canada that ends up paying for the Liberals' inaction.
The exact same thing happened with the Chinooks. The Jean Chrétien Liberals swore up and down that they would not buy that helicopter only to end up purchasing it anyway. History is repeating itself, and not in positive ways, unfortunately.
As Canadians, we have a fundamental responsibility regarding equipment for NORAD, and our facilities in Canada are outdated. They were built before the Internet even existed. Updates are needed, but the government has done nothing. The same goes for establishing Arctic sovereignty, since we are still in need of icebreakers. We have gotten to this point because the Liberals have done nothing for seven years.
We cannot talk about equipment without talking about procurement. The Parliamentary Budget Officer recently released a scathing report regarding procurement, the purchase of military equipment and defence spending under this government. He found that the government, which announced investments that never materialized, was responsible for a shortfall of $10 billion between 2017 and 2021. It kept putting things off and saying it would do something later, but ultimately nothing got done. This does not come from us, it comes from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Today's debate is crucial. It is about the responsibility that we, as Canadians, have to the world. Our country made a commitment in 2014, along with all of our NATO allies, to make investments over the next 10 years with a goal of hitting 2% of GDP. Eight years later, we are at 1.36%. This government has failed, but it is never too late to do the right thing. We need spending, hiring, and careful, intelligent management—not to make us happy, but to fully ensure our soldiers' legacy. They have been serving for more than a century and have always been on the right side of history. We need to preserve their legacy and ensure that this great Canadian military tradition continues.
1199 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
